Last week, Caitlyn Jenner floated the idea that she could run for US Senate next year here in California. The idea gained some traction this week as Jenner spoke out vociferously against President Trump's tweet storm proposing a ban on transgender service members in the military.
So it's possible she could run, but should she?
Too often rich people and celebrities with an itching for politics hire consultants who will tell them what they want to hear because they will bill their client, win or lose.
Is that the case with Caitlyn? Perhaps.
In California, any Statewide Republican candidate has a hill to climb. Democrats hold a 45% to 26% registration advantages, according to the latest numbers from the Secretary of State, with "No Party Preference" on the verge of becoming the State's second largest party.
In 2016, two Democrats faced each other in November in the race for U.S. Senate under California's top-two runoff system.
So could Caitlyn Jenner become a U.S. Senator? We rate that as highly unlikely.
Let's assume that Senator Feinstein retires and Jenner makes the runoff against a generic Democrat, like Antonio Villaraigosa or Eric Garcetti.
LGBT voters make up about 5% of Californi'a electorate, and 20% of those vote Republican already. The best Statewide Republican result was Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2003, with 33%. If Jenner beats that result by 7% among LGBT voters, it only nets her one percent of the total vote.
Can celebrity factor make a difference like it did for Donald Trump? Maybe a little. But Keeping Up with the Kardashians is NOT The Apprentice. The E! Reality show regularly gets between 1 million and 1.5 million viewers, nationwide. At its peak, Trump's Apprentice reached 21 million viewers, so the celebrity bump that Jenner might get is but a fraction of the help it might have given Trump.
So let's be generous and give Jenner a 1 percent bump in the polls for being a celebrity, and another 1% for The Gays, and with every Republican voting for her, she is still at 28%, and would need to capture more than 75% of independent and third party voters.
But could there be value to her making a run as a high-profile transgender candidate in the nation's largest state? Perhaps.
In the primary, Jenner's transgender status and position commitment to equality could pull any other quixotic Republican candidates towards a more mainstream position.
Should she make the runoff, that alone would be historic. Jenner would get tons of TV attention, nationwide.
Working to defeat Proposition 8 and to pass Marriage Equality in New York, I found the most persuasive messengers to change the hearts and minds of Republicans are other Republicans, making the case that if you believe in limited government and fundamental freedoms, then you should support equal rights for LGBT people.
Jenner could be just the messenger we need to reach conservatives in Red parts of California, and even middle America.
So while it is unlikely we will be saying "Senator Jenner" any time soon, that's not a reason to say she should not run.