CA-Sen: California Quake

[Pouring Rain and Blairing Music]

So the way it looks now, there's roughly 4 declared Dems (Harris, Villaraigosa, Steyer, Sanchez), and zero Republicans.

Sundheim, Chavez and Ose seem to be the most likely picks for Republicans, but given the state and climate they'll get one spot in the general at best. As long as the DSCC makes sure Harris makes it to the general, then all's good.

Ose couldn't beat Bera in CA-07 last year. I don't think that he'll be a serious contender.

[Pouring Rain and Blairing Music]

Hmmm... Harris vs. Villaraigosa 1-on-1 with 1 major GOP candidate does probably lead to a Harris vs. GOP general.  Harris vs. Villaraigosa with 2 major GOP candidats is probably a Harris vs. Villaraigosa general.  If a 3rd Dem with strong credentials gets in, time to worry about an all GOP general.

I think he is betting on a 2 Dem general and higher Hispanic turnout in 2016 vs. 2018 is drawing him in now.

I don't think any other credible Dem is stupid enough to jump in against Harris and Villaraigosa. Otherwise they'll have to face John Burton's wrath.... LOL!

In the two open-seat statewide elections in 2014 (SecState and Comptroller), the Green candidate received 6% of the vote in both, leading me to suspect that this may occur in a Senate race as well. No Green candidate would fear John Burton's wrath.

To be honest, I kinda doubt either party will be able to keep the field limited to just 2 serious candidates -- especially the Republicans, where the possibilities are weaker and unlikelier to clear. But I don't think Harris and Villaraigosa will be able to keep all 38 Democratic Congressmen from California from running for US Senate, and that's without speaking of sundry state legislators, businessmen, mayors, and randos. It's a big state. There's a lot of ambition.

I can definitely see a few Reps running (Sanchez and maybe Schiff?). I don't think that most state legislators would be taken seriously compared to mayors, statewide officeholders, and congress members. That isn't to say that none of them will run and get a few percent here and there.

[Pouring Rain and Blairing Music]

Republican chances here are very low, but the NRSC basically has two ways to attack this race. Way 1 is to find some very good, probably self-funding Republican candidate, clear the Republican field, and then hope they can beat Harris in the general election. This is very doubtful. Way 2 is to find two candidates, geographically disparate, one establishment and one TP, and then hope they split the vote evenly enough that they can keep Harris out. This is a long-shot, but I'm quite confident it's less of a longshot than trying to beat Harris head-on like an elephant is. If the NRSC is going with Way 1, a Tim Donnelly candidacy is a problem to be dealt with; if they're going with Way 2, he's just what the doctor ordered. A tiny bit less than half the GOP love him, and a tiny bit more than half hate him. He can split the vote with Swearengin, get both of them to November, and then send her to the Senate.

Tim Donnelly could only poll about 15% in the 2014 gubernatorial primary. With a more competent mainstream opponent, I think he'd be lucky to reach 15% again. I don't think that Donnelly would make the top two, especially if there are 2 decent Democrats running (If they could each get about 25%, they would still beat Donnelly and one would place in the top two against the more mainstream Republican.

Here's the 2014 Primary:
https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?fips=6&year=2014&f=0&off=5&elect=5

[Pouring Rain and Blairing Music]

I think Donnelly could do better if his establishment Republican opponent wasn't trying to attack him during the primary, but you do have a point that there are better candidates out there. Well, the CAGOP has to deal with the cards it's been dealt.

The big problem of the 2014 gubernatorial primary was the 6% that went to minor Republican candidates. That can't be allowed to be repeated. Open Campaigns is down right now, so I can't look up how it is geographically that Daniel Evans performed in the 2014 Comptroller open primary, which was less than a percentage point off from being perfect.

I found a site called "Our Campaigns," which had the results here: http://www.ourcampaigns.com/RaceDetail.html?RaceID=726292

Ashley Swearengin won with only 24.79% compared with Daniel Evans's 4th place finish with 21.05%. That race was a mess. It is possible that there could be a repeat, but I kind of doubt that there will be as many candidates by the time the filing date comes around. If more candidates stay in, the winner might not break 20%.

[Pouring Rain and Blairing Music]

I think Donnelly could do better if his establishment Republican opponent wasn't trying to attack him during the primary, but you do have a point that there are better candidates out there. Well, the CAGOP has to deal with the cards it's been dealt.

The big problem of the 2014 gubernatorial primary was the 6% that went to minor Republican candidates. That can't be allowed to be repeated. Open Campaigns is down right now, so I can't look up how it is geographically that Daniel Evans performed in the 2014 Comptroller open primary, which was less than a percentage point off from being perfect.

I found a site called "Our Campaigns," which had the results here: http://www.ourcampaigns.com/RaceDetail.html?RaceID=726292

Ashley Swearengin won with only 24.79% compared with Daniel Evans's 4th place finish with 21.05%. That race was a mess. It is possible that there could be a repeat, but I kind of doubt that there will be as many candidates by the time the filing date comes around. If more candidates stay in, the winner might not break 20%.

What needs to happen for Republicans is to run one Republican from the north/central valley and another from the south, all in a low turnout year (like CA 2014).

Theoretically, If Swearengin ran again without Evans, she should pick up the most support from the northeast corner, which Evans swept. Then run a Republican like Kevin Faulconer (RINO alert) who has the ability to win in usually Democratic San Diego, and would assumedly perform well in Orange County. Abysmal turnout in Los Angeles, throw in a Green Party/more random Democrats to siphon off Bay Area support, and bam, you've got yourself a R vs R election.

Faulconer won't run, since he'll be seeking reelection in 2016. Swearengin v. DeMaio (for example) would be absolutely fantastic, since we'd also get to take revenge on Scott Peters' horrible smear campaign last year. But I don't think any prominent San Diego or Orange County Republicans are running.

The question, to some extent, is whether Donnelly can repeat Evans' performance from 2014. In the gubernatorial race, due to the preponderance of minor candidates, Jerry Brown's popularity, and the fact that they were largely attacking each other, the two main Republican candidates combined for only 33% of the vote. That number will be much greater in 2016, since they will have an incentive to cooperate and no popular Democratic incumbent running; it should be 45-46% at the least, assuming minor candidates can be kept out. So Donnelly should be able to make it into the low 20s, which could be enough assuming the Democratic vote is split right.

That is a fair point. It was basically a fight for the right to be the sacrificial lamb and people were generally happy with Brown; the Controller's seat was open. The seemingly minor candidates could be beneficial for either party. In the controller's race, they held about 10% and they got 11% in the governor's race. That's a lot if we're looking at the top two getting in the low to mid twenties.