To the editor: The Sunday paper, in each the first and California sections, effectively describes the sense that many have as we method the November vote. The article concerning the Home race in California’s twenty second Congressional District would possibly effectively describe the city during which I reside (“Will the economy motivate voters? This Central Valley swing district could be a test,” Sept. 13). Individuals interviewed sound cheap and pragmatic. Many marvel if the 2 main events even stand for something apart from self-interest.
In the meantime, columnists Anita Chabria and Mark Z. Barabak ponder notion of picture — the core theme of Sacramento politics — and Gov. Gavin Newsom (“Gavin Newsom is a lame duck. Can his presidential hopes still take flight?,” Sept. 13). Steve Lopez and Gustavo Arellano state the situation effectively: Each events deserve a very good lambasting (“Abandoned properties, fire hazards. Are L.A. mayor candidates part of the fix, or the problem?,” Sept. 12; “Your patron saints for the 2026 election,” Sept. 10). Inflation, warfare, relations with Canada and Mexico, immigration, schooling and native governance. All left unresolved.
My inclination is to vote unbiased and third celebration solely. Rejecting the 2 dominant events embraces one core perception: Change is required. Daily there are extra unbiased voters, and we symbolize a category keen to compromise and transfer ahead for the frequent good.
John Culbertson, Carpinteria
