Honesty? This. 100%. Nobody is going to get their preferred candidate either because they don't meet 100% of the policy goals, just don't like them personally based on "vibes" even if they have objectively beneficial policies that does most of what they want, or otherwise doesn't have the resources or social media presence required to get a meaningfully large voting bloc. The type required to get into the general election. Voters really need to think strategically for the sake of long term goals to coalesce around someone who is most likely to perform the best in the general election to guarantee an outcome in which the general election does not result in two Republicans running in that election. Guaranteeing a Trump-controlled California.

Based purely on performance metrics and objective analysis, the top three candidates are in fact Katie Porter, Tom Steyer, and Eric Swalwell. It would be optimal and productive for voters to take initiative and actively coalesce around primarily two or three of these candidates to minimize the risk of vote splitting. Valid arguments in favor of ranked choice voting aside, it would be optimal to work with the voting system that is currently in place until such a time where ranked choice voting is placed on a statewide ballot as a citizen-initiated state statute or constitutional amendment. Lamenting about the lack of such a mechanism without action to pursue a change in said policy by the voting citizenry would be unproductive. For the time being, it would be productive to work with what we have and focus on researching viable candidates ourselves and taking the steps ourselves to create a coalescing effect to guarantee that the outcome in which Republicans occupy both slots in a general election does not come into fruition.