CA-Sen: California Quake

[RogueBeaver]

Sanchez will decide in a few months.

[Negusa Nagast 🚀]

Harris/Sanchez replacing Boxer/Feinstein would be great.

Doubt it would be long term like the current pair.

Well of course not. Harris will have to be replaced in 2024 after she's elected President.

[tallguy23]

This is totally Harris' to lose. The state and national Democratic establishment is pretty united behind her.

Villaraigosa is still considered a joke here in LA. In fact, it was reported a few years ago that he only spent about 11% of his time working as mayor. He was always traveling somewhere or at a party/event.

http://www.laweekly.com/news/how-mayor-villaraigosa-spends-his-16-hour-days-2155722

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Need another woman to replace Feinstein when she retires.

Nobody else really stands out, except for maybe Loretta Sanchez. She's moderate relative to the delegation but could pull a Gillibrand and slide left if she were to get it.

Gillibrand wasn't in a D+9.

[IceSpear]

Need another woman to replace Feinstein when she retires.

Nobody else really stands out, except for maybe Loretta Sanchez. She's moderate relative to the delegation but could pull a Gillibrand and slide left if she were to get it.

Gillibrand wasn't in a D+9.

Sanchez doesn't actually vote like a blue dog though.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Need another woman to replace Feinstein when she retires.

Nobody else really stands out, except for maybe Loretta Sanchez. She's moderate relative to the delegation but could pull a Gillibrand and slide left if she were to get it.

Gillibrand wasn't in a D+9.

Sanchez doesn't actually vote like a blue dog though.

Well, she feels some sort of loyalty to the much hated group. And her voting record is way more conservative than her sister.

[smoltchanov]

Need another woman to replace Feinstein when she retires.

Nobody else really stands out, except for maybe Loretta Sanchez. She's moderate relative to the delegation but could pull a Gillibrand and slide left if she were to get it.

Gillibrand wasn't in a D+9.

Sanchez doesn't actually vote like a blue dog though.

Absolutely. She votes as a pragmatic moderate liberal. There is even such notion as "California's Blue Dog"... Among Democratic congressmen from California only Costa is more or less REAL Blue Dog, and even he is much less conservative then Blue Dogs of recent past. In fact even Peterson (MN-07), who is frequently called "the most conservative House Democrrat" this year is no more then slightly right-of-center populist. Democratic caucus is so liberal now, that it's only slightly less liberal then Republican - conservative...

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Need another woman to replace Feinstein when she retires.

Nobody else really stands out, except for maybe Loretta Sanchez. She's moderate relative to the delegation but could pull a Gillibrand and slide left if she were to get it.

Gillibrand wasn't in a D+9.

Sanchez doesn't actually vote like a blue dog though.

Absolutely. She votes as a pragmatic moderate liberal. There is even such notion as "California's Blue Dog"... Among Democratic congressmen from California only Costa is more or less REAL Blue Dog, and even he is much less conservative then Blue Dogs of recent past. In fact even Peterson (MN-07), who is frequently called "the most conservative House Democrrat" this year is no more then slightly right-of-center populist. Democratic caucus is so liberal now, that it's only slightly less liberal then Republican - conservative...

You make it sound like 35 conservadems didn't just vote to gut Dodd-Frank.

Anyways, membership in the Blue Dog organization is a 100% disqualifier for being US Senator from California.

[smoltchanov]

Need another woman to replace Feinstein when she retires.

Nobody else really stands out, except for maybe Loretta Sanchez. She's moderate relative to the delegation but could pull a Gillibrand and slide left if she were to get it.

Gillibrand wasn't in a D+9.

Sanchez doesn't actually vote like a blue dog though.

Absolutely. She votes as a pragmatic moderate liberal. There is even such notion as "California's Blue Dog"... Among Democratic congressmen from California only Costa is more or less REAL Blue Dog, and even he is much less conservative then Blue Dogs of recent past. In fact even Peterson (MN-07), who is frequently called "the most conservative House Democrrat" this year is no more then slightly right-of-center populist. Democratic caucus is so liberal now, that it's only slightly less liberal then Republican - conservative...

You make it sound like 35 conservadems didn't just vote to gut Dodd-Frank.

Anyways, membership in the Blue Dog organization is a 100% disqualifier for being US Senator from California.

There are no conservadems in House any more. Not even a single one. And i am not absolutely sure that even Barrow, McIntyre and Matheson would absolutely qualify as such. All, who are called this name by ultraliberals, are no less then centrists. 30-40 years ago they would be even considered "somewhat liberal"... Party became MUCH more liberal since that days. And that's the reason it will be in minority most of the time in foreseable future. Not in California of course, but in the country...

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Need another woman to replace Feinstein when she retires.

Nobody else really stands out, except for maybe Loretta Sanchez. She's moderate relative to the delegation but could pull a Gillibrand and slide left if she were to get it.

Gillibrand wasn't in a D+9.

Sanchez doesn't actually vote like a blue dog though.

Absolutely. She votes as a pragmatic moderate liberal. There is even such notion as "California's Blue Dog"... Among Democratic congressmen from California only Costa is more or less REAL Blue Dog, and even he is much less conservative then Blue Dogs of recent past. In fact even Peterson (MN-07), who is frequently called "the most conservative House Democrrat" this year is no more then slightly right-of-center populist. Democratic caucus is so liberal now, that it's only slightly less liberal then Republican - conservative...

You make it sound like 35 conservadems didn't just vote to gut Dodd-Frank.

Anyways, membership in the Blue Dog organization is a 100% disqualifier for being US Senator from California.

There are no conservadems in House any more. Not even a single one. And i am not absolutely sure that even Barrow, McIntyre and Matheson would absolutely qualify as such. All, who are called this name by ultraliberals, are no less then centrists. 30-40 years ago they would be even considered "somewhat liberal"... Party became MUCH more liberal since that days. And that's the reason it will be in minority most of the time in foreseable future. Not in California of course, but in the country...

Huh? There are a number of "Democrats" who vote more often with the Republicans than the Democrats on crucial votes. Just check ProgressivePunch.

[smoltchanov]

Need another woman to replace Feinstein when she retires.

Nobody else really stands out, except for maybe Loretta Sanchez. She's moderate relative to the delegation but could pull a Gillibrand and slide left if she were to get it.

Gillibrand wasn't in a D+9.

Sanchez doesn't actually vote like a blue dog though.

Absolutely. She votes as a pragmatic moderate liberal. There is even such notion as "California's Blue Dog"... Among Democratic congressmen from California only Costa is more or less REAL Blue Dog, and even he is much less conservative then Blue Dogs of recent past. In fact even Peterson (MN-07), who is frequently called "the most conservative House Democrrat" this year is no more then slightly right-of-center populist. Democratic caucus is so liberal now, that it's only slightly less liberal then Republican - conservative...

You make it sound like 35 conservadems didn't just vote to gut Dodd-Frank.

Anyways, membership in the Blue Dog organization is a 100% disqualifier for being US Senator from California.

There are no conservadems in House any more. Not even a single one. And i am not absolutely sure that even Barrow, McIntyre and Matheson would absolutely qualify as such. All, who are called this name by ultraliberals, are no less then centrists. 30-40 years ago they would be even considered "somewhat liberal"... Party became MUCH more liberal since that days. And that's the reason it will be in minority most of the time in foreseable future. Not in California of course, but in the country...

Huh? There are a number of "Democrats" who vote more often with the Republicans than the Democrats on crucial votes. Just check ProgressivePunch.

I check them weekly. They have a very liberal criteria of what's a liberal issue and what's not. "Conservative" for me are the people like Phil Gramm (when he was a Democrat), or Bob Stump (ditto). At least - like James Eastland. Making correction for present days - Walt Minnick and Bobby Bright (even both of them - barely). Not less...

P. S. Voting against liberal programs slightly more then 50% of the time doesn't make one a "conservative" - at most it makes him "slightly right of center". Voting more then 75% - does, but when year statistics will be more ample - there will be no more then 1 Democrat of this type. Most likely - zero...

[Miles]

GHY poll:

Swearingin (R)- 31%
Harris (D)- 28%
Villaraigosa (D)- 18%

[RogueBeaver]

Villaraigosa likely to launch within 2 weeks.

[Senate Minority Leader Lord Voldemort]

Villaraigosa likely to launch within 2 weeks.

Hopefully he gets s**t on by establishment D.C. and CA Dems. I get why they'd run him now though. Harris will win, just sacrifice Villaraigosa now, then get him out of politics. Run a solid Latino candidate (Loretta Sanchez, Becerra, Padilla, literally ANYONE else) and win Feinstein's seat in 2018 with someone who at least (somewhat) cares about substantive politics and not just his own career.

If there is only one Republican that ends up running, they will probably be the top vote getter. Harris should be able to edge out Villaraigosa for spot 2, then win the general without breaking a sweat. I think people overestimate how loyal Los Angeles County will be to Villaraigosa, particularly if Harris actively campaigns down here in the primary. Harris will have all the money.

I think Harris was the only statewide candidate who ran ads for herself in the general election down here. Perez ran ads for Controller during the primary to solidify his LA base, but lost anyway to Betty Yee, a northerner. Should work out the same way for this.

[Panda Express]

Kamala Harris declares war on foie gras.

[Skill and Chance]

Villaraigosa likely to launch within 2 weeks.

Hopefully he gets s**t on by establishment D.C. and CA Dems. I get why they'd run him now though. Harris will win, just sacrifice Villaraigosa now, then get him out of politics. Run a solid Latino candidate (Loretta Sanchez, Becerra, Padilla, literally ANYONE else) and win Feinstein's seat in 2018 with someone who at least (somewhat) cares about substantive politics and not just his own career.

If there is only one Republican that ends up running, they will probably be the top vote getter. Harris should be able to edge out Villaraigosa for spot 2, then win the general without breaking a sweat. I think people overestimate how loyal Los Angeles County will be to Villaraigosa, particularly if Harris actively campaigns down here in the primary. Harris will have all the money.

I think Harris was the only statewide candidate who ran ads for herself in the general election down here. Perez ran ads for Controller during the primary to solidify his LA base, but lost anyway to Betty Yee, a northerner. Should work out the same way for this.

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.

[Senate Minority Leader Lord Voldemort]

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!

Feinstein got 49.5% in the 2012 primary, but 5 other Dems ran, giving Dems about 56-57% of the vote. I think we should expect the same share here, but with two credible Dems running and maybe one or two randoms that'll get 1 or 2%. In an (essentially) three way race, Swearengin would probably beat Harris and Villaraigosa by double digits in the primary.

[Vosem]

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.

[An American Tail: Fubart Goes West]

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.

[Vosem]

That isn't to say that none of them will run and get a few percent here and there.

That few percent is exactly what is at stake; if a top-two Republicans to runoff scenario takes place, it will only be by a few percent.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Didn't see it posted anywhere, but Kashkari is out of the running.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/07/politics/2016-california-senate-neel-kashkari/index.html

[Maxwell]

Didn't see it posted anywhere, but Kashkari is out of the running.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/07/politics/2016-california-senate-neel-kashkari/index.html

Excellent news! That means a real candidate can run here!

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Didn't see it posted anywhere, but Kashkari is out of the running.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/07/politics/2016-california-senate-neel-kashkari/index.html

Excellent news! That means a real candidate can run here!

I like Kashkari way more than I should. That being said, I don't give us much of a shot unless 15 Dems run and we get both of the top 2. I don't think we'll get a real candidate either way, but I'm at least glad Kashkari won't be throwing his name there as a joke once again because his chances will be even lower than last time. I'm still optimistic he may be able to do something down the road, but US Senate is not one of those things. I wouldn't completely toss him out though. Just better to limit the losses with an actual sacrificial lamb.

[Senate Minority Leader Lord Voldemort]

Didn't see it posted anywhere, but Kashkari is out of the running.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/07/politics/2016-california-senate-neel-kashkari/index.html

I could see him making another run for governor if a Democratic administration implodes. But if there's ever an opportunity like that, he'd probably get trampled by Issa, McClintock, Hunter, or Royce.

Excellent news! That means a real candidate can run here!

Like a self-funder? I don't see any established Republican career politician who would run for this seat.

[NewYorkExpress]

Didn't see it posted anywhere, but Kashkari is out of the running.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/07/politics/2016-california-senate-neel-kashkari/index.html

I could see him making another run for governor if a Democratic administration implodes. But if there's ever an opportunity like that, he'd probably get trampled by Issa, McClintock, Hunter, or Royce.

Excellent news! That means a real candidate can run here!

Like a self-funder? I don't see any established Republican career politician who would run for this seat.

Issa could at make it competitive...and that's all Republicans should ask for right now.