Comments on: Full report on the CA9 McNerney-Gill debate

By: Truthclubber

Truthclubber — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 19:34:11 +0000

@9 –

I said earlier on this blog (a different thread) that Stark only needs to get 80% of the Obama vote to win, given that CD15 is likely to go 65% for Obama, and 35% for Romney.

80% x 65% = 52% for Stark — so we are in the same ballpark.

Khanna ’14!

By: GV Haste

GV Haste — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 18:47:46 +0000

Elwood, surely you are joking
Swalwell 60%
Old Starkers 35%
Out to lunch 5%

I’d be stunned if Swalwell could get more than 52%.
I’d be not at all surprised if Stark got between 50% and 55%.
Right now, I’d guess Stark wins it 52.5% to 47.5%
Not the result I’d like but everyone always over estimates what the challenger will do.
For far too many voters, they go into the booth clueless and do a kneejerk vote for the “safe” incumbent.

It will be a mild upset if Swalwell wins.
I’d give Stark a slight favorite position now.
He’ll be flooding the homes with fliers showing photos that are 10 years old.
Most voter have not seen the clips where he is a bumbling old fool.
We see that, but that’s because we hunt it out.
The average voter has all but forgotten his gaffes during he primary. And he sure isn’t going to appear in public to make any more between now and election day.

I’d love a squeaker where Swalwell wins by 50.1%

I heard Ro Khanna on KQED FM Forum show Monday.
Ro’s positive comments about Pete Stark were tepid at best. He said only the bare minimum about any reason to return Pete to congress. Almost like he was pulling his punches in his “praise”.
Now if supporters of Pete are that weak in their endorsement, makes you wonder if Swalwell might just pull it off. Lets hope so.

By: JohnW

JohnW — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 18:19:03 +0000

I agree McNerney is a decent guy. Hope he survives the challenge. But, other than Pelosi, members of the Bay Area delegation are not among the movers and shakers in the House. That’s true of Jerry too — partly because he hasn’t been there that long and partly because he is low key. Garamendi is not low key, but he is a bloviator. My major objection to Swalwell as a replacement for Stark is that he will be the lightest among a team of lightweights.

By: RR senile columnist

RR senile columnist — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 15:27:17 +0000

Little Ricky wants to be a congressman. He also wants Santa to bring him a really cool Playstation and some other stuff.

By: moderatevoter

moderatevoter — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 13:15:42 +0000

Current Constituent is totally correct about Jerry McNerney, he is just a super guy, as good a Congressman as you will find, thoughful, intelligent – and he works well with everybody, he’s not one of these partisan robots. I would have liked for McNerney to run in the 15th district, he would have been perfect for 15th district.
But Washington DC based power brokers decided to dump 80 year old Pete Stark on the 15th district, a far out left winger – so left wing the New York Times describes Stark as “left of Lenin”. Stark is about as poor a fit for the 15th district as you could find, he can’t work with anybody, is cantankerous, and he rarely bothers to even visit the districts he represents.
Amazingly, even though the 15th is a brand new district Stark has announced this will be his “final term”. Voters from the newly configured 15th district – if Stark is elected – will be getting an 80 year old “lame duck” left-wing extremist Congressman – one who never bothers to visit his district, who is one of the worst examples of a partisan robot you can find in DC.
Fortunately we have a local Congressional candidate for this seat – Dublin City Councilman and Alameda County prosecutor Eric Swalwell. Swallwell is, in my view, a Jerry McNerney type, decent, moderate, ideologically attuned with this district, and – like McNerney – he’s hardworking, he can get along with people and work with others, he’s no partisan robot like Pete Stark. I think Congress needs more Jerry McNerney types members that can be problem solvers rather than partisan warriors, so I think McNereny and Swalwell are the right kind of people to send to Washington DC from NorCal.
Let’s get stuff done in Washington, let’s stop all this partisan in- fighting, that’s what voters want, in my view, voters want problem solvers in DC. If voters make the mistake of electing Ricky Gill or Pete Stark you are going to get more partisan warfare, that’s my read

By: Current Constituent

Current Constituent — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 06:28:53 +0000

I am a current constituent of Congressman McNerney and can testify to his dedication to representing voters he serves. I could not be at the debate tonight but voters in district 9 will be well served to elect McNerney as he is the most intelligent, thoughtful and above all highly qualified candidate. He regularly meets with voters in his district, is responsive to constituents concerns and comes home from D.C. every weekend!! Dedication that could not be matched by Gill with the huge learning curve he would have ahead of him.

By: Elwood

Elwood — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 05:42:00 +0000

Swalwell 60%

Old Starkers 35%

Out to lunch 5%

By: JohnW

JohnW — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 04:41:16 +0000

Any predictions on what the Stark and Swalwell vote percentages will be election night?

By: GV Haste

GV Haste — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 04:04:53 +0000

Hey, say what you will about McNerney, at least he is willing to hold one debate.
Compare that to Pete Stark who not only won’t debate, but who has gone into deep hiding.
As of 4:00 PM today, Pete Stark was hunkered down in Maryland (and unavailable for quotes)

By: Truthclubber

Truthclubber — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 03:32:14 +0000

Looks from all accounts like this “wet-behind-the-ears”, 25-year-old tyke held his own against this pushing-60-year-old-hard, baldly-badly, former-unemployed-wind-consultant-hack claiming (falsely) that he had a “thriving small renewable energy business” — and is now a…wait for it..Jerry-manderer!

A three-term, sitting member of Congress and new to a redistricted area, and all he wants to do is ONE obiligatory debate with his “wet-behind-the-ears” opponent — not three, or four, or five, as one would expect?

Who cut his balls off?
Woof, woof, woof, woof!
Who cut his balls off?
Woof, woof, woof, woof!