# 2021 California gubernatorial recall election

The 2021 California gubernatorial recall election was a special recall election that started in August 2021 and ended on September 14, 2021, when the majority of California voters chose not to recall incumbent Democratic governor Gavin Newsom, elected for the term January 2019 to January 2023. Many hopefuls took on the incumbent, to become the replacement Governor.
Had the recall been successful, the replacement candidate with the most votes on the second part of the ballot would have assumed the office. The election followed the same format used in the November 2020 general election: in August, county election offices sent an official ballot to the mailing address of every registered voter, giving them the option to vote by mail on or before election day, or, when polling places opened statewide, to vote in-person. The recall petition was filed in February 2020 and signatures were collected from June 2020 to March 2021, with the signature drive gaining critical momentum in late 2020 regarding Newsom's personal behavior and leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic. The front runner Larry Elder chose to run in the 2024 Republican Party presidential primaries.
Voters' ability to recall an elected official in California is the result of Progressive Era democratic reforms intended to reduce corruption, enacted alongside the introduction of the ballot initiative and women's suffrage in 1911. Following a petition drive collecting signatures amounting to at least 12 percent of voters in the previous election for the political office in question, a special election is held. The election was the fourth gubernatorial recall election in American history and the second in state history after the 2003 recall election, which resulted in the successful recall of Governor Gray Davis, who was replaced with Arnold Schwarzenegger.
The ballot asked voters two separate questions: whether to recall Newsom as governor, and which candidate should replace Newsom as governor if he were recalled. All voters could answer the second question regardless of their vote (if any) on the first. Allies of Newsom were successful in dissuading any high-profile Democrats from entering the field of candidates seeking to replace Newsom if he was recalled. His campaign encouraged voters to vote "no" on the first question (whether to recall Newsom) while abstaining from voting on the second question (who should replace Newsom if he were recalled). Largely as consequence of this, while 12,838,565 voters answered the first question, only 7,361,568 voters answered the second.
Due to the wide margin of the results, most major news outlets projected the race for Newsom within an hour of polls closing; later that night, Larry Elder, the frontrunner replacement candidate, conceded defeat. Official certification of the results occurred on October 22, 2021.

## Background

Elections in California :
Federal governmentU.S. President
1852
1856
1860
1864
1868
1872
1876
1880
1884
1888
1892
1896
1900
1904
1908
1912
1916
1920
1924
1928
1932
1936
1940
1944
1948
1952
1956
1960
1964
1968
1972
1976
1980
1984
1988
1992
1996
Dem
Rep
2000
Dem
Rep
2004
Dem
Rep
2008
Dem
Rep
2012
Dem
Rep
2016
Dem
Rep
2020
Dem
Rep
2024
Dem
Rep
U.S. Senate
1849
1850
1852 sp
1856
1857 sp
1860
1860 sp
1868
1872
1873
1873 sp
1878
1880
1885
1886 sp
1887
1891
1891 sp
1893
1895 sp
1897
1900 sp
1903
1905
1909
1911
1914
1916
1920
1922
1926
1928
1932
1934
1938
1940
1944
1946
1946 sp
1950
1952
1954 sp
1956
1958
1962
1964
1968
1970
1974
1976
1980
1982
1986
1988
1992
1992 sp
1994
1998
2000
2004
2006
2010
2012
2016
2018
2022
2022 sp
2024
2024 sp
2028
2030
U.S. House of Representatives
1849
1851
1852
1854
1856
1859
1861
1863
1864
1867
1868
1871
1872
1875
1876
1879
1880
1882
1884
1886
1888
1890
1892
1894
1896
1898
1900
1902
1904
1906
1908
1910
1912
1914
1916
1918
1920
1922
1924
1926
1928
1930
1932
1934
1936
1938
1940
1942
1944
1946
12th
1948
1950
1952
1954
1956
1958
1960
1962
1964
1966
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1987
5th sp
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2001
32nd sp
2002
2004
2005
5th sp
48th sp
2006
50th sp
2007
36th sp
2008
12th sp
2009
10th sp
32nd sp
2010
2011
36th sp
2012
2014
2016
2017
34th sp
2018
2020
25th sp
2022
22nd sp
2024
16th
20th sp
30th
45th
47th
2026 :
State governmentExecutive Governor
1849
1851
1853
1855
1857
1859
1861
1863
1867
1871
1875
1879
1882
1886
1890
1894
1898
1902
1906
1910
1914
1918
1922
1926
1930
1934
1938
1942
1946
1950
1954
1958
1962
1966
1970
1974
1978
1982
1986
1990
1994
1998
2002
2003 (recall)
2006
2010
2014
2018
2021 (recall)
2022
2026
Lieutenant governor
1950
1954
1958
1962
1966
1970
1974
1978
1982
1986
1990
1994
1998
2002
2006
2010
2014
2018
2022
2026
Attorney general
1970
1974
1978
1982
1986
1990
1994
1998
2002
2006
2010
2014
2018
2022
2026
Secretary of state
1970
1974
1978
1982
1986
1990
1994
1998
2002
2006
2010
2014
2018
2022
Treasurer
1994
1998
2002
2006
2010
2014
2018
2022
2026
Controller
1994
1998
2002
2006
2010
2014
2018
2022
Insurance commissioner
1994
1998
2002
2006
2010
2014
2018
2022
Superintendent
1994
1998
2002
2006
2010
2014
2018
2022
Board of equalization
2018
2022
Legislature Senate
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024
Special
Assembly
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2021 (79th sp)
2022 (17th sp)
2024
Special
Judiciary Court of appeals
1994
1998
2002
2006
Elections by year
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2005
2006
2008
Feb
Jun
Nov
2009
2010
Jun
Nov
2012
Jun
Nov
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024 :
State propositions1910–1919
1911
4
7
8
1960–1969
1964
14
1970–1979
1978
6
8
13
1980–1989
1982
8
1986
64
65
1988
98
99
1990–1999
1994
187
1996
196
209
215
218
1998
6
10
227
2000–2009
2000
21
22
36
39
2003
53
54
2004
1A
55
56
57
58
59
60
60A
61
62
63
64
65
66
69
71
2005
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
2006
81
82
83
85
87
89
90
2008
91
92
93
94, 95, 96, and 97
98 and 99
1A
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
2009
1A
1B
1C
1D
1E
1F
2010–2019
2010
13
14
15
16
17
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
2012
29
30
32
34
37
38
39
2014
1
2
41
42
45
46
47
48
2016
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
2018
68
69
70
71
72
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
2020–2029
2020
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2022
1
26
27
28
29
30
31
2024
1
2
3
4
5
6
32
33
34
35
36
Full list :
Los Angeles CountyLos Angeles County Board of supervisors
1980
1996
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024
Ballot measures
1980
A
2008
R
2012
B
J
2016
M
Elections
2020
2022
2024
Los Angeles Mayor
1896
1898
1900
1902
1904
1906
1909 (sp)
1909
1911
1913
1915
1917
1919
1921
1923
1925
1929
1933
1937
1938
1941
1945
1949
1953
1957
1961
1965
1969
1973
1977
1981
1985
1989
1993
1997
2001
2005
2009
2013
2017
2022
2026
City attorney
2009
Ballot measures
1986
U
2017
S
Elections
2009
2011
2013
2015
2017
2019 (sp)
2020
2022
2023 (sp)
2024
Long Beach Mayor
1994
1998
2002
2006
2010
2014
2018
2022 :
Orange CountyOrange County Board of supervisors
2018
2020
2022
2024
District attorney
2018
Anaheim Mayor
2002
2006
2010
2014
2018
2022
Irvine Mayor
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024
Costa Mesa Municipal
1947
1953
1954
1956
1958
1960
1962
1964
1966
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024 :
SacramentoMayor
2000
2004
2008
2012
2016
2020
2024 :
San Diego CountySan Diego County Board of supervisors
2020
San Diego Mayor
1887
1889
1891
1893
1895
1897
1899
1901
1903
1905
1907
1909
1911
1913
1915
1917
1919
1921
1923
1925
1927
1929
1931
1932
1935
1939
1943
1947
1951
1955
1959
1963
1967
1971
1975
1979
1983 (sp)
1984
1986 (sp)
1988
1992
1996
2000
2004
2005 (sp)
2008
2012
2013–14 (sp)
2016
2020
2024
2028
City attorney
2004
2008
2012
2016
2020
City council
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024
Special :
San FranciscoMayor
1901
1903
1905
1907
1909
1911
1931
1935
1939
1943
1947
1951
1955
1959
1963
1967
1971
1975
1979
1983 (recall)
1983
1987
1991
1995
1999
2003
2007
2011
2015
2018 (sp)
2019
2024
District attorney
2019
2022 (recall)
2022 (sp)
2024
Board of supervisors
1977
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024
Board of education
2018
2022 (recall)
Ballot measures
2024
G
Elections
2004
Mar
Nov
2005
2006
Jun
Nov
2007
2008
Feb
Jun
Nov
2009
2010
Jun
Nov
2011
2012
Jun
Nov
2013
2022
Feb :
San JoseMayor
1974
1978
1982
1986
1990
1994
1998
2002
2006
2010
2014
2018
2022
2024 :
Other localities
Bakersfield
Mayoral elections:
2004
2008
2012
2016
2020
2024
Fresno
Mayoral elections:
1996
2000
2004
2008
2012
2016
2020
2024
Oakland
Mayoral elections:
1994
1998
2002
2006
2010
2014
2018
2022
2024
2025
Riverside
Mayoral elections:
1997
2001
2005
2009
2012
2016
2020
2024
San Bernardino
Mayoral elections:
2005
2009
2014
2018
2022
Stockton
Mayoral elections:
2008
2012
2016
2020
2024 :
vte :
Following their ascension into power in 1911, California's progressive Republican reformers introduced direct democracy with the recall (Proposition 8) and the initiative and referendum (Proposition 7) processes, alongside other sweeping democratic reforms like women's suffrage (Proposition 4), to weaken the corrupting power of private interests over the state's government (especially that of the enormously influential Southern Pacific Railroad), and restore, according to newly elected governor Hiram Johnson, "the people's rule".
Prior to this election, the only other gubernatorial recall attempt in California to qualify for the ballot happened in 2003, which resulted in Gray Davis being replaced by Arnold Schwarzenegger. This election was the result of one of 179 attempts to recall a state-level elected official in California since voters gained the right to recall in 1911, one of 55 attempts to recall a governor, and one of six such efforts to remove Newsom. Every California governor since 1960 has experienced some form of a recall attempt. Of the ten prior recall attempts on state-level elected officials in California which led to special recall elections, six ultimately resulted in their removal from office by voters. The recall election was the fourth gubernatorial recall election ever held in the United States; the other three were in North Dakota in 1921, California in 2003, and Wisconsin in 2012.

### Newsom recall petition (June 2020–March 2021)

During Newsom's tenure as governor, a total of seven recall petitions have been launched against him. On February 20, 2020, the petition which led to the 2021 recall election was served against Newsom. It stated, "People in this state suffer the highest taxes in the nation, the highest homelessness rates, and the lowest quality of life as a result." The timing of the recall attempt coincided with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. The basis for previous recall attempts included the state's "Universal Healthcare and laws regarding illegal aliens" and "homelessness".
On June 10, 2020, then-Secretary of State Alex Padilla approved petitioners' petitions for circulation. The recall petition focused on a variety of grievances, on issues such as sanctuary policies, homelessness, high taxes, and water rationing. Newsom's official response to the petition touted his support for funding education, health care, and infrastructure, noted the State's fiscal health, and warned that the recall campaign was a partisan attack that would result in a costly election.
The recall campaign hired a political consulting firm in late June 2020, and the initial plan was to pay circulators to collect signatures. To ensure a successful validation, the recall campaign sought to gather 2 million signatures. Given the difficulties in obtaining signatures during the pandemic, however, the per-signature cost rose dramatically, and petitioners opted to proceed with a team of approximately 5,000 volunteer circulators instead. The first proponent of the recall, Orrin Heatlie, played a grassroots role in the previous attempt led by aspiring Tea Party politician Erin Cruz. Heatlie, a former county sheriff's sergeant, was motivated by his disapproval of a video in which Newsom advised immigrants of their right not to be subject to warrantless searches.
The petition was initially given a signature deadline of November 17, 2020, but was extended to March 17, 2021, by Sacramento County Superior Court Judge James P. Arguelles due to the pandemic. Arguelles ruled that recall proponents could have a longer time window to collect signatures than they normally would have under non-pandemic circumstances.

#### Party at The French Laundry

Newsom was widely criticized in November 2020 for his attendance at a birthday party with more than three households at The French Laundry restaurant in Yountville in the Napa Valley, despite guidelines issued by his administration ahead of an expected holiday COVID-19 surge, which limited private gatherings to at most three households. Also in attendance were multiple lobbyists, including both the head lobbyist and the CEO of the California Medical Association. Newsom and his office initially defended the outing while saying it was the first time he and his wife dined with others in public since the COVID-19 pandemic began, that public dining recommendations were separate from state guidelines for private gatherings, and that the party was held outdoors.
The day after Newsom claimed the party had been held outdoors, photographs showing an enclosed and maskless gathering were published and widely shared. Neighboring diners said Newsom's party was so loud, restaurant staff closed off their garage-like dining space with sliding glass doors, essentially making an indoor dining space. Napa County was in the "orange tier" of pandemic severity at the time, which permitted some indoor dining. Newsom later apologized for attending the celebration. The incident severely damaged Newsom's image and credibility amid the public health crisis.
This incident and voter anger over lockdowns, job losses, and school and business closures were widely credited for the recall petition's surge in support. Other reasons included a $31 billion fraud scandal at the state unemployment agency and pre-pandemic grievances over homelessness and high taxes. By August 2020, the petitioners had submitted 55,000 valid signatures, and from August 2020 through October 2020, a total of 890 new valid signatures were submitted. Coincidentally, both the French Laundry party and the extension of the signature collection deadline happened on November 6, 2020 and between November 5, 2020, and December 7, 2020, over 442,000 new signatures were submitted and verified; 1,664,010 valid signatures, representing roughly 111 percent of the 1,495,709 minimum required signatures and 98 percent of the 1,719,900 final certified signature count, would be submitted from November 2020 to the March 2021 deadline.

#### Reactions

Though the state's Republican Party establishment was not involved with the launch of the recall petition, the growing recall effort eventually received the attention and support of statewide and nationwide Republicans, with the Republican Governors Association commissioning a poll involving prospective candidates in February 2021. In January 2021, Newsom refused to acknowledge the developing recall movement when questioned by reporters. In January 2021, Rusty Hicks, the chairman of the California Democratic Party, likened it to the storming of the U.S. Capitol, calling it the "California coup". The comparison drew bipartisan criticism, with Newsom's former deputy chief of staff, Yashar Ali, saying it was "absolutely insane to frame a recall where the voters go to the polls a coup".

#### Certification

The recall campaign submitted 2,117,730 signatures by the March 2021 deadline. On April 26, 2021, the office of Secretary of State Shirley Weber announced that the recall effort had gained enough signatures to pass the 1,495,709 threshold and qualify for the ballot, pending official certification after a period of 30 days where voters could retract their signatures and where state officials tallied the costs to conduct the election (up to 60 days). The count yielded 1,719,943 valid signatures, which was roughly 13.8 percent of votes cast in 2018, exceeding the 12 percent threshold required to trigger the recall election. On June 23, 2021, the secretary of state announced that only 43 recall signatories withdrew their signatures statewide prior to the withdrawal deadline, resulting in a final count of 1,719,900 signatures (224,191 more than the required total), and all but ensuring a special election to recall Newsom from the governor's office.
After official certification, Lieutenant Governor Eleni Kounalakis was legally required to call the election within 60 to 80 days (per recent changes in recall election procedures signed by Governor Newsom, which eliminated the election cost review requirements if sufficient funding had been appropriated for the election). The signature drive was officially certified on July 1, 2021 and on the same day, Kounalakis called the election for September 14, 2021 (76 days later and the last Tuesday within the 60 to 80 day time period available to Kounalakis).

### Recall campaigning (March 2021–September 2021)

Newsom's opponents said he was being dishonest when in a March 16, 2021, interview with Jake Tapper of CNN, he said, "I've been living through Zoom school and all of the challenge related to it," since his children had been receiving in-person instruction at their private school since October 2020, unlike schoolchildren in many densely-populated and urban public school districts in California. Newsom made the comments while conducting a public outreach effort to address the all-but-certain recall. The COVID-19 pandemic in California led to widespread school closures, the emergence of distance learning, and student mental health and academic challenges, and by the summer of 2021, education became a prominent issue in the recall campaign. Republican candidates said the public K-12 school system failed to adequately serve students after teachers unions' demands led to extended shutdowns, and proposed a statewide voucher system, whereby parents could use their share of per-pupil state funding on the public, charter, or private school of their choice.
Ahead of the September recall election, President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris campaigned for Newsom. At a rally in Long Beach on the eve of the election, Biden said, "Folks, send a message to the nation: Courage matters, leadership matters, science matters. Vote to keep Gavin Newsom." Both Biden and Newsom likened the frontrunner candidate Larry Elder to Trump, with Newsom warning, "We may have defeated Donald Trump, but we have not defeated Trumpism. Trumpism is still on the ballot in California."
Newsom's campaign ran television ads in September 2021 that called his Republican opponents' positions "anti-vax" and called the outcome of the recall vote "a matter of life and death." All four major Republican candidates (Elder, Faulconer, Kiley, and Cox) opposed vaccine mandates, although none contended that the vaccines were dangerous and all said that they had been vaccinated against the virus. Among the Republican candidates, Faulconer was the strongest advocate of COVID-19 vaccination; Cox had an "evolving position" but eventually recommended that everyone get vaccinated against COVID-19, and Elder and Kiley said that individuals should make up their own minds. Elder pledged, if elected, to repeal all face-covering and COVID-19 testing requirements for state workers.

#### Newsom under recall

Although the recall petition was introduced in February 2020, before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, Newsom's response faced scrutiny by recall supporters and the news media. Many in favor of recalling Newsom cited issues unrelated to the pandemic as reasons for their support.
Newsom presided over an unexpected surplus in the state's 2021 finances, attributable to the recovery in the stock market, the state's progressive tax code, and $26 billion in federal aid, and announced a $100 billion post-pandemic spending proposal in May 2021 which would expand the eligibility for stimulus checks issued by the state to higher-wage earners with an additional payment to those with children, provide rental and utility assistance, and give funds to small businesses. While Newsom was required to return some of the surplus to taxpayers due to the Gann limit, which requires surplus funds to "be returned by a revision of tax rates or fee schedules", the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association said the law was likely being misapplied with the issuance of rebate checks to targeted constituencies rather than with the reduction of tax rates for all taxpayers. A report from the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office, published shortly after the proposal was revealed, said that when considering spending that must go towards public schools, pay off debt, or be placed in the state's main reserve account, the surplus was actually $38 billion, not $75 billion as claimed by Newsom, that the proposal was being rushed since more time was needed to determine which solutions would be effective, and that the proposal was "shortsighted and inadvisable" since it requested $12 billion from the state's existing reserves in spite of the surplus. Newsom's Democratic predecessor Jerry Brown said the spending plans were "not sustainable" and said, "I would predict, certainly within two years, we're going to see fiscal stress." Proponents of Newsom's proposal said the high amount of spending was "historic" and would help the economy recover from the pandemic, while opponents said Newsom's proposal was crafted in response to the imminent recall election. According to state officials, a stimulus payment would be issued to eligible individuals starting in September 2021. The first round of 600,000 stimulus checks was directly deposited into bank accounts on August 27, 2021, with payments to other recipients scheduled to be disbursed every two weeks.
In May 2021, Kaiser Health News reported that throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, Newsom was "routinely outsourcing life-or-death public health duties to his allies in the private sector" with lucrative no-bid government contracts. The report said the "vast majority" of awardees were Newsom supporters and donors who had collectively donated $113 million to his political campaigns (including to his campaign to fight the recall), charitable causes, or policy initiatives, since his entry into state-level politics in 2010.
In June 2021, The Sacramento Bee reported that the non-profit organization founded by Newsom's wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom, had received over $800,000 in donations from companies that lobbied or did business with California state government, and paid her over $2.3 million since 2011 for leading the organization and producing documentary films through her production company, Girl's Club Entertainment. When questioned about his wife's non-profit, Newsom denied that there was any conflict of interest with the arrangement. In response to the report, several recall challengers called for a ban on donations to non-profit organizations of elected officials' family members from companies engaged in business with the state.

#### Partisanship

The recall effort was not launched by the state Republican Party apparatus, but rather by activists who had unsuccessfully attempted to recall Newsom before; the activists said the party establishment did not get involved in a substantial way until the recall effort had almost triggered the election.
Newsom did not acknowledge the recall election until its occurrence became all but certain, calling the effort "partisan, Republican". He recruited nationwide Democrats to help fundraise against it. State Democratic leaders warned members of their party against running in the recall election to avoid a potential split electorate, which some attribute to the 2003 recall of Governor Gray Davis, where Democratic lieutenant governor Cruz Bustamante was defeated in his candidacy by Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger. A May 2021 UC Berkeley Institute of Government Studies poll sponsored by the Los Angeles Times found that Democratic voters overwhelmingly preferred having a prominent Democratic replacement candidate on the ballot in case the recall was successful, at odds with attempts by party leadership to prevent such a scenario.
Former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger disputed the supposed partisan motives of the recall, comparing the 2021 effort to the successful 2003 recall and saying,
   "It's pretty much the same atmosphere today as it was then. There was dissatisfaction, to the highest level. And it's the same with the momentum. Something that sets it off to a higher level, kind of the straw that breaks the camel's back ... like an explosion."
Democratic strategist Katie Merrill said that the chance for a successful recall in 2021 was low:
   "Politically, we're a completely different state than we were in 2003. If you look at the statewide races, the Republican Party has effectively become a third party in California."
Newsom sought to connect the backers of the recall effort to "the RNC, anti-mask and anti-vax extremists, and pro-Trump forces", while recall proponents said that the recall was only about Newsom and his performance as governor, and claimed that around one-third of recall petition signatories were registered Democrats or independents. As of April 30, 2021, nearly a year after the recall campaign was approved for petition circulation by the secretary of state, Trump had yet to personally comment on the recall effort. In September 2021, Trump commented on the recall election, claiming without evidence that it was "probably rigged".
Despite the CDC's mid-May guidance that it was not necessary for persons fully vaccinated against COVID-19 to wear masks in most indoor settings, Newsom's administration decided that California would continue its indoor mask mandate for another month, until June 15, 2021. Reception to the CDC's new guidance among public health experts had been mixed, with some favoring quick implementation and others favoring a delay, including Bob Wachter, chair of the UCSF Department of Medicine, who called the CDC's new guidance "premature". The delayed implementation was criticized by UCSF scientist and COVID-19 expert Dr. Monica Gandhi who said it had no scientific rationale, while potentially causing harm by suggesting there is "still a danger when there isn't one". Isaac Hale, a lecturer of political science at UC Davis, said partisan politics concerning the recall may have been a factor in the decision:
   "One of [the] top political priorities Newsom has is keeping the Democratic base together, which is why they're really focused on arguing the recall is a partisan Republican endeavor. The biggest thing that could damage that narrative is if a prominent Democrat or progressive emerged as a candidate in the recall, like Cruz Bustamante did in 2003. The key to Newsom staying in power is keeping the Democratic base happy, consolidated and making sure the California Democratic Party is the party of Gavin Newsom, and Gavin Newsom only. It's smart politics since mask mandates are popular among California Democrats."
Jack Citrin, a political science professor at UC Berkeley, said changing the electoral calendar threatened to reinforce the public's cynicism about politicians using any means available to stay in power, and that they were "trying to create a situation that is most favorable for the partisan outcome that they favor". The changes were heavily criticized by Newsom's Republican opponents.
In August, recall proponents filed suit challenging language proposed by Newsom for the voter information handbook, alleging it falsely or misleading characterized the recall as a "power grab" by "Republicans and Trump supporters". On August 5, 2021, Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Laurie M. Earl ruled against the suit and allowed inclusion of the disputed language, saying, "There is nothing false or misleading about describing the recall effort's leaders as Trump supporters." Judge Earl wrote that while it may have been an exaggeration to describe the election as a "Republican recall", the rhetoric was "common to political debate" and "permissible".
On July 24, 2021, the California Republican Party's steering committee voted to allow the party to endorse a candidate in the recall election, if the candidate received at least 60 percent of delegate votes in an upcoming August 7 meeting. Some Republicans opposed the move out of concern that endorsing a single candidate would reduce Republican voter turnout. On August 7, the party voted to cancel the endorsement vote and issue no endorsement; prior to the cancellation of the endorsement vote, Republican delegates were set to choose an endorsee from the four candidates who each had received the support of at least 200 delegates, which were Larry Elder, Kevin Faulconer, Kevin Kiley, and Doug Ose.
With political allies having successfully dissuaded prospective high-level Democrats from joining the race, Newsom's campaign urged supporters to skip the second question on the recall ballot. The directive was criticized by nonpartisan political observers, who said that it was misleading and could cause voter confusion.

### Recall election (September 2021)
#### Election administration

After some blueprints of the Dominion Voting Systems voting machines were leaked, a group of eight cybersecurity experts called, in a letter to Secretary of State Shirley Weber, for rigorous auditing of the recall election with a risk-limiting audit to mitigate any cyberattack risk. The experts wrote that they had no evidence of a hacking threat, and did not cast any blame on Dominion, but said that the state and counties should take steps to ensure that "the release of the Dominion software into the wild" did not increase election security risks. The California Secretary of State's office said the 40 counties in California using Dominion election management system use a different version of the software that meets state requirements, and noted that California election systems have layered security protections, including routine vulnerability testing, pre-election testing, access controls, and physical security. California also uses paper ballots with a voter-verified paper audit trail, another security measure.

#### Larry Elder's unsubstantiated fraud claim prior to election day

The day before the end of voting, candidate Larry Elder claimed on his campaign website that fraud had already been detected and linked to a petition for citizens to sign "demanding a special session of the California legislature to investigate and ameliorate the twisted results" of the election, though no vote totals had yet been reported. Elder would concede defeat on election day. His claim that cast doubt on the legitimacy of the election result was accompanied by similar unsubstantiated claims from former president Donald Trump and several right-wing media figures.

## California's recall process

As of 2021, California is one of 19 states to allow recall elections. Under state law, any elected official may be subjected to a recall. To trigger a recall election of a statewide elected official, proponents must gather a certain number of signatures from registered voters within a certain time period. The number must equal at least 12 percent of the votes cast in the previous election for that office. Based on the previous gubernatorial election, the 2021 recall petition required 1,495,709 signatures. When the secretary of state confirms that a recall petition meets the required number of signatures, a recall election must be scheduled within 60 to 80 days. If the petition qualifies fewer than 180 days prior to the next regularly scheduled election, then the recall becomes part of that regularly scheduled election. In the case of a recall against the governor, the responsibility for scheduling the recall election falls on the lieutenant governor, which for 2021 was Eleni Kounalakis.
A recall ballot in California consists of two parts: whether the incumbent should be recalled, and a selection of replacement candidates in the event they are recalled. If a simple majority of those who cast ballots favors removing the incumbent by selecting "YES" on the first question, then the replacement candidate who receives the most votes (a type of plurality voting) finishes out the incumbent's term in office. A voter is allowed a single unranked vote when choosing a preferred replacement candidate, irrespective of their response to the first question. If the recall had been successful, the new governor would have taken office 38 days after the election and served the remainder of the term through January 2, 2023. Following legislation, all registered voters would be mailed a ballot for any elections held in 2021, including the recall election (subsequent legislation signed by Governor Newsom in September 2021 would mandate the same universal mail-in format for all future state and local elections).

### Changes to state recall election laws

Though California's recall process remains fundamentally unchanged since its introduction in 1911, beginning in 2017 and up to the 2021 gubernatorial recall, California's Democratic-led government enacted legislation to change how recall elections are conducted. Several lawmakers and academics also proposed more substantial changes during the 2021 recall campaign that would later fail in the legislature and the courts; similar rule changes were proposed during California's 2003 recall election campaign that targeted Democrat Gray Davis. In addition, a new election law was applied to the 2021 recall election, though its application would later be ruled invalid in court.

#### Recall election timeline (SB 117 and SB 152)

In 2017, ahead of the successful recall of State Senator Josh Newman (D-Fullerton), Democratic legislators changed the law concerning recall elections with Senate Bill 117 to give voters 30 business days to withdraw their names from the recall petition. The 2017 law change also added a 30-day period for the state Department of Finance to conduct a cost estimate and gave the Joint Legislative Budget Committee 30 days to review the estimate.
On June 28, 2021, Newsom signed Senate Bill 152 into law, which allowed for his recall election to be held as early as August 2021 by allowing for a shorter recall timeline, which had been lengthened prior to the recall of Senator Newman. The changes allowed the lieutenant governor to set a date for the recall without waiting for the Joint Legislative Budget Committee to review the cost estimate "so long as the Legislature has appropriated the funds it determines 'reasonably necessary' to conduct the recall election". With the same law change, the legislature appropriated $250 million to administer the recall election.

#### Election cost

While Newsom's pre-pandemic response to the recall effort in early 2020 warned that a special recall election would cost $81 million, county officials estimated in June 2021 that a statewide recall election, which at the time was expected to be held in the fall of 2021, would cost taxpayers $215 million. This higher estimate had presumed higher paper costs due to California's requirements for universal mail-in ballots instituted during the COVID-19 pandemic, which covered all elections held in 2020 and 2021, as well as a lengthy recall calendar featuring the rule changes enacted in 2017, ahead of Senator Newman's recall.
With the shortened timeline from SB 152 now ensuring a summertime election, California's county election clerks nonetheless urged Lieutenant Governor Kounalakis to schedule the election as late as possible, citing an inability to guarantee a successful August election, possible voter confusion, and the potential for costs far beyond the original estimate. A summertime election, held in late August or early September, could have helped Newsom defeat the recall by avoiding political fallout over fires, virus variants, or school reopenings, which could coincide with what had been anticipated to be a late October or early November recall election; this strategic advantage was the rationale for public advocacy for an earlier election by Democratic state senator Steve Glazer. On July 1, the Department of Finance released an estimate of the cost of the September 14, 2021 election at $276 million, an increase of $61 million from the prior $215 million estimated by county election offices.
Newsom's campaign and Democratic legislative leaders of both state houses had criticized the recall election as a waste of taxpayer money, while recall proponents said, "You can't put a price on democracy," and that some costs could have been avoided if officials allowed for a "traditional" election without universal mail-in ballots. While the projected $276 million cost of the recall was close to the $292 million spent on the 2020 general election in California, which was the first to feature universal mail-in ballots, the cost per voter was significantly higher than in the 2018 midterm elections.
Secretary of State Weber said in an interview with KABC-TV that the recall election's total cost by election day had surpassed $276 million and was on track to eventually exceed $300 million. On February 3, 2022, election officials released a final tally of the costs for the recall election, at a little over $200.2 million.

#### Incumbent's party preference (SB 151)

In 2019, Newsom signed Senate Bill 151 into law, which gave recall targets the right to state their party preference on the recall ballot. Newsom was unable to take advantage of the new law after his campaign missed a February 2020 deadline (when the recall petition was filed) to state his party preference. In June and July 2021, Newsom's campaign sued Secretary of State Shirley Weber (whom he appointed earlier in 2021) over the issue, but lost the case. Weber sided with him, telling the judge that voters would benefit from knowing Newsom's political party preference. The lawyers arguing the case in opposition to Newsom before Judge James P. Arguelles (who had also approved the recall signature deadline extension) represented replacement candidate Caitlyn Jenner and proponents of the recall.

#### Misapplication of tax return disclosure law (SB 27)

A new requirement for gubernatorial candidates to disclose their most recent tax returns was passed into law in 2019, when Governor Newsom signed Senate Bill 27. Although the language of the law says that gubernatorial candidates must publicize the prior five years of their tax returns in order for their names to appear on a "primary ballot", the secretary of state applied the law to the recall election. The law has been cited as a potential reason for the major reduction in recall replacement candidates relative to the number of candidates in the 2003 gubernatorial recall.
The tax return disclosure requirement did not apply to Newsom, who was not considered a "candidate" in the recall. Newsom's campaign nonetheless submitted his tax documents to Secretary of State Shirley Weber, who refused to publish them on the grounds that the governor was not required to disclose them. Newsom's campaign did not respond to a reporter's July 19, 2021, request for his recent tax returns.
On July 21, 2021, Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Laurie Earl invalidated all tax return disclosure requirements for the 2021 recall election. The ruling was on a suit filed by prospective recall challenger Larry Elder against Secretary of State Weber, alleging she overstepped her authority by disqualifying him from his candidacy due to a purported tax return filing error. The judge ruled that Weber had improperly disqualified Elder, who had "substantially complied" with the requirements and that the special recall election was not a primary election and therefore Senate Bill 27 did not even apply. By then, 42 candidates' tax returns had already been made public by the secretary of state's office. Weber's office said it would comply with the ruling and did not appeal.

#### Constitutional legal challenge

In August 2021, an essay by UC Berkeley School of Law Dean Erwin Chemerinsky and UC Berkeley Professor of Law and Economics Aaron Edlin appeared in The New York Times claiming California's recall process violates the Constitution of the United States, since more people could vote to retain Newsom than for any particular candidate while still ousting him, thus potentially violating "one person, one vote" legal precedent (conversely, if a majority of voters favored retaining Newsom, but an even greater number of voters favored a particular replacement candidate, Newsom would nonetheless prevail). Charles C. W. Cooke, writing in The National Review in the same month, criticized the rationale and timing of the essay's publication and said Chemerinsky had selectively taken issue with California's recall, in which a Democrat was targeted, by not bringing up the pivotal 2020–21 United States Senate election in Georgia, which would also be invalid by his logic. Many experts have said the current recall process would probably survive legal challenges.
On August 13, 2021, two California voters filed a federal lawsuit against California's recall process, with formerly disbarred attorney Stephen Yagman and Joseph Reichmann as counsel, alleging violation of the U.S. Constitution's Equal Protection Clause. California Attorney General Rob Bonta said on August 16, 2021, that he was monitoring the lawsuit and legal debate; by then, millions of ballots had already been sent out. On August 27, 2021, United States District Court for the Central District of California Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald, an Obama appointee, dismissed the lawsuit. Judge Fitzgerald, in his ruling, said of the plaintiffs' grievances: "Such disgruntlement raises no federal constitutional issues and certainly does not give the federal judiciary the right to halt the mammoth undertaking of this gubernatorial recall election." The office of Secretary of State Shirley Weber (the defendant in the case) said they would not appeal the ruling.

#### Proposed changes to state recall election law

In April 2021, two bills that could make future recalls less likely were introduced in the California Senate: the first, a bill originally authored by Senator Ben Allen (D-Redondo Beach) two years prior, in response to the recall of Senator Josh Newman, would allow a targeted incumbent to be a candidate on the recall ballot; the second, authored by Senator Josh Newman (who by 2020 had reclaimed his lost state senate seat) would have allowed targets of recall campaigns to access the lists of recall petition signers and try to persuade them to remove their signatures. Neither bill would have impacted the 2021 recall election.
Newman's proposed law (Senate Bill 663) cleared the State Senate's Elections Committee on April 12, but he pulled the bill before it headed to the Judiciary Committee after it received fierce opposition from proponents of the 2021 recall over privacy and voter intimidation concerns. As of July 2021, Senator Allen's bill (Senate Constitutional Amendment 3) was on hold in the legislative "suspense file".
In September 2021, while voting in the recall election was underway, Democratic State Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon said discussions were being held to alter California's recall process; support and opposition to changes in the recall process in California have fallen along partisan lines. Any major changes to the recall process must be approved by California's voters via an amendment to the Constitution of California.

## Fundraising

California's recall process requires that campaigns supporting challengers adhere to the usual campaign finance limits for political candidates, while there is no dollar limit for a donor's contribution to the campaign of the defending incumbent, nor for donations to groups advocating narrowly for the recall of the incumbent while not supporting any specific challenger. For the 2021 recall election, the maximum amount that a donor could have given to a candidate (other than Newsom) was $32,400.
By June 2021, the three biggest donors to Newsom's campaign against the recall were the California Association of Realtors, the California Democratic Party, and Reed Hastings. Prominent donors against the recall also included Steven Spielberg, George Soros, Jeffrey Katzenberg, Peter Chernin, J.J. Abrams and Katie McGrath, Laurene Powell Jobs, and Marissa Mayer. By June 3, 2021, labor unions across the state donated $2 million to Newsom's campaign against the recall and union leaders, while saying their side was already favored by voters, promised a get-out-the-vote drive to "make sure we secure those votes and talk to our members to ensure that base" through a door-to-door canvassing effort.
While organizers of the recall campaign said the effort was driven by grassroots supporters angry over pandemic restrictions and Newsom's attendance at the French Laundry dinner that defied his own guidelines, over half of the $4 million raised by recall proponents by March 2021 originated from two dozen Republican groups, along with wealthy companies and individuals, including Douglas Leone, David O. Sacks and Chamath Palihapitiya. Recall proponents said there was greater voter energy in favor of the recall and that despite having a small budget, an "unparalleled" volunteer base collected more than enough signatures for the "purposeful and organic" recall effort.
By May 26, 2021, $11.1 million and $4.6 million went to the pro-Newsom and pro-recall sides, respectively, with most funding for both sides originating from the same wealthy enclaves around the state. On August 4, 2021, the Los Angeles Times published updated campaign finance data for the upcoming recall election: Newsom's campaign was by far in the lead with $51 million raised, while $5.8 million had been raised by pro-recall committees unaffiliated with a candidate (most of the $5.8 million raised had already been spent during the signature gathering phase). Among challengers who had raised over a million dollars, John Cox reported the most, with $7.6 million (largely self-funded), followed by Faulconer, who reported $3.4 million (raised over a six-month period), and Elder, who reported over $1 million (raised over a three-week period).
After surviving the recall election, Newsom would decide the fate of numerous bills passed in the legislature and determine policy that could affect donors to his anti-recall campaign, which included the film and tech industries, real estate and labor union interests, and Native American tribes, who had collectively donated tens of millions of dollars to fight the recall (being unencumbered by donation limits), in what was described as a unique opportunity to attempt to buy influence in California's government.

## Campaign
### Qualified replacement candidates

To have been listed on the ballot as a replacement candidate, a candidate must have been a United States citizen and registered to vote in California, submitted signatures from 65 registered voters and paid a $4,194.94 filing fee (which could be waived with the submission of 7,000 signatures of registered voters). Candidates who had been convicted of a felony involving bribery or embezzlement of public money were not allowed to run.
The deadline for filing was July 16, 2021. Forty-six candidates qualified to appear on the recall ballot, consisting of 24 Republicans, nine Democrats, two Greens, one Libertarian, and ten no party preference. Four of the 46 candidates qualified after a Sacramento County judge invalidated application of SB 27 on recall elections and ordered California's Secretary of State to add candidates who did not meet requirements for tax return disclosure. The list of candidates on the ballot was certified on July 21, 2021. Additionally, seven write-in candidates were certified by the secretary of state on September 3. Of the write-in candidates, their party affiliation consisted of two Democrats, one Republican, one American Independent, and three no party preference. Lieutenant Governor of California Eleni Kounalakis declined to run.

#### Top candidates

Candidates who received at least 1% of the vote :
| Candidate | Party | Prior positions | Residence |
| Holly L. Baade | Democratic | Spiritual teacher and coach | Fairfax |
| John H. Cox | Republican | Businessman Perennial candidate 2018 Republican gubernatorial nominee | Rancho Santa Fe |
| Larry Elder | Republican | Conservative talk show host and author | Los Angeles |
| Kevin Faulconer | Republican | Former mayor of San Diego (2014–2020) | San Diego |
| Caitlyn Jenner | Republican | Reality show personality Former Olympic athlete Transgender rights activist | Malibu |
| Kevin Kiley | Republican | Assemblyman for California's 6th State Assembly district (2016–2022) | Rocklin |
| Patrick Kilpatrick | Democratic | Actor Screenwriter Producer | Los Angeles |
| Jacqueline McGowan | Democratic | Cannabis advocate and business owner | Napa |
| Kevin Paffrath | Democratic | YouTuber Real estate broker Landlord | Ventura |
| Armando Perez- Serrato | Democratic | Business owner | Orange |
| Brandon Ross | Democratic | Doctor and lawyer | San Diego |
| Joel A. Ventresca | Democratic | Former executive committee member of the Service Employees International Union Retired airport analyst Perennial candidate | San Francisco |
| Daniel Watts | Democratic | Free speech lawyer Green candidate in the 2003 California gubernatorial recall election | Vista |

### Debates

The Richard Nixon Foundation announced plans for two debates during the month of August 2021: the first on August 4, and the second on August 22. The first debate was a 90-minute televised event held at the Nixon Presidential Library in Yorba Linda, California. Six Republican candidates (Faulconer, Elder, Cox, Jenner, Kiley, and Ose) were invited to participate, along with Newsom. The Nixon Foundation announced that all the Republican candidates, with the exception of Jenner, had accepted the invitation, and Gov. Newsom had not responded. A day after the debate was announced with Elder as a participant, the Elder campaign issued a statement that he would not attend the debate.
During the August 17 debate in Sacramento, Cox was served with a subpoena while on stage, and on camera. The subpoena by a San Diego County court was for failure to pay a debt of about $100,000 from his 2018 gubernatorial campaign. Ose had initially accepted the invitation to appear at the same debate, but dropped out of the race the day of the debate, and therefore did not attend. Elder announced that he would not attend the debate, nor any other debate that Newsom was not attending.
During the August 25 debate in Sacramento, Kevin Paffrath called on the other three candidates onstage (Faulconer, Cox, and Kiley) to drop out of the race and endorse him, stating he feared a lame-duck governor would get nothing done.
2021 California's gubernatorial recall election debates :
| No. | Date (2021) | Host / sponsor | Moderator(s) |
| 1 | July 24 | Yes California (virtual format) | Marcus Ruiz Evans & Tom Elias |
| 2 | August 4 | Nixon Presidential Library | Hugh Hewitt (with Robert C. O'Brien, Christine Devine and Elex Michaelson serving as panelists) |
| 3 | August 17 | Sacramento Press Club | Vicki Gonzalez |
| 4 | August 19 | KRON-TV studios, San Francisco | Nikki Laurenzo & Frank Buckley |
| 5 | August 25 | KCRA-TV studios, Sacramento | Alexei Koseff & Deirdre Fitzpatrick |

#### Participation

Participating candidates in the debates :
| Candidate | P Present  A Absent  N Not invited  W Withdrawn | P Present  A Absent  N Not invited  W Withdrawn | P Present  A Absent  N Not invited  W Withdrawn | P Present  A Absent  N Not invited  W Withdrawn | P Present  A Absent  N Not invited  W Withdrawn |
| Debate number (see table above) |||||
| Candidate | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Larry Elder | A | A | A | A | A |
| John Cox | A | P | P | P | P |
| Kevin Faulconer | A | P | P | P | P |
| Kevin Kiley | A | P | P | P | P |
| Caitlyn Jenner | A | A | A | A | A |
| Kevin Paffrath | A | N | N | N | P |
| Doug Ose | P | P | W | W | W |
| Jacqueline McGowan | P | N | N | N | N |
| James G. Hanink | P | N | N | N | N |
| Holly L. Baade | P | N | N | N | N |
| David Alexander Bramante | P | N | N | N | N |
| John R. Drake | P | N | N | N | N |
| David Hillberg | P | N | N | N | N |
| Dan Kapelovitz | P | N | N | N | N |
| Kevin K. Kaul | P | N | N | N | N |
| Daniel R. Mercuri | P | N | N | N | N |
| Joel A. Ventresca | P | N | N | N | N |
| Daniel Watts | P | N | N | N | N |

### Endorsements
#### On recall question
##### Executive branch officials

* Richard Grenell, former United States Ambassador to Germany (2018–2020), former acting director of National Intelligence (2020) and former Special Presidential Envoy for Serbia and Kosovo Peace Negotiations (2019–2021)

##### Governors

* Mike Huckabee, former governor of Arkansas (1996–2007) and candidate for President of the United States in 2008 and 2016
* Pete Wilson, 36th Governor of California (1991–1999), United States Senator from California (1983–1991), and 29th mayor of San Diego (1971–1983)

##### U.S representatives

* Ken Calvert, U.S. representative from California's 42nd congressional district (2023–present), California's 41st congressional district (2013–2023), California's 44th congressional district (2003–2023) and California's 43rd congressional district (1993–2003)
* Dan Crenshaw, U.S. representative from Texas's 2nd congressional district (2019–present)
* Mike Garcia, U.S. representative from California's 25th congressional district (2020–2023) and California's 27th congressional district (2023–present)
* Newt Gingrich, former U.S. representative from Georgia's 6th congressional district (1979–1999), 50th Speaker of the United States House of Representatives (1995–1999), and candidate for President of the United States in 2012
* Darrell Issa, U.S. representative from and California's 48th congressional district (2023–present), California's 50th congressional district (2021–2023), California's 49th congressional district (2003–2019), and California's 48th congressional district (2001–2003); former director of the USTDA (2019–2021)
* Young Kim, U.S. representative from California's 39th congressional district (2021–2023) and California's 40th congressional district (2023–present)
* Doug LaMalfa, U.S. representative from California's 1st congressional district (2013–present)
* Kevin McCarthy, U.S. representative from California's 23rd congressional district (2007–2023), California's 20th congressional district (2023) and House Minority Leader (2019–present)
* Tom McClintock, U.S. representative from California's 4th congressional district (2009–2023), California's 5th congressional district (2023–present) and candidate for governor in the 2003 recall election
* Devin Nunes, U.S. representative from California's 22nd congressional district (2003–2022)
* Jay Obernolte, U.S. representative from California's 8th congressional district (2021–present)
* Doug Ose, former U.S. representative for California's 3rd congressional district (1999–2005) and candidate for governor in 2018 and 2021
* Burgess Owens, U.S. representative for Utah's 4th congressional district (2021–present)
* Michelle Steel, U.S. representative from California's 48th congressional district (2021–2023) and California's 45th congressional district (2023–present)
* David Valadao, U.S. representative from California's 21st congressional district (2013–2019; 2021–2023) and California's 22nd congressional district (2023–present)

##### State legislators

* Laurie Davies, state assemblymember from the 73rd district (2020–present)
* Shannon Grove, state senator from the 16th district (2018–present) and former Republican Minority Leader of the California Senate (2019–2021)
* Dov Hikind, former state assemblymember from New York's 48th Assembly District (1983–2018) (Democrat)
* Gloria Romero, former state senator from the 24th district (2001–2009) and former Democratic Majority Leader of the California Senate (2001–2008) (Democrat)

##### Local officials

* Joel Anderson, member of the San Diego County Board of Supervisors (2021–present) and former state senator from the 38th district (2010–2018)
* Clint Eastwood, former mayor of Carmel-by-the-Sea (1986–1988), actor, film director, composer, and producer (Libertarian)
* Mike Feinstein, former mayor of Santa Monica (2000–2002) and candidate for California Secretary of State in 2018 (Green)

##### Individuals

* Rudy Giuliani, former Mayor of New York City (1994–2001) and former United States Associate Attorney General (1981–1983)
* Rose McGowan, activist and former actress
* David O. Sacks, technology industry executive
* Kat Von D, tattoo artist and television personality

##### Organizations

* California Republican Party
* Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
* Libertarian Party of California

##### Newspapers and other media

* The Bakersfield Californian Editorial Board
* Southern California News Group

##### Executive branch officials

* Joe Biden, 46th president of the United States (2021–2025), 47th vice president of the United States (2009–2017), and former U.S. senator from Delaware (1973–2009)
* Kamala Harris, 49th vice president of the United States (2021–2025) and former U.S. senator from California (2017–2021)
* Barack Obama, 44th president of the United States (2009–2017) and former U.S. senator from Illinois (2005–2008)

##### U.S. senators

* Cory Booker, United States senator from New Jersey (2013–present) and candidate for President of the United States in 2020
* Barbara Boxer, former U.S. senator from California (1993–2017)
* Amy Klobuchar, U.S. senator from Minnesota (2007–present) and candidate for President of the United States in 2020
* Alex Padilla, U.S. senator from California (2021–present) and former California Secretary of State (2015–2021)
* Bernie Sanders, U.S. senator from Vermont (2007–present) and candidate for President of the United States in 2016 and 2020 (Independent)
* Chuck Schumer, U.S. senator from New York (1999–present) and Senate Majority Leader (2021–present)
* Elizabeth Warren, U.S. senator from Massachusetts (2013–present) and candidate for President of the United States in 2020

##### U.S representatives

* Karen Bass, United States representative from California's 37th congressional district (2013–2022)
* Julia Brownley, U.S. representative from California's 26th congressional district (2013–present)
* John Burton, former U.S. representative from California's 5th congressional district (1975–1983)
* Salud Carbajal, U.S. representative from California's 24th congressional district (2017–present)
* Judy Chu, U.S. representative from California's 28th congressional district (2023–present), California's 27th congressional district (2013–2023) and California's 32nd congressional district (2009–2013)
* Mark DeSaulnier, U.S. representative from California's 10th congressional district (2023–present) and California's 11th congressional district (2015–2023)
* Sara Jacobs, U.S. representative from California's 51st congressional district (2023–present) and California's 53rd congressional district (2021–2023)
* Ro Khanna, U.S. representative from California's 17th congressional district (2017–present)
* Barbara Lee, U.S. representative from California's 12th congressional district (2023–2025), California's 13th congressional district (2013–2023) and California's 9th congressional district (1998–2013)
* Ted Lieu, U.S. representative from California's 33rd congressional district (2015–present)
* Zoe Lofgren, U.S. representative from California's 18th congressional district (2023–present), California's 19th congressional district (2013–2023) and California's 16th congressional district (1995–2013)
* Alan Lowenthal, U.S. representative from California's 42nd congressional district (2023) and California's 47th congressional district (2013–2023)
* Doris Matsui, U.S. representative from California's 7th congressional district (2023–present), California's 6th congressional district (2013–2023) and California's 5th congressional district (2005–2013)
* Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, U.S. representative from New York's 14th congressional district (2019–present)
* Nancy Pelosi, U.S. representative from California's 12th congressional district (1987–present) and 52nd Speaker of the United States House of Representatives (2007–2011; 2019–2023)
* Katie Porter, U.S. representative from California's 47th congressional district (2023–2025) and California's 45th congressional district (2019–2023)
* Raul Ruiz, U.S. representative from California's 36th congressional district (2013–2023) and California's 25th congressional district (2023–present)
* Adam Schiff, U.S. representative from California's 30th congressional district (2023–2025), California's 28th congressional district (2013–2023), California's 29th congressional district (2003–2013) and California's 27th congressional district (2001–2003)
* Jackie Speier, U.S. representative from California's 14th congressional district (2013–2023) and California's 12th congressional district (2008–2013)
* Maxine Waters, U.S. representative from California's 43rd congressional district (2013–present) and California's 35th congressional district (1993–2013)

##### State officeholders

* Stacey Abrams, former minority leader of the Georgia House of Representatives (2011–2017), Democratic nominee for Governor of Georgia in 2018, and founder of Fair Fight Action
* Rob Bonta, California Attorney General (2021–present) and former state assemblymember from the 18th district (2012–2021)
* Jerry Brown, former governor of California (1975–1983; 2011–2019)
* Wendy Carrillo, state assemblymember from the 51st district (2017–2024)
* David Chiu, state assemblymember from the 17th district (2014–present) and former president of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors (2009–2014)
* Bill Dodd, state senator from the 3rd district (2016–2024)
* María Elena Durazo, state senator from the 24th district (2018–present)
* Laura Friedman, state assemblymember from the 43rd district (2016–2024)
* Lorena Gonzalez, state assemblymember from the 80th district (2013–2022)
* Hannah-Beth Jackson, former state senator from the 19th district (2012–2020)
* Sydney Kamlager-Dove, state senator from the 30th district (2021–2022)
* Eleni Kounalakis, lieutenant governor of California (2019–present) and former United States Ambassador to Hungary (2010–2013)
* Ricardo Lara, California Insurance Commissioner (2019–present)
* Fiona Ma, California State Treasurer (2019–present), former member of the California Board of Equalization (2015–2019), and former state assemblymember from the 12th district (2006–2012)
* Richard Pan, state senator from the 6th district (2014–2022)
* Fran Pavley, former state senator from the 27th district (2008–2016)
* Robert Rivas, state assemblymember from the 30th district (2018–present)
* Rudy Salas, state assemblymember from the 32nd district (2012–2022)
* Nancy Skinner, state senator from the 9th district (2016–2024)
* Tony Thurmond, California State Superintendent of Public Instruction (2019–present)
* Betty Yee, California State Controller (2015–2023) and former member of the California Board of Equalization (2004–2015)

##### Local officials

* London Breed, mayor of San Francisco (2018–2025; 2017-2018)
* Robert Garcia, mayor of Long Beach (2014–2022)
* Todd Gloria, mayor of San Diego (2020–present; 2013-2014) and former state assemblymember from the 78th district (2016–2020)
* Sam Liccardo, mayor of San Jose (2015–2023)
* Libby Schaaf, mayor of Oakland (2015–2023)
* Antonio Villaraigosa, former mayor of Los Angeles (2005–2013), former Speaker of the California State Assembly (1998–2000), and 2018 gubernatorial candidate

##### Individuals

* Byron Allen, entertainment industry executive
* Mary Carey, adult film actress and candidate for governor of California in the 2003 recall election
* Jaime Harrison, Chair of the DNC
* Alan F. Horn, entertainment industry executive
* George Lopez, actor and comedian
* Alyssa Milano, actress and activist
* Michael Moore, author, film documentary and activist
* Paula Poundstone, actress, author, and comedian
* Rob Reiner, actor, filmmaker, and activist
* Ann Sarnoff, television executive
* George Takei, actor and activist
* Elijah Wood, actor and producer

##### Newspapers and other media

* Bay Area Reporter Editorial Board
* Los Angeles Times Editorial Board
* McClatchy California Editorial Boards
* The Mercury News and East Bay Times Editorial Boards
* Monterey County Weekly Editorial Board
* Napa Valley Register Editorial Board
* The New York Times Editorial Board
* The San Diego Union-Tribune Editorial Board
* San Francisco Chronicle Editorial Board
* Santa Barbara Independent Editorial Board

##### Organizations

* American Civil Liberties Union California Action
* Armenian National Committee of America-Western Region
* California Democratic Party
* California Faculty Association
* California Federation of Teachers
* California League of Conservation Voters
* Climate Hawks Vote
* Democratic Governors Association
* Democratic Socialists of America Los Angeles Electoral Committee
* Equality California
* Green Party of California
* Human Rights Campaign
* International Association of Fire Fighters
* Jewish Democratic Council of America
* NARAL Pro-Choice California
* National Union of Healthcare Workers
* Peace and Freedom Party
* Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California
* Service Employees International Union California
* Socialist Equality Party
* United Food and Commercial Workers
* Valley Industry & Commerce Association

#### For candidates
##### Governors

* Pete Wilson, 36th Governor of California (1991–1999), former U.S. senator from California (1983–1991), and 29th Mayor of San Diego (1971–1983)

##### U.S. representatives

* Dan Crenshaw, U.S. representative from Texas's 2nd congressional district (2019–present)
* Burgess Owens, U.S. representative from Utah's 4th congressional district (2021–present)
* Michelle Steel, U.S. representative from California's 45th congressional district (2023–present) and California's 48th congressional district (2021–2023), former member of the Orange County Board of Supervisors (2015–2021), and former member of the California State Board of Equalization (2007–2015)

##### State legislators

* Laurie Davies, state assemblymember from the 73rd district (2020–present)
* Shannon Grove, state senator from the 16th district (2018–present) and former minority leader of the California Senate (2019–2021)
* Dov Hikind, former state assemblymember from New York's 48th Assembly District (1983–2018) (Democrat)
* Gloria Romero, former state senator from the 24th district (2001–2009) and former Democratic Majority Leader of the California Senate (2001–2008)

##### Local officials

* Clint Eastwood, former mayor of Carmel-by-the-Sea (1986–1988), actor, film director, composer, and producer
* Rudy Giuliani, former mayor of New York City (1994–2001) and former United States Associate Attorney General (1981–1983)

##### Individuals

* Hugh Hewitt, radio talk show host
* Rose McGowan, former actress and activist
* Chuck Norris, martial artist, actor, film producer, and screenwriter
* Mike Piazza, former professional baseball player

##### Organizations

* American Independent Party
* California College Republicans
* California Rifle and Pistol Association
* New York Young Republican Club

##### Newspapers and other media

* The Santa Clarita Valley Signal
* Southern California News Group

##### U.S. representatives

* Darrell Issa, U.S. representative from California's 48th congressional district (2023–present), California's 50th congressional district (2021–2023), California's 49th congressional district (2003–2019), and California's 48th congressional district (2001–2003); former director of the USTDA (2019–2021)

##### State legislators

* Patricia Bates, state senator from the 36th district (2014–present) and former minority leader of the California Senate (2017–2019)
* Frank Bigelow, state assemblymember from the 5th district (2012–present)
* Jordan Cunningham, state assemblymember from the 35th district (2016–present)
* Megan Dahle, state assemblymember from the 1st district (2019–present)
* Heath Flora, state assemblymember from the 12th district (2016–present)
* Brian Jones, state senator from the 38th district (2018–present)
* Tom Lackey, state assemblymember from the 36th district (2014–present)
* Devon Mathis, state assemblymember from the 26th district (2014–present)
* Melissa Melendez, state senator from the 28th district (2020–present)
* Janet Nguyen, state assemblymember from the 72nd district (2020–present)
* Jim Nielsen, state senator from the 4th district (2013–present)
* Thurston Smith, state assemblymember from the 33rd district (2020–present)
* Randy Voepel, state assemblymember from the 71st district (2016–present)
* Marie Waldron, state assemblymember from the 75th district (2012–present) and Minority Leader of the California Assembly (2018–present)
* Scott Wilk, state senator from the 21st district (2016–present) and Minority Leader of the California Senate (2021–present)

##### Individuals

* Michael Shellenberger, author and 2018 gubernatorial candidate

##### Newspapers and other media

* The Bakersfield Californian Editorial Board
* Los Angeles Times Editorial Board

##### Individuals

* Brian Carroll, teacher and 2020 ASP presidential nominee

##### Organizations

* American Solidarity Party

##### Organizations

* Libertarian Party of California

##### Local officials

* Mike Feinstein, former mayor of Santa Monica (2000–2002) and candidate for California Secretary of State in 2018

##### Organizations

* Green Party of California

##### U.S. representatives

* Doug Ose, former U.S. representative for California's 3rd congressional district (1999–2005), candidate for governor in 2018 and 2021

##### Local officials

* Joel Anderson, member of the San Diego County Board of Supervisors (2021–present) and former state senator from the 38th district (2010–2018)

##### Individuals

* Orrin Heatlie, main recall organizer and retired county sheriff's sergeant

##### Newspapers and other media

* RedState, conservative blog

##### Organizations

* California National Party

##### Organizations

* Socialist Equality Party

##### Individuals

* Alyson Kennedy, mineworker and SWP nominee for president in 2016 and 2020

##### Organizations

* Socialist Workers Party

### Predictions

| Source | Ranking | As of |
| The Cook Political Report | Likely D | September 13, 2021 |
| Inside Elections | Likely D | August 16, 2021 |
| Sabato's Crystal Ball | Likely D | September 9, 2021 |

### Newsom recall
#### Aggregate polls

| Source of poll aggregation | Dates administered | Dates updated | Yes on recall | No on recall | Undecided | Margin |
| Real Clear Politics | September 6–13, 2021 | September 14, 2021 | 41.8% | 56.3% | 1.9% | No on recall +14.5 |
| FiveThirtyEight | August 27 – September 14, 2021 | September 14, 2021 | 41.5% | 57.3% | 1.2% | No on recall +15.8 |
| Average | Average | Average | 41.7% | 56.8% | 1.5% | No on recall +15.1 |
| Result | Result | Result | 38.12% | 61.88% | – | No on recall +23.76 |

#### Graphical summary

| Poll source | Date(s) administered | Sample size | Margin of error | Yes on recall | No on recall | Undecided |
| 2021 CA gubernatorial election | September 14, 2021 | 12,892,578 | – | 38.12% | 61.88% | – |
| The Trafalgar Group (R) | September 11–13, 2021 | 1,082 (LV) | ± 3.0% | 45% | 53% | 2% |
| Momentive | August 31 – September 13, 2021 | 3,985 (LV) | ± 1.6% | 41% | 55% | 4% |
| Emerson College | September 10–11, 2021 | 1,000 (LV) | ± 3.0% | 40% | 60% | 1% |
| Data for Progress (D) | September 2–10, 2021 | 2,464 (LV) | ± 2.0% | 43% | 57% | – |
| SurveyUSA | September 7–8, 2021 | 930 (LV) | ± 4.2% | 41% | 54% | 5% |
| Suffolk University | September 6–7, 2021 | 500 (LV) | ± 4.4% | 41% | 58% | 1% |
| Berkeley IGS | August 30 – September 6, 2021 | 7,917 (LV) | ± 2.0% | 38% | 60% | 1% |
| The Trafalgar Group (R) | September 2–4, 2021 | 1,079 (LV) | ± 3.0% | 43% | 53% | 4% |
| YouGov | August 30 – September 1, 2021 | 1,618 (LV) | ± 3.0% | 43% | 57% | – |
| The Trafalgar Group (R) | August 26–29, 2021 | 1,088 (LV) | ± 3.0% | 44% | 52% | 4% |
| Public Policy Institute of California | August 20–29, 2021 | 1,080 (LV) | ± 4.5% | 39% | 58% | 3% |
| SurveyUSA | August 26–28, 2021 | 816 (LV) | ± 4.4% | 43% | 51% | 6% |
| Gravis Marketing | August 25–27, 2021 | 729 (LV) | ± 3.6% | 45% | 50% | 5% |
| Targoz Market Research | August 23–25, 2021 | 787 (LV) | ± 3.5% | 42% | 52% | 6% |
| Change Research (D) | August 22–25, 2021 | 782 (LV) | ± 3.7% | 42% | 57% | 1% |
| Redfield & Wilton Strategies | August 20–22, 2021 | 1,000 (RV) | ± 3.1% | 41% | 48% | 11% |
| Redfield & Wilton Strategies | August 20–22, 2021 | 964 (LV) | ± 3.2% | 43% | 51% | 7% |
| YouGov | August 6–12, 2021 | 1,585 (RV) | ± 3.4% | 46% | 54% | – |
| YouGov | August 6–12, 2021 | 1,534 (LV) | ± 3.8% | 48% | 52% | – |
| SurveyUSA | August 2–4, 2021 | 613 (LV) | ± 5.0% | 51% | 40% | 9% |
| Emerson College | July 30 – August 1, 2021 | 1,000 (LV) | ± 3.0% | 46% | 48% | 6% |
| Core Decision Analytics | July 27–29, 2021 | 804 (RV) | ± 3.5% | 41% | 52% | 7% |
| Core Decision Analytics | July 27–29, 2021 | ~728 (LV) | ± 3.6% | 44% | 51% | 5% |
| Berkeley IGS | July 18–24, 2021 | 5,795 (RV) | ± 2.0% | 36% | 51% | 13% |
| Berkeley IGS | July 18–24, 2021 | 3,266 (LV) | ± 2.5% | 47% | 50% | 3% |
| Emerson College | July 19–20, 2021 | 1,085 (RV) | ± 2.9% | 43% | 48% | 9% |
| Change Research (D) | June 11–16, 2021 | 1,085 (RV) | ± 3.0% | 40% | 54% | 6% |
| Moore Information Group (R) | June 1–3, 2021 | 800 (RV) | ± 3.0% | 44% | 50% | 6% |
| Moore Information Group (R) | June 1–3, 2021 | 682 (LV) | ± 4.0% | 49% | 46% | 5% |
| Tulchin Research (D) | May 21–30, 2021 | 1,500 (RV) | ± 2.5% | 37% | 50% | 13% |
| Tulchin Research (D) | May 21–30, 2021 | 1,168 (LV) | ± 2.9% | 38% | 52% | 9% |
| Public Policy Institute of California | May 9–18, 2021 | 1,074 (LV) | ± 4.2% | 40% | 57% | 3% |
| Berkeley IGS | April 29 – May 5, 2021 | 10,289 (RV) | ± 2.0% | 36% | 49% | 15% |
| Berkeley IGS | April 29 – May 5, 2021 | 7,943 (LV) | ± 2.3% | 42% | 50% | 8% |
| SurveyUSA | April 30 – May 2, 2021 | 642 (RV) | ± 5.3% | 36% | 47% | 17% |
| McLaughlin & Associates (R) | April 15–19, 2021 | 1,000 (LV) | ± 3.1% | 45% | 45% | 10% |
| Public Policy Institute of California | March 14–23, 2021 | 1,174 (LV) | ± 3.9% | 40% | 56% | 5% |
| Probolsky Research (R) | March 16–19, 2021 | 900 (RV) | ± 3.3% | 40% | 46% | 14% |
| Probolsky Research (R) | March 16–19, 2021 | 900 (LV) | ± 3.3% | 35% | 53% | 13% |
| Emerson College | March 12–14, 2021 | 1,045 (RV) | ± 3.0% | 38% | 42% | 20% |
| WPA Intelligence (R) | February 12–14, 2021 | 645 (LV) | ± 3.9% | 47% | 43% | 10% |
| Berkeley IGS | January 23–29, 2021 | 10,357 (RV) | ± 2.0% | 36% | 45% | 20% |
| Berkeley IGS | January 23–29, 2021 | 7,980 (LV) | ± 2.4% | 36% | 49% | 15% |
| Remington Research (R) | March 17–18, 2019 | 1,303 (LV) | ± 2.7% | 31% | 52% | 17% |

### Replacement candidates

The table below contains all candidates who had polled at or above 2% since the filing deadline for the recall, had raised at least $100,000 (excluding loans and including at least $5,000 in the most recent filing period), were a current or former elected official, or were otherwise considered notable in their own right. The graphical summary includes all candidates who met at least one of those criteria and had appeared in at least four separate publicly released polls.

#### Aggregate polls

| Source of poll aggregation | Dates administered | Dates updated | Elder (R) | Paffrath (D) | Faulconer (R) | Cox (R) | Kiley (R) | Jenner (R) | Other/Undecided | Margin |
| Real Clear Politics | August 20 – Sep 13, 2021 | Sep 13, 2021 | 32.4% | 7.8% | 5.3% | 4.0% | 3.1% | 1.3% | 46.1% | Elder +24.6 |
| FiveThirtyEight | July 18 – Sep 13, 2021 | Sep 13, 2021 | 29.7% | 6.1% | 5.1% | 4.5% | 3.0% | 1.0% | 50.6% | Elder +23.6 |
| Average | Average | Average | 31.1% | 7.0% | 5.2% | 4.3% | 3.1% | 1.2% | 48.4% | Elder +24.1 |
| Result | Result | Result | 48.4% | 9.6% | 8.0% | 4.1% | 3.5% | 1.0% | 25.4% | Elder +38.8 |

#### Graphical summary

| Poll source | Date(s) administered | Sample size | Margin of error | (I) Angelyne | (D) Holly Baade | (R) John Cox | (D) John Drake | (R) Larry Elder | (R) Kevin Faulconer | (R) Ted Gaines | (L) Jeff Hewitt | (R) Caitlyn Jenner | (G) Dan Kapelovitz | (R) Kevin Kiley | (D) Patrick Kilpatrick | (D) Jacqueline McGowan | (R) Doug Ose | (D) Kevin Paffrath | (D) Armando Perez-Serrato | (D) Brandon Ross | (D) Joel Ventresca | (D) Daniel Watts | Other | Undecided | None |
| 2021 CA gubernatorial election | Sep 14, 2021 | 7,361,568 | – | 0.5% | 1.3% | 4.1% | 0.9% | 48.4% | 8.0% | 0.7% | 0.7% | 1.0% | 0.9% | 3.5% | 1.2% | 2.9% | 0.4% | 9.6% | 1.2% | 5.3% | 2.5% | 2.3% | 4.6% | – | – |
| The Trafalgar Group (R) | Sep 11–13, 2021 | 1,082 (LV) | ± 3.0% | – | – | 3% | 1% | 41% | 4% | – | – | 1% | – | 4% | – | 4% | – | 10% | – | 1% | – | – | 9% | 23% | – |
| Emerson College | Sep 10–11, 2021 | 1,000 (LV) | ± 3.0% | – | – | 3% | 6% | 30% | 4% | – | – | 2% | – | 4% | – | 3% | 1% | 6% | – | – | – | – | 3% | 6% | 34% |
| Data for Progress (D) | Sep 2–10, 2021 | 2,557 (LV) | ± 2.0% | – | 2% | 7% | – | 22% | 4% | – | – | 1% | – | 3% | – | 4% | – | 6% | – | 5% | – | 3% | 5% | 7% | 29% |
| SurveyUSA | Sep 7–8, 2021 | 597 (LV) | ± 5.5% | – | 4% | 8% | 4% | 29% | 6% | – | – | 2% | – | 3% | 2% | 4% | – | 9% | 1% | 3% | 2% | 2% | 6% | 13% | – |
| Suffolk University | Sep 6–7, 2021 | 233 (LV) | ± 6.4% | 0% | 0% | 4% | 1% | 39% | 5% | 1% | 1% | 1% | 0% | 2% | – | 2% | 0% | 5% | 0% | 2% | 1% | – | – | 7% | – |
| Berkeley IGS | Aug 30 – Sep 6, 2021 | 4,707 (LV) | ± 2.6% | – | 1% | 4% | 1% | 38% | 8% | – | 1% | 1% | 1% | 4% | 1% | 2% | – | 10% | 1% | 3% | 2% | 1% | 8% | 16% | – |
| The Trafalgar Group (R) | Sep 2–4, 2021 | 1,079 (LV) | ± 3.0% | – | – | 3% | – | 32% | 4% | – | – | 1% | – | 4% | – | 3% | – | 13% | – | – | – | – | 11% | 29% | – |
| YouGov | Aug 30 – Sep 1, 2021 | 1,618 (LV) | ± 3.0% | 1% | 1% | 3% | 1% | 24% | 5% | 0% | 1% | 1% | 1% | 2% | 1% | 2% | 1% | 7% | 1% | 1% | 1% | 1% | 4% | – | 39% |
| The Trafalgar Group (R) | Aug 26–29, 2021 | 1,088 (LV) | ± 3.0% | – | – | 4% | – | 29% | 4% | – | – | 1% | – | – | – | – | 0% | 22% | – | – | – | – | 9% | 30% | – |
| Public Policy Institute of California | Aug 20–29, 2021 | 1,080 (LV) | ± 4.5% | – | – | 3% | – | 26% | 5% | – | – | 1% | – | 3% | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 14% | 24% | 25% |
| SurveyUSA | Aug 26–28, 2021 | 515 (LV) | ± 5.2% | – | 5% | 6% | 2% | 27% | 5% | – | – | 2% | – | 5% | – | 5% | – | 6% | 3% | 5% | 2% | – | 12% | 14% | – |
| Gravis Marketing | Aug 25–27, 2021 | 729 (LV) | ± 3.6% | – | – | 4% | – | 22% | 6% | 1% | 2% | 3% | 3% | 4% | – | – | – | 18% | – | – | – | – | 16% | 21% | – |
| Targoz Market Research | Aug 23–25, 2021 | 787 (LV) | ± 3.5% | – | – | 13% | – | 12% | 7% | – | – | 3% | – | 3% | – | – | 2% | 13% | – | – | – | – | 4% | 20% | 23% |
| Change Research (D) | Aug 22–25, 2021 | 782 (LV) | ± 3.7% | – | 2% | 2% | – | 27% | 3% | – | – | 1% | – | 4% | – | 5% | 1% | 6% | – | 3% | – | 3% | 7% | 15% | 22% |
| YouGov | Aug 6–12, 2021 | 1,534 (LV) | ± 3.8% | – | – | 3% | – | 23% | 3% | 2% | 1% | 2% | – | 3% | – | – | 2% | 13% | – | – | – | – | 5% | 25% | 20% |
| SurveyUSA | Aug 2–4, 2021 | 545 (LV) | ± 5.4% | – | – | 10% | – | 23% | 5% | – | – | 4% | – | 3% | – | – | 4% | 27% | – | – | – | – | 5% | 20% | – |
| Emerson College | Jul 30 – Aug 1, 2021 | 1,000 (LV) | ± 3.0% | – | – | 7% | – | 23% | 4% | – | – | 7% | – | 5% | – | – | 0% | 1% | – | – | – | – | 14% | 40% | – |
| Core Decision Analytics | Jul 27–29, 2021 | 803 (RV) | ± 3.5% | 1% | 1% | 4% | 0% | 9% | 3% | 1% | 1% | 1% | 1% | 2% | 1% | 3% | 1% | 2% | 1% | 2% | 0% | 1% | 9% | 34% | 22% |
| Core Decision Analytics | Jul 27–29, 2021 | ~728 (LV) | ± 3.6% | 1% | 1% | 4% | 0% | 10% | 3% | 1% | 1% | 1% | 1% | 2% | 1% | 3% | 1% | 3% | 1% | 2% | 0% | 1% | 8% | 32% | 22% |
| Berkeley IGS | Jul 18–24, 2021 | 5,795 (RV) | ± 2.0% | 1% | 2% | 7% | 1% | 12% | 8% | 0% | 1% | 2% | 1% | 3% | 0% | 2% | 1% | 5% | – | 2% | 1% | 2% | 1% | 44% | – |
| Berkeley IGS | Jul 18–24, 2021 | 3,266 (LV) | ± 2.5% | 0% | 1% | 10% | 1% | 18% | 10% | 0% | 1% | 3% | 1% | 5% | 0% | 1% | 1% | 3% | – | 1% | 0% | 2% | 1% | 40% | – |
| Emerson College | Jul 19–20, 2021 | 1,085 (RV) | ± 2.9% | – | – | 6% | – | 16% | 6% | – | – | 4% | – | 4% | – | – | 0% | 2% | – | – | – | – | 8% | 53% | – |
| Moore Information Group (R) | Jun 1–3, 2021 | 800 (RV) | ± 3.0% | – | – | 22% | – | – | 11% | – | – | 6% | – | – | – | – | 4% | – | – | – | – | – | 18% | 39% | – |
| Moore Information Group (R) | Jun 1–3, 2021 | 682 (LV) | ± 4.0% | – | – | 24% | – | – | 12% | – | – | 6% | – | – | – | – | 4% | – | – | – | – | – | 17% | 37% | – |
| SurveyUSA | Apr 30 – May 2, 2021 | 642 (RV) | ± 5.3% | – | – | 9% | – | – | 3% | – | – | 5% | – | – | – | – | 2% | – | – | – | – | – | 17% | 26% | 38% |

#### Full-field ballot including potential Democratic candidates

| Poll source | Date(s) administered | Sample size | Margin of error | John Cox (R) | Kevin de León (D) | Kevin Faulconer (R) | Caitlyn Jenner (R) | Doug Ose (R) | Tom Steyer (D) | Antonio Villaraigosa (D) | Other | Undecided |
| Moore Information Group (R) | Jun 1–3, 2021 | 800 (RV) | ± 3.0% | 16% | 4% | 7% | 4% | 2% | 5% | 9% | 14% | 38% |
| Moore Information Group (R) | Jun 1–3, 2021 | 682 (LV) | ± 4.0% | 18% | 4% | 8% | 4% | 2% | 5% | 8% | 13% | 37% |

#### Antonio Villaraigosa vs. Kevin Faulconer

| Poll source | Date(s) administered | Sample size | Margin of error | Antonio Villaraigosa (D) | Kevin Faulconer (R) | Undecided |
| WPA Intelligence (R) | Feb 12–14, 2021 | 645 (LV) | ± 3.9% | 28% | 31% | 41% |

## Results

The recall election result was officially certified on October 22, 2021. Newsom had survived the recall with similar results as his first run for governor. No on recall votes exceeded that of what the votes Newsom received in 2018 by 200,000 votes and had a similar vote percentage as well. No on recall had also won nearly all counties that Newsom had, save for Merced County that voted for the recall by 4 points.
Substantially fewer voters voted on the second question regarding replacement candidates than had voted on the first question regarding whether Newsom should be recalled.
2021 California gubernatorial recall election (question 1) :
| Choice | Choice | Votes | % |
| | No on recall | 7,944,092 | 61.88 |
| | Yes on recall | 4,894,473 | 38.12 |
| Blank and invalid votes | Blank and invalid votes | 54,013 | – |
| Total votes | Total votes | 12,892,578 | 100 |
| Registered voters and turnout | Registered voters and turnout | 22,057,154 | 58.45% |
2021 California gubernatorial recall election (question 2) :
| Party | Party | Candidate | Votes | % |
| | Republican | Larry Elder | 3,563,867 | 48.4% |
| | Democratic | Kevin Paffrath | 706,778 | 9.6% |
| | Republican | Kevin Faulconer | 590,346 | 8.0% |
| | Democratic | Brandon M. Ross | 392,029 | 5.3% |
| | Republican | John Cox | 305,095 | 4.1% |
| | Republican | Kevin Kiley | 255,490 | 3.5% |
| | Democratic | Jacqueline McGowan | 214,242 | 2.9% |
| | Democratic | Joel Ventresca | 186,345 | 2.5% |
| | Democratic | Daniel Watts | 167,355 | 2.3% |
| | Democratic | Holly L. Baade | 92,218 | 1.3% |
| | Democratic | Patrick Kilpatrick | 86,617 | 1.2% |
| | Democratic | Armando "Mando" Perez-Serrato | 85,061 | 1.2% |
| | Republican | Caitlyn Jenner | 75,215 | 1.0% |
| | Democratic | John R. Drake | 68,545 | 0.9% |
| | Green | Dan Kapelovitz | 64,375 | 0.9% |
| | Libertarian | Jeff Hewitt | 50,378 | 0.7% |
| | Republican | Ted Gaines | 47,937 | 0.7% |
| | No party preference | Angelyne | 35,900 | 0.5% |
| | No party preference | David Moore | 31,224 | 0.4% |
| | Republican | Anthony Trimino | 28,101 | 0.4% |
| | Republican | Doug Ose | 26,204 | 0.4% |
| | No party preference | Michael Loebs | 25,468 | 0.3% |
| | Green | Heather Collins | 24,260 | 0.3% |
| | No party preference | Major Singh | 21,394 | 0.3% |
| | Republican | David Lozano | 19,945 | 0.3% |
| | Republican | Denver Stoner | 19,588 | 0.3% |
| | Republican | Sam Gallucci | 18,134 | 0.2% |
| | Republican | Steve Chavez Lodge | 17,435 | 0.2% |
| | Republican | Jenny Rae Le Roux | 16,032 | 0.2% |
| | Republican | David Alexander Bramante | 11,501 | 0.2% |
| | Republican | Diego Martinez | 10,860 | 0.1% |
| | Republican | Robert C. Newman II | 10,602 | 0.1% |
| | Republican | Sarah Stephens | 10,583 | 0.1% |
| | No party preference | Dennis Richter | 10,468 | 0.1% |
| | Republican | Major Williams (write-in) | 8,965 | 0.1% |
| | No party preference | Denis Lucey | 8,182 | 0.1% |
| | No party preference | James G. Hanink | 7,193 | 0.1% |
| | Republican | Daniel Mercuri | 7,110 | 0.1% |
| | Republican | Chauncey "Slim" Killens | 6,879 | 0.1% |
| | Republican | Leo S. Zacky | 6,099 | 0.1% |
| | No party preference | Kevin Kaul | 5,600 | 0.1% |
| | Republican | David Hillberg | 4,435 | 0.1% |
| | No party preference | Adam Papagan | 4,021 | 0.1% |
| | Republican | Rhonda Furin | 3,964 | 0.1% |
| | Republican | Nickolas Wildstar | 3,811 | 0.1% |
| | No party preference | Jeremiah "Jeremy" Marciniak | 2,894 | 0.0% |
| | Republican | Joe M. Symmon | 2,397 | 0.0% |
| | No party preference | Miki Habryn (write-in) | 137 | 0.0% |
| | Democratic | Roxanne (write-in) | 116 | 0.0% |
| | Democratic | Stacy Smith (write-in) | 81 | 0.0% |
| | No party preference | Vivek B. Mohan (write-in) | 68 | 0.0% |
| | American Independent | Thuy E. Hugens (write-in) | 19 | 0.0% |
| | No party preference | Vince Lundgren (write-in) | 5 | 0.0% |
| Total valid votes | Total valid votes | Total valid votes | 7,361,568 | 100.00% |
| Invalid or blank votes | Invalid or blank votes | Invalid or blank votes | 5,531,010 | 42.90% |
| Turnout | Turnout | Turnout | 12,892,578 | 58.45% |
| Registered electors | Registered electors | Registered electors | 22,057,154 | |

### By county
#### On recall question

Here are the results of the recall election by county. Khaki represents counties won by No. Light blue represents counties won by Yes.
| County | No | No | Yes | Yes |
| County | % | # | % | # |
| Alameda | 81.2% | 465,901 | 18.8% | 108,081 |
| Alpine | 61.1% | 354 | 38.9% | 225 |
| Amador | 35.0% | 6,957 | 65.0% | 12,895 |
| Butte | 45.6% | 36,128 | 54.4% | 43,129 |
| Calaveras | 35.5% | 8,320 | 64.5% | 15,133 |
| Colusa | 33.4% | 2,027 | 66.6% | 4,037 |
| Contra Costa | 71.4% | 324,747 | 28.6% | 130,058 |
| Del Norte | 40.1% | 3,505 | 59.9% | 5,243 |
| El Dorado | 40.6% | 39,907 | 59.4% | 58,393 |
| Fresno | 48.7% | 126,488 | 51.3% | 133,309 |
| Glenn | 28.2% | 2,485 | 71.8% | 6,331 |
| Humboldt | 64.0% | 33,164 | 36.0% | 18,621 |
| Imperial | 59.4% | 19,288 | 40.6% | 13,177 |
| Inyo | 45.9% | 3,502 | 54.1% | 4,134 |
| Kern | 38.2% | 81,030 | 61.8% | 131,061 |
| Kings | 36.3% | 11,242 | 63.7% | 19,710 |
| Lake | 51.0% | 11,367 | 49.0% | 10,923 |
| Lassen | 15.8% | 1,604 | 84.2% | 8,538 |
| Los Angeles | 70.8% | 2,077,859 | 29.2% | 855,940 |
| Madera | 38.8% | 16,233 | 61.2% | 25,638 |
| Marin | 81.7% | 108,599 | 18.3% | 24,273 |
| Mariposa | 38.6% | 3,376 | 61.4% | 5,378 |
| Mendocino | 64.7% | 22,093 | 35.3% | 12,075 |
| Merced | 48.0% | 27,867 | 52.0% | 30,210 |
| Modoc | 22.0% | 730 | 78.0% | 2,593 |
| Mono | 55.5% | 2,805 | 44.5% | 2,245 |
| Monterey | 67.9% | 80,664 | 32.1% | 38,169 |
| Napa | 67.6% | 38,948 | 32.4% | 18,681 |
| Nevada | 54.0% | 29,851 | 46.0% | 25,426 |
| Orange | 51.7% | 586,457 | 48.3% | 547,685 |
| Placer | 42.6% | 85,677 | 57.4% | 115,411 |
| Plumas | 36.8% | 3,408 | 63.2% | 5,842 |
| Riverside | 49.5% | 355,630 | 50.5% | 362,958 |
| Sacramento | 59.9% | 329,952 | 40.1% | 220,498 |
| San Benito | 57.8% | 12,718 | 42.2% | 9,276 |
| San Bernardino | 50.2% | 288,877 | 49.8% | 286,364 |
| San Diego | 57.2% | 674,670 | 42.8% | 505,081 |
| San Francisco | 86.1% | 292,744 | 13.9% | 47,193 |
| San Joaquin | 52.6% | 105,405 | 47.4% | 94,877 |
| San Luis Obispo | 52.8% | 68,429 | 47.2% | 61,203 |
| San Mateo | 77.9% | 227,368 | 22.1% | 64,390 |
| Santa Barbara | 61.8% | 94,219 | 38.2% | 58,149 |
| Santa Clara | 73.7% | 468,851 | 26.3% | 166,995 |
| Santa Cruz | 78.1% | 90,874 | 21.9% | 25,454 |
| Shasta | 30.4% | 22,592 | 69.6% | 51,608 |
| Sierra | 36.6% | 616 | 63.4% | 1,065 |
| Siskiyou | 38.1% | 6,961 | 61.9% | 11,295 |
| Solano | 62.7% | 97,935 | 37.3% | 58,372 |
| Sonoma | 73.7% | 160,602 | 26.3% | 57,419 |
| Stanislaus | 45.5% | 69,247 | 54.5% | 82,911 |
| Sutter | 36.2% | 11,593 | 63.8% | 20,458 |
| Tehama | 27.6% | 6,386 | 72.4% | 16,770 |
| Trinity | 43.8% | 2,106 | 56.2% | 2,699 |
| Tulare | 38.9% | 41,009 | 61.1% | 64,372 |
| Tuolumne | 38.4% | 9,850 | 61.6% | 15,832 |
| Ventura | 57.2% | 182,470 | 42.8% | 136,610 |
| Yolo | 67.9% | 52,444 | 32.1% | 24,769 |
| Yuba | 34.2% | 7,961 | 65.8% | 15,291 |
| Totals | 61.88% | 7,944,092 | 38.12% | 4,894,473 |
Counties that flipped from Democratic in 2018 to Yes
* Merced (largest municipality: Merced)

#### On replacement candidates

Here are the results of the election by county for replacement candidates. Red represents counties won by Elder. Blue represents a county won by Paffrath.
| County | Elder | Elder | Paffrath | Paffrath | Faulconer | Faulconer | Ross | Ross | Others | Others |
| County | % | # | % | # | % | # | % | # | % | # |
| Alameda | 26.83% | 68,410 | 18.65% | 47,543 | 7.36% | 18,755 | 6.69% | 17,067 | 40.48% | 103,203 |
| Alpine | 48.01% | 157 | 7.65% | 25 | 3.98% | 13 | 4.89% | 16 | 35.47% | 116 |
| Amador | 60.68% | 8,862 | 3.20% | 467 | 7.30% | 1,066 | 2.09% | 305 | 26.74% | 3,905 |
| Butte | 52.41% | 28,705 | 6.48% | 3,547 | 3.80% | 2,083 | 3.43% | 1,876 | 33.88% | 18,555 |
| Calaveras | 62.61% | 10,660 | 2.93% | 499 | 6.33% | 1,077 | 1.81% | 309 | 26.32% | 4,481 |
| Colusa | 54.48% | 2,574 | 3.45% | 163 | 4.08% | 193 | 2.33% | 110 | 35.66% | 1,685 |
| Contra Costa | 37.99% | 91,262 | 12.78% | 30,696 | 7.15% | 17,165 | 8.08% | 19,407 | 34.00% | 81,670 |
| Del Norte | 64.23% | 4,094 | 4.14% | 264 | 2.68% | 171 | 3.36% | 214 | 25.59% | 1,631 |
| El Dorado | 53.01% | 37,507 | 4.76% | 3,368 | 7.30% | 5,162 | 2.77% | 1,959 | 32.16% | 22,753 |
| Fresno | 59.85% | 103,060 | 5.55% | 9,551 | 7.27% | 12,514 | 3.14% | 5,411 | 24.20% | 41,669 |
| Glenn | 58.60% | 4,202 | 2.86% | 205 | 2.23% | 160 | 2.15% | 154 | 34.17% | 2,450 |
| Humboldt | 45.58% | 13,483 | 8.55% | 2,528 | 3.87% | 1,145 | 5.11% | 1,511 | 36.89% | 10,911 |
| Imperial | 50.25% | 9,564 | 5.73% | 1,091 | 4.17% | 793 | 8.15% | 1,551 | 31.70% | 6,033 |
| Inyo | 63.05% | 3,275 | 4.95% | 257 | 6.55% | 340 | 3.31% | 172 | 22.14% | 1,150 |
| Kern | 67.79% | 99,969 | 4.87% | 7,188 | 4.50% | 6,634 | 1.41% | 2,076 | 21.43% | 31,609 |
| Kings | 66.81% | 15,577 | 4.25% | 991 | 5.17% | 1,205 | 2.04% | 476 | 21.73% | 5,067 |
| Lake | 52.23% | 7,259 | 4.77% | 663 | 3.54% | 492 | 3.42% | 475 | 36.04% | 5,008 |
| Lassen | 69.58% | 6,293 | 1.43% | 129 | 2.58% | 233 | 1.25% | 113 | 25.17% | 2,276 |
| Los Angeles | 43.59% | 648,067 | 10.22% | 151,944 | 8.29% | 123,331 | 7.93% | 117,961 | 29.97% | 445,562 |
| Madera | 65.13% | 19,530 | 3.12% | 936 | 6.52% | 1,954 | 2.20% | 660 | 23.04% | 6,908 |
| Marin | 29.88% | 15,901 | 16.57% | 8,817 | 12.06% | 6,417 | 11.65% | 6,198 | 29.85% | 15,887 |
| Mariposa | 63.14% | 4,086 | 4.99% | 323 | 5.97% | 386 | 2.50% | 162 | 23.40% | 1,514 |
| Mendocino | 42.40% | 7,799 | 7.51% | 1,382 | 4.75% | 873 | 4.08% | 750 | 41.26% | 7,589 |
| Merced | 61.54% | 21,830 | 4.30% | 1,525 | 3.75% | 1,329 | 2.24% | 796 | 28.17% | 9,993 |
| Modoc | 62.01% | 1,753 | 1.84% | 52 | 2.12% | 60 | 1.27% | 36 | 32.76% | 926 |
| Mono | 53.40% | 1,690 | 8.78% | 278 | 7.74% | 245 | 3.70% | 117 | 26.38% | 835 |
| Monterey | 44.39% | 27,841 | 11.37% | 7,130 | 4.92% | 3,088 | 5.35% | 3,354 | 33.98% | 21,312 |
| Napa | 43.02% | 12,613 | 9.73% | 2,853 | 7.17% | 2,101 | 6.28% | 1,841 | 33.80% | 9,909 |
| Nevada | 47.97% | 16,546 | 6.93% | 2,390 | 8.24% | 2,841 | 3.33% | 1,149 | 33.53% | 11,564 |
| Orange | 57.37% | 423,224 | 8.09% | 59,694 | 7.74% | 57,109 | 3.61% | 26,599 | 23.19% | 171,030 |
| Placer | 52.02% | 73,309 | 5.11% | 7,207 | 7.53% | 10,613 | 2.92% | 4,110 | 32.42% | 45,681 |
| Plumas | 57.46% | 3,918 | 3.37% | 230 | 6.22% | 424 | 2.11% | 144 | 30.84% | 2,103 |
| Riverside | 60.70% | 283,217 | 6.01% | 28,046 | 5.83% | 27,214 | 3.94% | 18,379 | 23.52% | 109,740 |
| Sacramento | 45.93% | 147,776 | 8.89% | 28,585 | 8.88% | 28,579 | 5.21% | 16,772 | 31.09% | 100,010 |
| San Benito | 49.03% | 6,848 | 9.21% | 1,287 | 3.32% | 464 | 4.57% | 638 | 33.87% | 4,731 |
| San Bernardino | 61.59% | 225,674 | 5.47% | 20,042 | 5.27% | 19,296 | 3.85% | 14,119 | 23.82% | 87,295 |
| San Diego | 46.58% | 355,417 | 10.76% | 82,089 | 14.96% | 114,155 | 4.10% | 31,289 | 23.59% | 180,009 |
| San Francisco | 20.95% | 26,285 | 21.07% | 26,434 | 11.41% | 14,317 | 6.69% | 8,387 | 39.87% | 50,015 |
| San Joaquin | 54.16% | 68,230 | 5.59% | 7,047 | 6.26% | 7,889 | 5.60% | 7,058 | 28.38% | 35,756 |
| San Luis Obispo | 53.68% | 45,298 | 10.90% | 9,195 | 6.64% | 5,607 | 2.92% | 2,460 | 25.87% | 21,829 |
| San Mateo | 30.82% | 41,162 | 17.43% | 23,271 | 8.87% | 11,845 | 7.62% | 10,179 | 35.26% | 47,091 |
| Santa Barbara | 49.04% | 43,582 | 10.51% | 9,344 | 6.66% | 5,921 | 4.09% | 3,633 | 29.69% | 26,389 |
| Santa Clara | 32.79% | 105,590 | 17.86% | 57,503 | 7.50% | 24,166 | 6.70% | 21,568 | 35.15% | 113,197 |
| Santa Cruz | 31.49% | 17,494 | 17.21% | 9,562 | 5.33% | 2,960 | 7.42% | 4,123 | 38.55% | 21,420 |
| Shasta | 60.09% | 36,022 | 3.21% | 1,922 | 2.72% | 1,631 | 2.65% | 1,586 | 31.34% | 18,788 |
| Sierra | 56.70% | 698 | 2.84% | 35 | 7.47% | 92 | 1.22% | 15 | 31.76% | 391 |
| Siskiyou | 60.89% | 8,127 | 3.30% | 441 | 2.99% | 399 | 3.08% | 411 | 29.74% | 3,970 |
| Solano | 47.18% | 40,387 | 6.79% | 5,813 | 6.23% | 5,336 | 8.33% | 7,132 | 31.47% | 26,935 |
| Sonoma | 37.42% | 38,131 | 12.69% | 12,936 | 6.69% | 6,821 | 7.75% | 7,903 | 35.44% | 36,119 |
| Stanislaus | 57.99% | 58,812 | 4.02% | 4,075 | 6.74% | 6,835 | 5.45% | 5,526 | 25.80% | 26,171 |
| Sutter | 52.54% | 12,440 | 3.63% | 859 | 5.21% | 1,233 | 2.53% | 598 | 36.10% | 8,546 |
| Tehama | 61.90% | 11,529 | 2.83% | 527 | 2.42% | 451 | 1.65% | 307 | 31.20% | 5,812 |
| Trinity | 53.38% | 1,770 | 3.41% | 113 | 2.59% | 86 | 2.20% | 73 | 38.42% | 1,274 |
| Tulare | 67.64% | 51,152 | 3.85% | 2,912 | 5.61% | 4,241 | 2.46% | 1,859 | 20.45% | 15,464 |
| Tuolumne | 62.58% | 11,374 | 3.32% | 603 | 5.60% | 1,017 | 2.41% | 438 | 26.09% | 4,742 |
| Ventura | 56.44% | 108,043 | 7.79% | 14,908 | 7.51% | 14,372 | 3.76% | 7,201 | 24.50% | 46,909 |
| Yolo | 37.19% | 15,911 | 10.40% | 4,450 | 10.74% | 4,596 | 6.83% | 2,921 | 34.83% | 14,900 |
| Yuba | 54.86% | 9,878 | 4.68% | 843 | 4.73% | 851 | 2.08% | 375 | 33.65% | 6,060 |
| Totals | 48.41% | 3,563,867 | 9.60% | 706,778 | 8.02% | 590,346 | 5.33% | 392,029 | 28.64% | 2,108,548 |

### By congressional district
#### On recall question

Khaki represents congressional districts won by No. Light blue represents congressional districts won by Yes. All districts with incumbent Democratic representatives voted for No except one, and all districts with incumbent Republican representatives voted for Yes except two.
| District | No | Yes | Representative |
| 1st | 38% | 62% | Doug LaMalfa |
| 2nd | 73% | 27% | Jared Huffman |
| 3rd | 52% | 48% | John Garamendi |
| 4th | 41% | 59% | Tom McClintock |
| 5th | 72% | 28% | Mike Thompson |
| 6th | 70% | 30% | Doris Matsui |
| 7th | 54% | 46% | Ami Bera |
| 8th | 40% | 60% | Jay Obernolte |
| 9th | 55% | 45% | Jerry McNerney |
| 10th | 47% | 53% | Josh Harder |
| 11th | 74% | 26% | Mark DeSaulnier |
| 12th | 87% | 13% | Nancy Pelosi |
| 13th | 90% | 10% | Barbara Lee |
| 14th | 78% | 22% | Jackie Speier |
| 15th | 72% | 28% | Eric Swalwell |
| 16th | 54% | 46% | Jim Costa |
| 17th | 74% | 26% | Ro Khanna |
| 18th | 76% | 24% | Anna Eshoo |
| 19th | 72% | 28% | Zoe Lofgren |
| 20th | 71% | 29% | Jimmy Panetta |
| 21st | 49% | 51% | David Valadao |
| 22nd | 42% | 58% | Devin Nunes |
| 23rd | 36% | 64% | Kevin McCarthy |
| 24th | 58% | 42% | Salud Carbajal |
| 25th | 51% | 49% | Mike Garcia |
| 26th | 59% | 41% | Julia Brownley |
| 27th | 67% | 33% | Judy Chu |
| 28th | 74% | 26% | Adam Schiff |
| 29th | 76% | 24% | Tony Cárdenas |
| 30th | 69% | 31% | Brad Sherman |
| 31st | 55% | 45% | Pete Aguilar |
| 32nd | 65% | 35% | Grace Napolitano |
| 33rd | 67% | 33% | Ted Lieu |
| 34th | 84% | 16% | Jimmy Gomez |
| 35th | 62% | 38% | Norma Torres |
| 36th | 55% | 45% | Raul Ruiz |
| 37th | 86% | 14% | Karen Bass |
| 38th | 66% | 34% | Linda Sánchez |
| 39th | 52% | 48% | Young Kim |
| 40th | 79% | 21% | Lucille Roybal-Allard |
| 41st | 58% | 42% | Mark Takano |
| 42nd | 41% | 59% | Ken Calvert |
| 43rd | 77% | 23% | Maxine Waters |
| 44th | 80% | 20% | Nanette Barragán |
| 45th | 53% | 47% | Katie Porter |
| 46th | 64% | 36% | Lou Correa |
| 47th | 62% | 38% | Alan Lowenthal |
| 48th | 48% | 52% | Michelle Steel |
| 49th | 51% | 49% | Mike Levin |
| 50th | 41% | 59% | Darrell Issa |
| 51st | 65% | 35% | Juan Vargas |
| 52nd | 61% | 39% | Scott Peters |
| 53rd | 65% | 35% | Sara Jacobs |

#### On replacement candidates

Elder swept all congressional districts except two, losing to Paffrath in 12th and 13th districts: the latter was the best performance for both Paffrath and Newsom. Conversely, Elder's best result was in the 23rd district, which supported recalling Newsom the most.
| District | Elder | Paffrath | Faulconer | Ross | Representative |
| 1st | 57.07% | 4.44% | 4.17% | 2.68% | Doug LaMalfa |
| 2nd | 38.5% | 12.19% | 7.57% | 7.83% | Jared Huffman |
| 3rd | 49.32% | 6.04% | 6.69% | 5.76% | John Garamendi |
| 4th | 55.02% | 4.67% | 7.28% | 2.74% | Tom McClintock |
| 5th | 39.35% | 11.14% | 5.96% | 7.18% | Mike Thompson |
| 6th | 38.75% | 11.26% | 9.75% | 6.26% | Doris Matsui |
| 7th | 49.11% | 7.71% | 8.67% | 4.86% | Ami Bera |
| 8th | 66.79% | 4.45% | 4.71% | 2.5% | Jay Obernolte |
| 9th | 52.46% | 6.28% | 5.63% | 6.47% | Jerry McNerney |
| 10th | 57.57% | 4.38% | 6.46% | 5.75% | Josh Harder |
| 11th | 35.14% | 14.07% | 8.39% | 7.66% | Mark DeSaulnier |
| 12th | 19.82% | 21.65% | 11.7% | 6.8% | Nancy Pelosi |
| 13th | 14.65% | 24.49% | 8.31% | 7.47% | Barbara Lee |
| 14th | 31.02% | 16.88% | 8.3% | 7.52% | Jackie Speier |
| 15th | 36.62% | 14.15% | 6.81% | 6.4% | Eric Swalwell |
| 16th | 56.51% | 5.49% | 4.97% | 3.15% | Jim Costa |
| 17th | 30.95% | 17.39% | 6.96% | 6.92% | Ro Khanna |
| 18th | 31.53% | 20.14% | 9.63% | 6.86% | Anna Eshoo |
| 19th | 35.79% | 15.05% | 5.75% | 6.33% | Zoe Lofgren |
| 20th | 40.06% | 13.24% | 4.85% | 6.0% | Jimmy Panetta |
| 21st | 62.06% | 5.29% | 4.49% | 2.61% | David Valadao |
| 22nd | 64.59% | 4.72% | 7.5% | 2.73% | Devin Nunes |
| 23rd | 68.27% | 4.44% | 4.78% | 1.61% | Kevin McCarthy |
| 24th | 51.41% | 10.69% | 6.66% | 3.51% | Salud Carbajal |
| 25th | 60.07% | 5.92% | 6.16% | 3.45% | Mike Garcia |
| 26th | 54.97% | 8.22% | 7.83% | 4.07% | Julia Brownley |
| 27th | 45.39% | 9.48% | 10.45% | 7.51% | Judy Chu |
| 28th | 39.36% | 12.99% | 9.72% | 6.99% | Adam Schiff |
| 29th | 37.1% | 10.46% | 5.67% | 7.41% | Tony Cárdenas |
| 30th | 46.13% | 10.44% | 9.53% | 6.81% | Brad Sherman |
| 31st | 58.83% | 5.92% | 5.92% | 4.09% | Pete Aguilar |
| 32nd | 49.47% | 7.18% | 5.95% | 9.05% | Grace Napolitano |
| 33rd | 46.93% | 11.43% | 13.37% | 5.52% | Ted Lieu |
| 34th | 24.59% | 13.66% | 8.25% | 11.51% | Jimmy Gomez |
| 35th | 52.46% | 7.17% | 4.82% | 6.73% | Norma Torres |
| 36th | 57.48% | 6.46% | 5.66% | 6.1% | Raul Ruiz |
| 37th | 26.32% | 15.24% | 11.14% | 15.27% | Karen Bass |
| 38th | 50.43% | 7.12% | 5.28% | 12.94% | Linda Sánchez |
| 39th | 58.04% | 7.15% | 7.28% | 6.78% | Young Kim |
| 40th | 34.86% | 9.86% | 3.89% | 13.74% | Lucille Roybal-Allard |
| 41st | 55.31% | 7.02% | 5.26% | 4.22% | Mark Takano |
| 42nd | 65.62% | 5.16% | 6.01% | 2.52% | Ken Calvert |
| 43rd | 39.44% | 11.72% | 6.84% | 5.68% | Maxine Waters |
| 44th | 35.85% | 10.45% | 3.9% | 6.17% | Nanette Barragán |
| 45th | 57.5% | 9.09% | 8.08% | 3.52% | Katie Porter |
| 46th | 44.63% | 10.25% | 5.73% | 4.35% | Lou Correa |
| 47th | 48.67% | 9.92% | 7.56% | 3.72% | Alan Lowenthal |
| 48th | 60.31% | 7.34% | 8.58% | 2.77% | Michelle Steel |
| 49th | 54.14% | 9.15% | 12.51% | 3.44% | Mike Levin |
| 50th | 58.89% | 6.27% | 11.37% | 2.74% | Darrell Issa |
| 51st | 40.35% | 12.05% | 10.79% | 5.36% | Juan Vargas |
| 52nd | 41.9% | 12.53% | 19.15% | 4.73% | Scott Peters |
| 53rd | 40.3% | 13.01% | 15.1% | 4.84% | Sara Jacobs |

### By city
#### On recall question

Official outcome by city and unincorporated areas of counties, of which No won 361 & Yes won 178. :
| City | County | No | No | Yes | Yes | Margin | Margin | Total Votes | 2018 to 2021 Swing % |
| City | County | # | % | # | % | # | % | Total Votes | 2018 to 2021 Swing % |
| Alameda | Alameda | 28,481 | 84.06% | 5,401 | 15.94% | 23,080 | 68.12% | 33,882 | 3.85% |
| Albany | Alameda | 8,356 | 91.42% | 784 | 8.58% | 7,572 | 82.84% | 9,140 | 0.72% |
| Berkeley | Alameda | 49,819 | 94.66% | 2,813 | 5.34% | 47,006 | 89.31% | 52,632 | -0.08% |
| Dublin | Alameda | 15,413 | 72.39% | 5,878 | 27.61% | 9,535 | 44.78% | 21,291 | 6.87% |
| Emeryville | Alameda | 4,092 | 90.87% | 411 | 9.13% | 3,681 | 81.75% | 4,503 | -1.34% |
| Fremont | Alameda | 51,217 | 74.06% | 17,937 | 25.94% | 33,280 | 48.12% | 69,154 | 5.84% |
| Hayward | Alameda | 32,733 | 79.03% | 8,684 | 20.97% | 24,049 | 58.07% | 41,417 | -0.54% |
| Livermore | Alameda | 23,556 | 61.15% | 14,965 | 38.85% | 8,591 | 22.30% | 38,521 | 7.12% |
| Newark | Alameda | 10,533 | 74.53% | 3,599 | 25.47% | 6,934 | 49.07% | 14,132 | 3.85% |
| Oakland | Alameda | 136,550 | 92.47% | 11,127 | 7.53% | 125,423 | 84.93% | 147,677 | -0.29% |
| Piedmont | Alameda | 6,164 | 86.20% | 987 | 13.80% | 5,177 | 72.40% | 7,151 | 7.69% |
| Pleasanton | Alameda | 22,064 | 67.64% | 10,558 | 32.36% | 11,506 | 35.27% | 32,622 | 11.55% |
| San Leandro | Alameda | 21,586 | 79.06% | 5,717 | 20.94% | 15,869 | 58.12% | 27,303 | 1.25% |
| Union City | Alameda | 17,772 | 78.37% | 4,906 | 21.63% | 12,866 | 56.73% | 22,678 | 1.88% |
| Unincorporated Area | Alameda | 37,565 | 72.41% | 14,314 | 27.59% | 23,251 | 44.82% | 51,879 | 2.42% |
| Unincorporated Area | Alpine | 354 | 61.14% | 225 | 38.86% | 129 | 22.28% | 579 | -3.25% |
| Amador | Amador | 93 | 65.49% | 49 | 34.51% | 44 | 30.99% | 142 | 13.13% |
| Ione | Amador | 710 | 27.69% | 1,854 | 72.31% | -1,144 | -44.62% | 2,564 | -2.43% |
| Jackson | Amador | 980 | 42.35% | 1,334 | 57.65% | -354 | -15.30% | 2,314 | -1.88% |
| Plymouth | Amador | 173 | 33.27% | 347 | 66.73% | -174 | -33.46% | 520 | 2.14% |
| Sutter Creek | Amador | 613 | 43.05% | 811 | 56.95% | -198 | -13.90% | 1,424 | 3.72% |
| Unincorporated Area | Amador | 4,388 | 34.05% | 8,500 | 65.95% | -4,112 | -31.91% | 12,888 | -0.75% |
| Biggs | Butte | 182 | 31.76% | 391 | 68.24% | -209 | -36.47% | 573 | -7.57% |
| Chico | Butte | 21,348 | 58.38% | 15,221 | 41.62% | 6,127 | 16.75% | 36,569 | -3.78% |
| Gridley | Butte | 734 | 39.96% | 1,103 | 60.04% | -369 | -20.09% | 1,837 | -7.43% |
| Oroville | Butte | 1,891 | 36.77% | 3,252 | 63.23% | -1,361 | -26.46% | 5,143 | -4.58% |
| Paradise | Butte | 1,280 | 34.62% | 2,417 | 65.38% | -1,137 | -30.75% | 3,697 | -12.08% |
| Unincorporated Area | Butte | 10,693 | 34.01% | 20,745 | 65.99% | -10,052 | -31.97% | 31,438 | -3.79% |
| Angels | Calaveras | 712 | 38.10% | 1,157 | 61.90% | -445 | -23.81% | 1,869 | 1.05% |
| Unincorporated Area | Calaveras | 7,608 | 35.25% | 13,976 | 64.75% | -6,368 | -29.50% | 21,584 | -1.07% |
| Colusa | Colusa | 653 | 35.11% | 1,207 | 64.89% | -554 | -29.78% | 1,860 | 4.53% |
| Williams | Colusa | 445 | 54.60% | 370 | 45.40% | 75 | 9.20% | 815 | -8.37% |
| Unincorporated Area | Colusa | 929 | 27.41% | 2,460 | 72.59% | -1,531 | -45.18% | 3,389 | -4.20% |
| Antioch | Contra Costa | 23,786 | 71.72% | 9,381 | 28.28% | 14,405 | 43.43% | 33,167 | 5.35% |
| Brentwood | Contra Costa | 14,998 | 56.29% | 11,646 | 43.71% | 3,352 | 12.58% | 26,644 | 6.34% |
| Clayton | Contra Costa | 3,825 | 59.20% | 2,636 | 40.80% | 1,189 | 18.40% | 6,461 | 12.80% |
| Concord | Contra Costa | 32,390 | 69.90% | 13,947 | 30.10% | 18,443 | 39.80% | 46,337 | 7.64% |
| Danville | Contra Costa | 14,994 | 61.64% | 9,331 | 38.36% | 5,663 | 23.28% | 24,325 | 10.91% |
| El Cerrito | Contra Costa | 11,968 | 90.11% | 1,314 | 9.89% | 10,654 | 80.21% | 13,282 | 2.32% |
| Hercules | Contra Costa | 8,726 | 81.13% | 2,029 | 18.87% | 6,697 | 62.27% | 10,755 | 5.97% |
| Lafayette | Contra Costa | 10,849 | 74.15% | 3,783 | 25.85% | 7,066 | 48.29% | 14,632 | 9.11% |
| Martinez | Contra Costa | 12,964 | 69.84% | 5,598 | 30.16% | 7,366 | 39.68% | 18,562 | 5.12% |
| Moraga | Contra Costa | 6,617 | 74.43% | 2,273 | 25.57% | 4,344 | 48.86% | 8,890 | 15.75% |
| Oakley | Contra Costa | 8,185 | 55.23% | 6,636 | 44.77% | 1,549 | 10.45% | 14,821 | -0.40% |
| Orinda | Contra Costa | 8,821 | 76.32% | 2,737 | 23.68% | 6,084 | 52.64% | 11,558 | 10.57% |
| Pinole | Contra Costa | 6,173 | 77.24% | 1,819 | 22.76% | 4,354 | 54.48% | 7,992 | 7.55% |
| Pittsburg | Contra Costa | 15,451 | 78.04% | 4,348 | 21.96% | 11,103 | 56.08% | 19,799 | 4.17% |
| Pleasant Hill | Contra Costa | 12,182 | 73.06% | 4,493 | 26.94% | 7,689 | 46.11% | 16,675 | 6.88% |
| Richmond | Contra Costa | 29,079 | 88.79% | 3,671 | 11.21% | 25,408 | 77.58% | 32,750 | 2.72% |
| San Pablo | Contra Costa | 5,063 | 86.89% | 764 | 13.11% | 4,299 | 73.78% | 5,827 | 1.10% |
| San Ramon | Contra Costa | 23,194 | 70.27% | 9,814 | 29.73% | 13,380 | 40.54% | 33,008 | 10.62% |
| Walnut Creek | Contra Costa | 27,377 | 74.47% | 9,387 | 25.53% | 17,990 | 48.93% | 36,764 | 10.84% |
| Unincorporated Area | Contra Costa | 48,105 | 66.30% | 24,451 | 33.70% | 23,654 | 32.60% | 72,556 | 5.23% |
| Crescent City | Del Norte | 497 | 49.65% | 504 | 50.35% | -7 | -0.70% | 1,001 | -2.84% |
| Unincorporated Area | Del Norte | 3,008 | 38.83% | 4,739 | 61.17% | -1,731 | -22.34% | 7,747 | -2.37% |
| Placerville | El Dorado | 2,246 | 48.15% | 2,419 | 51.85% | -173 | -3.71% | 4,665 | -2.05% |
| South Lake Tahoe | El Dorado | 3,552 | 61.47% | 2,226 | 38.53% | 1,326 | 22.95% | 5,778 | -6.73% |
| Unincorporated Area | El Dorado | 34,109 | 38.82% | 53,748 | 61.18% | -19,639 | -22.35% | 87,857 | 1.72% |
| Clovis | Fresno | 17,616 | 38.46% | 28,186 | 61.54% | -10,570 | -23.08% | 45,802 | 0.36% |
| Coalinga | Fresno | 1,230 | 41.32% | 1,747 | 58.68% | -517 | -17.37% | 2,977 | -4.09% |
| Firebaugh | Fresno | 736 | 66.55% | 370 | 33.45% | 366 | 33.09% | 1,106 | -0.55% |
| Fowler | Fresno | 1,046 | 54.00% | 891 | 46.00% | 155 | 8.00% | 1,937 | 5.54% |
| Fresno | Fresno | 71,084 | 56.16% | 55,492 | 43.84% | 15,592 | 12.32% | 126,576 | 0.25% |
| Huron | Fresno | 352 | 82.44% | 75 | 17.56% | 277 | 64.87% | 427 | 6.43% |
| Kerman | Fresno | 1,723 | 55.38% | 1,388 | 44.62% | 335 | 10.77% | 3,111 | 0.10% |
| Kingsburg | Fresno | 1,358 | 28.69% | 3,376 | 71.31% | -2,018 | -42.63% | 4,734 | -0.33% |
| Mendota | Fresno | 652 | 78.27% | 181 | 21.73% | 471 | 56.54% | 833 | 8.03% |
| Orange Cove | Fresno | 665 | 72.05% | 258 | 27.95% | 407 | 44.10% | 923 | -7.62% |
| Parlier | Fresno | 1,269 | 77.57% | 367 | 22.43% | 902 | 55.13% | 1,636 | 7.80% |
| Reedley | Fresno | 2,696 | 49.58% | 2,742 | 50.42% | -46 | -0.85% | 5,438 | 1.16% |
| San Joaquin | Fresno | 303 | 83.47% | 60 | 16.53% | 243 | 66.94% | 363 | 12.59% |
| Sanger | Fresno | 3,496 | 59.52% | 2,378 | 40.48% | 1,118 | 19.03% | 5,874 | -0.10% |
| Selma | Fresno | 2,681 | 55.91% | 2,114 | 44.09% | 567 | 11.82% | 4,795 | 2.87% |
| Unincorporated Area | Fresno | 19,581 | 36.76% | 33,684 | 63.24% | -14,103 | -26.48% | 53,265 | -1.16% |
| Orland | Glenn | 782 | 38.87% | 1,230 | 61.13% | -448 | -22.27% | 2,012 | -3.60% |
| Willows | Glenn | 566 | 30.59% | 1,284 | 69.41% | -718 | -38.81% | 1,850 | 2.43% |
| Unincorporated Area | Glenn | 1,137 | 22.95% | 3,817 | 77.05% | -2,680 | -54.10% | 4,954 | -2.86% |
| Arcata | Humboldt | 5,731 | 84.25% | 1,071 | 15.75% | 4,660 | 68.51% | 6,802 | -2.94% |
| Blue Lake | Humboldt | 430 | 74.27% | 149 | 25.73% | 281 | 48.53% | 579 | 3.43% |
| Eureka | Humboldt | 6,298 | 69.81% | 2,723 | 30.19% | 3,575 | 39.63% | 9,021 | 5.33% |
| Ferndale | Humboldt | 417 | 53.88% | 357 | 46.12% | 60 | 7.75% | 774 | 5.23% |
| Fortuna | Humboldt | 1,832 | 42.94% | 2,434 | 57.06% | -602 | -14.11% | 4,266 | 0.23% |
| Rio Dell | Humboldt | 366 | 36.78% | 629 | 63.22% | -263 | -26.43% | 995 | -4.02% |
| Trinidad | Humboldt | 153 | 79.27% | 40 | 20.73% | 113 | 58.55% | 193 | 2.36% |
| Unincorporated Area | Humboldt | 17,937 | 61.52% | 11,218 | 38.48% | 6,719 | 23.05% | 29,155 | -0.52% |
| Brawley | Imperial | 2,979 | 56.63% | 2,281 | 43.37% | 698 | 13.27% | 5,260 | -0.25% |
| Calexico | Imperial | 4,477 | 78.54% | 1,223 | 21.46% | 3,254 | 57.09% | 5,700 | -4.99% |
| Calipatria | Imperial | 337 | 62.52% | 202 | 37.48% | 135 | 25.05% | 539 | 7.99% |
| El Centro | Imperial | 5,494 | 61.19% | 3,484 | 38.81% | 2,010 | 22.39% | 8,978 | -2.23% |
| Holtville | Imperial | 592 | 52.30% | 540 | 47.70% | 52 | 4.59% | 1,132 | -9.67% |
| Imperial | Imperial | 2,389 | 50.86% | 2,308 | 49.14% | 81 | 1.72% | 4,697 | -3.50% |
| Westmorland | Imperial | 218 | 67.28% | 106 | 32.72% | 112 | 34.57% | 324 | 16.70% |
| Unincorporated Area | Imperial | 2,802 | 48.02% | 3,033 | 51.98% | -231 | -3.96% | 5,835 | -1.96% |
| Bishop | Inyo | 730 | 54.03% | 621 | 45.97% | 109 | 8.07% | 1,351 | 0.50% |
| Unincorporated Area | Inyo | 2,772 | 44.11% | 3,513 | 55.89% | -741 | -11.79% | 6,285 | 2.68% |
| Arvin | Kern | 1,148 | 74.11% | 401 | 25.89% | 747 | 48.22% | 1,549 | -2.45% |
| Bakersfield | Kern | 42,408 | 41.59% | 59,567 | 58.41% | -17,159 | -16.83% | 101,975 | -5.58% |
| California City | Kern | 1,354 | 44.02% | 1,722 | 55.98% | -368 | -11.96% | 3,076 | 5.79% |
| Delano | Kern | 3,916 | 70.00% | 1,678 | 30.00% | 2,238 | 40.01% | 5,594 | -3.14% |
| Maricopa | Kern | 35 | 13.94% | 216 | 86.06% | -181 | -72.11% | 251 | -13.07% |
| McFarland | Kern | 948 | 68.70% | 432 | 31.30% | 516 | 37.39% | 1,380 | -3.24% |
| Ridgecrest | Kern | 3,147 | 33.05% | 6,375 | 66.95% | -3,228 | -33.90% | 9,522 | 0.92% |
| Shafter | Kern | 1,413 | 41.88% | 1,961 | 58.12% | -548 | -16.24% | 3,374 | -14.37% |
| Taft | Kern | 294 | 14.77% | 1,697 | 85.23% | -1,403 | -70.47% | 1,991 | -8.26% |
| Tehachapi | Kern | 1,009 | 31.29% | 2,216 | 68.71% | -1,207 | -37.43% | 3,225 | -2.87% |
| Wasco | Kern | 1,605 | 55.34% | 1,295 | 44.66% | 310 | 10.69% | 2,900 | -6.45% |
| Unincorporated Area | Kern | 23,753 | 30.75% | 53,501 | 69.25% | -29,748 | -38.51% | 77,254 | -6.01% |
| Avenal | Kings | 445 | 63.85% | 252 | 36.15% | 193 | 27.69% | 697 | -6.50% |
| Corcoran | Kings | 1,000 | 52.55% | 903 | 47.45% | 97 | 5.10% | 1,903 | -14.86% |
| Hanford | Kings | 5,716 | 37.33% | 9,598 | 62.67% | -3,882 | -25.35% | 15,314 | -6.99% |
| Lemoore | Kings | 2,319 | 36.13% | 4,099 | 63.87% | -1,780 | -27.73% | 6,418 | -6.26% |
| Unincorporated Area | Kings | 1,762 | 26.62% | 4,858 | 73.38% | -3,096 | -46.77% | 6,620 | -9.44% |
| Clearlake | Lake | 1,797 | 55.70% | 1,429 | 44.30% | 368 | 11.41% | 3,226 | -2.54% |
| Lakeport | Lake | 1,028 | 53.26% | 902 | 46.74% | 126 | 6.53% | 1,930 | 3.57% |
| Unincorporated Area | Lake | 8,542 | 49.85% | 8,592 | 50.15% | -50 | -0.29% | 17,134 | -0.80% |
| Susanville | Lassen | 586 | 17.69% | 2,727 | 82.31% | -2,141 | -64.62% | 3,313 | -16.93% |
| Unincorporated Area | Lassen | 1,018 | 14.91% | 5,811 | 85.09% | -4,793 | -70.19% | 6,829 | -12.18% |
| Agoura Hills | Los Angeles | 6,531 | 61.21% | 4,139 | 38.79% | 2,392 | 22.42% | 10,670 | 3.23% |
| Alhambra | Los Angeles | 17,452 | 72.85% | 6,503 | 27.15% | 10,949 | 45.71% | 23,955 | 1.87% |
| Arcadia | Los Angeles | 10,331 | 57.93% | 7,502 | 42.07% | 2,829 | 15.86% | 17,833 | 9.25% |
| Artesia | Los Angeles | 2,593 | 63.59% | 1,485 | 36.41% | 1,108 | 27.17% | 4,078 | -0.67% |
| Avalon | Los Angeles | 491 | 53.90% | 420 | 46.10% | 71 | 7.79% | 911 | -4.75% |
| Azusa | Los Angeles | 7,632 | 65.55% | 4,011 | 34.45% | 3,621 | 31.10% | 11,643 | -1.27% |
| Baldwin Park | Los Angeles | 11,005 | 75.75% | 3,523 | 24.25% | 7,482 | 51.50% | 14,528 | -5.99% |
| Bell | Los Angeles | 4,476 | 82.95% | 920 | 17.05% | 3,556 | 65.90% | 5,396 | -1.20% |
| Bell Gardens | Los Angeles | 4,517 | 82.93% | 930 | 17.07% | 3,587 | 65.85% | 5,447 | -6.33% |
| Bellflower | Los Angeles | 12,522 | 67.37% | 6,064 | 32.63% | 6,458 | 34.75% | 18,586 | -2.20% |
| Beverly Hills | Los Angeles | 7,479 | 54.29% | 6,297 | 45.71% | 1,182 | 8.58% | 13,776 | -17.17% |
| Bradbury | Los Angeles | 163 | 42.67% | 219 | 57.33% | -56 | -14.66% | 382 | -7.81% |
| Burbank | Los Angeles | 29,980 | 68.61% | 13,714 | 31.39% | 16,266 | 37.23% | 43,694 | -0.45% |
| Calabasas | Los Angeles | 6,872 | 61.45% | 4,311 | 38.55% | 2,561 | 22.90% | 11,183 | -1.19% |
| Carson | Los Angeles | 24,304 | 78.96% | 6,477 | 21.04% | 17,827 | 57.92% | 30,781 | 0.33% |
| Cerritos | Los Angeles | 13,105 | 64.50% | 7,214 | 35.50% | 5,891 | 28.99% | 20,319 | 10.00% |
| Claremont | Los Angeles | 10,897 | 68.23% | 5,075 | 31.77% | 5,822 | 36.45% | 15,972 | 5.74% |
| Commerce | Los Angeles | 2,483 | 80.12% | 616 | 19.88% | 1,867 | 60.25% | 3,099 | -6.76% |
| Compton | Los Angeles | 15,313 | 89.54% | 1,789 | 10.46% | 13,524 | 79.08% | 17,102 | -2.00% |
| Covina | Los Angeles | 9,979 | 60.24% | 6,586 | 39.76% | 3,393 | 20.48% | 16,565 | 1.34% |
| Cudahy | Los Angeles | 2,461 | 85.07% | 432 | 14.93% | 2,029 | 70.13% | 2,893 | -0.32% |
| Culver City | Los Angeles | 15,941 | 82.92% | 3,284 | 17.08% | 12,657 | 65.84% | 19,225 | 0.88% |
| Diamond Bar | Los Angeles | 11,269 | 58.86% | 7,876 | 41.14% | 3,393 | 17.72% | 19,145 | 8.32% |
| Downey | Los Angeles | 21,389 | 67.31% | 10,387 | 32.69% | 11,002 | 34.62% | 31,776 | -2.32% |
| Duarte | Los Angeles | 5,173 | 67.58% | 2,482 | 32.42% | 2,691 | 35.15% | 7,655 | 2.95% |
| El Monte | Los Angeles | 12,639 | 73.00% | 4,674 | 27.00% | 7,965 | 46.01% | 17,313 | -3.81% |
| El Segundo | Los Angeles | 5,094 | 61.21% | 3,228 | 38.79% | 1,866 | 22.42% | 8,322 | 4.55% |
| Gardena | Los Angeles | 13,162 | 77.93% | 3,728 | 22.07% | 9,434 | 55.86% | 16,890 | -0.97% |
| Glendale | Los Angeles | 37,571 | 64.46% | 20,713 | 35.54% | 16,858 | 28.92% | 58,284 | -2.68% |
| Glendora | Los Angeles | 10,334 | 46.49% | 11,896 | 53.51% | -1,562 | -7.03% | 22,230 | 4.74% |
| Hawaiian Gardens | Los Angeles | 1,696 | 73.13% | 623 | 26.87% | 1,073 | 46.27% | 2,319 | -3.89% |
| Hawthorne | Los Angeles | 15,847 | 79.58% | 4,066 | 20.42% | 11,781 | 59.16% | 19,913 | -3.55% |
| Hermosa Beach | Los Angeles | 6,172 | 64.55% | 3,390 | 35.45% | 2,782 | 29.09% | 9,562 | -0.90% |
| Hidden Hills | Los Angeles | 527 | 53.39% | 460 | 46.61% | 67 | 6.79% | 987 | -4.35% |
| Huntington Park | Los Angeles | 7,031 | 84.42% | 1,298 | 15.58% | 5,733 | 68.83% | 8,329 | -2.30% |
| Industry | Los Angeles | 26 | 44.07% | 33 | 55.93% | -7 | -11.86% | 59 | -64.50% |
| Inglewood | Los Angeles | 27,235 | 90.41% | 2,889 | 9.59% | 24,346 | 80.82% | 30,124 | -1.36% |
| Irwindale | Los Angeles | 346 | 67.84% | 164 | 32.16% | 182 | 35.69% | 510 | -13.05% |
| La Canada Flintridge | Los Angeles | 6,355 | 58.83% | 4,447 | 41.17% | 1,908 | 17.66% | 10,802 | 10.32% |
| La Habra Heights | Los Angeles | 1,115 | 40.19% | 1,659 | 59.81% | -544 | -19.61% | 2,774 | 3.97% |
| La Mirada | Los Angeles | 9,449 | 52.87% | 8,422 | 47.13% | 1,027 | 5.75% | 17,871 | 4.75% |
| La Puente | Los Angeles | 6,171 | 75.17% | 2,038 | 24.83% | 4,133 | 50.35% | 8,209 | -3.53% |
| La Verne | Los Angeles | 7,304 | 48.07% | 7,892 | 51.93% | -588 | -3.87% | 15,196 | 3.85% |
| Lakewood | Los Angeles | 19,139 | 58.78% | 13,419 | 41.22% | 5,720 | 17.57% | 32,558 | 3.09% |
| Lancaster | Los Angeles | 21,590 | 53.43% | 18,817 | 46.57% | 2,773 | 6.86% | 40,407 | -4.23% |
| Lawndale | Los Angeles | 5,144 | 73.33% | 1,871 | 26.67% | 3,273 | 46.66% | 7,015 | -4.47% |
| Lomita | Los Angeles | 4,098 | 56.99% | 3,093 | 43.01% | 1,005 | 13.98% | 7,191 | 0.74% |
| Long Beach | Los Angeles | 100,770 | 71.38% | 40,402 | 28.62% | 60,368 | 42.76% | 141,172 | 0.07% |
| Los Angeles | Los Angeles | 831,326 | 77.14% | 246,360 | 22.86% | 584,966 | 54.28% | 1,077,686 | -4.04% |
| Lynwood | Los Angeles | 9,473 | 85.96% | 1,547 | 14.04% | 7,926 | 71.92% | 11,020 | 0.71% |
| Malibu | Los Angeles | 3,370 | 61.68% | 2,094 | 38.32% | 1,276 | 23.35% | 5,464 | -6.05% |
| Manhattan Beach | Los Angeles | 11,416 | 60.63% | 7,413 | 39.37% | 4,003 | 21.26% | 18,829 | 2.13% |
| Maywood | Los Angeles | 3,350 | 85.57% | 565 | 14.43% | 2,785 | 71.14% | 3,915 | -1.70% |
| Monrovia | Los Angeles | 9,448 | 65.00% | 5,087 | 35.00% | 4,361 | 30.00% | 14,535 | 5.46% |
| Montebello | Los Angeles | 12,268 | 75.72% | 3,933 | 24.28% | 8,335 | 51.45% | 16,201 | -0.88% |
| Monterey Park | Los Angeles | 11,555 | 71.40% | 4,628 | 28.60% | 6,927 | 42.80% | 16,183 | 6.74% |
| Norwalk | Los Angeles | 18,165 | 70.86% | 7,471 | 29.14% | 10,694 | 41.71% | 25,636 | -1.23% |
| Palmdale | Los Angeles | 23,042 | 60.45% | 15,073 | 39.55% | 7,969 | 20.91% | 38,115 | -4.35% |
| Palos Verdes Estates | Los Angeles | 3,970 | 50.79% | 3,846 | 49.21% | 124 | 1.59% | 7,816 | 7.87% |
| Paramount | Los Angeles | 7,465 | 79.96% | 1,871 | 20.04% | 5,594 | 59.92% | 9,336 | -3.08% |
| Pasadena | Los Angeles | 42,903 | 76.66% | 13,064 | 23.34% | 29,839 | 53.32% | 55,967 | 3.43% |
| Pico Rivera | Los Angeles | 14,072 | 77.00% | 4,204 | 23.00% | 9,868 | 53.99% | 18,276 | -4.39% |
| Pomona | Los Angeles | 22,036 | 70.16% | 9,371 | 29.84% | 12,665 | 40.33% | 31,407 | -5.08% |
| Rancho Palos Verdes | Los Angeles | 11,645 | 55.18% | 9,460 | 44.82% | 2,185 | 10.35% | 21,105 | 9.58% |
| Redondo Beach | Los Angeles | 20,859 | 64.86% | 11,302 | 35.14% | 9,557 | 29.72% | 32,161 | 2.67% |
| Rolling Hills | Los Angeles | 416 | 37.34% | 698 | 62.66% | -282 | -25.31% | 1,114 | 7.50% |
| Rolling Hills Estates | Los Angeles | 2,312 | 51.21% | 2,203 | 48.79% | 109 | 2.41% | 4,515 | 9.41% |
| Rosemead | Los Angeles | 7,309 | 71.37% | 2,932 | 28.63% | 4,377 | 42.74% | 10,241 | -1.62% |
| San Dimas | Los Angeles | 7,201 | 48.32% | 7,703 | 51.68% | -502 | -3.37% | 14,904 | 4.04% |
| San Fernando | Los Angeles | 4,390 | 77.82% | 1,251 | 22.18% | 3,139 | 55.65% | 5,641 | -2.07% |
| San Gabriel | Los Angeles | 6,856 | 67.64% | 3,280 | 32.36% | 3,576 | 35.28% | 10,136 | 3.17% |
| San Marino | Los Angeles | 3,263 | 56.69% | 2,493 | 43.31% | 770 | 13.38% | 5,756 | 16.72% |
| Santa Clarita | Los Angeles | 46,044 | 50.76% | 44,667 | 49.24% | 1,377 | 1.52% | 90,711 | 2.30% |
| Santa Fe Springs | Los Angeles | 3,887 | 68.37% | 1,798 | 31.63% | 2,089 | 36.75% | 5,685 | -3.56% |
| Santa Monica | Los Angeles | 34,372 | 80.30% | 8,431 | 19.70% | 25,941 | 60.61% | 42,803 | -2.58% |
| Sierra Madre | Los Angeles | 3,977 | 64.61% | 2,178 | 35.39% | 1,799 | 29.23% | 6,155 | 5.91% |
| Signal Hill | Los Angeles | 2,940 | 73.91% | 1,038 | 26.09% | 1,902 | 47.81% | 3,978 | 3.50% |
| South El Monte | Los Angeles | 2,835 | 76.89% | 852 | 23.11% | 1,983 | 53.78% | 3,687 | -5.78% |
| South Gate | Los Angeles | 14,726 | 82.02% | 3,229 | 17.98% | 11,497 | 64.03% | 17,955 | -1.99% |
| South Pasadena | Los Angeles | 9,998 | 79.36% | 2,600 | 20.64% | 7,398 | 58.72% | 12,598 | 6.61% |
| Temple City | Los Angeles | 6,582 | 59.80% | 4,425 | 40.20% | 2,157 | 19.60% | 11,007 | 7.77% |
| Torrance | Los Angeles | 34,569 | 59.28% | 23,750 | 40.72% | 10,819 | 18.55% | 58,319 | 5.71% |
| Vernon | Los Angeles | 50 | 73.53% | 18 | 26.47% | 32 | 47.06% | 68 | -0.77% |
| Walnut | Los Angeles | 6,859 | 61.96% | 4,211 | 38.04% | 2,648 | 23.92% | 11,070 | 7.39% |
| West Covina | Los Angeles | 21,455 | 65.50% | 11,303 | 34.50% | 10,152 | 30.99% | 32,758 | 0.04% |
| West Hollywood | Los Angeles | 13,970 | 83.39% | 2,782 | 16.61% | 11,188 | 66.79% | 16,752 | -8.90% |
| Westlake Village | Los Angeles | 2,558 | 54.66% | 2,122 | 45.34% | 436 | 9.32% | 4,680 | 3.98% |
| Whittier | Los Angeles | 19,041 | 60.73% | 12,312 | 39.27% | 6,729 | 21.46% | 31,353 | 0.23% |
| Unincorporated Area | Los Angeles | 192,713 | 67.95% | 90,897 | 32.05% | 101,816 | 35.90% | 283,610 | -1.64% |
| Chowchilla | Madera | 1,117 | 33.99% | 2,169 | 66.01% | -1,052 | -32.01% | 3,286 | -2.32% |
| Madera | Madera | 5,867 | 53.96% | 5,005 | 46.04% | 862 | 7.93% | 10,872 | -0.48% |
| Unincorporated Area | Madera | 9,249 | 33.37% | 18,464 | 66.63% | -9,215 | -33.25% | 27,713 | 0.67% |
| Belvedere | Marin | 876 | 70.93% | 359 | 29.07% | 517 | 41.86% | 1,235 | 9.56% |
| Corte Madera | Marin | 4,705 | 84.38% | 871 | 15.62% | 3,834 | 68.76% | 5,576 | 5.29% |
| Fairfax | Marin | 4,217 | 90.01% | 468 | 9.99% | 3,749 | 80.02% | 4,685 | -0.40% |
| Larkspur | Marin | 6,110 | 83.36% | 1,220 | 16.64% | 4,890 | 66.71% | 7,330 | 4.20% |
| Mill Valley | Marin | 7,538 | 88.34% | 995 | 11.66% | 6,543 | 76.68% | 8,533 | 3.36% |
| Novato | Marin | 18,968 | 74.87% | 6,367 | 25.13% | 12,601 | 49.74% | 25,335 | 7.46% |
| Ross | Marin | 987 | 75.81% | 315 | 24.19% | 672 | 51.61% | 1,302 | 7.27% |
| San Anselmo | Marin | 6,745 | 87.68% | 948 | 12.32% | 5,797 | 75.35% | 7,693 | 1.69% |
| San Rafael | Marin | 20,677 | 82.56% | 4,367 | 17.44% | 16,310 | 65.13% | 25,044 | 4.85% |
| Sausalito | Marin | 3,644 | 83.39% | 726 | 16.61% | 2,918 | 66.77% | 4,370 | 2.88% |
| Tiburon | Marin | 3,939 | 77.02% | 1,175 | 22.98% | 2,764 | 54.05% | 5,114 | 5.28% |
| Unincorporated Area | Marin | 30,193 | 82.37% | 6,462 | 17.63% | 23,731 | 64.74% | 36,655 | 3.59% |
| Unincorporated Area | Mariposa | 3,376 | 38.57% | 5,378 | 61.43% | -2,002 | -22.87% | 8,754 | -0.26% |
| Fort Bragg | Mendocino | 1,784 | 71.65% | 706 | 28.35% | 1,078 | 43.29% | 2,490 | -0.12% |
| Point Arena | Mendocino | 137 | 84.05% | 26 | 15.95% | 111 | 68.10% | 163 | -0.03% |
| Ukiah | Mendocino | 3,284 | 63.56% | 1,883 | 36.44% | 1,401 | 27.11% | 5,167 | -4.48% |
| Willits | Mendocino | 934 | 60.34% | 614 | 39.66% | 320 | 20.67% | 1,548 | -6.12% |
| Unincorporated Area | Mendocino | 15,954 | 64.33% | 8,846 | 35.67% | 7,108 | 28.66% | 24,800 | -3.21% |
| Atwater | Merced | 3,151 | 45.41% | 3,788 | 54.59% | -637 | -9.18% | 6,939 | -5.33% |
| Dos Palos | Merced | 502 | 44.66% | 622 | 55.34% | -120 | -10.68% | 1,124 | -7.97% |
| Gustine | Merced | 615 | 43.96% | 784 | 56.04% | -169 | -12.08% | 1,399 | -8.31% |
| Livingston | Merced | 1,596 | 70.96% | 653 | 29.04% | 943 | 41.93% | 2,249 | -4.97% |
| Los Banos | Merced | 4,751 | 55.18% | 3,859 | 44.82% | 892 | 10.36% | 8,610 | -6.33% |
| Merced | Merced | 9,947 | 56.12% | 7,779 | 43.88% | 2,168 | 12.23% | 17,726 | -4.29% |
| Unincorporated Area | Merced | 7,305 | 36.47% | 12,725 | 63.53% | -5,420 | -27.06% | 20,030 | -11.89% |
| Alturas | Modoc | 224 | 25.08% | 669 | 74.92% | -445 | -49.83% | 893 | -10.13% |
| Unincorporated Area | Modoc | 506 | 20.82% | 1,924 | 79.18% | -1,418 | -58.35% | 2,430 | -1.56% |
| Mammoth Lakes | Mono | 1,577 | 64.79% | 857 | 35.21% | 720 | 29.58% | 2,434 | 1.85% |
| Unincorporated Area | Mono | 1,228 | 46.94% | 1,388 | 53.06% | -160 | -6.12% | 2,616 | -2.36% |
| Carmel-by-the-Sea | Monterey | 1,409 | 68.50% | 648 | 31.50% | 761 | 37.00% | 2,057 | 9.23% |
| Del Rey Oaks | Monterey | 608 | 66.74% | 303 | 33.26% | 305 | 33.48% | 911 | 2.02% |
| Gonzales | Monterey | 1,071 | 70.05% | 458 | 29.95% | 613 | 40.09% | 1,529 | -10.06% |
| Greenfield | Monterey | 1,825 | 77.13% | 541 | 22.87% | 1,284 | 54.27% | 2,366 | 0.56% |
| King City | Monterey | 933 | 61.02% | 596 | 38.98% | 337 | 22.04% | 1,529 | -7.11% |
| Marina | Monterey | 4,993 | 70.63% | 2,076 | 29.37% | 2,917 | 41.26% | 7,069 | 5.38% |
| Monterey | Monterey | 7,969 | 72.47% | 3,028 | 27.53% | 4,941 | 44.93% | 10,997 | 4.87% |
| Pacific Grove | Monterey | 6,049 | 76.56% | 1,852 | 23.44% | 4,197 | 53.12% | 7,901 | 9.20% |
| Salinas | Monterey | 22,090 | 71.40% | 8,849 | 28.60% | 13,241 | 42.80% | 30,939 | 2.36% |
| Sand City | Monterey | 98 | 67.12% | 48 | 32.88% | 50 | 34.25% | 146 | 11.29% |
| Seaside | Monterey | 5,844 | 72.86% | 2,177 | 27.14% | 3,667 | 45.72% | 8,021 | 2.33% |
| Soledad | Monterey | 2,368 | 74.70% | 802 | 25.30% | 1,566 | 49.40% | 3,170 | -4.69% |
| Unincorporated Area | Monterey | 25,407 | 60.21% | 16,791 | 39.79% | 8,616 | 20.42% | 42,198 | 5.86% |
| American Canyon | Napa | 5,620 | 72.57% | 2,124 | 27.43% | 3,496 | 45.14% | 7,744 | 4.63% |
| Calistoga | Napa | 1,376 | 73.62% | 493 | 26.38% | 883 | 47.24% | 1,869 | -0.60% |
| Napa | Napa | 22,372 | 68.59% | 10,246 | 31.41% | 12,126 | 37.18% | 32,618 | 5.22% |
| St. Helena | Napa | 1,938 | 73.83% | 687 | 26.17% | 1,251 | 47.66% | 2,625 | 7.45% |
| Yountville | Napa | 983 | 70.21% | 417 | 29.79% | 566 | 40.43% | 1,400 | 9.08% |
| Unincorporated Area | Napa | 6,659 | 58.55% | 4,714 | 41.45% | 1,945 | 17.10% | 11,373 | 5.81% |
| Grass Valley | Nevada | 3,358 | 58.56% | 2,376 | 41.44% | 982 | 17.13% | 5,734 | 4.98% |
| Nevada City | Nevada | 1,386 | 75.08% | 460 | 24.92% | 926 | 50.16% | 1,846 | 16.78% |
| Truckee | Nevada | 5,677 | 72.25% | 2,180 | 27.75% | 3,497 | 44.51% | 7,857 | 1.65% |
| Unincorporated Area | Nevada | 19,430 | 48.77% | 20,410 | 51.23% | -980 | -2.46% | 39,840 | -0.41% |
| Aliso Viejo | Orange | 11,283 | 53.32% | 9,876 | 46.68% | 1,407 | 6.65% | 21,159 | -0.36% |
| Anaheim | Orange | 52,216 | 57.63% | 38,393 | 42.37% | 13,823 | 15.26% | 90,609 | 3.06% |
| Brea | Orange | 9,454 | 48.23% | 10,147 | 51.77% | -693 | -3.54% | 19,601 | 8.03% |
| Buena Park | Orange | 13,424 | 57.40% | 9,962 | 42.60% | 3,462 | 14.80% | 23,386 | 5.12% |
| Costa Mesa | Orange | 19,855 | 52.05% | 18,289 | 47.95% | 1,566 | 4.11% | 38,144 | -4.73% |
| Cypress | Orange | 10,027 | 51.90% | 9,293 | 48.10% | 734 | 3.80% | 19,320 | 7.60% |
| Dana Point | Orange | 7,593 | 43.71% | 9,779 | 56.29% | -2,186 | -12.58% | 17,372 | 1.36% |
| Fountain Valley | Orange | 11,858 | 48.18% | 12,755 | 51.82% | -897 | -3.64% | 24,613 | 5.40% |
| Fullerton | Orange | 25,470 | 55.83% | 20,153 | 44.17% | 5,317 | 11.65% | 45,623 | 5.58% |
| Garden Grove | Orange | 25,263 | 54.36% | 21,213 | 45.64% | 4,050 | 8.71% | 46,476 | 3.24% |
| Huntington Beach | Orange | 40,593 | 44.56% | 50,511 | 55.44% | -9,918 | -10.89% | 91,104 | -0.79% |
| Irvine | Orange | 59,653 | 63.62% | 34,107 | 36.38% | 25,546 | 27.25% | 93,760 | 3.86% |
| La Habra | Orange | 10,563 | 54.85% | 8,696 | 45.15% | 1,867 | 9.69% | 19,259 | 3.57% |
| La Palma | Orange | 3,451 | 56.37% | 2,671 | 43.63% | 780 | 12.74% | 6,122 | 11.70% |
| Laguna Beach | Orange | 7,988 | 60.34% | 5,251 | 39.66% | 2,737 | 20.67% | 13,239 | -0.47% |
| Laguna Hills | Orange | 6,787 | 49.02% | 7,059 | 50.98% | -272 | -1.96% | 13,846 | 6.31% |
| Laguna Niguel | Orange | 15,665 | 48.25% | 16,799 | 51.75% | -1,134 | -3.49% | 32,464 | 3.47% |
| Laguna Woods | Orange | 6,946 | 57.91% | 5,048 | 42.09% | 1,898 | 15.82% | 11,994 | 12.93% |
| Lake Forest | Orange | 17,992 | 50.45% | 17,669 | 49.55% | 323 | 0.91% | 35,661 | 7.33% |
| Los Alamitos | Orange | 2,351 | 49.69% | 2,380 | 50.31% | -29 | -0.61% | 4,731 | 1.12% |
| Mission Viejo | Orange | 22,316 | 47.57% | 24,593 | 52.43% | -2,277 | -4.85% | 46,909 | 7.68% |
| Newport Beach | Orange | 16,826 | 38.78% | 26,564 | 61.22% | -9,738 | -22.44% | 43,390 | -2.86% |
| Orange | Orange | 25,459 | 49.98% | 25,481 | 50.02% | -22 | -0.04% | 50,940 | 5.91% |
| Placentia | Orange | 9,997 | 49.53% | 10,186 | 50.47% | -189 | -0.94% | 20,183 | 6.53% |
| Rancho Santa Margarita | Orange | 9,998 | 45.46% | 11,994 | 54.54% | -1,996 | -9.08% | 21,992 | 5.81% |
| San Clemente | Orange | 12,836 | 39.87% | 19,361 | 60.13% | -6,525 | -20.27% | 32,197 | 0.25% |
| San Juan Capistrano | Orange | 6,647 | 43.26% | 8,718 | 56.74% | -2,071 | -13.48% | 15,365 | 1.78% |
| Santa Ana | Orange | 41,218 | 69.43% | 18,144 | 30.57% | 23,074 | 38.87% | 59,362 | -2.36% |
| Seal Beach | Orange | 7,525 | 51.00% | 7,230 | 49.00% | 295 | 2.00% | 14,755 | 7.49% |
| Stanton | Orange | 5,102 | 59.38% | 3,490 | 40.62% | 1,612 | 18.76% | 8,592 | -0.04% |
| Tustin | Orange | 15,089 | 59.55% | 10,249 | 40.45% | 4,840 | 19.10% | 25,338 | 6.01% |
| Villa Park | Orange | 1,220 | 34.28% | 2,339 | 65.72% | -1,119 | -31.44% | 3,559 | 8.05% |
| Westminster | Orange | 14,619 | 51.23% | 13,919 | 48.77% | 700 | 2.45% | 28,538 | 4.66% |
| Yorba Linda | Orange | 12,945 | 37.42% | 21,646 | 62.58% | -8,701 | -25.15% | 34,591 | 8.28% |
| Unincorporated Area | Orange | 26,228 | 43.75% | 33,720 | 56.25% | -7,492 | -12.50% | 59,948 | 5.04% |
| Auburn | Placer | 3,680 | 48.47% | 3,912 | 51.53% | -232 | -3.06% | 7,592 | 2.82% |
| Colfax | Placer | 308 | 39.24% | 477 | 60.76% | -169 | -21.53% | 785 | -0.76% |
| Lincoln | Placer | 10,837 | 41.91% | 15,021 | 58.09% | -4,184 | -16.18% | 25,858 | 5.11% |
| Loomis | Placer | 1,216 | 31.62% | 2,630 | 68.38% | -1,414 | -36.77% | 3,846 | 1.13% |
| Rocklin | Placer | 14,191 | 43.06% | 18,762 | 56.94% | -4,571 | -13.87% | 32,953 | 2.75% |
| Roseville | Placer | 31,165 | 45.72% | 36,997 | 54.28% | -5,832 | -8.56% | 68,162 | 3.51% |
| Unincorporated Area | Placer | 24,280 | 39.23% | 37,612 | 60.77% | -13,332 | -21.54% | 61,892 | 1.04% |
| Portola | Plumas | 300 | 41.04% | 431 | 58.96% | -131 | -17.92% | 731 | 0.63% |
| Unincorporated Area | Plumas | 3,108 | 36.48% | 5,412 | 63.52% | -2,304 | -27.04% | 8,520 | -0.77% |
| Banning | Riverside | 4,695 | 48.17% | 5,052 | 51.83% | -357 | -3.66% | 9,747 | 4.56% |
| Beaumont | Riverside | 8,341 | 45.66% | 9,926 | 54.34% | -1,585 | -8.68% | 18,267 | 2.19% |
| Blythe | Riverside | 999 | 40.19% | 1,487 | 59.81% | -488 | -19.63% | 2,486 | -13.70% |
| Calimesa | Riverside | 1,574 | 32.78% | 3,227 | 67.22% | -1,653 | -34.43% | 4,801 | 1.54% |
| Canyon Lake | Riverside | 1,217 | 20.54% | 4,709 | 79.46% | -3,492 | -58.93% | 5,926 | -5.81% |
| Cathedral City | Riverside | 10,664 | 71.98% | 4,152 | 28.02% | 6,512 | 43.95% | 14,816 | 4.25% |
| Coachella | Riverside | 4,219 | 79.51% | 1,087 | 20.49% | 3,132 | 59.03% | 5,306 | -9.48% |
| Corona | Riverside | 23,567 | 47.38% | 26,174 | 52.62% | -2,607 | -5.24% | 49,741 | -1.63% |
| Desert Hot Springs | Riverside | 3,550 | 62.03% | 2,173 | 37.97% | 1,377 | 24.06% | 5,723 | -2.95% |
| Eastvale | Riverside | 10,537 | 50.09% | 10,501 | 49.91% | 36 | 0.17% | 21,038 | -7.08% |
| Hemet | Riverside | 11,319 | 47.57% | 12,473 | 52.43% | -1,154 | -4.85% | 23,792 | 6.54% |
| Indian Wells | Riverside | 1,042 | 40.08% | 1,558 | 59.92% | -516 | -19.85% | 2,600 | 16.11% |
| Indio | Riverside | 13,456 | 58.09% | 9,710 | 41.91% | 3,746 | 16.17% | 23,166 | 0.37% |
| Jurupa Valley | Riverside | 12,343 | 52.56% | 11,142 | 47.44% | 1,201 | 5.11% | 23,485 | -8.33% |
| La Quinta | Riverside | 7,877 | 48.57% | 8,342 | 51.43% | -465 | -2.87% | 16,219 | 7.14% |
| Lake Elsinore | Riverside | 8,413 | 45.32% | 10,149 | 54.68% | -1,736 | -9.35% | 18,562 | -1.78% |
| Indio | Riverside | 15,822 | 40.58% | 23,166 | 59.42% | -7,344 | -18.84% | 38,988 | 4.70% |
| Moreno Valley | Riverside | 28,724 | 64.35% | 15,913 | 35.65% | 12,811 | 28.70% | 44,637 | -1.36% |
| Murrieta | Riverside | 15,546 | 37.94% | 25,433 | 62.06% | -9,887 | -24.13% | 40,979 | 1.53% |
| Norco | Riverside | 2,577 | 26.03% | 7,324 | 73.97% | -4,747 | -47.94% | 9,901 | -5.23% |
| Palm Desert | Riverside | 11,788 | 53.49% | 10,250 | 46.51% | 1,538 | 6.98% | 22,038 | 8.74% |
| Palm Springs | Riverside | 16,939 | 79.87% | 4,270 | 20.13% | 12,669 | 59.73% | 21,209 | 7.41% |
| Perris | Riverside | 8,633 | 68.45% | 3,980 | 31.55% | 4,653 | 36.89% | 12,613 | -8.27% |
| Rancho Mirage | Riverside | 5,930 | 60.33% | 3,899 | 39.67% | 2,031 | 20.66% | 9,829 | 14.08% |
| Riverside | Riverside | 46,480 | 54.42% | 38,930 | 45.58% | 7,550 | 8.84% | 85,410 | -3.54% |
| San Jacinto | Riverside | 5,595 | 51.16% | 5,341 | 48.84% | 254 | 2.32% | 10,936 | -4.12% |
| Temecula | Riverside | 17,129 | 40.91% | 24,740 | 59.09% | -7,611 | -18.18% | 41,869 | 1.64% |
| Temecula | Riverside | 4,241 | 34.41% | 8,085 | 65.59% | -3,844 | -31.19% | 12,326 | -1.99% |
| Unincorporated Area | Riverside | 52,413 | 42.90% | 69,765 | 57.10% | -17,352 | -14.20% | 122,178 | 0.98% |
| Citrus Heights | Sacramento | 14,600 | 44.52% | 18,197 | 55.48% | -3,597 | -10.97% | 32,797 | 0.61% |
| Elk Grove | Sacramento | 41,850 | 61.45% | 26,252 | 38.55% | 15,598 | 22.90% | 68,102 | 5.05% |
| Folsom | Sacramento | 17,883 | 49.92% | 17,942 | 50.08% | -59 | -0.16% | 35,825 | 7.15% |
| Galt | Sacramento | 3,625 | 40.56% | 5,312 | 59.44% | -1,687 | -18.88% | 8,937 | -2.21% |
| Isleton | Sacramento | 129 | 54.43% | 108 | 45.57% | 21 | 8.86% | 237 | 1.04% |
| Rancho Cordova | Sacramento | 14,094 | 55.10% | 11,483 | 44.90% | 2,611 | 10.21% | 25,577 | 1.67% |
| Sacramento | Sacramento | 126,031 | 75.06% | 41,866 | 24.94% | 84,165 | 50.13% | 167,897 | 2.69% |
| Unincorporated Area | Sacramento | 111,740 | 52.94% | 99,338 | 47.06% | 12,402 | 5.88% | 211,078 | 1.75% |
| Hollister | San Benito | 7,726 | 63.98% | 4,349 | 36.02% | 3,377 | 27.97% | 12,075 | 2.58% |
| San Juan Bautista | San Benito | 619 | 68.40% | 286 | 31.60% | 333 | 36.80% | 905 | -4.75% |
| Unincorporated Area | San Benito | 4,373 | 48.51% | 4,641 | 51.49% | -268 | -2.97% | 9,014 | 6.15% |
| Adelanto | San Bernardino | 2,894 | 61.54% | 1,809 | 38.46% | 1,085 | 23.07% | 4,703 | -6.50% |
| Apple Valley | San Bernardino | 8,618 | 33.85% | 16,844 | 66.15% | -8,226 | -32.31% | 25,462 | 2.25% |
| Barstow | San Bernardino | 2,027 | 44.76% | 2,502 | 55.24% | -475 | -10.49% | 4,529 | -2.89% |
| Big Bear Lake | San Bernardino | 727 | 37.59% | 1,207 | 62.41% | -480 | -24.82% | 1,934 | 6.56% |
| Chino | San Bernardino | 13,641 | 50.26% | 13,501 | 49.74% | 140 | 0.52% | 27,142 | -2.30% |
| Chino Hills | San Bernardino | 14,575 | 49.35% | 14,961 | 50.65% | -386 | -1.31% | 29,536 | 3.51% |
| Colton | San Bernardino | 6,969 | 65.54% | 3,664 | 34.46% | 3,305 | 31.08% | 10,633 | -4.29% |
| Fontana | San Bernardino | 30,373 | 62.50% | 18,227 | 37.50% | 12,146 | 24.99% | 48,600 | -7.39% |
| Grand Terrace | San Bernardino | 2,194 | 48.56% | 2,324 | 51.44% | -130 | -2.88% | 4,518 | 0.10% |
| Hesperia | San Bernardino | 8,728 | 37.67% | 14,441 | 62.33% | -5,713 | -24.66% | 23,169 | -5.22% |
| Highland | San Bernardino | 7,295 | 49.93% | 7,316 | 50.07% | -21 | -0.14% | 14,611 | -2.21% |
| Loma Linda | San Bernardino | 3,795 | 54.71% | 3,141 | 45.29% | 654 | 9.43% | 6,936 | 3.07% |
| Montclair | San Bernardino | 5,499 | 66.20% | 2,808 | 33.80% | 2,691 | 32.39% | 8,307 | -7.04% |
| Needles | San Bernardino | 430 | 39.89% | 648 | 60.11% | -218 | -20.22% | 1,078 | 1.13% |
| Ontario | San Bernardino | 24,966 | 60.20% | 16,508 | 39.80% | 8,458 | 20.39% | 41,474 | -5.92% |
| Rancho Cucamonga | San Bernardino | 30,616 | 47.89% | 33,314 | 52.11% | -2,698 | -4.22% | 63,930 | -1.85% |
| Redlands | San Bernardino | 14,658 | 51.13% | 14,009 | 48.87% | 649 | 2.26% | 28,667 | 2.91% |
| Rialto | San Bernardino | 14,266 | 67.72% | 6,800 | 32.28% | 7,466 | 35.44% | 21,066 | -6.83% |
| San Bernardino | San Bernardino | 23,026 | 62.28% | 13,945 | 37.72% | 9,081 | 24.56% | 36,971 | -6.77% |
| Twentynine Palms | San Bernardino | 1,685 | 45.10% | 2,051 | 54.90% | -366 | -9.80% | 3,736 | 6.94% |
| Upland | San Bernardino | 14,761 | 50.36% | 14,549 | 49.64% | 212 | 0.72% | 29,310 | 3.32% |
| Victorville | San Bernardino | 13,622 | 54.32% | 11,455 | 45.68% | 2,167 | 8.64% | 25,077 | -1.66% |
| Yucaipa | San Bernardino | 6,612 | 30.99% | 14,726 | 69.01% | -8,114 | -38.03% | 21,338 | -2.29% |
| Yucca Valley | San Bernardino | 2,941 | 39.04% | 4,593 | 60.96% | -1,652 | -21.93% | 7,534 | 4.10% |
| Unincorporated Area | San Bernardino | 33,959 | 39.96% | 51,021 | 60.04% | -17,062 | -20.08% | 84,980 | -2.28% |
| Carlsbad | San Diego | 32,219 | 54.15% | 27,278 | 45.85% | 4,941 | 8.30% | 59,497 | 3.41% |
| Chula Vista | San Diego | 51,915 | 62.41% | 31,269 | 37.59% | 20,646 | 24.82% | 83,184 | -0.26% |
| Coronado | San Diego | 4,017 | 48.75% | 4,223 | 51.25% | -206 | -2.50% | 8,240 | 7.57% |
| Del Mar | San Diego | 1,511 | 60.44% | 989 | 39.56% | 522 | 20.88% | 2,500 | 3.08% |
| El Cajon | San Diego | 12,206 | 46.13% | 14,255 | 53.87% | -2,049 | -7.74% | 26,461 | -0.54% |
| Encinitas | San Diego | 20,864 | 62.75% | 12,388 | 37.25% | 8,476 | 25.49% | 33,252 | -1.91% |
| Escondido | San Diego | 22,280 | 50.88% | 21,510 | 49.12% | 770 | 1.76% | 43,790 | 1.40% |
| Imperial Beach | San Diego | 3,719 | 53.42% | 3,243 | 46.58% | 476 | 6.84% | 6,962 | -7.15% |
| La Mesa | San Diego | 14,660 | 60.05% | 9,755 | 39.95% | 4,905 | 20.09% | 24,415 | 1.68% |
| Lemon Grove | San Diego | 5,136 | 61.49% | 3,216 | 38.51% | 1,920 | 22.99% | 8,352 | -1.03% |
| National City | San Diego | 7,652 | 68.15% | 3,576 | 31.85% | 4,076 | 36.30% | 11,228 | -0.50% |
| Oceanside | San Diego | 34,714 | 52.59% | 31,298 | 47.41% | 3,416 | 5.17% | 66,012 | -0.82% |
| Poway | San Diego | 11,433 | 48.96% | 11,917 | 51.04% | -484 | -2.07% | 23,350 | 10.55% |
| San Diego | San Diego | 324,705 | 66.46% | 163,872 | 33.54% | 160,833 | 32.92% | 488,577 | 1.30% |
| San Marcos | San Diego | 17,594 | 53.63% | 15,212 | 46.37% | 2,382 | 7.26% | 32,806 | 2.08% |
| Santee | San Diego | 10,303 | 40.57% | 15,093 | 59.43% | -4,790 | -18.86% | 25,396 | 1.78% |
| Solana Beach | San Diego | 4,470 | 61.39% | 2,811 | 38.61% | 1,659 | 22.79% | 7,281 | 3.30% |
| Vista | San Diego | 15,276 | 53.05% | 13,522 | 46.95% | 1,754 | 6.09% | 28,798 | -1.57% |
| Unincorporated Area | San Diego | 79,996 | 40.07% | 119,654 | 59.93% | -39,658 | -19.86% | 199,650 | 1.24% |
| San Francisco | San Francisco | 292,744 | 86.12% | 47,193 | 13.88% | 245,551 | 72.23% | 339,937 | -0.55% |
| Escalon | San Joaquin | 923 | 31.12% | 2,043 | 68.88% | -1,120 | -37.76% | 2,966 | -4.45% |
| Lathrop | San Joaquin | 4,302 | 63.62% | 2,460 | 36.38% | 1,842 | 27.24% | 6,762 | 0.87% |
| Lodi | San Joaquin | 8,521 | 40.34% | 12,604 | 59.66% | -4,083 | -19.33% | 21,125 | 4.36% |
| Manteca | San Joaquin | 12,493 | 49.96% | 12,514 | 50.04% | -21 | -0.08% | 25,007 | -1.01% |
| Ripon | San Joaquin | 2,126 | 29.50% | 5,081 | 70.50% | -2,955 | -41.00% | 7,207 | 0.48% |
| Stockton | San Joaquin | 43,063 | 64.72% | 23,477 | 35.28% | 19,586 | 29.43% | 66,540 | 2.95% |
| Tracy | San Joaquin | 15,774 | 60.24% | 10,411 | 39.76% | 5,363 | 20.48% | 26,185 | -0.08% |
| Unincorporated Area | San Joaquin | 18,203 | 40.91% | 26,287 | 59.09% | -8,084 | -18.17% | 44,490 | 0.66% |
| Arroyo Grande | San Luis Obispo | 5,218 | 53.63% | 4,511 | 46.37% | 707 | 7.27% | 9,729 | 10.98% |
| Atascadero | San Luis Obispo | 6,769 | 46.80% | 7,694 | 53.20% | -925 | -6.40% | 14,463 | 1.53% |
| El Paso de Robles | San Luis Obispo | 5,381 | 43.80% | 6,904 | 56.20% | -1,523 | -12.40% | 12,285 | 3.21% |
| Grover Beach | San Luis Obispo | 2,819 | 53.38% | 2,462 | 46.62% | 357 | 6.76% | 5,281 | 0.68% |
| Morro Bay | San Luis Obispo | 3,778 | 61.41% | 2,374 | 38.59% | 1,404 | 22.82% | 6,152 | 4.95% |
| Pismo Beach | San Luis Obispo | 2,493 | 50.62% | 2,432 | 49.38% | 61 | 1.24% | 4,925 | 2.39% |
| San Luis Obispo | San Luis Obispo | 14,689 | 73.75% | 5,228 | 26.25% | 9,461 | 47.50% | 19,917 | 5.62% |
| Unincorporated Area | San Luis Obispo | 27,282 | 47.96% | 29,598 | 52.04% | -2,316 | -4.07% | 56,880 | 1.54% |
| Atherton | San Mateo | 2,374 | 66.85% | 1,177 | 33.15% | 1,197 | 33.71% | 3,551 | 14.79% |
| Belmont | San Mateo | 9,787 | 79.11% | 2,585 | 20.89% | 7,202 | 58.21% | 12,372 | 8.34% |
| Brisbane | San Mateo | 1,664 | 79.13% | 439 | 20.87% | 1,225 | 58.25% | 2,103 | 0.53% |
| Burlingame | San Mateo | 10,605 | 76.66% | 3,228 | 23.34% | 7,377 | 53.33% | 13,833 | 6.22% |
| Colma | San Mateo | 388 | 80.33% | 95 | 19.67% | 293 | 60.66% | 483 | -2.22% |
| Daly City | San Mateo | 23,763 | 79.97% | 5,953 | 20.03% | 17,810 | 59.93% | 29,716 | 3.05% |
| East Palo Alto | San Mateo | 4,499 | 88.55% | 582 | 11.45% | 3,917 | 77.09% | 5,081 | -1.84% |
| Foster City | San Mateo | 9,687 | 76.31% | 3,008 | 23.69% | 6,679 | 52.61% | 12,695 | 9.15% |
| Half Moon Bay | San Mateo | 4,390 | 75.46% | 1,428 | 24.54% | 2,962 | 50.91% | 5,818 | 6.62% |
| Hillsborough | San Mateo | 3,796 | 64.28% | 2,109 | 35.72% | 1,687 | 28.57% | 5,905 | 9.73% |
| Menlo Park | San Mateo | 11,822 | 83.13% | 2,399 | 16.87% | 9,423 | 66.26% | 14,221 | 6.40% |
| Millbrae | San Mateo | 6,565 | 71.07% | 2,672 | 28.93% | 3,893 | 42.15% | 9,237 | 8.93% |
| Pacifica | San Mateo | 14,427 | 76.80% | 4,357 | 23.20% | 10,070 | 53.61% | 18,784 | 2.60% |
| Portola Valley | San Mateo | 2,253 | 77.93% | 638 | 22.07% | 1,615 | 55.86% | 2,891 | 12.59% |
| Redwood City | San Mateo | 24,121 | 80.39% | 5,883 | 19.61% | 18,238 | 60.79% | 30,004 | 5.22% |
| San Bruno | San Mateo | 12,080 | 75.15% | 3,995 | 24.85% | 8,085 | 50.30% | 16,075 | 2.66% |
| San Carlos | San Mateo | 12,701 | 78.73% | 3,432 | 21.27% | 9,269 | 57.45% | 16,133 | 9.33% |
| San Mateo | San Mateo | 30,697 | 78.18% | 8,568 | 21.82% | 22,129 | 56.36% | 39,265 | 5.37% |
| South San Francisco | San Mateo | 17,858 | 78.53% | 4,882 | 21.47% | 12,976 | 57.06% | 22,740 | 3.12% |
| Woodside | San Mateo | 2,139 | 69.09% | 957 | 30.91% | 1,182 | 38.18% | 3,096 | 9.38% |
| Unincorporated Area | San Mateo | 21,752 | 78.37% | 6,003 | 21.63% | 15,749 | 56.74% | 27,755 | 4.73% |
| Buellton | Santa Barbara | 1,235 | 50.84% | 1,194 | 49.16% | 41 | 1.69% | 2,429 | 7.28% |
| Carpinteria | Santa Barbara | 3,860 | 69.00% | 1,734 | 31.00% | 2,126 | 38.01% | 5,594 | 5.92% |
| Goleta | Santa Barbara | 9,978 | 69.87% | 4,302 | 30.13% | 5,676 | 39.75% | 14,280 | 8.13% |
| Guadalupe | Santa Barbara | 952 | 63.76% | 541 | 36.24% | 411 | 27.53% | 1,493 | -7.61% |
| Lompoc | Santa Barbara | 5,509 | 52.16% | 5,052 | 47.84% | 457 | 4.33% | 10,561 | 5.51% |
| Santa Barbara | Santa Barbara | 29,426 | 77.16% | 8,710 | 22.84% | 20,716 | 54.32% | 38,136 | 4.01% |
| Santa Maria | Santa Barbara | 10,300 | 53.20% | 9,062 | 46.80% | 1,238 | 6.39% | 19,362 | 3.47% |
| Solvang | Santa Barbara | 1,510 | 50.57% | 1,476 | 49.43% | 34 | 1.14% | 2,986 | 8.24% |
| Unincorporated Area | Santa Barbara | 31,449 | 54.67% | 26,078 | 45.33% | 5,371 | 9.34% | 57,527 | -1.47% |
| Campbell | Santa Clara | 12,829 | 73.42% | 4,644 | 26.58% | 8,185 | 46.84% | 17,473 | 3.23% |
| Cupertino | Santa Clara | 16,627 | 74.94% | 5,561 | 25.06% | 11,066 | 49.87% | 22,188 | 6.46% |
| Gilroy | Santa Clara | 12,407 | 66.16% | 6,347 | 33.84% | 6,060 | 32.31% | 18,754 | 4.23% |
| Los Altos | Santa Clara | 13,300 | 78.72% | 3,595 | 21.28% | 9,705 | 57.44% | 16,895 | 13.38% |
| Los Altos Hills | Santa Clara | 3,389 | 70.09% | 1,446 | 29.91% | 1,943 | 40.19% | 4,835 | 9.35% |
| Los Gatos | Santa Clara | 11,583 | 70.91% | 4,752 | 29.09% | 6,831 | 41.82% | 16,335 | 7.32% |
| Milpitas | Santa Clara | 15,231 | 71.70% | 6,013 | 28.30% | 9,218 | 43.39% | 21,244 | 4.45% |
| Monte Sereno | Santa Clara | 1,307 | 64.48% | 720 | 35.52% | 587 | 28.96% | 2,027 | 6.97% |
| Morgan Hill | Santa Clara | 12,158 | 63.70% | 6,929 | 36.30% | 5,229 | 27.40% | 19,087 | 7.59% |
| Mountain View | Santa Clara | 22,929 | 82.68% | 4,803 | 17.32% | 18,126 | 65.36% | 27,732 | 4.49% |
| Palo Alto | Santa Clara | 25,677 | 83.42% | 5,103 | 16.58% | 20,574 | 66.84% | 30,780 | 5.51% |
| San Jose | Santa Clara | 227,065 | 73.12% | 83,482 | 26.88% | 143,583 | 46.24% | 310,547 | 3.62% |
| Santa Clara | Santa Clara | 26,997 | 75.33% | 8,843 | 24.67% | 18,154 | 50.65% | 35,840 | 5.19% |
| Saratoga | Santa Clara | 11,608 | 71.02% | 4,737 | 28.98% | 6,871 | 42.04% | 16,345 | 11.87% |
| Sunnyvale | Santa Clara | 35,065 | 77.71% | 10,055 | 22.29% | 25,010 | 55.43% | 45,120 | 5.96% |
| Unincorporated Area | Santa Clara | 20,679 | 67.48% | 9,965 | 32.52% | 10,714 | 34.96% | 30,644 | 2.99% |
| Capitola | Santa Cruz | 3,878 | 77.01% | 1,158 | 22.99% | 2,720 | 54.01% | 5,036 | 2.97% |
| Santa Cruz | Santa Cruz | 22,829 | 86.72% | 3,496 | 13.28% | 19,333 | 73.44% | 26,325 | 0.62% |
| Scotts Valley | Santa Cruz | 4,541 | 69.46% | 1,997 | 30.54% | 2,544 | 38.91% | 6,538 | 9.76% |
| Watsonville | Santa Cruz | 8,854 | 80.17% | 2,190 | 19.83% | 6,664 | 60.34% | 11,044 | 2.09% |
| Unincorporated Area | Santa Cruz | 50,772 | 75.35% | 16,613 | 24.65% | 34,159 | 50.69% | 67,385 | 4.13% |
| Anderson | Shasta | 983 | 28.17% | 2,507 | 71.83% | -1,524 | -43.67% | 3,490 | -1.86% |
| Redding | Shasta | 12,413 | 34.32% | 23,751 | 65.68% | -11,338 | -31.35% | 36,164 | 4.86% |
| Shasta Lake | Shasta | 1,233 | 32.49% | 2,562 | 67.51% | -1,329 | -35.02% | 3,795 | 2.98% |
| Unincorporated Area | Shasta | 7,963 | 25.90% | 22,788 | 74.10% | -14,825 | -48.21% | 30,751 | 1.61% |
| Loyalton | Sierra | 100 | 31.15% | 221 | 68.85% | -121 | -37.69% | 321 | -14.42% |
| Unincorporated Area | Sierra | 516 | 37.94% | 844 | 62.06% | -328 | -24.12% | 1,360 | 5.16% |
| Dorris | Siskiyou | 51 | 28.02% | 131 | 71.98% | -80 | -43.96% | 182 | -6.14% |
| Dunsmuir | Siskiyou | 366 | 57.46% | 271 | 42.54% | 95 | 14.91% | 637 | -0.49% |
| Etna | Siskiyou | 92 | 33.45% | 183 | 66.55% | -91 | -33.09% | 275 | -3.89% |
| Fort Jones | Siskiyou | 75 | 28.85% | 185 | 71.15% | -110 | -42.31% | 260 | -5.47% |
| Montague | Siskiyou | 124 | 24.90% | 374 | 75.10% | -250 | -50.20% | 498 | -0.31% |
| Mt. Shasta | Siskiyou | 918 | 58.92% | 640 | 41.08% | 278 | 17.84% | 1,558 | -4.47% |
| Tulelake | Siskiyou | 33 | 26.61% | 91 | 73.39% | -58 | -46.77% | 124 | 11.04% |
| Weed | Siskiyou | 317 | 45.81% | 375 | 54.19% | -58 | -8.38% | 692 | -17.01% |
| Yreka | Siskiyou | 884 | 33.65% | 1,743 | 66.35% | -859 | -32.70% | 2,627 | -4.42% |
| Unincorporated Area | Siskiyou | 4,101 | 35.96% | 7,302 | 64.04% | -3,201 | -28.07% | 11,403 | -1.90% |
| Benicia | Solano | 10,167 | 69.10% | 4,546 | 30.90% | 5,621 | 38.20% | 14,713 | 7.88% |
| Dixon | Solano | 3,385 | 46.61% | 3,877 | 53.39% | -492 | -6.77% | 7,262 | -4.47% |
| Fairfield | Solano | 23,298 | 64.59% | 12,774 | 35.41% | 10,524 | 29.17% | 36,072 | 3.24% |
| Rio Vista | Solano | 3,339 | 59.32% | 2,290 | 40.68% | 1,049 | 18.64% | 5,629 | 11.51% |
| Suisun City | Solano | 5,987 | 67.59% | 2,871 | 32.41% | 3,116 | 35.18% | 8,858 | 2.99% |
| Vacaville | Solano | 17,837 | 48.86% | 18,671 | 51.14% | -834 | -2.28% | 36,508 | 1.70% |
| Vallejo | Solano | 30,463 | 78.21% | 8,487 | 21.79% | 21,976 | 56.42% | 38,950 | 3.31% |
| Unincorporated Area | Solano | 3,459 | 41.60% | 4,856 | 58.40% | -1,397 | -16.80% | 8,315 | 0.49% |
| Cloverdale | Sonoma | 2,504 | 65.65% | 1,310 | 34.35% | 1,194 | 31.31% | 3,814 | -1.59% |
| Cotati | Sonoma | 2,589 | 73.38% | 939 | 26.62% | 1,650 | 46.77% | 3,528 | -1.00% |
| Healdsburg | Sonoma | 4,124 | 77.03% | 1,230 | 22.97% | 2,894 | 54.05% | 5,354 | 7.35% |
| Petaluma | Sonoma | 22,296 | 75.22% | 7,345 | 24.78% | 14,951 | 50.44% | 29,641 | 4.08% |
| Rohnert Park | Sonoma | 12,014 | 68.84% | 5,439 | 31.16% | 6,575 | 37.67% | 17,453 | -0.47% |
| Santa Rosa | Sonoma | 52,502 | 75.40% | 17,131 | 24.60% | 35,371 | 50.80% | 69,633 | 3.62% |
| Sebastopol | Sonoma | 3,761 | 85.73% | 626 | 14.27% | 3,135 | 71.46% | 4,387 | 0.28% |
| Sonoma | Sonoma | 4,614 | 77.20% | 1,363 | 22.80% | 3,251 | 54.39% | 5,977 | 8.10% |
| Windsor | Sonoma | 7,855 | 66.44% | 3,968 | 33.56% | 3,887 | 32.88% | 11,823 | 2.81% |
| Unincorporated Area | Sonoma | 48,343 | 72.79% | 18,068 | 27.21% | 30,275 | 45.59% | 66,411 | 2.09% |
| Ceres | Stanislaus | 5,590 | 55.05% | 4,564 | 44.95% | 1,026 | 10.10% | 10,154 | -11.75% |
| Hughson | Stanislaus | 891 | 34.53% | 1,689 | 65.47% | -798 | -30.93% | 2,580 | -8.01% |
| Modesto | Stanislaus | 30,829 | 50.30% | 30,464 | 49.70% | 365 | 0.60% | 61,293 | -4.85% |
| Newman | Stanislaus | 1,316 | 49.09% | 1,365 | 50.91% | -49 | -1.83% | 2,681 | -13.12% |
| Oakdale | Stanislaus | 2,819 | 32.84% | 5,766 | 67.16% | -2,947 | -34.33% | 8,585 | -5.18% |
| Patterson | Stanislaus | 3,405 | 62.43% | 2,049 | 37.57% | 1,356 | 24.86% | 5,454 | -6.04% |
| Riverbank | Stanislaus | 3,120 | 46.82% | 3,544 | 53.18% | -424 | -6.36% | 6,664 | -10.20% |
| Turlock | Stanislaus | 9,523 | 44.35% | 11,949 | 55.65% | -2,426 | -11.30% | 21,472 | -6.25% |
| Waterford | Stanislaus | 769 | 32.16% | 1,622 | 67.84% | -853 | -35.68% | 2,391 | -13.16% |
| Unincorporated Area | Stanislaus | 10,985 | 35.57% | 19,899 | 64.43% | -8,914 | -28.86% | 30,884 | -8.33% |
| Live Oak | Sutter | 1,015 | 45.74% | 1,204 | 54.26% | -189 | -8.52% | 2,219 | -10.25% |
| Yuba City | Sutter | 8,520 | 40.47% | 12,535 | 59.53% | -4,015 | -19.07% | 21,055 | -1.56% |
| Unincorporated Area | Sutter | 2,058 | 23.45% | 6,719 | 76.55% | -4,661 | -53.10% | 8,777 | 0.21% |
| Corning | Tehama | 488 | 32.04% | 1,035 | 67.96% | -547 | -35.92% | 1,523 | -5.18% |
| Red Bluff | Tehama | 1,468 | 35.86% | 2,626 | 64.14% | -1,158 | -28.29% | 4,094 | 1.36% |
| Tehama | Tehama | 68 | 37.99% | 111 | 62.01% | -43 | -24.02% | 179 | 13.87% |
| Unincorporated Area | Tehama | 4,362 | 25.13% | 12,998 | 74.87% | -8,636 | -49.75% | 17,360 | 0.26% |
| Unincorporated Area | Trinity | 2,106 | 43.83% | 2,699 | 56.17% | -593 | -12.34% | 4,805 | 3.15% |
| Dinuba | Tulare | 2,185 | 53.38% | 1,908 | 46.62% | 277 | 6.77% | 4,093 | -12.18% |
| Exeter | Tulare | 898 | 29.28% | 2,169 | 70.72% | -1,271 | -41.44% | 3,067 | -9.14% |
| Farmersville | Tulare | 790 | 60.96% | 506 | 39.04% | 284 | 21.91% | 1,296 | -15.01% |
| Lindsay | Tulare | 877 | 60.15% | 581 | 39.85% | 296 | 20.30% | 1,458 | -12.82% |
| Porterville | Tulare | 4,701 | 43.55% | 6,094 | 56.45% | -1,393 | -12.90% | 10,795 | -8.57% |
| Tulare | Tulare | 5,553 | 36.87% | 9,507 | 63.13% | -3,954 | -26.25% | 15,060 | -10.63% |
| Visalia | Tulare | 15,918 | 38.77% | 25,144 | 61.23% | -9,226 | -22.47% | 41,062 | -6.06% |
| Woodlake | Tulare | 746 | 64.09% | 418 | 35.91% | 328 | 28.18% | 1,164 | -9.79% |
| Unincorporated Area | Tulare | 9,341 | 34.11% | 18,045 | 65.89% | -8,704 | -31.78% | 27,386 | -6.55% |
| Sonora | Tuolumne | 946 | 48.96% | 986 | 51.04% | -40 | -2.07% | 1,932 | 1.12% |
| Unincorporated Area | Tuolumne | 8,904 | 37.49% | 14,846 | 62.51% | -5,942 | -25.02% | 23,750 | -1.78% |
| Camarillo | Ventura | 17,266 | 52.49% | 15,625 | 47.51% | 1,641 | 4.99% | 32,891 | 7.84% |
| Fillmore | Ventura | 2,657 | 58.87% | 1,856 | 41.13% | 801 | 17.75% | 4,513 | -0.49% |
| Moorpark | Ventura | 8,240 | 52.54% | 7,442 | 47.46% | 798 | 5.09% | 15,682 | 4.43% |
| Ojai | Ventura | 2,648 | 70.07% | 1,131 | 29.93% | 1,517 | 40.14% | 3,779 | 2.68% |
| Oxnard | Ventura | 32,086 | 70.98% | 13,121 | 29.02% | 18,965 | 41.95% | 45,207 | -0.55% |
| Port Hueneme | Ventura | 3,827 | 65.84% | 1,986 | 34.16% | 1,841 | 31.67% | 5,813 | 1.47% |
| San Buenaventura | Ventura | 29,389 | 61.80% | 18,166 | 38.20% | 11,223 | 23.60% | 47,555 | 3.90% |
| Santa Paula | Ventura | 5,015 | 65.62% | 2,627 | 34.38% | 2,388 | 31.25% | 7,642 | 2.29% |
| Simi Valley | Ventura | 25,887 | 47.16% | 29,010 | 52.84% | -3,123 | -5.69% | 54,897 | 2.43% |
| Thousand Oaks | Ventura | 33,147 | 55.19% | 26,909 | 44.81% | 6,238 | 10.39% | 60,056 | 7.89% |
| Unincorporated Area | Ventura | 22,308 | 54.35% | 18,737 | 45.65% | 3,571 | 8.70% | 41,045 | 0.89% |
| Davis | Yolo | 23,485 | 84.64% | 4,263 | 15.36% | 19,222 | 69.27% | 27,748 | 3.29% |
| West Sacramento | Yolo | 11,197 | 61.67% | 6,958 | 38.33% | 4,239 | 23.35% | 18,155 | 0.05% |
| Winters | Yolo | 1,462 | 53.61% | 1,265 | 46.39% | 197 | 7.22% | 2,727 | -10.39% |
| Woodland | Yolo | 12,385 | 59.78% | 8,333 | 40.22% | 4,052 | 19.56% | 20,718 | 2.88% |
| Unincorporated Area | Yolo | 3,915 | 49.78% | 3,950 | 50.22% | -35 | -0.45% | 7,865 | -2.76% |
| Marysville | Yuba | 1,169 | 36.33% | 2,049 | 63.67% | -880 | -27.35% | 3,218 | -6.07% |
| Wheatland | Yuba | 356 | 27.70% | 929 | 72.30% | -573 | -44.59% | 1,285 | -6.04% |
| Unincorporated Area | Yuba | 6,436 | 34.33% | 12,313 | 65.67% | -5,877 | -31.35% | 18,749 | -2.61% |
| Totals | Totals | 7,944,092 | 61.88% | 4,894,474 | 38.12% | 3,049,618 | 23.75% | 12,838,566 | -0.15% |

## Aftermath
### Turnout and participation

The number of valid votes cast on the recall question (question 1) was vastly greater than the number cast on the replacement question (question 2). The Newsom campaign's official message to voters had been to vote "no" on the recall and to ignore the replacement question.

### Commentary after election

In an October 2021 interview with Chuck Todd at the Milken Institute Global Conference, Newsom commented on the personal impact of the recall, saying "it's hard", and that it was the result of "personal stupidity", which "took a life of its own" and was "weaponized" by opponents, and, "I mean, we colored it in. I took responsibility."
Recall candidate Larry Elder's support for the Trump administration, being unpopular among California's electorate, as well as his status as a front-runner and likely gubernatorial replacement if the recall was successful, were reported to have helped Newsom defeat it. Mid-summer polling conducted two months prior to election day suggested a close race. Newsom ultimately defeated the recall with a margin of roughly 24 percent after mobilizing Democrats to vote with a message that framed the race as a referendum on him versus Elder and their pandemic policy proposals. Newsom's campaigning had also invoked Elder's connections to the inner circle of former president Donald Trump, as well as his history of provocative right-wing rhetoric as a radio talk show host. Exit polling suggested the result fell along partisan lines, with 94 percent of self-reported Democrats saying they voted against the recall and 89 percent of self-reported Republicans saying they voted to remove Newsom from office.
The recall was widely invoked following the victory of Republican Glenn Youngkin two months later in the 2021 Virginia gubernatorial election (where Democrat Joe Biden had won in 2020 by 10 points); Virginia's race featured similar campaigning on education, the pandemic, and former president Trump.