.
.
.
We’ve already covered the big “good news” story from Tuesday: the victory of Josh Newman in the SD-29 primary. Now let’s look at the rest of the news — which is not particularly good. Let’s start with two “results” that is not actually “election result” at all.
Bad Ballot Handling?
Judging by Facebook comments from people about their own voting experiences yesterday, many, many provisional ballots, many of which should not have been required to be cast as such, remain outstanding — as will some Democratic crossover ballots that people say were wrongfully stuffed into “provisional ballot” envelopes.
This is abominable. Several personal friends of mine, whom I believe would not be the type to make up stories, reported experiences that just should never have happened. Some of them put up extended challenges to poll workers in order to get their (or their adult children’s) ballots counted; by far most other voters would not likely even try. I am truly jarred by how many ballots may have been denied or otherwise mishandled this year. I haven’t yet had time to go to the Registrar of Voters office, but I hope to do so by the end of this week or the beginning of next week — with printouts of people’s personal experiences.
The best source I’ve seen on what has happened in California is this piece from the often-controversial and sometimes incontrovertably dead-on Greg Palast. On Facebook, I amended it slightly:
Some of you don’t like Greg Palast and I won’t defend every word he’s ever written. But his description of what was going down in California — actions that can be reasonably estimated to have kept enormous numbers of NPPs, including many new voters, from voting for Bernie Sanders — matches completely what I’ve seen and heard from both my real-life and Facebook friends.
There’s a twist I heard that wasn’t mentioned in Palast’s article: at least some NPPs who DID successfully argue their way into receiving a “Democratic Crossover Ballot” rather than a provisional ballot had their completed ballots — over their loud objections — placed into a “provisional ballot” envelope, where they will not be opened for as long as two weeks.
So far as I can tell, the blame for this does not lie at the County level, but in the statewide training materials. (Hey, fellow Democrats: given that we’re in charge of all of this, how likely do you think that the young voters who were prevented from voting for Bernie this week will be to come out for Hillary in November — or will forgive the party in future years? Was all that table-tilting to get a big result in an election for a supposedly all-sewn-up nomination really worth it? Does this encourage people to “work within the system”?)
Turnout!
On the other hand, even without that massive stash of as-yet-uncounted ballots, turnout was big. And, unusually — that word presumes that it has happened before in OC, which I don’t actually know to be true — it was slanted towards Democrats.
Overall turnout: 34.2% (again, as will these all, this will surely go up)
Democratic: 49.5%
Libertarian: 30.7%
American Independent: 25.1%
Green: 21.5%
P&F: 17.4%
Republican: 36.9%
The difference between the major parties speaks for itself. It’s presumably due to both the Republican race being sewn up and to dislike of the man who did the sewing. Democrats can’t count on the former factor to lower Republican turnout in November, so some of the Democratic-leaning results that we’ve seen in this election might not be expected to be evident in November.
President
|
OC was more pro-Sanders than the state as a whole. Betcha didn’t see that coming! (Again, be wary of the outstanding provisionals as you interpret this.) We were also slightly more pro-Trump and pro-Kasich, but less pro-Cruz, Carson, and Gilmore. (Why did so few of you take my recommendation about voting for Gilmore?)
In other parties, OC supported the Green Party’s Jill Stein (76.3%, 402 votes), Libertarian Gary Johnson (64.5%, 1459 votes), American Independent Alan Spears (21.3%, 466 votes), and P&F’s Gloria Estela La Riva over Monica Moorehead, 74 votes to 73.
U.S. Senate
Here are your top 10 of 34 in OC:
|
This is actually a huge upset — for Harris! Given that the county delegation went so massively for her at the convention, I’d have expected a much larger margin than half a percent! this shows how out of step the party delegates have been with the voting public overall. Statewide, it was 40.3% for Kamala and 18.5% for Loretta, with Sundheim picking up 8.0% to win the bronze. [Disclaimer: I am Harris’s county coordinator, meaning that I get to take credit for this result. People who don’t get when I’m joking are welcome to write in to Liberal OC and be snotty.]
38th Congressional
|
Linda Sanchez won La Palma! That bodes well for her in November. So does the fact that she took 70% of the district overall.
39th Congressional
|
This is a respectable result. Murdock did little more to campaign than putting out a few signs, saving his resources for the fall. Good call — now try tying Royce to Trump! Tie, tie, tie!
45th Congressional
|
I’m happy for Ron Varasteh that he made the runoff — and that Democrats that he and Henry Vandermeir’s candidate Max Gouron almost equalled the vote for Mimi Walters. But I’m also sort of sorry that Greg Raths didn’t get his shot at squaring off against her. (Actually, I’d have liked a Varasteh vs. Raths runoff; that would have been a fun campaign.) It would be great if Democrats would just let Raths take on Mimi one on one in 2018 (if she is re-elected, of course) just to see what might happen. But, of course, if some Democrat even without Varasteh’s credentials came along and entered the race at the last minute, that still wouldn’t happen. (See discussion of AD-68, below.)
46th Congressional
|
This result shocked some people, but the second-place finish of Republican Bob Peterson, who will now face off against Lou Correa, was widely suspected by insiders. I don’t know why Bob Peterson did so much better than Lynn Schott to win Republican votes — but a
Bao’s deficit had shrunk by Wednesday evening from 492 to 456, and he has not yet conceded. (Dunn has.) It’s possible that as provisonal ballots come in they could push Bao into second place — he’s perfectly situated to receive them from young voters — and, as he’s noted, he won the Garden Grove Mayoral election in similar circumstances. But he’s burned a lot of bridges with the race he ran — which varies in others’ tellings from merely aggressive to downright unscrupulous — and that might make it hard for him to compete in November.
For me and Vern and others, the disappointment here was in Dunn’s performance. Everyone has their explanation for why Dunn lost. Vern thinks that Dunn’s mailers were lousy in that they focused on Correa (and with a not unflattering cover picture) more than Dunn; you can count me among those who say that, even if empirical studies show that ballot statements bring in no votes, you STILL have to put one in if you have the money because otherwise voters think that you’re a hopeless cause or an idiot. But let’s get real: while those might have closed the gap between Dunn and Bao, and maybe even Peterson, those aren’t the reason that Dunn lost.
It was the money. And by “the money,” I don’t mean simply the amount that each campaign raised for its own purposes — Dunn did OK there — but the money spend on independent expenditures, both media and printed mailers. And by “independent expenditures,” I don’t mean just any independent expenditures — but ones paid for by persons and groups that are traditionally antagonistic to Democratic issues and values. Groups like JOBS PAC — through which Chevron, Inc. helped Tom Daly in his legislative primary four years ago. These PACs exists specifically to keep the most progressive Democrat from winning primaries. I don’t have a complete stack of all the direct mail that went out from Lou and on his behalf from IEs, but my sense is that there were a whole lot of attacks from them on Dunn and hardly any against Bao. Bao may argue that Dunn, rather than he, was the spoiler here, but if the onslaught of attacks was aimed primarily against Dunn then there’s no fair comparison. Correa and his business/Republican supporters feared Dunn — and unless they were attacking Bao as viciously I don’t think that they feared Bao the same way. Unless I see evidence to the contrary, Bao was the actual spoiler between the two of them — even if he did get more votes.
I’ll happily support Bao if he wins, but I don’t think that that’s the way to bet. Correa has to love this result, because the only way that he could feel safe in office is to run against a Republican like Peterson, against whom he could call on the loyalties of easily gulled Democrats, rather than against a progressive/liberal reformer like Bao or Dunn. My personal rule is going to be that when a candidate wins a primary largely through the support of those sorts of expenditures, and when they didn’t take aggressive steps to disavow and attack such “help,” they don’t warrant my support in November and they don’t deserve the presumption of the right to stay in office that someone elected on the basis of Democratic support warrants.
47th Congressional
Al Lowenthal had just under 66% of the vote; his 2014 opponent, Andy Whallon, had just over 22%. Lowenthal did 9% worse and Whallon 8% better within OC.
48th Congressional
|
Dana almost doubles up Savary here, who in turn doubles up Banuelos. So, a rematch of 2014 — but with a more Democratic electorate. Given his district, Dana is not likely in too much trouble even if he supports Trump — but who knows, I guess it’s worth a shot!
49th Congressional
|
Doug Applegate is not all that far behind Darrell Issa in the OC balloting! But look at the other part — the big majority — of this district!
| Candidate | Votes | Percent | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Doug Applegate (Party Preference: DEM) |
50,065 |
45.4%
|
|
| * | Darrell Issa (Party Preference: REP) |
56,446 |
51.2%
|
| Ryan Glenn Wingo (Party Preference: NPP) |
3,778 |
3.4%
|
|
| Candidate | Votes | Percent | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Doug Applegate (Party Preference: DEM) |
11,351 |
38.6%
|
|
| * | Darrell Issa (Party Preference: REP) |
16,931 |
57.6%
|
| Ryan Glenn Wingo (Party Preference: NPP) |
1,113 |
3.8%
|
|
| Candidate | Votes | Percent | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Doug Applegate (Party Preference: DEM) |
38,714 |
47.9%
|
|
| * | Darrell Issa (Party Preference: REP) |
39,515 |
48.8%
|
| Ryan Glenn Wingo (Party Preference: NPP) |
2,665 |
3.3%
|
|
The fact that Issa could, if necessary, build every voter in the district a swimming pool suggests that Issa is probably going to win this thing — but all of the mailers and ads in the world can’t change their minds if they’re sick of the incumbent and his bullshit. This one bears some real scrutiny. AD-73 Democrats — you don’t have much of anything else going on, so maybe this should be your obsession for the next five months! That really would be headline news!
Next up in Run 3
— State Legislative Races and, time permitting, everything else as well!
You get a lot less junk mail and robocalls when you’re registered Green, and I only received 11 big, glossy mailers. (Saved them for entertainment.)
7 of the 11 were for Lou. 6 were hit pieces against Joe Dunn, all paid for by Correa for Congress. IEC’s weren’t even part of what I received. I think we’re looking at some very gullible Dem voters.
I’ve been boycotting these “top two” partisan elections whenever there was no “third” party to vote for, but Lou pissed me off enough that I had to vote for Joe.
Wow — I’d heard that there were a bunch of IEs, but I’m not in the district. Vern, what arrived at your place?
Shit, I know I shoulda saved em and looked at em closely, but there were just so many Lou flyers, a few a day, everyone just threw em out.
And then, infuriatingly (have I mentioned?) most of the Joe Dunn ones had Lou’s face on them, before you ever saw Joe. (Front – who do parents call when they’re worried about environmental hazards by their school?” Back – big lovable smiling Lou face, with caption “Not Lou – he was bad on bla bla bla, took money from bla bla bla” … open it up if a working parent has the fucking time … Picture of Joe “he was so great on this bla bla bla”)
Stupidest mailers ever.
I know — I just don’t think that that was the biggest factor. The support of conservative and Republican interests was such a big factor that talking about that sort of mistake — or even the omitted ballot statement — misses the main point, even if true..
Lynn Schott only got on the Irvine City Council in the most recent cycle. She has no “base” outside of Irvine – and Irvine councilcritters have a terrible track record running for higher office.
I still wonder how this Peterson dude did so well … what went under our radars?
Well, the district does have a not-insignificant amount of Republicans — and they broke strongly for Peterson over Schott. (Not to mention against Contreras and poor Rudy Gaona.) I had expected a more even split. And Lou’s getting 40% was unexpectedly high — which just attests to the firehose of corporate money behind him being THAT effective.
Keep an eye on Bao’s numbers, though, I’m telling you.
She was brought up in the district, would be her retort.
It is time for Democrats to unite behind Lou Correa. His commitment to the community is unparalleled. I think it is naive to believe that someone who speaks a good game, is more of a true Democrat than Lou. Lou’s district office and constituent service work was by far the best of all of the three Democrats in the race. All respect to Joe and Bao, but the true man of the people the real progressive because he works for the people is Lou Correa. He will make an excellent Congressman and I am proud to have voted for him.
I take it that you’ve never read a single word of the substantive case that we’ve made against Lou. That’s your right, but it gives context to your opinions.
Do you EVER tire of being a condescending bastard?
And you wonder why people don’t like you …..
When people don’t like me, I don’t usually have to wonder about it at all: I’m willing to stand up for what’s right and I’m pretty good at it. People who are sellouts, scoundrels, or dyspeptic assholes like you don’t like that.
My response to Katherine is straightforward. I disagree with her (that’s implied), we’ve written a lot about why that is on this blog, she doesn’t seem to be aware of it (given that she doesn’t engage any of it), and that leads me (and others, not including you) to take her comments less seriously than if she was aware of and engaged those criticisms.
That took me a whole bunch of words to answer your succinct yet bullshit attacks. I know that you don’t like it when I go on for so long; I can think of at least one cause for that that can readily be removed.
He’ll do fine. It’s not an existential struggle like Life vs. Trump.
And he’s only marginally better than a Republican.
He won’t do “fine,” but if elected most of us will pretend that he is. He’ll be another treacherous Joe Baca. — who I believe is now out as a Republican.
UPDATE 1
Two days after election night, we can start to get a sense of how the post-election night counting might take shape. Here’s where things stand regarding post-election day (run 9) ballots left to count:
Bao started out with about a 550-vote deficit to Peterson as of the official close of balloting. The next day, he had cut that down to 450 votes. Thursday, the margin was back up to about 500. All of those are post-election processed VBM ballots.
This difference is may be due to the mix of ballots received. The difference between Run 9 and Run 10 on Wednesday is about 4,000 precinct ballots added to the totals as well as 15,000 later-processed absentees. (These figures don’t seem to be counted in the “What’s Left to Count” numbers, suggesting that they were probably mop up work from Election Day itself.)
Thursday saw only about 300 precinct (and early voting) ballots added — also not part of the “Left to Count” figures — as well as about 22,000 later-processed absentees. Bao did better in the precinct voting and Peterson did better in the absentees. Peterson started out with a 1335 lead over Bao in VBM-only ballots (run 2); by the end of Tuesday’s last tally of precinct ballots Bao had caught up to a deficit of 552.
What probably matters most now to Bao are provisional ballots.
About 200,000 ballots are left to count countywide, 61,370 of which are provisionals. We’d expect about 1/6 of the county to be in CA-46 if the population figures were evenly distributed, but they aren’t, with CA-46 having by far the lowest voter pool. So, of the roughly 148,000 Vote-by-Mail ballots of different flavors left to count, we can estimate that only about 10% — 15,000 — belong to CA-46. (That is, again, a guess.)
However, a greater proportion of the ballots cast in CA-46 would likely be provisional ballots — which often include renters. As an initial estimate, let’s guess that these factors offset each other and that the number of provisionals left in CA-46 is about 10,000. Not all of those, by any means, will qualify; time permitting, I plan to go back and look at what proportion generally do. It’s certainly something worth looking at during ballot counting.
We might expect Peterson to get a small gain from those 15,000 or so VBM ballots — perhaps 70% of which (being charitable) will be filled out for the race, with 70% of those votes going to other candidates. (Let’s presume for now that the however-many paper ballots are in CA-46 will be a wash.) Let’s presume that Peterson gets about a 300-vote advantage from those, bringing his margin to 800 votes.
Let’s say that 40% of the provisionals get approved, which brings us down to 4,000. My guess is that Correa gets half of them and Dunn and the others get 1,000. Among those 1000 approved provisionals divided between Bao and Peterson, can Bao get 90% of that split? My guess is: he could — I don’t think that Peterson’s voters tended to vote using provisional ballots.
These figures are what we in the stats trade call “wild-ass guesses” — designed more to show people how an analysis might go forward rather than to home in on a specific correct result. But — I think that it’s reasonable to estimate that by the time counting is over, it the final margin could be very very close.
*Why do we have the feeling that Joe Dunn is going to make the run off against Lou?
We must be mental…except that 200,000 ballots still are not counted and it would only
take 3,000 of those to be for Joe….for him to make the run-off against Lou. Probably just pixie dust in our eyes….
I dunno — I’m just going to sit here and enjoy it while it lasts.