Navigating “Trump 2.0” in Southern California: A Data‐Driven Look

Income Tier	City Count	Avg Trump Primary %	Avg Baseline Rep %
Under $75,000	21	84.61%	25.69%
$75,000-$100,000	50	81.28%	37.86%
$100,000-$125,000	36	77.92%	44.74%
$125,000-$150,000	22	73.95%	47.26%
Over $150,000	21	68.93%	49.33%

City	County	Trump Primary %	Baseline Republican %	Trump 2024 General %	Median Income	Income Percentile
San Marino	Los Angeles	57.67%	47.97%	42.12%	$187,633	92.7
Palos Verdes Estates	Los Angeles	61.57%	53.35%	44.20%	$247,500	97.3
Coronado	San Diego	64.67%	53.91%	46.36%	$135,056	80.7
Rolling Hills Estates	Los Angeles	65.43%	51.85%	45.88%	$187,500	92.5
Westlake Village	Los Angeles	68.18%	48.33%	42.58%	$174,069	90.9
Hidden Hills	Los Angeles	69.39%	48.27%	45.06%	$250,001	97.7
Rancho Palos Verdes	Los Angeles	69.46%	49.05%	42.83%	$175,307	91.1
Arcadia	Los Angeles	71.47%	47.38%	44.39%	$116,142	70.1
Carlsbad	San Diego	73.25%	46.53%	41.27%	$139,326	82.6
Poway	San Diego	74.40%	53.23%	47.43%	$143,825	84.2
Thousand Oaks	Ventura	74.68%	47.56%	43.21%	$134,367	80.1
Camarillo	Ventura	75.50%	50.22%	45.67%	$109,390	66.0
Laguna Niguel	Orange	75.52%	53.33%	49.99%	$140,605	83.2
Seal Beach	Orange	76.16%	51.84%	47.24%	$83,045	39.8
Laguna Hills	Orange	76.31%	51.58%	49.99%	$122,778	74.7
Lake Forest	Orange	77.41%	52.13%	48.11%	$131,378	78.4
Fullerton	Orange	77.62%	48.03%	44.58%	$104,219	61.0
Moorpark	Ventura	77.69%	49.71%	45.35%	$149,403	85.7
Aliso Viejo	Orange	78.22%	48.18%	45.54%	$137,970	82.2
Los Alamitos	Orange	78.31%	52.42%	49.61%	$98,539	56.0
Placentia	Orange	78.36%	54.00%	49.84%	$110,575	67.6
Cypress	Orange	78.66%	51.41%	48.44%	$124,167	75.1
Orange	Orange	78.88%	52.77%	48.42%	$116,945	70.5
La Palma	Orange	79.03%	48.45%	46.00%	$115,833	69.9
Costa Mesa	Orange	79.35%	48.31%	47.30%	$110,073	67.2
San Marcos	San Diego	79.35%	47.46%	43.24%	$105,286	62.7
La Verne	Los Angeles	79.55%	53.71%	51.17%	$104,565	61.8
Escondido	San Diego	79.64%	50.71%	46.21%	$84,477	41.7
Diamond Bar	Los Angeles	79.92%	46.99%	46.19%	$106,602	63.9
Avalon	Los Angeles	80.24%	46.58%	42.92%	$91,713	49.0
Santa Clarita	Los Angeles	80.77%	51.05%	48.58%	$119,926	72.6
Oceanside	San Diego	80.96%	46.43%	44.17%	$93,724	51.5
La Mirada	Los Angeles	81.33%	51.93%	49.38%	$110,177	67.4
La Habra	Orange	81.85%	49.13%	47.83%	$98,158	55.6
Vista	San Diego	81.98%	46.57%	44.56%	$91,854	49.2
Buena Park	Orange	82.93%	46.88%	47.42%	$108,187	64.5
Lancaster	Los Angeles	84.66%	47.44%	45.61%	$76,083	30.1
Garden Grove	Orange	85.40%	50.12%	51.34%	$90,166	47.7

For added context, the Trump primary average was 78.09% across the 150 cities we examined. He received 79.2% across the entire state.

Why This Matters to Republican Candidates

A closer look at the table reveals why Trump’s local performance matters strategically:

• Identifying Where Trump Overperforms the “Generic” Republican

  • In cities like Lancaster or Garden Grove, Trump’s primary support soars above 80%, and his general‐election share equals or even exceeds the baseline Republican vote.
  • Takeaway: Candidates here likely can’t disown Trump without alienating a large chunk of their core voters, who appear far more “Trump‐first” than “Republican‐first.”

• Noting Where Trump Undershoots Traditional GOP Performance

  • In wealthier enclaves like San Marino or Palos Verdes Estates, Trump’s primary percentage lands in the 60–70% range. Although the citywide GOP baseline remains near 50%, it’s clear that local Republicans aren’t as enthralled by Trump’s populist style.
  • Takeaway: Campaigning on a measured, business‐friendly message may prove more effective than heavily invoking Trump.

• Connecting Income and Voting Patterns

  • Higher‐income cities (e.g., Rolling Hills Estates, Westlake Village) show somewhat weaker Trump enthusiasm yet remain close to 50/50 in general elections. This indicates a voter base open to conservative economic policies but skeptical of Trump’s tone.
  • Mid‐income areas (e.g., Buena Park, La Habra) can be equally competitive yet exhibit stronger pro‐Trump sentiments among Republican primary voters, reflecting a more populist cultural appeal.

• Calibrating the Campaign Message

  • If Trump’s general‐election share matches or exceeds the standard Republican vote, emphasizing his brand can potentially energize the base without sacrificing too many swing voters.
  • If Trump lags behind the generic Republican performance, that signals a need to pivot away from his rhetoric and highlight local issues such as zoning, policing, or schools—areas where a candidate can win over independents and moderate Democrats.
    
    

Two Divergent GOP “Factions”

These numbers ultimately underscore two broad currents within the Southern California GOP:

1. Pro‐Trump Populists

   • Often found in lower‐income or mid‐income areas where cultural conservatism and anti‐establishment attitudes run high.
   • Trump frequently outperforms the party baseline, indicating a voter bloc keyed in on his combative style and populist appeals.

2. Traditional/Moderate Republicans

   • Typically clustered in wealthier communities or places with a long history of pro‐business, low‐tax politics.
   • These voters often underperform for Trump but exceed him when it comes to standard GOP candidates, suggesting they prefer conservative policy over culture‐war battles.
     
     

Practical Guidance for Republican Candidates

1. Gauge Primary vs. General Sentiment

   • High Trump Primary Share? Downplaying Trump could cost essential GOP turnout.
   • Trump Below the Baseline Republican? Moderates and independents may be wary of Trump’s style, so a more traditional campaign can pay off.

2. Tailor the Message

   • Pro‐Trump Areas: Emphasize populism, cultural conservatism, and anti‐establishment appeals.
   • Moderate/Traditional Areas: Focus on taxes, economic development, and pragmatic local governance.

3. Keep Local Issues Front and Center

   • Regardless of Trump’s role, highlight what truly resonates in local elections—public safety, quality of life, and economic opportunities—to bridge partisan divides.
     
     

Why These Patterns Persist

For decades, the GOP’s backbone in wealthier suburbs was largely defined by economic conservatism—low taxes, pro-business policies, and overall fiscal restraint. In many lower-income areas, however, those economic pitches carried less weight, so Republicans needed a culturally charged message to resonate with the grassroots voter who felt alienated by the political establishment.

Trump essentially turbocharged the cultural appeal—an “America First,” brash, anti-establishment brand—so lower-income Republicans rallied behind it with renewed zeal. Wealthier Republicans, on the other hand, often found that rhetoric off-putting or disruptive to the classic business-focused, small-government ethos that originally attracted them to the party. Hence, as Trump leaned harder into the cultural dimension, it widened the gulf between the lower-income cohort that embraced it and the higher-income group that preferred traditional GOP economic talking points.

Conclusion

As 2026 approaches, Southern California’s local Republican candidates must walk a tightrope. Trump’s brand retains a powerful pull in many lower‐income, culturally conservative areas, but it risks alienating moderates in wealthier suburbs. By combining quantitative data—Trump’s primary and general results, baseline Republican trends, and local demographics—with a nuanced understanding of each community, candidates can decide where to lean in on Trump’s populist message or pivot toward more traditional GOP themes.

Above all, recognizing the two “factions”—the Trump‐first populists versus the more business‐focused, moderate Republicans—is key. Those who ignore this divide risk losing vital support on either side. Meanwhile, campaigns that adapt their message stand the best chance of winning in Southern California’s competitive local contests.

Get the Data, Go Deeper
To help you explore these dynamics firsthand, we’ve provided free access to the raw export of data for the 150 cities analyzed here. For many readers, though, these jurisdictions may not directly apply to their own races—especially if they’re working elsewhere in California or in areas with very different demographics.

That’s where the Ballot Book comes in. Subscribers can instantly pull similar data for any jurisdiction, along with additional demographic and electoral insights that might otherwise take weeks to assemble. By leveraging these tools, political professionals gain a strategic edge, enabling them to tailor messaging and resource allocation with unprecedented precision. Of course, local quirks, candidate quality, and one‐off circumstances can always break the mold, but these data points offer a critical head start in any campaign’s planning process.