The

voters aged 35 to 49, and across most of the state.

Steyer is at 22% among those interviewed before the Swalwell news broke wildly, at 17% among those interviewed afterwards.

Don't know what he can do to release the Venture Capital stranglehold on development and property management, and not sure that his plans actually address root causes - but housing costs and rental issues (landlord and tenant responsibility and incentives) are the big reason most people are unhappy with both parties in California right now.

Dems needed this

But I’ll be happy for 1.

two in the General

Steyer did not "shoot up" post Swallwell as this poll was almost entirely taken before the Swallwell news broke. His increase in polling had no connection to the Swallwell news as you claimed.

Is Steyer really a Dem?

From the Wikipedia entry:

Used to be a R then changed to I. I guess now he's claiming to be a D.

Do you have proof that he was ever a R or I? No, because he never was. Stop the disinformation.

EOM

and Bezos supported lots of democratic causes over the years. Then they decided that it benefited their billions to support Maga and the republicans and the tides quickly turned. I do not trust the vast majority of billionaires. The only one I would ever vote for is one who has not used the tax loopholes to get out of paying taxes on their billions. For me personally, that means I would never vote for Steyer or Pritzger.

But Billionaires Bad ... FDR says hello.

Okaaay... so put your money where your mouth is, Steve.

How about you START by paying taxes on ALL your money now! Pretend the "Trump tax loophole" doesn't exist and pay taxes on all your wealth just like the rest of us have to!

Oh wait, what? You haven't been doing that? You've been hoarding all your billions and using it for your own personal gain in order to amass power?

No thanks! I'll pass!

We're talking about Tom Steyer right?

Something of quality or substance, I'd presume.

The last time I checked, Steyer was a former Republican, then Independent. Never heard of him being a dem until now.

I can understand not having heard.

Understood.

I took your reply the wrong way. Thank you.

that the claim Swalwell was the Democratic frontrunner before the accusations was not really clear, although that last poll did have him breaking out of the top three into the lead. Now in a poll done little later, it is Steyer who is significantly ahead. ( Steyer's lead 21 vs 9 and 8 is bigger than Swalwell:s was at 18 vs 12 and 11).

From the op's link:
Swalwell has been described from time-to-time as the "frontrunner" in this contest, and his 9% showing in today's poll may be viewed suspiciously by those who have internalized that messaging. But in the 20 polls conducted in 2026 and reported in the New York Times' list here, Swalwell leads in just one poll, conducted more than one month ago, finishes second in 6, and polls between 9% and 18% in each.

All future polls will include the knowledge of the charges and that he is not running.

I don't care which Dem as long as it is a Democrat. I also would like for there to be 2 DEMs running in the general.

Over the weekend Swalwell supporters here on DU were trying to blame either Katie Porter or Republicans for Swalwell's woes. It looks like neither Porter nor the GOP had much to gain by taking out Swalwell.

From the poll description:

Swalwell by being a sleaze and rapist, and Porter by the leaked videos of her screaming obscenities at her staff. Republicans might be fine electing a sex offender, but that won't fly with democrats, and Porter has demonstrated she doesn't have the temperament to be governor.

He is spending a lot of money trying to buy the governorship. And it’s because of those ads I’m not interested in voting for one trying to buy the governorship. No legislative experience no thank you. Look what the mess we have in the white house now no experience running our country into the ground.

If someone wants to get into politics, great! Start from a state office, or run for a house seat. But the arrogance of thinking your first job should be president of the United States or governor of California is such a supreme level of arrogance that I can't even. Not my race to vote in, but I truly hope Steyer doesn't win.

I'm not voting for any billionaires unless they've been paying taxes on ALL their wealth, not using loopholes to grow rich on the backs of regular American workers.

Democrat Tom Steyer finishes first with 21% of the vote, and leads among most demographic subgroups, including among voters aged 35 to 49, and across most of the state. Steyer is at 22% among those interviewed before the Swalwell news broke wildly, at 17% among those interviewed afterwards.

Republican Steve Hilton takes 18% overall, and leads among younger voters, ties Steyer among seniors, and leads among white voters, parents, Republicans, conservatives, Trump voters, those with high school educations, those with the highest household incomes, and in rural areas and the Inland Empire.

Democrats Eric Swalwell and Katie Porter, as well as Republican Chad Bianco, are all effectively tied for 3rd place, with Swalwell nominally ahead at 9%, Porter and Bianco at 8%.

Swalwell is strongest, at 19%, among those who say they are somewhat liberal – where he and Steyer are tied. Swalwell's support is a nominal single point higher among those interviewed after the news broke, 10% vs. 9%.

Porter is strongest, at 17%, among voters of Asian and other descent – where she and Steyer are tied. Porter also polled one point higher after the Swalwell news broke, 9% vs. 8%.

Bianco is strongest, at 24%, among Republicans – where Hilton takes 47%. Bianco declines 1 point, from 8% to 7%, after the Swalwell news.

Five other Democrats are further back:

Antonio Villaraigosa at 5% (5% for those interviewed before the Swalwell news, 2% for those interviewed after it).
Xavier Becerra at 4% (but up 3 points, to 7%, among those interviewed after the Swalwell news).
Betty Yee at 4% (4% before, 2% after Swalwell story breaks)
Matt Mahan at 4% (4% before, 5% after)
Tony Thurmond at 1% (0% before, 2% after).

18% of likely voters tell SurveyUSA they are undecided – including 17% of those who responded to the survey before the Swalwell news broke wildly and 21% of those who responded after the news broke.

Just curious about that "before the news broke wildly" thing. Did they mean widely? Although I suppose "wildly" does kind of make sense too.