According to survey results just released, former San Diego City Councilman and 2012 mayoral candidate Carl DeMaio “stands in a very strong position among voters in the (52nd) district as a potential candidate for Congress, both in terms of a primary and a general election.”
The report goes on to note that DeMaio “currently leads Democrat incumbent Scott Peters on a trial ballot test at this time, with 49% of voters indicating they would vote for DeMaio and only 39% indicating they would vote for Peters.”
Here is the report from the Tarrance Group.
Also, read the Roll Call story.
Comments 39
When do we start walking precincts?
Wrong! That’s all we need; a lying, gay-activist congress critter. NO THANK YOU!!! Personally, I prefer someone with a real sense of morality and common decency whose “partner” wasn’t directly involved in promoting gay porn and destroying the Balboa Park Koi Pond. We can do better than that, at least if we don’t let Tony Krvaric make the decision for us. We have to do better than that.
Besides, it was a very small sample. The only poll I trust is the one at the ballot box, and the voters rejected him. I don’t like Filner either, but whose fault was it that we wound up with such lousy choices in the first place?
“The only poll I trust is the one at the ballot box.” That’s good Karen, because DeMaio WON CA-52 in the Mayor’s race by 16 points — 58% to 42%.
Oh what a shocker. Haven’t we all known this for months?
I’d assume this is the same Karen Grube who decided to “fire” Tony Krvaric, but also who placed 13th in her attempt to run for central committee…
Karen… you talk big… run for something and win.
Author
Justin, you knew about this poll for months? Interesting.
Yes Thor’s asst and Justin….anything that anyone wants to share would be good information….
Ok, if Karen Grube were running against Carl DeMaio and I could vote…
Yeah, I’d vote for Carl and that says something coming from me.
Author
It may be common knowledge to insiders that Carl is a potential candidate. But, that’s not what this post is referencing. It’s about poll results. Maybe we shouldn’t report on anything that insiders view as common knowledge. Not.
Based on the number of emails today ensuring we had seen the survey — from insiders — we’re guessing there’s an interest.
Carry on.
I would support Carl DeMaio, just as I supported him for Mayor. However, having listened to Scott Peters in person, I think he will prove tough to defeat. He comes across as very reasonable and knowledgeable and as someone who is working to solve Washington’s gridlock and fix the budget issues. Further, he has taken a popular position that with the local Federal workforce on furloughs, arguing for giving the Navy flexibility that would allow elimination of furloughs.
This is not an endorsement, just an acknowledgement that the Congressman enjoys some advantages due to his role on the House Armed Services Committee and the Science and Technology Committee.
His caucus has provided Peters with some significant advantages. Both committees are good positions to raise money from and to support a lot of San Diego-centric policies. Carl will be a fine challenger. Some of it is how many local horror stories we have about Obama-care between now and then
In a competitive district (something seen too seldom in California), Peters is in office because of the “Obama effect.”
Obama is not running in 2014. Low information voters won’t turn out. Peters loses.
Karen Grube is a shining star in the party — the DEMOCRAT Party. They know full well that such activist GOP homophobes are vote-getters for liberals.
Perhaps Mayor Filner should appoint Grube to Donna Fry’s empty, useless, patronage position — paying Grube a six figure income for her stellar service.
For those who think Karen Grube is opposed to DeMaio because of his partner, it’s not. That’s just a smokescreen she puts up. She hates gays, PERIOD.
Here’s Grube’s post blasting the idea of Bonnie Dumanis running for mayor — from an impeccable source:
Karen Grube says:
March 6, 2011 at 1:13 pm
“Great, that’s all we need. A lesbian mayor. Didn’t we have enough of a push for gay “marriage” with Sanders’ support for his lesbian daughter? The republican party can do better. PLEASE!”
http://sdrostra.com/?p=12092
Karen has shown textbook baseless hatred towards gays online, and in person. She’s the classic out of touch gay-hating conservative that Liberals love to try to portray as the overall sentiment of the Republican Party. Proudly, in 2012 Republican voters soundly rejected Karen in her bid for Republican Central Committee, despite her making a somewhat aggressive effort with a campaign website and community activism. She finished well below individuals who had no campaign effort, meaning people that knew her, probably chose to vote for someone else randomly.
The Congressional opponents battling Scott Peters in 2012 were never able to properly point out the DEVASTATING results of Peters city pension decisions — a result of his fealty to public employee labor unions.
But Carl DeMaio knows this issue forwards and backwards — including the details of Peters’ culpability in the matter. It would be a FUN race (well, for me, anyway).
When you can use your real name, “Common Sense,” perhaps you might have some credibility to attack me personally. Until then, you have none. The same for you, Tom Thumb. Come out, come out, whoever you are.
In the meantime, you need to know that it is liars and promoters of porn that I am against. And i don’t like people who go against what they said when they were campaigning, like Mayor Sanders did. It’s two-faced and no one should stand for it. How can you EVER trust someone like that?
Richard Rider: Admit it/ I’m right. We can and should be doing better when it comes to vetting candidates for all offices, and you know it. If we are going to take back San Diego and California, we need good candidates, and the Republican Party of San Diego County has provided us with only a few decent ones, like Brian Jones. We need more candidates like Brian and Nick Popaditch (yes, I know he’s moving). What we don’t need are people who put their own personal agendas before those of the voters who elected them, or the agenda of their own special interest group, no matter what that group is.
Peters will only win if we let him, if we put up a lousy candidate like DeMaio. Work to find a truly great candidate! We can win that seat if we do. That’s all I’m saying.
Karen Grube, “all you are saying” is that you’d never support (indeed, will actively OPPOSE) any GOP candidate who is gay. PERIOD. End of story.
Don’t BS us, Karen. You are a rabid homophobe. Even most social conservatives are uncomfortable with your ill-disguised hatred.
But, as I said, the Democrats just LOVE ya. You’re their GOP pin up girl.
Karen, I didn’t see you respond to the fact that DeMaio mayoral vote totals in the Peters’ district show that he has VERY strong voter support — 58% to 42% for Filner. How is supporting DeMaio going to get Peters reelected?
Facts are such troubling things, aren’t they Karen?
There is a simple solution to this, Karen–run against Carl DeMaio for Congress.
You have been complaining that the RPSDC doesn’t properly vet candidates for a year now. You proclaim to have a good handle on what voters want and need, You live in the 52nd CD…so run.
The logical conclusion is that you should put up…or…
No, that isn’t a logical conclusion, Brian. First of all, I now live in Juan Vargas’ district. We need to work on this district as well. Second, I have been asking for people to find the best candidate, one with experience, personal integrity, and one who won’t back down on OR BETRAY the Republican stand on Social Issues. We CAN find such a candidate if we search. I think we should. I know we have to or we will lose to Peters again. It won’t be Carl DeMaio becaus his lack of personal integrity regarding his support for porn disqualifies him in that category. The fact that he hid his “partner’ aliases also disqualifies him. I don’t know. I’d like to be able to vote for someone who is open and honest and is a real Republican, not a RINO, thank you very much. And NO, not a libertarian either. What I want is a real Reagan Republican.
I did address the Peters question when I said that a true Republican candidate, one with deeply held convictions about the Constitution, about the role of government, and so on, could win against Peters. That person is NOT Carl DeMaio. The Republican Party should only run him if they want to lose again in that district. And you can consider that a very real prediction, one I pray I won’t have to come back and say “I told you so” about in 2014.
And PUHLEEZE, Richard Rider. Is name calling the best you can do? REALLY?
The reason we lose is because we endorse lousy candidates. Yes, we have some great candidates to run for Congress, like Duncan D Hunter. But we did not lose so many elections and we have not lost so many voters because the Democrats are just better at it than we are. We lost because we aren’t providing a solid slate of candidates that people can trust and that people actually want to vote for. There is little difference between many of the Republican candidates the RPSDC endorses and the Democrats. Seriously.
Nick Popaditch’s loss was shameful and never should have happened. We probably shouldn’t even have lost Brian Bilbray’s election to Peters either. And why we didn’t even bother trying to find a decent candidate to run against Lorena Gonzalez for the Assembly in the special election in my new district, I’ll never understand. We even stupidly blew the filing deadline! What was that all about? It is that kind of incompetence that I’m talking about.
We need great candidates who stand up for what the Republican Party stands for, and we need great party leadership here in San Diego to get them elected. We’ll have to find the first. I know we can if we work on it. I think we’re screwed again in 2014 if we don’t get the second . . . FAST!
Tell you what. If the Republican Party catches up with the approximately 60,000 voters it needs to reach the Democrat total by, say, a year from now – or any time before then, I’ll apologize profusely. Until then, I suggest we start working on recruiting decent candidates who will actually attract and inspire voters rather than those that turn them away from the polls.
Okay Brian, that’s just MEAN. Of course, I LOVE your suggestion to Karen!
Then Karen would get vetted by the folks she touts to make the right decision — the voters.
Boy, talk about a massacre!
Richard, please learn to read.
I said I no longer live in the 52nd CD.
Brian’s response wasn’t mean; it was uninformed. And it is a poor deflection of my asking him and the rest of the Republican Central Committee to find and support decent candidates and stop endorsing lousy ones. Yours was a bad deflection as well, Richard. Deal with the issue, you guys. I am not the issue. Our losses and our inability to register voters is. We can solve that if we vet and support great candidates.
Karen, it is YOU that is deflecting. You absolutely REFUSE to face the fact (and I know it galls you to no end) that Carl DeMaio is VERY popular in the Congressional district being discussed. As you like to point out — the only poll that matters is the VOTE. And 58% of the city VOTERS in that district voted for Carl in the mayoral election.
And tell us again how unacceptable a candidate lesbian Bonnie Dumanis is. You truly ARE one pathetic bigot.
There are many instances of Council President Scott Peters insulting the public and at City Council meetings on the official record audio tapes that may not be on CityTV video. Scott Peters was especially mean and dismissive to homeless and environmental advocates.
As Council President, Peters did not allow the issue of changing the 1931 Trust for the Children’s Pool to be discussed or put on the Agenda for City Council hearings. Resulting in over $1 million to a fellow La Jolla lawyer in their quest to outlaw sand at the beach, and require dangerous dredging in the Children’s Pool sandtrap in order to create a “Swimming Pool” configuration.
As soon as Peters left his position of power, the City Council voted to change the trust to allow the seal rookery, and save millions in continuous dredging costs. The Army Corps of Engineers questioned the City’s engineering findings regarding dredging of sand traps.
http://www.blogofsandiego.com/BlogArchives/2007-1st-Quarter.htm#01/30/07b
Then there was the January 30, 2007 hearing when Mayor Sanders and Scott Peters tried to break the 30 foot Coastal height limit in the name of the poor and Affordable Housing. They almost got away with the legal loophole scam to bypass Proposition D.
To end this fraudulant practice that allowed the Council President to hide backup documentation from the City Council and public at hearing, Councilmembers DeMaio and Frye changed the authority of the backup paperwork from the Council President to the City Clerk.
As Council President Peters was allowed to change online Agenda documents and allowed to edit CityTV videos because the only real Public Record is in the City Clerk’s Official Binders and Audio Tapes of City Council Meeting. Changing documents or videos online that were negative towards Scott Peters was routine.
So many civic issues beside the Pension votes that were never discussed.
Karen, I’ve got great news for you. You don’t have to live in CD 52 to run for it. You only have to be a California resident.
You go show everyone how it’s done by exposing these two-faced politicians like Carl who was the first City Council-member to refuse a pension and lead the charge against a sales tax, for pension reform, and for open competition. Rigid fiscal conservatives like him need to be put in their place by folks like you who make bizarre references to gay porn! I think you should run on the platform that the Federal government needs to regulate people’s private lives more.
If your Central Committee effort was any indication of how successful your ideas are, you better get to work right away to turn the tide.
Another sensitive issues with Progressive / Democrats / Sierra Club is Scott Peters being the advocate on the California Coastal Commission for the private La Jolla Beach & Tennis Club signage and buoys.
The posted signs gave visitors the mistaken impression that public access to the beach in front of the private La Jolla Beach & Tennis Club was off limits to the General public.
http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2005/may/12/clowning-around/
http://legacy.utsandiego.com/news/metro/20060714-9999-7m14buoys.html
http://www.lajollalight.com/2005/04/12/sierra-club-says-city-decision-over-buoys-sets-bad-precedent/
Richard: Since when does being popular make you a decent candidate? Gee, it didn’t do much to make president Obama a decent president, did it? I prefer that we actually have a decent candidate to run for Congress, one who stands for something and sticks with it, doesn’t lie, and actually has some semblance of personal integrity.
Peters is a lousy Congressman. We all know that. But why did he win? And why did DeMaio lose the Mayoral race? Are you attributing all of the Republican losses to combined Democrat skill and deception? I don’t think so.
We lost for one reason: Candidates. We endorsed too many lousy candidates and we failed to support some good ones who should have won.
What are we going to do about that? What is the plan? Does the Republican Party even have a plan to win in 2014? Sure doesn’t seem like it if they’re blowing off special elections by missing the filing deadline. Why would any voter actually think we care about winning elections when we pull stupid stunts like that?
We are so far behind in voter registration, I don’t believe we can possibly catch up. Why do you think that is? And, what are we going to do about it.
HInt: Promoting Carl DeMaio for Congress is no plan – unless you want to lose the entire County in 2014 again. Commit to finding a better candidate NOW!
B-Daddy is right about incumbent Congressman Scott Peters sounding knowledgeable and reasonable. He is. He works at it. He is also wrong about big government solutions. He has excellent committee assignments for a San Diego Representative (House Armed Services Comm. and the Science and Technology Comm.). They will serve him well on every military base, university campus, high tech and research campus and in the office of every military contractor/sub-contractor in the area. He has served on the City Council and Port District sounding knowledgeable and reasonable. He worked at it. He has great downtown crony capitalist connections. He worked at it. He spent his own money freely.
His wife worked at it. He defeated a very well known incumbent Republican in a solidly Republican district. He worked at it.
Carl DeMaio started out as a strong candidate for Mayor. In the end he could not control the issues. Republican leadership could not right his ship. Bob Filner had built up many a support group over the years and knew how to collect his debts. Republicans are really weak sisters at doing the same. Democrats turned out their voters. Democrats are better at it.
Congressman Peters will run for re-election. He will really work hard all the while looking like and acting like a Member of Congress reasonably and knowledgeably solving Congressional issues. He will not be running for city council or mayor. He will be very happy to let a Republican opponent run for city council or mayor.
Republicans need to register more Republicans. Republicans need to figure out how to turn out their voters. In order to turn out more voters they need to figure out what they stand for. Do you really believe sodomy now and sodomy forever is really a winning issue? Do you really want to base your future on that?
We can argue about opinions but we shouldn’t argue about facts….
A) Peters won for one simple reason – comparatively VERY high turn out from UCSD students.
B) Ray Ellis lost for the same reason.
C) The 52 is a highly diverse and socially moderate district. Pull any hot button social issue you would like (prop 8, death penalty, legalizing of mj, etc. etc.) and you can see where voters are on social issues. Running first and foremost as a social conservative in that district would be….well….not a winning strategy.
D) PURELY from a political standpoint (not in respect to issue preferences) the only candidate CLOSE to Carl in strength would be Brain Maienschien. While fiscal conservatives turn up their nose, Brian has huge amounts of good will in the district from the 2007 fires. But he too, fitting that district, is a socially moderate candidate.
Finally, the bottom line is beating Peters and increasing the GOP majority in the house. Whether it is a social conservative or a socially moderate candidate I really don’t care. Winning is, bluntly, what matters most because otherwise you are wrapping yourself in your self rightousness and watching the Dems hold a seat.
To be honest, an election is really the ULTIMATE popularity contest. To imply that popularity has no impact on candidacy is shortsighted… but then again, so are some of your other points… sooooo yeah.
Guys: Take it easy on the lady.
A take on the gay issue during the election. I remember the many conversations I had with gay people I know when I was promoting Carl to them in the election. Half were Dems and half were Republicans active in the Republican Party or DTS. A big majority of them said that the fact that Carl is gay was nice but they were still voting for Filner because Carl seemed aloof to gays as a group and did not go out of the way to campaign for their votes. True story.
Author
We’d remind everyone of the general rules…
-Issues, not personalities.
-No name calling.
-No allegations of illegal or unethical behavior without substantiation.
This goes for everyone. If you don’t like being called a name, maybe as a start don’t call others names. Just a thought.
For instance, Carl DeMaio being called a liar. Is that an opinion, or fact? Want to try to prove it…without libeling him? Assuming you can’t substantiate it, other than with your opinion, then DON’T say it here.
Now, if what you meant is that all politicians are liars, that too would be your opinion, but the way you delivered your message (“lying, gay”) sounds a lot like you believe anyone who is gay is a liar.
Maybe you do.
All commenters: Know the difference between opinion and fact. If you can’t figure out the difference, this blog is above your head.
Someone may have a strong opinion about gays. They may even be tactless about how they express it. But, does that make them a bigot, or is that an opinion?
It’s much harder to show than tell, but we’re all smart enough to figure out how to do it.
Regarding the allegation that Scott Peters “was allowed to change online Agenda documents and allowed to edit CityTV videos … changing documents or videos online that were negative…”
Care to substantiate that? An article or link? Or is that what you “heard”?
If you can’t substantiate it, then it’s alleging unethical behavior, and close to libel.
Both DeMaio and Peters have suffered worse, so we’re letting the above stand, while taking the opportunity to hi-lite examples of what we typically wouldn’t tolerate on Rostra. Please use caution moving forward.
Carry on.
GL
Mole………..Congrats you win on every count……..I live on Mount Soledad and have the best view of local politics. Scott and Filner are safe beyond 2014……..As long as UCSD is part of the district, the 52nd will never have a Gop Rep……..You will never find another Brian Bilbray…….Get a life…….Although Matt Romney could shake it up.
There were many times during City Council hearings when Councilwoman Donna Frye mentioned she did not have particular pages in her backup documentation binder, which other council people mentioned they had in their binders. In 2009 as part of Best Practices, the City Council made changes to Records Management to move control of online backup documentation for City Council hearings, and councilmember binders to the City Clerk, from the Office of the Council President.
The previous linked Pat Flannery’s Blog of San Diego documented a specific incidence where the “Supplement to an Environmental Impact Report No. 96-0333” to allow exemptions to the 30 foot Coastal height limit was not available through DSD, online, or in the City Council hearing binders, but was discovered downstairs in the City Clerk’s Official Binder. The Supplemental to an EIR acknowledged the 30 foot Coastal height limit could be waived with just DSD staff ministerially findings for Affordable Housing projects, and put the blame on City Attorney Aguirre. See Pages 2 and 4.
http://www.blogofsandiego.com/DSD/DensityBonus/FirstRound/Supplement_EIR_December_2006.pdf
I specifically called DSD for a copy of the Supplemental to an EIR, searched Agenda documents online, and look through binders on the 12th Floor hearing room, because approval and certification of the Supplemental to an EIR, and adoption of Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations were part of Item 331 in the Agenda.
http://docs.sandiego.gov/councildockets/dkt2007/dkt20070130.pdf
A few years earlier, DSD tried to create a legal loophole to the 30 foot Coastal height limit for Affordable Housing / Density Bonus, but was stopped by the California Coastal Commission on a CEQA technicality. At the City Council hearing I asked DSD staff for a copy of the Supplemental to an EIR, they said they would mail me a copy after the hearing was over. They never did.
The City Council except for Scott Peters, voted to continue Item 331 to analyze the effects on the 30 foot coastal height limit. Mayor Sanders, DSD, and Council President Peters wanted Item 331 to be voted on that day.
After the City Council hearing on the continuance, I went to the City Clerk’s office on the 2nd Floor and found the Supplemental to an EIR in the Official City Clerk binders. I asked the City Clerk’s office how the binders can have different paperwork in them, and was told that the only official copy is the one kept by the City Clerk, and the other Binders for the other Council persons and the public were put together by the Office of the Council President.
For CityTV, subsequent to speaking at Council hearings I would replay the videos of the hearings and saw my public testimony was edited out a few times. Others citizens in Ocean Beach had the same problem, and would make their own tapes of City Council hearings because the online archives were edited. The online videos are not part of the official public record; therefore according to the Office of the City Clerk, edits on videos of City Council hearings are not illegal. Just shady. Only the audio tapes kept by the City Clerk are valid official public records, and cannot legally be altered.
For CityTV, I directly asked them about City Council hearing video online where my comments were edited out of the film. At their office, CityTV confirmed my comments did not exist online. CityTV allowed me to look at the original video tapes in their back offices where my testimony did exist. I asked CityTV to reload the original video that included my comments and they did. So although Council President Peters was rude to many members of the public, easily accessible video tape evidence to use on a Congressional campaign may not exist online.
http://www.blogofsandiego.com/BlogArchives/2006-3rd-Quarter.htm#09/21/06
Is CityTV being censored? 09/21/06. by Pat Flannery.
Is the City of San Diego Cable Office subject to political censorship? Try this. Here is a screen image of it for the record, taken at 9:30 A.M. September 21, 2006. It is now Thursday and Tuesday’s pivotal City Council Meeting is still not online.
I am eager to hear the exact words Nancy Graham used when she kindly offered to listen to our City Council’s comments before she would go away and decide the Navy Broadway issue for us – a new low in San Diego governance. I want to create a link to it so I can give its exact position on the tape. I also want to link to the part where Captain Allen confirmed that NTC was given to McMillan at less than market value.
So I called (619) 533-4784 and asked what gives. Technical problems. I asked whether they were political technical problems or technical technical problems. You know the answer. But it was reassuring to be told that I was not the first to ask the same question today. So if they are monkeying around with when the public can see City Council tapes, they have been warned – the public is watching.
They did the same thing last year with the tape of Leslie Girard announcing at a Council Meeting that the City had authorized Mike Aguirre’s law suit against the Pension Board. That clip had “technical problems” for months, right about the time Aguirre needed it to prove in court that he had indeed been authorized to file on behalf of the City. Peters was insisting that Aguirre was suing the Pension Board in his own name only.
Is Peters tampering with the streaming of critical video tapes? These “technical problems” are just too convenient to be coincidental.
Peters led off the City Council Meeting on Tuesday by announcing that the City Council had no role in approving the Navy Broadway project, despite the fact that he had received Mr. Aguirre’s Addendum to his Friday’s legal opinion on Monday! Note that Aguirre’s Addendum is dated September 18th. I haven’t heard Mr. Peters deny that he had received it on Monday, a whole day before Tuesday’s Council Meeting.
Perhaps he is anxious to redact his remark about the City not having a role.
From what we have seen of our Council President, Mr. Peters, he is not above reminding CityTV who is boss. If Tuesday’s Council Meeting is not up and streaming by day’s end, I for one will be convinced there is political censorship going on.
“And it is a poor deflection of my asking him and the rest of the Republican Central Committee to find and support decent candidates and stop endorsing lousy ones”
Not really. You are the most prominent San Diego Republican I know who thinks a candidates choice of partners is a litmus test. I”m sure there are more who think like you but I don’t know any who are as outspoken about it as you.
I’m absolutely doing my job as a committeeman—facilitating the different points of view within our party. I want you to feel welcome to test your views on the markets that matter–Republican volunteers, donors (and if you are successful with them) the voters.
In the interest of full disclosure, Carl DeMaio is very popular with Committee members because he has a great voting record, is supportive of other candidates, shows up to speak when our clubs need a speaker, and raises money for the local party. He articulates the limited government position well and most committee members (including me) want him to run against Peters.
You might suggest that the committee is out of touch with Republican voters but I can assure you that at least 42 of us were elected by Republican voters. Moreover, that election was held during the June primary, the election which attracts the most conservative voters (because they are voting in the Presidential Preference Primary)
“Karen, I’ve got great news for you. You don’t have to live in CD 52 to run for it. You only have to be a California resident..”
Steve is right. Moreover, you have strong ties to the 52nd –it’s the most natural district for you. As a committee member, I want to encourage as much participation as possible. You may not get my support over DeMaio but you will always have my encouragement to participate on the democratic process
Carl is a great candidate for CD-52, and would make an excellent Congressman. That being said, I do not share Richard Rider’s optimism that this should be a slam dunk because of the mayoral numbers in CD-52, combined with being on the same ballot as Obama. Likewise, there was more at work in Peters last win/Ellis loss than UCSD. This party has been pumping money into Dist 1 since…Peters 2004? Earlier? That’s a decade of futility. Plus, Peters is a far different candidate, who will be positioned far differently, then Filner. On top of that, the National Dems will be circling the wagons around that district.
That all being said, assuming the Party can avoid hurting Demaio through another contentious endorsement process in the public domain, he’ll be an incredibly strong candidate. I look forward to his running for the nomination, and supporting whomever the eventual nominee is.
D. Morton,
The fact that District 1 has gone to a Democrat since 2000 is not indicative of what could happen in a Congressional race. While Congressional races are every two years, the District 1 race always coincides with a Presidential election and a bigger turnout especially among UCSD students.
One of the interesting and less reported battles that went on during the redistricting process was the battle over which districts got which numbers. Democrats wanted the competitive districts to have odd numbers while the Republicans wanted those districts to have even numbers.
The “unbiased” and “non-partisan” redistricting involving the 51st district should also be mentioned as to why Bilbray lost, let alone Republicans regaining the seat. The 51st probably should resemble its 1991 configuration minus parts of San Diego, making the district more even Republican.