Democrats worried about an expensive primary war for Dianne Feinstein's seat
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 06:37:31 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Congressional Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  Democrats worried about an expensive primary war for Dianne Feinstein's seat
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: Democrats worried about an expensive primary war for Dianne Feinstein's seat  (Read 1669 times)
Shadows
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: October 22, 2017, 11:54:15 PM »

Then they shouldn’t waste a single penny on the race. We all know Feinstein is going to win another term and if not, we will still have a democrat seated from California. Use the funds for Arizona, Nevada, and competitive congressional races.

Pretty much this. Not quite as assured of a Feinstein victory, but a Republican won't take this seat. If it does turn out to be Feinstein vs De León, national organizations should waste their money on an assured Dem seat. If the goal is to beat Republicans, there's no sense in fooling around in a 100% assured Dem seat.

I really wish that Feinstein wasn't running. She's a fossil. No butts about it. Sure, she's still pretty coherent (compare to Cochran), but she's way out of synch with California. If she represented Missouri or some place like that, I'd back her 100%. But not in California. We can do better.

Hell, if Feinstein was running, I guarantee that De León wouldn't be the only major Dem officeholder to run, so there could still be the "issue" of two major Dems running in the general. Again, there's no sense in wasting money on that when a close seat like Arizona or Nevada could be targeted instead. Any big groups wasting money on a Feinstein vs De León race should be ashamed of themselves and aren't worth donating to. I can understand CA groups, but national groups should really stay out of it.

The people who will donate to De Leon will likely not donate to a Senate race in AZ or Nevada if you talk about small $ contributions or they will additionally donate if they feel strong enough about the race in AZ or NV. I am somewhat amused by the idea of a 0 Sum fundraising game in which you have a fixed pot of 100$ & you can chose to spend it here or there. The other part which I find baffling is this idea that spending massive money will automatically win you the race. I hoped after Moore beat Jones or after Trump won the GOP Primary or after Hillary spend 1.3 B, close to double that of Trump & still lost, that people would understand that -

1) Money is only 1 out of multiple factors & is not a guarantee for victory, 2) Democratic candidates in key races have more than enough money to compete.

A Senate race is for 6 years. The CA Senator will be till 2024, maybe with a Dem President in 2020. Do you really want Feinstein for another 7 years, till she is 91, when she is totally out of touch from her constituents? A CA Senator should be a leading ally of a Dem President in legislation, not be a Lieberman to an Obama.
Logged
politicallefty
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,200
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.87, S: -9.22

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: October 23, 2017, 09:00:06 AM »

If the general election is Feinstein vs de Leon, that would be amazing. However, to really get the benefit of depressed Republican turnout, the Governor's race needs to be DvD as well, or maybe at least Democrat vs Ultimate "Some Dude," although I'm not sure how bad that would be for the CAGOP in terms of turnout.

While not as interesting, I'd also note that Republican state legislative candidates in California would be in trouble if no Republican made it to the GE in CA's Senate/Governors races. They rely on ticket splitting and optimal Republican turnout to stay afloat in Romney/Clinton or Obama/Clinton districts. If they see lower turnout and more straight ticket voting in 2018, Democrats could really sweep legislative races and build a comfortable supermajority.

You beat me to it. The prospect of having both the Governor's race and the Senate race be D vs. D is highly problematic to down-ballot Republicans. And when I say highly problematic, I really mean catastrophic. Securing the supermajorities is just the beginning. If 5-7+ Congressional Republicans are facing defeat, Nancy Pelosi will easily be Speaker once again.
Logged
Figueira
84285
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,175


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: October 23, 2017, 04:08:02 PM »

Don't donate to Feinstein or De León if you don't want money to flow into that race. It's not like either of them are anathema to the average California Democrat.

The advantage, if they both make the top two, is that it would depress Republican turnout in House elections, although I question how ethical this strategy is.
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,856
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: October 23, 2017, 04:13:59 PM »

The advantage, if they both make the top two, is that it would depress Republican turnout in House elections, although I question how ethical this strategy is.

Maybe it would push the CAGOP to invest in a ballot initiative that would scrap jungle primaries. I really don't like it myself, and Republicans would be wise to try and get it removed while they still can.
Logged
henster
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,976


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: October 23, 2017, 04:47:17 PM »

91 at the end of her next term is insanity, Cochran seemed fine and healthy enough in 2014 but now look at him. Health can deteriorate so quickly in the 80s/90s.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,612


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: October 23, 2017, 05:45:26 PM »

Don't donate to Feinstein or De León if you don't want money to flow into that race. It's not like either of them are anathema to the average California Democrat.

The advantage, if they both make the top two, is that it would depress Republican turnout in House elections, although I question how ethical this strategy is.

If the California Republican party determines that it would hurt them to not have a candidate in November, they will endorse a primary candidate, which will increase the odds that its' Feinstein vs. a Republican, which definitely not be a race worth voting in.
Logged
ProgressiveCanadian
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,690
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: October 23, 2017, 06:22:12 PM »

I'd be more worried about having half of California not wanting Feinstein to run but of course all they worry about is the money aspect.
Logged
henster
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,976


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: October 23, 2017, 07:44:40 PM »

I think age limits would be far more effective than term limits, I think 75 is a fair and reasonable cutoff.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.031 seconds with 12 queries.