Our new ad released from my camapaign picked up national attention this morning, getting mentions in USA Today and Politico’s Morning Score.
The ad illustrates how cockroaches, zombies, and Lindsay Lohan are more popular than Congress, including Bob Filner and Scott Peters.
Take a look:
-Carl
PS: If you haven’t signed my petition to Fix Congress First, there’s never been a better time.
Comments 24
So, Cockroaches scored higher than Congress and Bob Filner…is this the same Bob Filner that defeated Mr. DeMaio in his last political adventure in search for a job? So, Mr. DeMaio lost to the guy that is identified as lower than cockroaches, zombies, and LL…
Interesting comparison.
Perhaps Mr. DeMaio will do better actually claiming to be a republican…poor Mr. Faulconer received some rather bizarre advice regarding emphasizing his “independent street cred” in yesterday’s debate. If one had come down from another planet, not knowing who was who in the mayoral race, until ole’ Alvarez called him out, Kevin seemed certainly content touting his “independent” positions…once punked on it, he tried to explain his “independence” from special interests, but to anyone remotely politically astute, it was a poor attempt.
I guess not only is the GOP picking/backing weak Republican candidates, they are tacitly, if not intentionally hiding who we are now…what a sad state of affairs. I guess that’s what can be expected from the New Generation GOP.
Founding Father makes an interesting point. Why is Kevin Faulconer running away from the Republican label? David Alvarez certainly has no problem letting everyone know he is a proud Democrat.
Is everyone running from the republican label? Probably due to the Bush era. But if you notice all republicans run with a ‘qualifier’ – tea party gop, new generation gop, real conservative etc. Basically trying to distinguish themselves from the gop establishment and RINOs.
“Why is Kevin Faulconer running away from the Republican label? .”
Faulconer’s not running away from the brand. He’s emphasizing the fact that San Diego voters are extremely jaded after suffering through the most partisan Mayor in decades. He’s also keenly aware that Democratic voter registration advantage is 40-28 with 27% identifying as independent.
“David Alvarez certainly has no problem letting everyone know he is a proud Democrat:
That may be his undoing. I have a lot of friends who are registered Democrats and they are ashamed of the local party’s progressive push. They think labor unions control the process, that the local activists are to the left of the Occupy movement, and long for Democratic candidates in the Kennedy/Clinton mold.
They may think national Republicans are too far to the right but they vote for our local candidates because they think our locals represent their values more.
There are a lot of registered Democrats who recognize that entrepreneurs drive prosperity rather than politicians and they’ll be voting for Kevin Faulconer because he speaks to them in a way no local Democrat has.
“They may think national Republicans are too far to the right but they vote for our local candidates because they think our locals represent their values more.”
Brian, we have discussed this ad nauseum, but what precisely are we saying here? I think what is implied, if not direct, is that Democrats can relate to local “Republican” candidates because they “represent” their (Dem) values…for a platform Republican (many of those that have left in droves over the last 7 plus years recognizing the GOP has abandoned them), that is a fairly ominous and stark revelation; if that is true, which I am not claiming that it is not, it confirms what many Republicans have been referencing, many on this site, that we do not want Republicans that represent Democrat values…we want candidates that represent our values…The GOP appears at least tacitly, if not purposely, willing to conflate formerly distinct issues that were the hallmarks of the two-party system…I know for myself, and for thousands of (former) GOP-ers, the desire to “compromise” and to appear “amenable/tolerant” by the GOP collides with the conviction that was a hallmark for what the GOP used to represent…With Republican candidates and strategic direct like this, who needs Democrats?
You’re reading into my comment too much, FF. There are many registered Democrats who believe (like you and I do) that pre-born humans’ lives are worthy of government protection from aggression but disagree with us on the role of government in economic matters.
I would guess that you and I are more closely aligned on issues than Kevin and I are but even you and I disagree. There are a lot of registered Democrats who think my viewpoints on the Fed are spot on but think my viewpoints on the welfare State are nuts.
I think that Elliot hits the nail on the head: when Democrats think of Republicans, they think of Geo W Bush …and they don’t like Geo W Bush. Conversely, when I think of Democrats I think of Nancy Pelosi.
You and I are different FF than most of the “normal” people. Most “normal voters” don’t think like you and I do. They voted for Clinton because he is a “New Democrat” and unlike Jimmy Carter. The’;ll vote for Kevin because he is neither like George Bush nor Nancy Pelosi.
Messaging matters and, in this Mayoral election, party identification is subordinate to issues like experience and longevity. I get that.
Everybody is excited about Kevin Faulconer’s upcoming mayoral victory — a romp. But don’t draw TOO much from it in making predictions about the rise or fall of either party.
If this race were in November, 2012, Kevin’s chances would be “iffy” at best. This is a SPECIAL, election with perhaps HALF the “usual” presidential election turnout. It ain’t the same demographic (thank Goodness) — the average voter IQ is probably 20 points higher than Nov. 2012.
Founding Father — A reminder, DeMaio lost the 2012 Mayoral citywide election by 52.5% – 47.5% points, but he WON the mayoral race in the city’s part of the Scott Peters district by a whopping 58-42 percent. Again, it ain’t the same demographic — and no (positive) 2014 Obama effect this time.
Your hopes to return to intolerant right wing white heterosexual social conservative GOP standards is both ill-advised and reprehensible — check the surveys of the 1/3+ of the voters now registered independent.
Your social conservative candidate(s) running against Carl will not fare well — at BEST they can get Scott Peters reelected in November.
Democrats lie. It seems to be a prerequisite for leadership positions. Witness their absurd poll that David Alvarez is WINNING!!
It’s a made-up poll to buck up the troops. Zero scientific method is employed (did they use “global warming” scientists??).
But they will stick to their lie right up until the election. After the election, their “poll” will be forgotten. Again.
But for HQ and the other Democrats — why don’t we make this interesting. How about a friendly wager on who wins the mayoral race? Winner picks the charity the loser has to pay the loss to. How about $100K? I’m good for it.
CONDITIONS:
1. It must be a legal wager — no breaking of the gambling laws.
2. The funds must be ESCROWED in advance — no reneging.
3. The wager must be public.
No takers? Gee, THAT’s a surprise!!
Okay, let’s make it interesting. How about 2-1 odds? No? Perhaps 3-1? Sigh.
Come on, Democrat leaders — you’ve got a POLL to back your winning assertion. Put your money where your mouth is.
NOTE: Sorry, I don’t think you can use confiscated labor union dues in such a wager.
“Your hopes to return to intolerant right wing white heterosexual social conservative GOP standards is both ill-advised and reprehensible — check the surveys of the 1/3+ of the voters now registered independent.”
Intolerant Right Wing- The same “intolerant right wing” that led the civil rights movement in congress against the intransigent Democratic Left hanging on to the vestiges of Jim Crow and segregation…
White- Like Tim Scott, Allen West, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Condolessa Rice, Mia Love, Alveda King, Thomas Sole, Van Tran, Nikki Haley, Ben Carson…and on and on…
Heterosexual- As long as they aren’t attempting to press homosexual policy at the K-6 level, or promoting SB 48 propaganda, or supporting Transgender bathrooms on the other 99 % of the “non-confused” children, I could care less (boy this is getting old). I would consider Richard Grennell in a minute not because he is gay, but because he doesn’t care nor is he a “victim” by being so. That is the difference between discernment and the crass, cheap, and often intellectually stunted charge of “intolerenace.”
Social Conservatives- Billy Graham, Ronald Reagan, Newt Gingrich, Bill Bennett, JFK, …hardly “toothless swamp rubes…”
What is reprehensible is the attempt by those, like yourself, that continue to craft the lie loud enough and long enough about the “intolerant” right wing…for you that is anyone demonstrating conviction and fortitude for the principles the once mighty GOP did stand for…the same principles that remain on the platform of the CA GOP…yet, like you, cower and submit to political correctness and social decay and dysfunction all for political expediency and the hope of tacking left “just a bit” will make the GOP liked by the “cool” kids on the left and the media…
I’d just soon take advice elsewhere, thank you…
….and another thing… 🙂
Jorgensen and DeMaio do differ on traditionally social matters..there is no denying that…yet I do not see you, nor other hyper-libertarians New Generation GOP-ers calling Mr. DeMaio a “social-progressive”..since his positions on the “social” issues mirror those of Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, and Harry Reid…everything being equal on the other key tenants of the GOP notwithstanding, you, and the RPSDC sided with the social-progressives…not only is that a tack against the platform’s own tenants, it supports the notion that Scott Peters and Carl Demaio are actually in alignment politically on very vital issues to thousands of San Diegans and millions of Americans….say what you will about the challenger, one thing he will NOT be accused of is holding the same positions as the incumbent Democrat. And, he won’t have to parse his words and be called out by the Democrat for feigning “independent.”
There are more independents precisely because the 80K of former registered GOP-ers in SDC were abandoned by their own party…If Peters gets elected, you and the RPSDC only have yourselves to blame…
Richard,
It is healthy to root with your heart, but it is wise to bet with your head. I have no doubt that Faulconer will beat Alvarez, probably by 6-8%. Isn’t that the reason that the Lincoln Club spent their money and their credibility to insure that it was Alvarez, not Fletcher, who made it to the run-off?
HQ, OF COURSE Faulconer is going to win. I offer ONLY sucker bets. The point is that Democrats have put out a bogus survey that no one believes — including the surveyers and the people who paid for it.
You are a wiser here than your fellow liberals (you can do that anonymously, of course), but the Dem leadership is putting out a lie, and they know it. If one knowingly distributes a lie — a bogus survey with no basis in reality — then that person/leadership is/are liars.
I’m simply giving them an chance to fund one of my charities, and to show they are sincere. LOL, I believe fits well here.
I DO enjoy that the unions now realize they have spent millions on a losing candidate. They SHOULD have gotten behind Fletcher, I suppose, but it’s their loss — LITERALLY.
Founding Father — Here’s the difference between rabid social conservatives such as yourself and social liberals like me. I ally with and work well with many social conservatives. We can put our differences aside to concentrate on what’s both most important and most doable. I don’t fear social conservatives will carry out their agenda — there’s not sufficient support for it — especially in California.
However, you (and your rabid social conservatives) are perfectly willing to help elect a liberal Democrat rather than a libertarian-leaning Republican. A small but pure, devout, intolerant GOP is your primary goal. Sad but true. And it’s likely the fatal weakness in the GOP (especially in this state).
FF, this is a perfect example of why we need fewer platitudes and a little more thinking.
According to them both, neither Jorgensen or DeMaio will use law or tax policy to discourage same sex marriage in any way or try to reinstate anything like DOMA. From what they have both told me in person, their stance is the same on same sex marriage. There would be no difference in their voting record on this subject. At all. If this issue is important to you, it is time for you to find another candidate to support.
Jorgensen clearly states he is pro-life, which is fantastic. So am I. But…now what? There’s a Supreme Court decision that prevents him from furthering that agenda.
DeMaio states clearly on his website (despite not considering himself “pro-life”) that he agrees with most Americans and would like to protect life. So he wants to lead community leaders, organizations, and religious groups to help reduce or eliminate the amount of unwanted babies in turn reducing the amount of actual abortions. This is going after the cause rather than railing about the symptom. This is leadership. This is thoughtfulness. This is experience and understanding of government. This is a guy who sounds like the only adult in the room.
I’ve also heard Carl say he wants to defund Planned Parenthood (the largest abortion provider in the U.S.) I’m on board with that too. That’s the kind of guy who I want to hit the ground running on his first day in congress.
Tell me, Richard…when precisely did time-tested, current and promulgated tenets within the National and State wide GOP platforms become “rabid…”?
I get your use of incendiary and ad hominem emphasis and lexis to craft your clear “libertarian” socially-progressive agenda. You are trying to make an argument, albeit a sloppy one. At least be accurate…you, like many of your socially-aligned progressive liberals, like Scott Peters, conflate conviction and measured and discerning positions, with “extremism.” When did conviction, and the very conviction touted explicitly and demonstrably on the actual websites from the organization (s, presumably when national GOP $$$ begins to flow) that have backed your precious “moderate” become “rabid, intolerant, extreme?”
I have had my heated tet-a-tets here on Rostra with people I initially thought were a bit ignorant and/or overly hostile…with 90% of them we have come around to a mutual understanding, even respect, though not full agreement, to various positions…even some of the admitted Democrats and liberals here (Lord knows not all)…and there are those that have “spit and run” becoming overly emotional and caustic. Yet you seem to viscerally respond often with baseless and charged accusations of “extremist” etc anytime you are pressed .. Sure, it makes for good copy, but for a man that appears to take himself so seriously and appears to invest a modicum of financial rigor and economic understanding behind various endeavors, for fiscal issues I applaud, you fall short anytime anyone actually tests you.
It is a truly sad state of affairs to see the once powerful and formidable GOP having been infiltrated at the national, state and local levels by these amoral and indifferent progressives hiding in plain sight as “moderates…” “libertarian-leaning”, “fiscal-conservatives” …and is exhibit A on the 80K GOP losses in the last 7 plus years…One comforting fact is where as you think I am some kind of “extremist”, I know I am not, nor do any of my immediate colleagues, friends, family, or those that know my politics…thank God, it isn’t “rabid” propagandists like yourself that define me or the millions that adhere to the very EXISTING tenants of the party they once knew and loved. I will stand by my conviction.
And when Peters wins (and he will if DeMaio is the candidate…that is a bet I AM willing to wager), again, you, the Executive Committee, and all the Star Chamber back-room supporters from developer and media elite, to insider State and National GOP Politicos, will ONLY have yourselves to blame…and though it will be truly sad to see, knowing YOU and your myopic, politically expediate experiement with the New Generation actually f*cked it up, will make it a little less painful.
Then the “DeMaio” example can be used and that of the loser-tarian New Generation approach on exactly how NOT to wage Republican campaigns in the future…
…(see, a silver lining everywhere..:)
Michael,
Though I appreciate the practical approach to the “no path” understanding to either candidate legislatively supporting issues, what is clear, and surprisingly NOT the calculus for current GOP leadership, is the measure of a person as to what is in their heart and what they truly believe; i.e character- what one does beleive, their moral anchor points, when no one is looking or they do not think they are accountable, and the tangential, oblique and subtle influence they may lever in the dark places of power.
When Bill Clinton was found having lied about his sexual antics in the Oval Office, was anyone truly surprised? Of course not. Clinton was known as a serial predator aka Filner, yet people supported him, and still support him. As with DeMaio, he and Faulconer signed a statement expressing their outright negation of Prop 8…again, this was a “symbolic” gesture for the most part by the City Council, but it demonstrated a hubris and indifference to the people they represent…So, though there may not be any definitive, “legislatable” issue on the immediate horizon that would impact morally convicted persons in key issues, it does tell us, when no one is looking, and their doesn’t appear to be anyone accountable, what is in the heart and minds of powerful men/women aligned with positions in key issues where they can have impact/influence on the social, political, and cultural fabric.
For example, my issue, (and I know this will NOT resonate with the more obtuse on this medium…and we all know who they are) my biggest, most discerning issue for both Messrs DeMaio and Faulconer is they went against the will of thousands of San Diegans and millions of Californians that expressed through the official political process, thinking their majority position had been heard and accepted, when they signed that stunt pledge…so I ask you, and all the “fiscal”, “gun”, or immigration and policy advocates…would you be so “rabid” (to coin a fellow Rostra-ite) about Messrs DeMaio and Faulconer had they signed an immigration amnesty pledge, or a gun control pledge, or a supportive issue for Labor and Public Unions, or a “entitlement” pledge, equally against the will of the people they claim to represent and YOUR personal political or moral position or conviction?
Of course not…and neither are the thousands that will not show up for Mr. DeMaio or at least a vast majority of folks I know that won’t show up for Faulconer. These two have already demonstrated their politically fungible character. So, if either is elected, can you guarantee either will then not pivot on an issue that eventually DOES concern or affect you? I don’t, like myself, believe that you can.
Oh..and Happy New Year 🙂
Richard,
It is amazing how accurate your post would still be if you were talking about the 2012 election and substituted Filner for Faulconer, Rep leadership for Dem leadership and Businesses and Lincoln Club for Unions. Your closing line was especially appropriate and fitting for the 2012 election.
“There are many registered Democrats who believe (like you and I do) that pre-born humans’ lives are worthy of government protection from aggression but disagree with us on the role of government in economic matters.”
Brian, the right stuff first…Happy New Year. I captured your quote above because it was so refreshing to see a fellow Rostra-ite who can make the approach and introduce civilly appropriate discourse I , for one, believe Rostra was created for in the first place. We have fixed bayonets on more than one occasion, testy even, but we found mutually acceptable grounds, where though our positions may not have changed, our dispositions toward one another had. Besides, we have mutual acquaintances that have shared with me your attributes as a moral and descent man…so I’m honored we can be civil while convicted in our positions.
So, and not a rhetorical or “trick question…given your stated thoughts and views on pre-born humans, how can a man of conviction and moral caliber who is praised and touted by people we both know who respect you, have supported the endorsement of a candidate/s that do, either by word, deed or thought, condone and support the whole industry and false ideology of “reproductive rights”? How is it such a morally convicted and well respected man of his community, and a community in many aspects the places a great emphasis on the sanctity of life, not as choice, but as an imperative, have been swept into the false narrative that produced such vile and insensitive and indifferent comments worthy of Progressive Eugenics theories of the Bolsheviks and National Socialists such as “not wanting to burden [my daughter] her with a baby?”, infamously uttered by President Obama wrt abortion?
As your personal and public character has been revealed to me by people I respect immensely, I am honestly inquisitive how one goes from such deep-rooted moral and ethical foundations that are indicative of the very character you possess, to endorsing Abortion-supporting candidate/s and a culture, if not a mentality or tacit approval, that considers death above life ?
Thank you for the kind words, FF.
“I am honestly inquisitive how one goes from such deep-rooted moral and ethical foundations that are indicative of the very character you possess, to endorsing Abortion-supporting candidate/s and a culture, if not a mentality or tacit approval, that considers death above life ?”
That;s a great question which deserves an answer. That answer will require an independent blog post which I can’t write until Sunday night. As always, I appreciate the discourse we have here
Brian,
Thank you for your serious consideration. There are those, though formerly on the left, but increasingly infiltrating on the right, that conflate one’s deeply held moral and ethical convictions as supported by the GOP as “extremism.”. For many on the left, or those opposed to a morally grounded and discerning right, “extremist” or “intolerance” are the new code words for “racist/prejudice, ” …nowhere was this more evident than critics and virulent opposition to anyone that criticized President Obama…of course, the charge was, if you disagree with the President, his enablers, or his policies, one was, de facto, racist. This same maligned and false indictment is often cast for those that oppose Mr. DeMaio. The comments and positions by some on this very site are starkly indicative of that!
Your insight and perspective as one who comes from a culture of Life first, while promoting and supporting a Pro-Abortion candidate through the RPSDC endorsement of said candidate, illuminates what may be the thought process and definitive shift of a core-leadership team within the SDC GOP and what their motivation was/is regarding the abandonment of the GOP as the Party of Life. This is of particular interest as the CA GOP and the National GOP platforms still emphasize this aspect in no uncertain terms in their official platforms. The schizophrenic position of the GOP nationally is creating havoc for candidates and potential voters alike.
The GOP has stood for principled and salient issues that have been the cornerstone of its DNA for decades…Limited Government, strong, effective and deterring National Defense, pro-growth policies and promoting opportunity for all through unleashing the free-market, acknowledging the 2nd Amendment promotes safety and harmony for communities and not limiting it, prudent and viable immigration policy that secures our boarders and promotes a fair and just approach to citizenship and not a “free ride” or dangerous and irresponsible border procedures ALL have contributed to the ethos and definition of the GOP…no less or more important than other key issues that defined the once great party such as Sanctity of Life/Life First and the universally acknowledged definition of marriage.
Clearly, if either Messrs DeMaio of Faulconer were pro-gun control, or pro higher taxes, or pro-ammnesty, or pro-limited defense, they would also be receiving considerable scrutiny and criticism from many of the same “fiscal-conservitives/moderates” that claim “extremism” for those of us standing steadfast to equally recognized tenants of the GOP.
Again, your measured, thoughtful insight is appreciated and respected as we delve into the sea-change that is the current GOP and its decidedly apparent shift in ideology.
I look forward to your post, My Friend (not typed flippantly or without merit)
FF
Sorry, Founding Father. You’re not testing me. But you sure do BABBLE a lot, I’ll give you that.
Time tested GOP positions? Oh, you mean like the dogged support by the Republican Party for Prohibition in the 20’s and 30’s? That didn’t go well, either from a policy or vote-getting standpoint.
Times change. For you and the GOP to be still ranting against medical marijuana is pathetic and incredibly mean-spirited. I speak from experience. Again, your time tested position only marks the GOP as out of touch with political reality — as the preference to legalize medical MJ (with reasonable controls) is now spread across the political spectrum.
The reason I find you obnoxious is because of your personal hatred for DeMaio. It’s not just that you disagree with his gayness or his positions — you drip bile. You attack his character and his morals as a human being. You don’t even give him credit for the astonishing victories he had with San Diego city reforms and propositions — seeing some plot behind it all. A real GOP uniter you are!
Here’s one other difference between you rabid social conservatives (you and Karen Grube, are the current poster children) and more tolerant GOP voters is that you vociferously attack Republicans like Carl who don’t meet your social conservative standards. But I see no such vicious attacks by socially liberal Republicans against Carl’s GOP challengers.
Oh, BTW, I hold no position within the GOP — not part of the cliche’ “Star Chamber backroom supporters” (oh my!) or GOP central committee you rail against. On the other hand, YOU may be just some Democrat sowing hate here — you remain an anonymous caricature of what turns off voters about the GOP.
DeMaio may win or lose in November — it will be close, with big bucks from both sides pouring into the race. But I ALMOST wish your best social conservative choice were the GOP November candidate in this race. In such circumstances, this close Peters race would turn into a rout. You’d fail to get even 40% of the vote in that district. It would be a massacre.
Believe me when I say the Scott Peters is one of your biggest fans for your efforts. You might even seek some funding from his supporters — start with the labor unions.
??? First, I’m an “intolerant, rabid, social conservative”, now I babble”, and am accused of being a Democratic agent provocateur…Well, apparently my “babble” is the brook from where your goat drinks., Sir..:)
As I have seen, your “prose” is just as long if not longer than any of mine…Mr. “Kettle”. I often am responding to two or three different posts…Still all that “babbling” doesn’t come close to your 237 postings on SDR…oh, and the blog!
But please, make up your mind Mr. Rider on what tack you want to choose for your demonization for those that do not see the world through your apparent economic-centric, amoral and indifferent world lens… I’m either intolerant and ineffective, which begs the question why one would even respond as vociferously (read: babble) as you, or a brilliant and devious agent-provocateur, which possible, however there are those here that know that is not the case, or, gadzooks, I am on to something.,… 🙂
Its pretty simple, Mr. Rider…we disagree…you see the political construct as a single function, a main vehicle, of economic prosperity. i.e. a staunch, dare I say, “extreme” libertarian. The other vital and equally foundational criteria for robust, flourishing, healthy, civil moorings of cultural, traditional, social, faith, historical aspects of a thriving society are just smoke-filled coffee house musings to you…or ideologies that warrant your intolerance and demonization. i.e progressive (um, who is the agent-provocateur again??)
I think the morality and decency of a society and that which we pass to our children is a fundamental cornerstone to that society’s survival and well being…given your choices for potential leadership in our political system, and their positions and support for certain positions antithetical to mine, and the MAJORITY of the people of San Diego (Exhibit A=Prop 8 votes, and the increasing number of Americans that see the American abortion industry for the abhorrent and depraved and indefensible construct that it is) I’d say maybe you might want to open your intellectual aperture a bit…get on board for the big win!
Oh, since we are “lifting the Kimonos”…My “candidate” is simply some one I believe in, who is most aligned with my spectrum of political views…I am not writing or commenting here at anyone’s behest or behalf…And though I have serious misgivings about the direction of the GOP as demonstrated by the abysmal record of the local GOP and its loss of tens of thousands of registered voters, I write as a free and passionate citizen…just like you, but better. 🙂
It seems that every comment is filled with some sort of label, be it good or bad, every one has a special label.
The label I never see or hear is American. What happened to all of the Americans?
I am an American who believes in the Constitution and Bill of Rights the way they were written. Not the way some dumb ass judge thinks they were meant to be.
The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire should be required reading for every citizen.
Even that guy in the White House who I have labeled Ceasar Disgustus