Here we are, two days away from the 2026 California Primary Election, and we are officially in the silly season where there are desperate and at times reckless campaign ads.
Usually it’s best not to look too deeply into ads, but this time, we have no choice.
A local ad from Eric Jones, who is running against longtime incumbent congressman Mike Thompson, states: “The Davis Vanguard calls Jones hardworking, smart, a fighter.”
Text of the Ad:
Here is the transcript for the video:
(0:00) There’s only one candidate for Congress offering new leadership. Eric Jones.
(0:05) The courage to take on the insurance lobby, Pharma and big tech.
(0:08) He’ll be a fighter for us.
(0:10) The [music] appeal Democrat says he has big plans to lower the cost of housing, improve healthcare, and keep corporate money out of politics.
(0:20) The Davis Vanguard called Jones hardworking, smart, a fighter.
(0:25) [music] Eric Jones, a new vision for America.
(0:27) I’m Eric Jones and I approve [music] this message
However, the Davis Vanguard has said no such thing.
A letter that the Vanguard ran under the byline of S. Steward, published in April, used those words
Since the Vanguard’s IRS battle and the guidelines received by legal counsel, the Vanguard now runs all op-eds and letters with a disclaimer to clarify the Vanguard is not endorsing these views.
The disclaimer reads: “Opinions are those of the writer and do not reflect those of The Vanguard or its Editorial Staff. The Vanguard does not endorse political candidates and is committed to publishing all public opinions and maintaining an open forum subject to guidelines related to decency and tone, not content.”
Unfortunately, Eric Jones’ campaign disclaimer ad is attributing these words to the Vanguard.
That is not accurate — the Vanguard has simply run letters to the editor on both sides of this and other elections this cycle and publication does not imply endorsement nor should be attributed to the Vanguard.
(Editor’s note: The Eric Jones campaign apologized to the Vanguard and let us know they were taking the ad down).
So I’m watching CNBC the other day and they are talking about Anthropic, a major Artificial Intelligence company, that is going to have what is expected to be the highest valued initial public offering in history. In the CNBC story they said Anthropic would trade at an estimated market capitalization of $1.8 trillion. That t in trillion is not a typo.
Anyway in the story on CNBC, they were talking about early investors in Anthropic, investors who are going to get a huge payday when the IPO hits and I hear them mention Dragoneer.
Now for those of you who haven’t been paying attention Dragoneer is where Empty Suit Eric Jones worked before deciding to buy himself a Congressional seat. Some of the people at Dragoneer are the same people who have spent millions of dollars in independent expenditure ads stuffing your mail boxes with negative mailers attacking Mike Thompson and supporting their former colleague Empty Suit Eric Jones.
Meanwhile there is a major debate in Washington DC. A Federalism vs States Rights debate over who will regulate A.I. with the Trump administration arguing that the Federal government should usurp the rights of states like California to regulate A.I.
I think I can guess where Empty Suit Eric will come down in this debate. Nevertheless I do congratulate Eric and the people at Dragoneer for making an early investment in what is predicted to be the biggest payday in the history of Wall Street.
But before you vote remember the words of F Scott Fitzgerald who famously wrote “Let me tell you about the very rich, they are different from you and me.”
Eric Jones’ campaign just called, apologized and let me know they were pulling the ad.
I covered politics for a major metropolitan newspaperman for 15 years. This is the middle of the weekend. I would be surprised if local TV outlets actually execute the Jones’ team requests to take down these fake endorsement ads until late Monday, hours before Election Day . Which is exactly why candidates do these slimy things at the last minute.
I’m confused as to why the Jones campaign thinks that a Vanguard endorsement is valuable in the first place. Pretty sure that Reisig didn’t need it, though I understand that this is related to the reason that the Vanguard had some “difficulty” with the IRS.
It’s unfortunate that the law apparently does allow the Vanguard to campaign on behalf of development proposals, however.
The government really needs to overhaul its 501(c)(3) regulations. Think about it – the California Realtors Association has created a YIMBY “non-profit” 501(c)(3), themselves. How in the heck is that allowed?
https://www.caforhomes.org/
“I’m confused as to why the Jones campaign thinks that a Vanguard endorsement is valuable in the first place.”
I was wondering the same thing. 🤣
Ron O: “I’m confused as to why the Jones campaign thinks that a Vanguard endorsement is valuable in the first place.”
Keith O: “I was wondering the same thing.”
If you do not believe that David and this site have influence then neither of you would have reason to post here multiple times a day in an effort to contradict him. Your actions tell the story.
Mark: I’m not sure it makes any difference one way or another.
It apparently didn’t regarding DISC 1 & 2, or regarding Reisig at least.
And David believed that Nishi 1 was better than Nishi 2. (Not sure what he thought of WDAAC/Bretton Woods, but my buddy Eileen supported the latter.)
If anyone has a “pulse on the heartbeat of the community”, I’d guess it’s Eileen – more than David (regarding development proposals).
She probably has a better record than Mike Tyson.
On NextDoorDavis, a Jones supporter, an ethical person whom I believe is personally blameless for what happened here, blamed Jones’ campaign staff for this video. However, Jones stated in the video message itself that he personally approved this ad. He has not issued any public statement of regret or acceptance of blame for what happened. Absent that and a more detailed explanation of what actually happened here by the campaign, one can only wonder if the mistake here was that he got caught.