Feinstein in electoral trouble?
posted at 11:36 am on March 24, 2011 by Ed Morrissey
A new poll from California shows Dianne Feinstein falling below 50% in re-elect support, a rating than in any other state might mean something. McClatchy sends up the red flag from the latest Harris Poll, which gives the four-term Senator only a +4 on support for a fifth term, hitting below 50%:
Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein remains more popular among California voters than her colleague Barbara Boxer, a new Field Poll shows.
But Feinstein can’t rest easy as she prepares for another re-election bid next year. For the first time since her initial 1992 election, less than half of the Californians surveyed consider themselves leaning toward Feinstein.
“It’s somewhat surprising, because she’s considered by many to be among the most popular politicians in California,” Field Poll director Mark DiCamillo said Wednesday.
Forty-six percent of Californians surveyed between Feb. 28 and March 14 said they are “inclined” to vote for Feinstein next year. Forty-two percent are “not inclined,” and 12 percent call themselves undecided.
My friend Eric Ostermeier at Smart Politics takes a hard look at the data, and says Feinstein should be worried:
For starters, the senior Senator from California’s job approval rating has been languishing in the 40s for well over a year and has been on the decline for half a decade.
SurveyUSA’s most recent poll from February of this year found Senator Feinstein with only a 43 percent approval rating – down by more than a quarter from the 59 percent rating she received in November 2006 when she was elected to her fourth term.
That means Feinstein has suffered through a 29-point net drop in job approval from her reelection in November 2006 (+25 points; 59 percent approve, 34 percent disapprove) to February 2011 (-4 points; 43 percent approve, 47 percent disapprove).
And the February poll is not an aberration.
On job approval, Feinstein is actually under water at 43/47.5 in Survey USA polling this year (averaging two iterations). That’s about the same as last year’s 43.5/47.8 over 12 polls, when Barbara Boxer withstood a tough election against Carly Fiorina. Eric does even more number-crunching and discovers that only 23 of the 140 Senators to have won four or more terms in office failed to win 60% of the vote in at least one of those first four elections, and Feinstein has only gotten as high as 59.4% — in her last election, in the Democratic wave of 2006.
National Journal’s Hotline throws a dash of cold water on the Feinstein-is-vulnerable analysis:
46 percent of California voters surveyed said they would be inclined to vote for Feinstein in 2012, while 42 percent said they would not be inclined to do so. During the year before her previous reelection campaigns, Feinstein’s reelect percentage has consistently been over 50 percent in the Field Poll: 53 percent of registered voters were inclined to reelect her in a poll released in March of 2005, while that figure was 59 percent in March of 1999. In a June 1993 poll, the figure was 58 percent.
Still, there are encouraging signs for Feinstein.
48 percent of California voters approve of the job Feinstein is doing, while just 33 percent disapprove, according to the survey. That figure is higher than Sen. Barbara Boxer‘s (D-Calif.) October 2009 44 percent approval rating.
It’s encouraging news for Feinstein; Boxer, despite attracting a well-known and well-financed GOP opponent in Carly Fiorina, still won by ten percent. The 2012 presidential election should also boost Feinstein’s chances in the heavily Democratic state of California.
The sample for the Harris poll was also rather small for a state the size of California, only 444 registered voters. Harris and Field are considered the leading pollsters in the state, but given the wide geographical distances and disparities in the Golden State’s electorate, that seems too small to be a reliable predictor for an election eighteen months away.
Also, one would have to presume that California would vote for a Republican for statewide office to believe that Feinstein is really vulnerable. The GOP didn’t win one such office in 2010 despite the Republican sweep across the rest of the nation and the disastrous economy in their own state. They re-elected Boxer, for Pete’s sake, and stuck a 72-year-old retread in the Governor’s office 28 years after serving his first two terms in that office — by fourteen points. In 2012, with Barack Obama at the top of the ticket, Feinstein will be one of the few — perhaps the only — Senator who will benefit from his presence.
The GOP will robustly contend for Feinstein’s seat, but don’t expect any miracles. About the best that could happen would be to force Democrats to spend a lot of money defending her, and keep them from spending it elsewhere.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
She’ll pull through at the end of the day. But bad polls and close races make Democrats spend money they would otherwise spend in really contested races.
amerpundit on March 24, 2011 at 11:39 AM
If Boxer didn’t lose in a midterm where Dems were getting plastered across most of the country, DiFi won’t lose in a Presidential election year.
That doesn’t mean they won’t have to blow money propping her up, though, which is exactly what they don’t need in a year where they’re having to defend 22 seats.
teke184 on March 24, 2011 at 11:39 AM
Please see: Barbara Boxer, 2010.
Fuggedaboutit.
Bat Chain Puller on March 24, 2011 at 11:39 AM
I dunno. She’s ancient, and she was never the kind of street fighter that Barbara Boxer is. She doesn’t have the kind of rabid faithful following on the Left that Boxer has either. She might even be vulnerable to a primary challenge. Would not surprise me to see boy wonder Gavin Newsome take her on.
rockmom on March 24, 2011 at 11:42 AM
She’ll win reelection if she wants to out here in California, but due to her advanced age (she’s getting up there) and the fact that the DIMocrats just might be in the minority in 2013, she may just want to retire to the family mansion in Baghdad by the Bay (‘Frisco) and spend time with the grandkids…
Here’s hoping…
Khun Joe on March 24, 2011 at 11:42 AM
That’s all you need to know about California. The GOP would be wise to spend as little money as possible in that craphole. Let self-financed candidates like Meg Whitman have at it if they wish. But otherwise, that state is a lost cause. The best I personally think we can hope for is that when their budgetary crisis causes serious austerity measures, the Democrats are at the helm and the voters will finally learn the hard lesson of life.
Doughboy on March 24, 2011 at 11:42 AM
Feinstein has the illegal alien vote. She’ll win. Sadly.
rbj on March 24, 2011 at 11:43 AM
She could poll low and still get re-elected. Barbara Bouncer redux.
Beaglemom on March 24, 2011 at 11:43 AM
I’ve heard this song before. Wake me when the US congress votes to bail out California.
Vashta.Nerada on March 24, 2011 at 11:43 AM
Californians would vote for the rotting, headless corpse of Saddam Hussein if you put a D after his name.
Mark1971 on March 24, 2011 at 11:44 AM
Yeah, after seeing the much more useless Boxer win last year, I don’t have any hope Dianne will lose in this crazy state. Unless she retires, we can hope.
Bob's Kid on March 24, 2011 at 11:44 AM
California is a goner. If they reelected that crazy Boxer the only way they would replace Feingstein is with someone further to the left. I don’t know what will wake those folks up. I assume they think the feds will bail them out based on their awesomeness.
Cindy Munford on March 24, 2011 at 11:45 AM
Yes, but that means the GOP is going to have to spend as well. What gazillionaire is going to be stupid enough (and subject themselves to the guaranteed abuse and possible embarrassment) to throw a bunch of money down a rathole trying to win an un-winnable seat?
pain train on March 24, 2011 at 11:45 AM
Not holding my breath….
cmsinaz on March 24, 2011 at 11:45 AM
If it gets any worse she may have to change her name to a hispanic one, maybe Feinandez?
slickwillie2001 on March 24, 2011 at 11:48 AM
That’s the key. When they don’t get the bailout(it’ll never happen with a GOP-controlled House), they’ll be forced to institute so many budget cuts and layoffs that the state will descend into chaos. And hopefully out of that mess will emerge a more fiscally conservative and budget-conscious electorate.
Doughboy on March 24, 2011 at 11:48 AM
Doesn’t her hubby have some sort of defense contractor relationship with the government or something like that?
I’d heard a few years ago that she was getting funds for her contractor hubby.
Anyway …
BowHuntingTexas on March 24, 2011 at 11:49 AM
Feinstein ain’t going anywhere… If we could not oust Boxer we can’t oust any Democrat. All the Unions will get their members out to vote, the illegals get to vote and Republicans are outnumbered. Ca is toast… Every friggin Democrat wonin November. Saving this country is up to the rest of you!
CCRWM on March 24, 2011 at 11:51 AM
Good point.
What people conveniently and often forget is that the “GOP wave” or the Tea Party revolt (or whatever term you want to call it) of November 2010 actually led to higher Democrat turnout in some parts of the country. The grassroots revolt against spending is not uniform across the country.
In Illinois, the Democrat governor got re-elected this past November, and the new GOP senator Mark Kirk barely won election against a Democrat opponent whose family the FBI is investigating for bank corruption.
Illinois and California and other places are just reflective of the fact that the voters actually “love the goods” (entitlements, federal programs) more than their dislike of paying for them.
ColtsFan on March 24, 2011 at 11:51 AM
The most interesting thing about this is that Feinstein is showing weak with no named opponent in sight. Not that there ever is one; even on election day, half the voters would have trouble giving the name of the GOP candidate for a US Senate seat.
California GOP: AKA, the Feckless Boys
J.E. Dyer on March 24, 2011 at 11:52 AM
I see an opening for Gavin Newsome.
Kalifornia Kafir on March 24, 2011 at 11:52 AM
Which reminds me, has Nicky Diaz been deported yet? (Like I don’t know the answer.)
slickwillie2001 on March 24, 2011 at 11:53 AM
DiFi’s low numbers come in part from liberal in California who actually think she’s a DINO. They want someone ever more liberal to run against her, but will come back home if it’s a choice between Feinstein and any Republican.
If voters reject Jerry Brown’s tax plan in June and the state Democrats go ahead and push through some new tax hikes anyway instead of cutting spending, that could create enough of a backlash among swing voters to put DiFi’s seat, along with other Democratic incumbents, into play in 2012. But we still have to see if voters are willing to give themselves a tax hike in perpetuity, and — this being 21st Century California — there may be enough state voters out there (legal and illegal) who aren’t paying the taxes to begin with who’ll have no problem voting in more taxes for the ones who do.
jon1979 on March 24, 2011 at 11:54 AM
rockmom on March 24, 2011 at 11:42 AM
Wrong. DiFi has always been more popular in CA, for she’s always been perceived as a reasonable moderate. She even voted for the Bush tax cuts the first time around. Boxer has relied much more on DiFi for reelection than the other way around.
IR-MN on March 24, 2011 at 11:54 AM
Move along folks..Nothing to see here!..:)
Dire Straits on March 24, 2011 at 11:54 AM
She’ll be re-elected as will most dimmis in K-fornia until the state collapses, then and only then will the constituents actually wake up.
Tim Zank on March 24, 2011 at 11:56 AM
I’m pretty sure this is right. Boxer won easily though the campaign was tough. This seat is still Feinstein’s if she still wants it. She is somewhat old and may want to retire. But if she wants to stay, no way she will lose or even be in danger of losing.
jwolf on March 24, 2011 at 11:57 AM
And this point further shows that it isn’t just social conservatism (pro-life policies and/or pro-traditional marriage stands) that is unpopular with the electorate in these deep blue states, …..rather, it shows that any semblance of fiscal conservatism is itself unpopular.
How can the GOP win in these of any states?
ColtsFan on March 24, 2011 at 11:57 AM
In a target-rich environment like the 2012 Senate, the GOP should be focusing on smaller and cheaper targets–Nelson in NE, Tester in MT, Johnson in SD, McCaskill in MO, Pryor in AR, and the open seats in VA and NM.
Oops, did I say “target”? So terribly sorry, Gabby…
While it isn’t cheap to run for Senate in Florida, Jeb Bush is popular there and could easily oust Bill Nelson, with the added benefit of keeping Jeb out of the Presidential race.
Steve Z on March 24, 2011 at 11:57 AM
Of the two I’d rather be rid of Boxer.
I’m certain the unions will not allow Feinstein to go under.
petunia on March 24, 2011 at 11:58 AM
Feinstein will lose in California when hell freezes over.
ButterflyDragon on March 24, 2011 at 11:58 AM
If DiFi runs again , I’ll give odds of 500-1 that she wins against any GOP challenger.
My state has become so corrupt it makes those union goons in Wisconsin look like Dominican nuns.
jjshaka on March 24, 2011 at 11:59 AM
More like it.
Bat Chain Puller on March 24, 2011 at 12:00 PM
Now, I’m depressed.
petunia on March 24, 2011 at 12:00 PM
Once they realize they’re so broke that the Democrats’ promise of a free lunch is a load of BS.
Doughboy on March 24, 2011 at 12:02 PM
LOL, what?!?! What a load of nonsense. The GOP hasn’t robustly contended for anything in California in many years.
There is a near zero chance that Feinstein will lose. She’d have to drop dead before the election and even then she’d probably still win as a corpse.
California’s Democrats just ran the table! Gavin Newsom and Kamala Harris won office, for Christ’s sake! If you know anything about them you know how nuts that is.
This post is talking about California as if it is a normal state inhabited by rational, intelligent voters. It’s not. The educated and productive have fled the state in massive numbers and the illegal and uneducated have largely taken over.
I know Ed used to live out here but I don’t think he’s acknowledging how deeply effed up California really is at this point. And the economic, scholastic, and demographic numbers promise that things are only going to get a hell of a lot worse.
Django on March 24, 2011 at 12:03 PM
Another thought why she would never lose- she is actually held in high regard by tons of independents and Rino’s.
Of course, she has the advantage of being compared to Boxer and Jeriatric Brown.
jjshaka on March 24, 2011 at 12:03 PM
Fixed it for ya’…
Seven Percent Solution on March 24, 2011 at 12:03 PM
Two words: Governor Moonbeam
If he can win statewide office DiFi can’t lose.
MJBrutus on March 24, 2011 at 12:03 PM
California is a glutton for punishment, and addicted to the stupid water they drink out there.
The state is a financial mess thanks to years of liberal policies, and they STILL vote more liberals in, in the hopes that THIS time, the liberals will fix things. I gave up hope on California, and the hopes they had a smidge of brain, or common sense left, when Boxer beat Fiorina.
capejasmine on March 24, 2011 at 12:04 PM
ColtsFan on March 24, 2011 at 11:57 AM
That’s interesting. In Rhode Island, they had a pro-life GOP governor and gay marriage was defeated this year, yet the state is deep blue.
IR-MN on March 24, 2011 at 12:05 PM
Mitch Daniels should move out there and run against her.
SouthernGent on March 24, 2011 at 12:09 PM
Schwarzenegger did the one thing no one thought was possible: he left the California GOP in even worse shape than when he was elected.
The Brown/Boxer result was in large part voter revulsion over Schwarzenegger.
Ecolunacy, year after year of budgetary three-card-monte, big mouth and no action.
JEM on March 24, 2011 at 12:09 PM
I think Ed knows.
:-)
But I think he is just trying to be positive about the future.
We all know (including Captain Ed) that California tends to gain a electoral college seat (US representative) or 2 every so often due to the US Census counting.
ColtsFan on March 24, 2011 at 12:09 PM
Too true.
For myself,Kamala Harris winning was the sign of the California political apocalypse. Beyond unfit for office.
Her election confirmed that CA is a total basket case.
jjshaka on March 24, 2011 at 12:10 PM
If Diane Feinstein died two weeks before the 2012 election she would still win. We re-elected Barbara Boxer again, that says it all.
Blue Collar Todd on March 24, 2011 at 12:11 PM
Hmmmm, I wonder if Angie Harmon is interested in running for office?
Just throwing it out there…
ornery_independent on March 24, 2011 at 12:11 PM
I hope I am wrong about my earlier point involving blue states.
But the growing dependence on the federal government doesn’t appear to reach a stopping point.
ColtsFan on March 24, 2011 at 12:12 PM
John Cornyn has another, cool 8 MILLION to blow on this race – the way he did on Carly “The Sure Thing” Fiorina!
HondaV65 on March 24, 2011 at 12:15 PM
The Pubbies only chance would be finding someone like a Scott Brown to turn the tables on her; but she’s not as stupid as Coakley. And, I wouldn’t go overboard in funding opposing her – just enough to hurt Dem senators seeking re-election in other states.
Bob in VA on March 24, 2011 at 12:17 PM
I say ignore California, let it collapse.
Tim Zank on March 24, 2011 at 12:21 PM
For all her flaws, Dianne Feinstein is perhaps the least reprehensible representatives California has sent to the national stage. The California Republican Party machine is corrupt and incompetent — unlike its Democratic Party counterpart, which is merely corrupt.
California is under one party rule, God help us all. I have often thought that if the state could get an amalgamation of rebel Democrats, disgruntled Republicans, Independents, Libertarians, and those who want a party focused soley on state issues that are budget/finance oriented — and make it a state-specific third party (e.g., Golden State party), that might be the only chance to shake things up meaningful.
Mutnodjmet on March 24, 2011 at 12:26 PM
And George Soros would fund him too!
TugboatPhil on March 24, 2011 at 12:27 PM
Given the recent elections in that state, I would think the entire state would have to burn to the ground and slip into the sea before that would happen. It would take something of Biblical proportions for them to get the heads out of their arses.
iurockhead on March 24, 2011 at 12:30 PM
Forget the polls! The polls do NOT reflect what will be marked on the MAIL-IN ballots!
Why do you think Jerry Brown is trying to have major tax increases on a MAIL-IN ONLY ballot? California has totally corrupted the voting process by allowing millions of MAIL-IN ballots that can NEVER be VERIFIED to determine election results.
Freddy on March 24, 2011 at 12:32 PM
If California had a Marco Rubio, he could beat Feinstein. We don’t though.
Maybe some Hollywood guy could win.
Kohath on March 24, 2011 at 12:33 PM
Lifelong Californian….Ain’t gonna happen.
sandee on March 24, 2011 at 12:35 PM
No way she loses. This is California, after all. I would not get my hopes up…
golfer1 on March 24, 2011 at 12:37 PM
There may not be a Republican running against Feinstein. California has changes its primary system. There is an open primary with both Republicans and Democrats on the ballot now. Whoever are the top two in the primary, regardless of party, moves to the general election. So the general election will likely have two Democrats and no Republicans.
They did this in order to prevent Republicans from getting to the general election in statewide elections.
crosspatch on March 24, 2011 at 12:40 PM
If that idiot Boxer can get re-elected, Feinstein should have no problems.
GarandFan on March 24, 2011 at 12:42 PM
What about a Hollywood Girl?
Again, presenting Angie Harmon
ornery_independent on March 24, 2011 at 12:46 PM
Exactly. We voted for Ahnold. California is basically a one-party state but we’re also whores for a personality.
hisfrogness on March 24, 2011 at 12:46 PM
Anybody who dares run against Feinstein will hear the full howl of the taxpayer funded highly organized liberal screaming smear machine, kindergarteners are on that payroll.
Speakup on March 24, 2011 at 12:47 PM
Actually, the liberals don’t like Feinstein much. If you look at her words over the years, she is actually the more moderate of the left wing, more of a center-left Democrat.
The “progressives” in California can often be heard calling her a “neo-con”.
crosspatch on March 24, 2011 at 12:49 PM
Agreed. But Johnson and Pryor aren’t up until 2014.
steebo77 on March 24, 2011 at 12:53 PM
Her primary residence isn’t in California.
steebo77 on March 24, 2011 at 12:54 PM
I am so tired of stories like this…….she is not in trouble and I theorize polls like this are put out to pull the right’s chain and at the same time get the Dems concerned so they will make sure the Dem doesn’t lose.
Republicans are such an endangered species in Calif. they need to put themselves on the endangered species list. Then again, the better idea is to remane themselves DemocratLite. After all, look at South Carolina where a person arrested and charged with a sex crime and virtually unknown won the Dem U.S. Senate primary over KNOWN candidates to see how mind numb and idiotic your average Democrat voter truly is. However, now that I have given it more thought, having a sex charge against you is a resume enhancer in the Dem. party and might have helped him win the primary.
devolvingtowardsidiocracy on March 24, 2011 at 12:54 PM
Worth a try. But I don’t think she has enough star power to win. How does she get any Latino votes?
Kohath on March 24, 2011 at 12:58 PM
This is the same as the early polls for Boxer last year. How’d that turn out?
People in Kalifornia will continue to vote for someone who will keep their gubbermint goodies coming until the checks start bouncing.
Bevan on March 24, 2011 at 12:58 PM
..so many repsonses in this thread are on target. She will be re-elected unless challenged. However, of the two, Boxer and Feinstein, I woulda preferred to see Boxer go. I mean, Boxer’s dumber than a bag of hammers. Feinstein can at least be dealt with.
If Newsome runs and beats Feinstein, then the Dems will have to spend some serious money to get him in versus a moderate/Rino Republican.
Like someone said, could suck a lot of money out of the till in a critical senate re-election year for the Democrats.
The War Planner on March 24, 2011 at 12:59 PM
In Kookafornia, a Republican has to be +4 or +5 in the actual vote to win. The Democrooks can easily conjure up 3% from dead friends.
mr.blacksheep on March 24, 2011 at 1:04 PM
But that’s the thing. Eventually the checks will bounce.
The biggest Democrat idiocy is that they think that raising taxes = increased revenue. Even now they enjoy a lot of revenue but, eventually, at some point, high state taxes and regulations will diminish their budget to the point that they have nothing else to do but start cutting.
California is Greece.
hisfrogness on March 24, 2011 at 1:04 PM
That’s sort of like ignoring a cancerous tumor. I agree that other states’ options are limited re dealing with California but it’s still attached to the rest of the US for better or worse.
Django on March 24, 2011 at 1:05 PM
NSFW
mr.blacksheep on March 24, 2011 at 1:23 PM
Ed, have you been smoking some of our fine medical marijuana? The republican party of California doesn’t robustly do anything, except suck!!
Meg Whitman? Are you kidding me? Her employees hated her! Carly Fiorina? Are you kidding me? Everybody hates her!
Look elsewhere for salvation, because it’s not coming to California. Tom McClintock seems the lone standout.
Pablo Snooze on March 24, 2011 at 1:24 PM
Bingo- this is why CA is gone- massive vote fraud is their Ace in the Hole.
It was no coincidence that every race that was borderline in November magically went to the Democrats a few days later- they needed an election night number to “come up” with enough absentee ballots to win.
In an honest country, we would have a massive vote fraud investigation by the Feds.
jjshaka on March 24, 2011 at 1:27 PM
It is beyond the D’s wanting their gov. cheese, most are such true believers that they don’t even ask themselves what they believe in. They are stunned when someone they know is a conservative. They just assume everybody is going green and all that.
Even financial collapse won’t wake them up, they would blame it on uncooperative R’s, corruption, whatever, but they will never blame their own policies, never. It’s hopeless.
jodetoad on March 24, 2011 at 1:29 PM
I thought you said “72-year old retard.” I had to re-read that twice. Either answer is acceptable.
Beo on March 24, 2011 at 1:38 PM
..ouch! That’s gonna leave a mark!
The War Planner on March 24, 2011 at 1:42 PM
The only thing that could do Feinstein in is Jerry Brown being governor. There are no Republicans to blame for anything. Most conservatives (and a good many Democrats)have fled the state due to the continuing economic decline which will continue because public employee unions own the state now. Maybe there’s enough independents left to blame the next Democrat running in a statewide election, but don’t bet on it.
cartooner on March 24, 2011 at 1:48 PM
Don’t waste a dime, NRSC. California is a lost cause.
See Boxer, Moonbeam (during an off Dem year).
kevinkristy on March 24, 2011 at 2:17 PM
emphasis mine.
THANK YOU, Ed. We are not a monolithic bunch, but after the ridiculous 2010 election us conservatives are pretty nihilistic. Most of us are stocked up on what we will need for what could become an absolute mess here. We are saying that, like an addict, anything to bring this state to rock-bottom faster will make us face the grim facts of our existence faster, and will ultimately help us recover more quickly. That’s not to say we’d vote for Democrats, and there are some shining stars in this state besides Tom McClintock.
Star Parker
Kevin McCarthy
Devin Nunes: http://devinnunes.blogspot.com/2010/12/feinstein-embraces-pearl-harbor-style.html
And non-politicians like Dennis Miller, Michael Savage, Dennis Prager, Ray Appleton, Inga Barks, etc.
After the Bell, California scandal, the congress-created valley dust bowl, the crazy CalPERS corruption (not getting any attention over here) we are doomed if people don’t wake up to who got them in this mess. But with Prop 14 (we don’t get to have a GOP primary anymore, effectively), we are doomed.
NTWR on March 24, 2011 at 2:18 PM
the problem was not Boxer…it was Fiorina (RINO)….run a real candidate and watch Feinstein go down….
SDarchitect on March 24, 2011 at 2:19 PM
Where is Cindy Sheehan when we need her?
Alibali on March 24, 2011 at 2:20 PM
Prop 14 will actually help. In Dem areas, a crazy leftist Dem will have to face a less crazy leftist Dem. And the less-crazy leftist will win most of the time.
This is the best thing we can hope for in most of these districts. It will happen in R districts too, but there are a lot fewer of those.
Kohath on March 24, 2011 at 2:28 PM
They’ll wake up just long enough to flee to red states and start their locust like destructive behavior anew.
Hard Right on March 24, 2011 at 2:36 PM
“It will happen in R districts too, but there are a lot fewer of those.”
There are no “districts” for statewide elections (US Senate, governor, etc.)
crosspatch on March 24, 2011 at 2:38 PM
That’s due in no small part to the GOP handpicking candidates from the Beltway in Washington, two candidates that were unelectable. Generated no enthusiasm from the base and one was not properly vetted for skeletons in the closet.
Vanilla Republicans. Just like the Beltway crowd wants to run against Our Lord and Savior next year as well, too.
pdigaudio on March 24, 2011 at 2:38 PM
So if we all got together and had a fundraiser, think we could raise enough to pay Mexico to take California back?
jarodea on March 24, 2011 at 2:39 PM
“I say ignore California, let it collapse.”
Intel just announced they are opening a new chip fab employing 5000 people — in Arizona.
crosspatch on March 24, 2011 at 2:40 PM
Well shoot, her bio says she splits time between Los Angeles and Texas. If that’s true, it’s simply a paperwork issue.
ornery_independent on March 24, 2011 at 2:57 PM
If all of you conservative Californians would pack up and move to another state (bringing your electoral votes along for the ride), it would pretty much render the influence of CA useless. Plus, without any common sense in play, CA would go truly looney and collapse into total ruin. Then you Cali expats could go reclaim the land and lay the foundations for a bright new future. Gee, there has to be a book in there somewhere…
Beo on March 24, 2011 at 3:04 PM
Sort of OT:
I’m just sooo proud to be Texan !!!
http://tinyurl.com/4apkhlr
pambi on March 24, 2011 at 3:06 PM
Yeah, rules like that only get waived if you’re running for mayor of Chicago.
Scrappy on March 24, 2011 at 3:22 PM
If she’s actually conservative, it won’t fly.
Probably the best we can do out here is someone like Clint Eastwood. He’s pro-choice and green but he’s also more individualistic than most of the lefties and he does seem to be business friendly. I think he’s also pro-gun, so that’s a plus.
JadeNYU on March 24, 2011 at 3:29 PM
Prop 14
Yeah, but if the Republican can’t finish in the top 2 positions for those races, how were they possibly going to win in November? We’re better off with the less-crazy-leftist Dem in that situation too.
It’s not good, but it seems to me that it should make a bad situation slightly less bad.
Kohath on March 24, 2011 at 4:07 PM
Great ideas but unless a magical entrant appears we are lost until the bankruptcy….
how to feel like a eunuch….your congressman is Waxman and your senators are DiFi and Boxer and your Governor is Jerry Brown.
Those are the reasons nothing will happen until a bankruptcy or the next Rubio comes to Cal. Sad but it is hopeless. I spent personal money and time on the recent elections for Whitman and Repubs – barely honorable mention. What to do????
highninside on March 24, 2011 at 5:48 PM