Democrats’ Incentives to Turn on Eric Swalwell

You may be wondering why Democrats and their pundit class have turned so swiftly on Eric Swalwell. The California representative, a longtime fixture on cable TV and a vendor in good standing of the most hackish Democratic talking points, has in the space of four days become such a persona non grata in his party that his endorsers in the race for California governor abandoned him and his party’s leaders called upon him to drop out of the race, which he promptly did. Stories of sexual impropriety, predation, and even assault that were merely rumored as recently as Thursday are now career-ending — although, notably, not quite career-ending enough to trigger calls for him to quit Congress.

Let’s explain how the incentives suddenly shifted to result in a mass and seemingly lockstep-coordinated abandonment of Swalwell. First, recall that Gavin Newsom is not running for a third term, and the June 2 primary for governor is a “jungle” primary open to both parties, with the top 2 finishers advancing to November. I’ve previously explained how the California system functions, and in a normal year, it benefits the Democrats, often resulting in a general election between two Democrats with the Republicans shut out of the general election entirely.

Not in 2026. The Democrats had eight candidates, while Republicans have only two, Steve Hilton and Chad Bianco. Moreover, those eight Democrats are surprisingly well-matched, with five fairly prominent figures and a sixth who has won statewide office — but no clear frontrunner. As I observed in February, this has created a situation in which it is at least theoretically possible that Republicans could take the two general election slots. For months, Hilton and Bianco have been one and two in the RealClearPolitics poll average, albeit by a very slim margin, and entering Friday, Hilton was first at 14.7 percent with Bianco third at 13 percent, while Swalwell was second at 13.7 percent, Katie Porter fourth at 11.3 percent, and the deep-pocketed Tom Steyer fifth at 10.3 percent.

That presents Democrats with two possibilities. One is the disaster scenario where Hilton and Bianco are the two general election candidates. Democrats need to winnow the field, and quickly, to avoid that. Early voting (which in California is indistinguishable from election day voting) starts in just over three weeks.

The other, likelier outcome is that Hilton (who was recently endorsed by Donald Trump) makes the general election ballot with Swalwell as his only opponent. But Swalwell, while nominally the Democratic frontrunner, is a weak one, never polling out of the teens. If Democratic insiders know that he’s sitting on unexploded ordnance that his opponents can detonate at a time of their choosing, that’s a huge risk for them. And apparently, Swalwell’s misbehavior has been an open secret for years, maybe over a decade, in Democratic circles.

Moreover, the alternatives to Swalwell are, in general, running to his left and/or are progressive darlings: Porter has a big “yes, queen” public fanbase, and Steyer is a hard-left fanatic who has spread a ton of his cash around progressive politics. (Porter’s allies are strongly suspected of having pushed the opposition research drop on Swalwell.) So not only are there multiple strong partisan interests to get him out of the race, there are ideological incentives to turn on a guy they’ve previously protected.

In short: Democrats have not suddenly gotten religion on sexual abusers in a way that shows they are willing to let a Republican win a major election. They are instead acting ruthlessly in their own partisan, personal, and ideological interests. That’s why they’re abruptly treating Eric Swalwell the way they normally treat Republicans. They know that if he becomes their only nominee, it’s too late to not support him to the hilt. So this is now or never. That’s why this looks so coordinated on so many levels. Because everybody who wasn’t read into the plan already could see where the wind needed to blow.