Comments on: One of six does not constitute ‘most’

By: John W

John W — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 20:42:44 +0000

Let’s hope open primaries and independent redistricting will marginalize the hard right and left; so that the grown-ups can still have a healthy and vigorous competition of ideas, but in a way that leads to real solutions.

By: Jon Fleischman

Jon Fleischman — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 14:36:33 +0000

So I need to apologize and clarify. “Half suffered embarrassing defeats in pursuit of higher office, Maldonado, Villines and Niello — and all are out of office today, but for one who was elected to an obscure county post.”

We’re parsing words – when the point is that being a Republican who votes for higher taxes is hardly the road to long-term success.

By: Steven Harmon

Steven Harmon — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 02:58:10 +0000

Sorry, Jon. Your words were: Most of the six “suffered embarrassing defeats in pursuit of higher office.” I’ve got it on tape! I’ll play it back to you it you want to come by my office. So: Only one can be put in the category of suffering an embarrassing defeat. It doesn’t take fuzzy math to see one of six is not “most.”

By: Shame on Me

Shame on Me — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 19:50:03 +0000

Why don’t these hacks ever get real jobs, given the GOP’s supposed support for “smaller government” and lower taxes?

By: Hcat

Hcat — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 19:35:35 +0000

Why don’t these embattled Republicans just join the Democratic party? The California Republican party needs to be put out of it’s misery.

By: Jon Fleischman

Jon Fleischman — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 16:01:22 +0000

Steve, I appreciate your analysis. But I disagree.
I did not say that these folks failed at receiving GOP nominations, I said that they failed in their attempts to be elected to higher office.

Abel Maldonado was appointed by Schwarzenegger as LG for his role in raising taxes. GOP colleagues voted his tax-raising butt OUT of the Senate and into the non-voting LG spot. HE FAILED IN HIS ELECTION TO THE OFFICE.

Mike Villines FAILED IN HIS ELECTION FOR INSURANCE COMMISSIONER.

Roy Ashburn openly considered a run for Congress, but decided NOT to run (undoubtedly after polling showed his vulnerability).

Roger Niello, as you pointed out LOST BIG TIME in a special election for State Senate…

That is the four that I call “most” –

Another of the six, Anthony Adams, chose not to run for an available third term — I submit that was because of his vote for taxes.

Finally, Dave Cogdill retreated to his home county and ran for Assessor (and won).

So it could be that you are right, and I am right. But I think you will agree that a reasonable person can agree with my analysis, which is that “most [4] of the six Republicans were defeated in their efforts to be elected to higher office.”

By: ralph hoffmann

ralph hoffmann — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 04:52:09 +0000

Regarding Central Committee selection, what’s the definition of faithful? I haven’t decided which major party to be “faithful” to. My philosophy is to be bipolar in an increasingly polarized state and nation.

By: John W

John W — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 04:25:11 +0000

Steve Wier, if I understand you correctly, the open primary ballots we receive will still be differentiated according to party registration for purposes of choosing presidential nominees and state and county party officials. So, I assume your concern is the extra costs and logistics associated with doing this. Right? Are we talking major extra costs and effort? You raise a good question about the notion of taxpayers conducting elections for private parties at no charge — although I would posit that their function in the electoral process is a very public one.

By: John W

John W — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 04:02:36 +0000

Re: #6

This is why passing the proposition for simple majority for budget passage but leaving in the 2/3rds requirement for taxes was a non-event. If anything, it puts the Republicans in an even stronger rhetorical position. They can say, “See, the Democrats have complete control over passing a budget, and they still can’t get the job done.”

By: steve weir

steve weir — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 03:50:17 +0000

Unfortunately, the Legis & Gov., bowed to Maldonado’s desire for a blanket primary combined with a top two angle in exchange for his vote on placing tax extensions on a May 19, 2009 Special Election. However, it does not apply to Presidential portion of primaries and does not include central committees. No one checked about cost consequences and capacity. LA says that it cannot conduct a Presidential Primary under the top two method.

In addition, you will be receiving a separate central committed ballot because parties want their central committees elected ONLY by the party faithful. The costs and logistics are a problem for California Counties.

Maybe this does not matter, but why are Calif. tax payers conducting elections for private entities (parties) as no charge?