Do Dems have any ideas beyond identity politics and impeach Trump?
2
Top two was a really bad choice in voting reform. The voter Intent was probably toward an instant runoff kind of system. That kind of system allows people to make protest votes in a "safe" way. Including third party and small money candidate votes. It avoids what the voters are waking up to here...massive support for multiple candidates actually favoring the least popular candidate. But the parties themselves probably knew this. They want to maintain two party control and a system that strongly pushes voters to fall in line with the party elite.
Democrats have shown themselves to be strategically impaired. OR have they? Bear in mind the democratic party elite are owned and run by the financial elite. If the party gets over-run by candidates who actually represent their constituents and have no allegiance to the party money machine, the financial elite could lose control of the party. I'm pretty sure they would rather lose races than lose control of the party machinery. Thus their actual aim and function is to maintain 'establishment' control and prevent democracy oriented, campaign-finance-reform oriented candidates from succeeding.
It would be interesting to see what might happen in the senate primary in an instant runoff scenario. Feinstein is intensely disliked by progressives with good reason. But democratic voters have to be wary of some freak result if their votes are too divided. Ending up with a nazi and a foaming at the mouth property over people libertarian.
2
The open primary elections experience in State of California , is indeed one great beginning to redirect a divisive system of elections , to unite our country on major national and local issues . The dysfunctional Congress led by ideological agenda , during last few decades has hurt these United States hugely . Evidently has only hurt big time, the silent majority of the poor, economic disadvantaged folks and decline of millions of folks in the Middle class . Adversely impacting up on economic opportunities and growth rate , Infrastructure rebuilding and replacement programs , expansion of the educational and technological system improvements , affordable healthcare costs and coverage , immigration reforms , environmental protection and climate change , including the Judicial system . What do you think ?
1
With impeachment fever, Metoo Movement, Resistance Movement, Pussyhat Project, open borders, sanctuary cities, marijuana legalization, and even more bonds measures were going full Stormy in California!
We are gonna even elect MS-13 loving Pelosi in a landslide! Just you watch!
3
Haven't seen Dems this giddy since, oh, November 7, 2016.
1
They Dems ate their own.. It will be remembered as the feast of the epiphany. Congressional District 4 is a perfect example. Two democrats who didn't get the democratic nomination and endorsement refused to get off of the ballot. They both lied to a lot of people about doing so, and now they will split the vote assuring a water carrying trumpster Tom McKlintock's victory. Dems are just not very bright.
1
Even though I tend vote blue (and after the past year-and-a-half, I'm not bothering to read the red side's campaign statements), and I'm in a deep blue section of this blue state, I still believe in voting anyway.
...and so I did.
Yes, the election may still go against me, as they sometimes do (2016 standing-out in my mind especially).
However, it is (still) a democracy, despite attempts to circumvent that, whether from Russia or the President's Twitter finger.
And as we've all learned the hard way, those "protest votes" add-up...
2
I think The New York Times is doing the public a disservice by referring to the Top-Two / Non-Partisan Primary in California by the pejorative term you have used. It was a decision of the people of the state some eight years ago, to address problems in governance in the state. The evidence so far suggests it has been effective. The designation you have used (repeatedly) belittles their efforts.
2
California registered voter speaking here--something very fishy is going on. I spent all morning reading the great dry stack of election literature which the city and the state and the candidates send to registered voters. Reading your article now, I was astounded to find that former SF mayor Gavin Newsom was running for the governor of California. Newsom appears on the facsimile ballot in the San Francisco city guide, and there only, and he gets no more than a one-line mention in the California state guide. For Antonio Villaraigosa, just the same--and those are two of the three top runners in the polls mentioned by Jenny Medina. It's possible, I supposed, that Newsom and Villaraigosa just missed the deadline to submit candidate statements to the state guide--but in that case, how could they be leading in the polls? I hope your 30 journalists in California will drill into this a little deeper and get to the bottom of what is going on here.
2
people should vote as God would will them to vote... follow your heart, mind and soul
2
It would be such beautiful California-style karma if the only folks on the ballot this fall are Republicans.
3
People who believe in democracy and want democracy and know how valuable it is will indeed not only vote, but urge everyone else to vote also.
i voted last week. the amount of heavy paper junk mail was the reason. since last tuesday the daily amount has doubled. it does not even reach the inner sanctum.
on the plus side the post office is taking ballots postage free this time. i guess next election trump will have decided that californians have cheated his precious post office and require triple postage or something stupid cause stupid is his default position.
5
Is this yet another Democrat strategy designed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory?
3
We can only hope. Defeat is what’s needed until Dems become less unhinged.
For every complex problem, it is said, there is a simple solution, which is wrong. Well, here's a simple solution that is simple but goes a considerable distance to fixing some of the problems of 1-2 primaries: Let registered Democrats vote to choose the Democratic candidate -- registered Republicans to choose the Republican -- etc. Those who choose to be independent, fine! Let them vote in November -- but I see no reason for them to have a say in who my party's candidate will be.
5
I hope to see a preponderance of Democrats at the top of the ticket races, and I am hopeful that that will result in a huge turn out in November. As for the Congressional races, if it looks like two Republicans could come out ahead in the Primary, go with the state Democratic party recommendation .
2
The problem with Democrats is that they are too smart for their own good. They want to argue fine points of policy, and make theoretical debates like the eggheads on the High School debate team, when they don't have any real power yet worth debating.
There is a good chance that Democrats will revert true to their 2016 form, divide their vote sufficiently in the stubborn belief that "their" progressive, establishment, whatever, candidate is the absolute superior candidate, and hand races to Republicans.
Perhaps we'll even be able to say by tomorrow that the House will remain in Republican hands, given California's primary system -- which I'm guessing was designed and implemented by Democrats...
1
The foolish choice to run multiple Democratic Party candidates, rather than focusing on one effective candidate to defeat incumbent Republican Members of Congress brings to mind the old Will Roger's quote:
"I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat."
That used to be a very funny line. Now, sadly, it's an essential truth.
4
Who decides who the one effective party candidate is? Keep in mind the Democratic party has gotten slaughtered the last 4 elections, and lost 1000 or so seats across the country, along with the House, Senate, and the Presidency. The national parties? The state parties? Not such a great track record. And even now, their answer seems to be the most Republican one with the most money.
1
Why such a stupid way of selecting candidates for the November election? It was sold as a way of having more moderates nominated but all it does is lead to poll watching. Every partisan has to identify the member of ones own party that is polling the best (often with just 15% support due to so many candidates) and vote for that person, to ensure at least one member of the party gets into the final two, regardless of what one thinks of the candidate. If you want a system that tends to select moderate consensus candidates then one exists and is used all over the world: Single Transferable Vote.
The one house seats that needs to be flipped above all is the 22nd Congressional District currently represented by Devin Nunes.
16
Democrats fear Nunes and his relentless pursuit of the truth despite stonewalling and obstruction by Dems in Congress, the DOJ, and the bureaucracy. What are they afraid of?
Not sure I understand. The Dems are stonewalling? Nunes is pursuing the truth? Nunes is doing the WH's bidding. What am I missing?
2
America is demonstrating to the world that democracy, like every other GOOD thing, can be tampered with sufficiently as to make it worthless.
4
As a millennial who went to UCSD, I have concerns about younger voter turnout. Most UC schools run on a quarter system, which means by the time primaries come around tomorrow, it will be the week before their finals, which for many also means moving, and even graduation. I can't imagine most students remembering to vote at such a critical period for them, assuming they've registered at all. If Democrats really want to crank up voter turn out, they need to work more on university campuses, and remind people there that voting takes like 10 min. UC Berkeley is not the only left-wing haven in this state.
2
"by the time primaries come around tomorrow, it will be the week before their finals, which for many also means moving, and even graduation. I can't imagine most students remembering to vote at such a critical period for them..."
Oh, for Pete's sake! What do students think other voters have to worry about? Jobs, kids, etc. If a student can't find 15 minutes to vote (or can't even remember that they have to vote tomorrow), then maybe that student doesn't deserve to live in a democracy.
8
As a student in the late 60s, I voted in every single election. There is no excuse for the college students of today not to vote.
11
They can sign up for a vote by mail ballot that is mailed to your home 4 weeks before the official election. You have time to research the issues via google. I am sure these bright college students could manage that.
1
Honestly, living in Ca my whole life, there will be very little surprise if the Democrats lose seats. Their media has solely consisted of tying the GOP to Trump; the recall election, which is about the gas tax is being pushed as a Trump power grab. Most of my neighbors who usually vote Democratic are angry that the LA mayor, famous for his corruption,and children out of wedlock while married/in office is being touted by Obama. They are not impressed with newsom, either who had his own sex scandal,and did not wat to stay around to do his job. Chiang is the best qualified, but will not finish in the top 2. The judges, etc. are even worse-so many up , so little information. Sick of the tv ads, and incessant robocalls, and susan Rubios thugs calling 6-7 times a day.
5
My Republican rep will probably win again. However, the Democratic candidate running against him has been a strong presence during the run for the seat. We have seen more of her than our rep who ducks town halls. She isn’t a Trump rubber stamp. Win or lose the politics in this district have become better.
3
The U.S. Census Bureau now publishes an annual poverty report titled the Supplemental Poverty Measure that takes regional cost of living into account. The report is changing perceptions regarding which states are rich and which are poor. The most recent report shows that California is by far the poorest state, with 23.8 percent of its residents below poverty level. The poverty rate in often maligned Mississippi is 16.9.
However, California’s poverty rate may have little impact the polls because, lower- and middle-income Californians are fleeing the state. According to data from the American Community Survey, from 2007 to 2016, about 5 million people moved to California from other states, while about 6 million left California. The Los Angeles Times recently reported, “For those making $40,000 to $49,999, for instance, the net loss of population is 15,403 residents since 2007. The loss is 22,754 residents in the $30,000 to $39,999 range, then more than doubles to 46,318 residents in the $20,000 to $29,999 range.” California population is still growing only because the exodus of lower- and medium income Californians is offset by the arrival of undocumented immigrants attracted by the state’s sanctuary policies.
Source: The Supplemental Poverty Measure: 2016, Appendix Table A-5: Number and Percentage of People in Poverty by State Using 3-Year Average Over: 2014, 2015, and 2016.
https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2017/demo...
5
Rohrabacher is the one Paul Ryan was joking about being on Russias payroll with Trump before the election. He swore all his buddies to secrecy but the tape was in the public in 7 seconds.
5
As a proud California voter, I really like the current primary and district-boundary setting protocols for voting. However, the former is clearly a double-edged sword.
I would be considered fairly left-wing in the political spectrum, save in Berkeley (or at a Bernie caucus) where the distribution is artificially shifted by self-selection. I am happy to support left-leaning people who can get things done - including those some might consider "corporatist", or others some might consider "overly simplistic extreme leftists" - just convince me based on your policy proposals and who you are as a person. The "Jungle primary" allows that to happen, and makes it easier for third party candidates to jump in as well.
However, it also makes it easier for candidates driven by ego or monied interests to buy their way in, and it facilitates the kind of partisan auto-cannibalism that gave us Trump: so many candidates from a particular party run, that the one most would agree is least desirable actually wins.
On balance, I think that our system is a good thing - but it relies on a level of maturity that will occasionally be lacking, to ill effect (as we see in some of these districts mentioned in the article).
From my perspective, the time for purity tests is far behind us, and all that matters now is electing Democrats in November 2018. If I only agree with a Democratic candidate 80% of the time, that is a vastly better percentage than any Republican who could be elected.
5
What a stupid primary system. I guess Democrats can never miss an opportunity to lose sure thing elections. Always looking for new and ingenious ways to put Republicans into power.
It was the Republicans who invented this monstrosity in the hope of having both candidats in the general election being Republicans.
3
My voter guide doesn't have Gavin Newsom as a candidate, and this is in liberal educated Marin. Good lord! OK, they actually do have him as a candidate placed around #20 on the list, but they have no candidate statement or photo of him like everyone else.
From what I read the candidate has to pay to be included in the voter pamphlet, which I think is not voter friendly. I would like to see all candidates statements in one place.
1
Why are the media outlets obsessed with the term "jungle primary"?
It's just a top-two primary, pretty straightforward concept.
Settle down and stop trying to make this sound like some exotic, complicated process.
22
It's difficult to imagine that my fellow Californians are unaware of tomorrow's primary elections -- for months I have received multiple daily emails from candidates and elected officials supporting candidates, in addition to mailed flyers and non-stop ads on television.
I just hope that the tragedy of millions of meaningless votes cast for Hillary last November will not deter voters from showing up at the polls.
10
The state of California is the most interesting place to live. Not necessarily for its Mediterranean climate. What makes California interesting are its legislators at every government level. So far Mr. Newsom seems to be in position to be the next governor of the state. Which is only fitting.
Allow me to illustrate. There are a few constants in the universe, gravity being one of them. And you guessed it, In California, legislators are the most extreme form of gravity, black holes. In the California legislative universe not even the most energetic and logical idea escapes the point of singularity. It is intellectually punishing and dense! The City of Los Angeles recently adopted an "Affordable Housing Linkage Fee Ordinance" charging additional fees for every dwelling unit permitted to be built in order to provide funding for affordable housing.
At this point logic breaks down, city legislators believe that charging additional fees and making the construction of housing more expensive will create an environment for affordable housing to emerge.
5
PLEASE stop calling it a ‘jungle’ primary that’s inappropriate on many levels. Try ‘top two’ or ‘non-partisan’.
It will leave us with a contest between contenders, not parties.
Ironically, i’m voting for Chiang — hope that works out.
10
The name jungle does apply because the candidates are trying to devour one another, till only one person is standing. That means Democrats clawing at each other, because they feel if only 1 GOP candidate is on the ballot, they will win in a cakewalk.
2
This informative article gives one the strong impression that political life in this country is of the utmost importance.
The tone here seems to be one of urgent information sharing, full of detailed analysis, to beckon citizen interest and participation in politics...a good antidote to our usual national apathy when it comes to casting a ballot during the midterm electoral season.
I have the distinct impression that this article is written to reach younger voters especially; as though reading the information presented is a really "cool" thing to be involved with.
I sure hope they do feel that way, and carry through by voting.
Good job, New York Times!
1
Watch the Democrat, liberal and progressives candidates try to outdo each other as they pander to every special interest group under the sun in California. Political correctness and big government will be the bane of a once great state.
12
Good thing you don’t live here, isn’t it!
8
Pretty hilarious, coming as it does from a right-winger of upstate New York. By the way, and just FYI, California's turned in a budget on time for the last several years, run surpluses, and stashed billions away for a rainy day, all while getting massive things done on water, public transport, medical care and education, and pension reform.
All while upholding a well-deserved digit to one Donald John Trump.
Pity that the Republican Congress cnnot say one-tenth so much.
19
Going over my voting materials now. One thing is for sure, I will NOT be voting for any Republicans.
50
The calfornia primary system was created by progressives for progressives. Now they are running scared because they cannot think things through. Similarly, the accompanying article briefly mentions Asian who voted against affirmative action because it unfairly targets their children for discrimination. Ahh, you Californians with all your homeless masses that you deny basic restroom priveleges to. Yes, you are morally superior, in your minds that is.
5
Well, you may have a point there. But given that we know the "jungle primary," like rational reapportionment, is the legacy of some guy name Ah-nuld Schwarzenegger, we can at least argue for intellectual superiority.
Considerable amounts, actually.
2
Wrong! It was the brain child of the California Republican Party.
2
I am mystified that the Democrats did not anticipate a potential disaster with too many candidates splitting the vote, thus giving these races to Republicans and change this crazy system well ahead of the midterms. Also, what is going on with Democrats getting rid of the super delegates well ahead of 2020? Haven't they gotton the message even now that manipulating our democratic electoral system as they did in 2016 to ensure that their favored candidate was nominated has alienated many independent voters? And as for states that do not allow independent voters to vote in the primaries, can't they count? Don't they realize that independents are a huge cohort of voters? Looks like they are heading for electoral defeats that should never happen.
3
If I remember correctly there were 37 candidates for US Senate and 32 candidates for CA Governor on the ballot.
1
Let's hope CA adds major heft to a Democrat uprising in November.
12
Not if they tear each other apart and pit northern CA vs southern Ca vs the farming/inland areas.
California has a misguided primary election process
The state should not dictate how the political parties choose their candidate for the general election ballotl.
It is even more important to implement a ranked voting system so that the winner in the fall election can rightfully claim a majority victory over ALL the alternatives
6
What I can’t figure out is why my son and I did not receive any election materials when we both vote in every election. But we did receive a TON of “Taxpayer Alerts - vote no, vote yes, promises, and official voting material for my beloved, dearly departed Dad who died two years ago.
2
You are right; what they should do is simply kill all partisan labels for office. The sooner we eliminate the power of the two parties, the better off we will all be.
It will be interesting to see if this primary results in a skewed one-sided ballot, perhaps with no Democrats on it, if Californians will still think this chaotic "jungle primary" is a good idea. It deserves to de on the political junk heap of failed ideas.
21
You're not a Californian. Our primary is not your concern. The NYT's ludicrous hyping of the political horse race is tedious and in the case of California breathtakingly off-base.
10
The total number of Democratic members of the house from California has increased by six since 2003. The top two primary has been wildly successful. The CA legislature has also been a model of productive law making since top two. You are 100% wrong about the effects of top two primaries.
1
You fail to cover the candidacy of John Chiang and thereby do a diservice to your readers. The other candidates are just celebrities.
19
Delaine Eastin, too. Same old, same old horse race coverage.
2
Good luck California. The eyes of the nation and the world are upon you. Get out and vote!
11
WE THE PEOPLE are counting on you, Good People of California! Please, go full Blue and Purple to show the world that there are still honorable, smart people in OUR United States of America.
The Con Don and his Robber Baron friends do NOT represent the vast majority of Americans. Help make it crystal clear to our allies - and enemies - around the world that WE THE PEOPLE will purge the Robber Baron democracy-destroyers from OUR governments at all levels and restore/preserve OUR standing as honorable people who want relative peace and prosperity.
40
I will be voting ALL BLUE tomorrow.
17
Democrats are making it hard to keep voting democratic when they allow crooks like Antonio V. to run as a Democrat, when he tried just a few years ago to set up his own party including GOP voters. Plus his personal and political corruption make him almost as bad as Trump.
3
the california solution to almost every problem is to raise taxes which forces the retired to live in near poverty or move to another state
15
That is a rather broad, untrue statement. The kind of thing oft-repeated on right wing media that becomes accepted, conventional wisdom.
Like tax cuts create jobs.
24
Blame Schwarzenegger, Reagan and their Robber Baron brethren for privatizing everything, doling out corporate welfare and corporate tax havens for the wealthiest. Californians got toll roads and other indirect taxes to compensate. Voters can change that if they purge Robber Barons from elected office.
25
Nonsense. There are safety nets for poorer people here, something the Republicans try to get rid of at every turn, so they can give more money to the wealthy. I'm VOTING for the DEMOCRATS!! I am so SICK of the Republicans and their bigotry.
18
Reality Check make voting manditory .Person cant vote unless they are citzen or they not felon. Citzen bill of rights should be if dont vote they loose right to be citzen period.And in case the voter doesnt want to vote for those who are running they must sustain an it go recorded as so to show in resullts
2
I see. So, a "felon" to you is not a citizen, given that "if dont vote they loose right to be citzen period".
May I suggest that before you strip citizens of their rights that you at least learn to spell the word correctly.
14
Mandatory voting is a dreadful idea that rears its ugly head every cycle now. Forcing the ill-informed, biased, uncaring, and disinterested to the polls is not a recipe for better elections or candidates. People don't know when the election is, "know" about a candidate from social media, will select solely based on party label, "learn" about critical issues from some vulgar skit by comedians on TV - and you think even more people with that level of involvement should be forced to vote? Heaven help us all!
17
If I could lose my obligation to pay taxes with my citizenship, and there were a "half-way" citizenship that maintained my passport, I would be up for that.
3
The Battle Royale is the 25th District, north of Los Angeles where Katie Hill, Bryan Caforio, and Jesse Phoenix are all highly qualified candidates with parallel policy proposals coming from all three offices; competing for a spot against the incumbent republican Steve Knight, the only Republican running.
KH is the best organized with a domestic coalition of women's rights and LGBT advocates knocking on doors and utilizing phone banks. JP has celebrity backer Patton Oswald and a fervent following from outside the district on the internet. BC has his DCCC connections.
Unfortunately BC has gone negative and sends out attack ads against the leading contender who is KH according to the polling firm FM3. Resultantly his funding is drying up and he posted numbers of money taken in as one third of the object of his derision when the $75,000 loan he made to his campaign out of his own pockets is not counted.
The JP gang is a dedicated bunch and ate the least likely to be compelled to change their votes. I have been knocking on doors within view of her headquarters (it's what I do) on behalf of KH and there was one sign, three supporters and nobody else has even heard of her out of the hundred conversations I had with voters. There has been ten percent of the canvassing when comparing flyers at houses previously owned by Democrats and are currently unoccupied; between JP and KH. BC has next to nobody knocking on doors. I have seen one flyer in the thousands of homes I have worked.
4
Vote-splitting is the primary argument against jungle primaries. The idea is simple. 60% of the vote split across 6 Blue candidates leads to 10% per candidate. 2 Red candidates will split the other 40% and gain 20% per candidate. Even though Republicans are a minority, they win regardless. Pick your flavor. This is a considerable risk for Democrats today.
If you could eliminate vote-splitting, jungle primaries would be awesome. Open primaries are one alternative but I have my concerns there as well. This is where independent voters are allowed to vote in either party's primary. Every one gets one vote. Just choose the race where you want to participate. You don't have to become affiliated with either party. This allows for a more independent representation to win primaries within the major parties. Not necessarily moderate but unaffiliated opinions.
The problem as always: Major parties enact procedural barriers to keep independent candidates off the ballot or suppress them when they do make the ballot. Witness Bernie Sanders. Trusting major parties is bad idea if you favor representational government. Jungle primaries were a creative solution but the system obviously still needs some work. You need to somehow limit the number of candidates from any one politic position without relying on the parties. That's tough.
13
"Open primaries are one alternative but I have my concerns there as well. This is where independent voters are allowed to vote in either party's primary. Every one gets one vote."
This is in fact how my state primaries work. Mass is a blue state, but I am one of the 51% of voters here who are registered Independent. We choose our ballot, R or D at the polls. It's pretty smart, because the possibility exists for the primary winners to be not the candidate the party backed, but the candidate that can actually win Independent votes in November. Bernie only lost here by 1.5%. A couple of Dem incumbents (Clinton superdelegates too) who usually run unopposed are getting primaried this year and are actually having to run some tough races they didn't expect to have. This makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside.
So long as the Dem elites keep pulling their nonsense about trampling on the popular candidates and what the common people want I am happy if they lose. If it takes burning this country to the ground to get rid of all of them and their oligarch masters, then that's fine with me, as it can then be rebuilt anew.
1
The California "voting packets" arrived in the mail about a month ago. It's still sitting on the seat of my car in a stack of envelopes full of bills. The old folks seem to know or care about voting, the younger ones don't have the slightest interest.
During the past 5 years the older folks have been trying to stop the water tunnel project here in the Sacramento river delta. All over the countryside are signs, mostly in front yards, saying "STOP THE TUNNELS." But all the activism was for nothing, Governor Brown recently announcing the tunnels would be built anyway. Everyone knows diverting the water will damage the ecosystem but our "vote" counted for nothing.
In November 2016 we dutifully voted in the presidential election. To my great surprise, the polling place was nearly empty. There were as many election officials as there were voters. Because of the Electoral College, my vote counted for absolutely nothing. We awoke the next morning to our worst nightmare, which continues today:
Our president just announced he has the power to pardon himself. That's got to be just about the dumbest thing I ever heard. My father was a bureaucrat and staunch Republican but if he was alive today he would be furious. He didn't like Nixon, but for all Nixon's failings he had dignity, knowledge, experience, and even a little compassion. At least compared to what we have now, which is none of the above.
55