California Governor Candidate Sharifah Hardie Removed from 2026 Wikipedia Gubernatorial Candidate List
Sharifah Hardie, a 2026 CA Governor candidate, was removed from Wikipedia's election list despite an active campaign and public platform.
'If they can delete me today, they can delete you tomorrow.'— Sharifah Hardie
LONG BEACH, CA, UNITED STATES, April 12, 2025 / EINPresswire.com / -- California gubernatorial candidate Sharifah Hardie has raised concerns regarding online candidate visibility after discovering that her name had been removed from Wikipedia's 2026 California gubernatorial election page, despite being a declared candidate with an active campaign website.
Hardie's name remains listed as a candidate on the Wikipedia page for the 2026 United States gubernatorial elections. However, on the California-specific page (2026 California gubernatorial election), she is no longer listed among the candidates, although her campaign website— SharifahHardieForGovernor.com, is still cited as a source.
'If I'm not considered a candidate, then why is my campaign website still cited as a source?' said Hardie. 'This raises an important question about the accuracy and consistency of how candidates are publicly presented on widely used platforms.'
Emphasizing Transparency and Fair Representation
Hardie emphasizes that she remains a declared candidate for Governor of California, with an active platform focused on economic equity, housing reform, and government transparency. She continues to publish regular press releases and engage with voters through her campaign outreach.
'Regardless of political affiliation, all candidates deserve equal visibility so that voters can make informed decisions,' said Hardie. 'We should be encouraging democratic participation, not limiting it.'
New Awareness Campaign: #TheyDeletedMe
In response to her removal from the California-specific Wikipedia page, Hardie is launching a new voter education campaign called #TheyDeletedMe, focused on raising awareness around candidate visibility, fair representation, and the digital access voters rely on.
The campaign will encourage:
Voter awareness of where candidate information appears online
Review of listing standards and editorial oversight on public platforms
Equal digital visibility for all verified candidates in future elections
About Sharifah Hardie
Sharifah Hardie is a declared 2026 candidate for California Governor, entrepreneur, media personality, and small business advocate. Her campaign is focused on practical solutions to California's most pressing challenges, including housing affordability, government reform, and inclusive economic development.
Sharifah Hardie
Sharifah Hardie for CA Governor
+1 562-822-0965
[email protected]
Visit us on social media:
Facebook
X
Instagram
Legal Disclaimer:
EIN Presswire provides this news content 'as is' without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the author above.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
21 minutes ago
- CNN
Trump preparing large-scale cancellation of federal funding for California, sources say
The Trump administration is preparing to cancel a large swath of federal funding for California, an effort which could begin as soon as Friday, according to multiple sources. Agencies are being told to start identifying grants the administration can withhold from California. On Capitol Hill, at least one committee was told recently by a whistleblower that all research grants to the state were going to be cancelled, according to one of the sources familiar with the matter. CNN has reached out to the White House for comment. President Donald Trump has long made Democratic-led California a target. Just last month, he threatened to withhold federal funding from California over a transgender athlete's participation in a sporting event — the latest example of the president trying to use funding as leverage to enact his agenda. The administration recently cut $126.4 million in flood prevention funding projects, and Trump repeatedly went after the state's handling of devastating wildfires earlier this year. The president and California Gov. Gavin Newsom have also publicly feuded for years. Higher education in the state could be hit hard by Trump's move. GOP Rep. Darrell Issa of California, who said he was unaware of the imminent grant cancellations, told CNN he recently met with university representatives who were concerned about the future of their funding. 'Every university, every research organization, pretty much I saw them passing through here the last two days' Issa said. Issa told CNN his message to the fearful university representatives was, 'We're going to advocate for essentials, but I sent them back and said come to me with specifics. Come to me with the grant and the justification, and I'll advocate for that. But I'm not going to advocate for no cuts; you just get more money every year. That's how we got in this problem.'
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Every Election Is Now Existential
The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. A few days before the Polish presidential election on Sunday, a Polish friend of mine received an unexpected message from someone she had not seen for 20 years. The woman had found my friend on Facebook, noticed that she was supporting the candidacy of Rafał Trzaskowski—the mayor of Warsaw, a liberal centrist—and begged her to change her mind. She asked her to vote instead for Karol Nawrocki, a nationalist historian, former boxer, and veteran of street fights that he describes as 'noble battles.' She sent my friend a copy of an anonymous appeal that has shown up elsewhere on social media but seems to have been one of many similar warnings spread widely by email. It began like this: Before you put your ballot in the ballot box, call up your memories. Open your eyes, clear your mind, reach for the truth—not the one on TV, but the one you carry in your heart, the truth acquired from life, from work, from the blood spilled on this land. Because I am married to the Polish foreign minister, Radek Sikorski, and because he was briefly a presidential candidate in the past, I have read a lot of this kind of thing before (and, of course, hereby make a declaration of interest). Nevertheless, the appeal that my friend received seemed to me a particularly striking, almost paradigmatic invocation of the blood-and-soil nationalism that is now part of Polish politics, American politics, and European politics. The message listed all of the crimes allegedly committed by a series of Polish center-right and center-left governments, twisting the record and rewriting the history of the past 30 years into a story of trauma and victimization. One statement accused Trzaskowski and his ilk of having 'allowed foreigners to rob Poland and humiliate us, forcing young people to emigrate in exchange for bread.' In truth, Poland has been a major beneficiary of both foreign investment and European Union funds, has grown consistently for 30 years, and is now one of the fastest-expanding economies in Europe. The level of social spending has grown too. The appeal did not go into these details. Instead, it warned against impending treason: 'Wake up from your lethargy! Look how Poland, your motherland, is being torn apart by external and internal forces. Don't let her be abused, don't let her face be as sad as the soil of a graveyard.' The language used by Trzaskowski's campaign and his supporters was very different. On the day after the election, which he lost, the Warsaw mayor wrote that he had wanted to build a 'strong, safe, honest, empathetic Poland. A modern Poland in which everyone will be able to fulfill their goals and aspirations.' It was an optimistic message—but also a message that, at least among a large part of the population, could not compete with blood, graveyards, humiliation, and treason. The election was so close that exit polls predicted a narrow win for Trzaskowski on Sunday evening. But by Monday morning, the tiny majority had swung the other way. Nawrocki won with 50.89 percent of the vote, to Trzaskowski's 49.11 percent. Poland's constitution has some peculiarities, so the impact on policy and politics is not straightforward. The Civic Platform party, to which Trzaskowski belongs, now runs the government as part of a three-party coalition of the center left and center right. The coalition won parliamentary elections in October 2023, following eight years of governments led by the Law and Justice party, which nominated Nawrocki. During its two terms in office, Law and Justice politicized the Polish court system, as well as the civil service and public media; it created a string of taxpayer-funded foundations designed to support the party and enrich some of its members. The current government has been unable to reverse all of these policies because President Andrzej Duda, also aligned with the previous regime, has vetoed or threatened to veto all of the changes. The election of Nawrocki does not change Polish foreign policy. The Polish prime minister, not the president, will continue to control domestic policy, budgets, and trade. But because the president can veto legislation and pardon criminals, Nawrocki's election probably means that the courts cannot be repaired, and that those who broke the law or stole from the state will not face any consequences. For people who spent the past decade trying to fix Poland's judicial system and protect Polish democracy, this is dispiriting, even devastating, and the same kinds of recriminations and anger that followed the 2024 American presidential election are echoing around Poland this week. But for anyone fighting creeping authoritarianism anywhere else, there is a larger lesson: The language of blood and soil, which has once again become central to public debate in many democracies, is very powerful. It helps many people explain a complex world. It cannot easily be defeated or dismissed in one electoral cycle. The triumphant election of a centrist coalition in 2023 did not remove it from Polish politics, just as the election of Joe Biden in 2020 did not weaken its power in the U.S. At the same time, the election of Nawrocki also does not mean, as so many will now be tempted to write, that nationalism in Poland or Europe is 'on the rise.' In fact, this knife-edge election result in Poland is almost exactly the same as the knife-edge result in the country's presidential election five years ago. Had Trzaskowski won an additional 0.9 percent of the votes, that would not have spelled final defeat for authoritarian populism. Other narrow victories in other places don't either. When a centrist candidate defeated an authoritarian populist in Romania a few weeks ago, some were trumpeting that as the possible start of a trend. But the same challenge will emerge in Romania during the next election too, and will once again be the defining argument of the campaign. And that is how all elections will look, for a long time to come. Although many hoped otherwise, we do not seem to be returning to a world in which the center left and the center right compete over tax rates or budgets. Economic and policy arguments just don't matter as much to people right now as these deeper cultural divides. That's why all elections are now existential: Small numbers of voters swinging one way or the next will decide the nature of the state, the future of democracy, the independence of the courts. Every time we go to the polls, politicians will say that every election matters and every vote counts. They will be right. Article originally published at The Atlantic
New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
If Elon Musk and President Trump Divorce, Who Gets Silicon Valley?
Last year, Elon Musk was the Pied Piper of support for Donald J. Trump among Silicon Valley power brokers. One by one, tech billionaires close to Mr. Musk who had either backed Democrats or avoided the political scrum put their money and their time behind the former president's bid to reclaim the White House. But the meltdown of the relationship between President Trump and Mr. Musk on Thursday has thrown that coziness into question. In the coming days, the billionaires who followed Mr. Musk to Washington may be forced to decide whose side they are on in this suddenly personal fight. For Silicon Valley, what appeared to be a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to team up with decision makers in Washington is looking precarious. Mr. Musk was the keystone of the tech industry's relationship with the Trump administration. Without him, it could be up to lesser-known figures, such as the venture capitalist David Sacks, a close friend of Mr. Musk who has become the Trump administration's A.I. and crypto czar, to maintain those ties. 'This is a tale as old as time,' said Venky Ganesan, a partner at the venture capital firm Menlo Ventures. 'Like Icarus, Elon is finding out that if you fly too close to the sun, your wax melts and you crash.' Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
