Well the filing deadline for office has come and gone and there were definitely quite a few interesting developments, some of which have been discussed here and some haven’t, and obviously everything is tentative before signatures are verified.
The Sheriff race narrowed to three with Gore, Duffy, and LaSuer. The big question here is where do the Democrats and Independents go and can Gore survive June? I think if Gore grabs 40% in June he’ll win in November, if not we might have a new Sheriff in town (too easy?). The good news is that no matter who wins the seat will stay in the hands of a Republican.
Ron Roberts will be facing some of his strongest competition to date. It will be interesting to see if he can clinch the 50.1% in the primary or how close to that mark he’ll get. If I had to guess it will go to a run off with Roberts picking up 47% of the vote in June and an additional 13% in November for the win.
Assemblyman Anderson and Supervisor Stone both filed for the 36th State Senate and the full field filed to replace Anderson. At this point either seat is a toss, but again, both will stay in Republican hands.
City Council Districts 2, 4, and 8 all have multiple candidates but likely won’t be competitive at all, at least not in terms of Republicans picking up or losing a seat.
Council District 6 will continue to be the focus of much attention and excitement as five candidates filed to replace Frye. After a very controversial week Lorie Zapf was one of three Republicans to file papers. The good news for Zapf about this week, aside from being the only Republican to submit a ballot title, is that her previous comments, while a bump in the road, will likely not have a lasting impact on the race. While it isn’t too late for Huckabone or Tran to officially drop out it doesn’t look like it will happen.
The other races around the county had no surprises and will most likely end the way conventional wisdom predicts they’ll end.
On the Central Committee filings, it was interesting to see who filed, when, and with what ballot titles. Will Michael Crimmins get to keep his “Central Committee Member” title now that he has been removed? And if he wins a spot will he get to take it or does his expulsion stand? I wonder if Robert Morey/Holly Barrett/Debra Capelo/Richard Preuss will get to keep their “Community Volunteer” titles. And on a Democrat note, can anyone tell me what exactly is Toni Atkins’ “business”?
The first round of signature verifications should be out shortly and it will be very interesting to see who, if anyone, gets cut.
Sunshine…Welcome to Rostra. We look forward to your continued musings. Tran didn’t submit a ballot statement?
I think he said Huckabone and Tran did not submit ballot titles. I am disappointed Zaph is now a self labeled moderate. (see below) Seems as if conservatives are in short supply these days.
“….Jerry & Eleanor Navarra
George & Beverly Coles
Invite you to an evening with Lorie Zapf
Meet the Candidate for City Council District 6
Join us for Don Refugio’s famous tacos featuring:
Homemade tortillas, carne asada, chicken, and cheese quesadillas With authentic margaritas and other refreshments
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
5:30 to 7:30pm
1190 West Morena Blvd
San Diego, CA 92110
Your Contribution will help elect Lorie Zapf,
a fiscally responsible, moderate candidate
No minimum to attend…”
The SD City Clerk has updated their filings to list Tran with a FPPC# (which she did not have before Thursday), updated the titles of all other candidates, and dropped one minor Dem who either did not file or did not meet the 100 sigs. Unless there was some mistake Tran and Huckabone both left the titles out.
I love the internet. Tran filed 410 with FPPC number in January
Yes, she had the number and filed the forms before Thursday, you’ll notice I said “the Clerk updated their filings to list Tran with a FPPC#” and made other adjustments to their sheet.
Mr. Jantz was looking for some confirmation that Tran didn’t submit a ballot title and the best information I had was that before Thursday the Potential Candidates sheet listed Tran without her number and Doug Beckham as a candidate, and afterward both of those changed. I was pointing out that the sheet had been updated with the most current information but neglected to list ballot titles for Tran/Huckabone. So IF they filed them the Clerk left those off and updated everything else, which makes me believe they were not filed.
Yes, the internet is wonderful.
I think you could understand why the first two lines of your posting could be misconstrued as Tran not having a FFPC # prior to last Thursday. Wouldn’t want anyone to think a candidate wasn’t following campaign laws by running a campaign without a committee. Clearly, the depressed economy has left me with way too much free time on my hands.
I though it would be helpful to post this link, so others might know what comments you were referring to.
I believe a similar article was published in the UT. Though may I ask why you think this wont have an impact on the race?
From a Google search of her name, the pro-gay community is not happy with her (to say the least). And James Hartline is making sure that politically active Christians know about her.
I’m inclined to think it’s impossible for anyone to win this election with neither the gay nor the christian vote. But I’m not a political analyst or anything, does someone with more political experience and knowledge have an opinion?
Mayor Sanders and Councilman DeMaio have still come out (no pun intended) as strong supporters, so it seems that anyone in the “pro-gay community”, as you put it, who was open to supporting Zapf still is. Republicans, Decline To States, and moderate Democrats are still looking for the message that Zapf has. As far as politically active Christians go, there has never been a more radical hate-filled man as James Hartline and all other Christian activists know it. Her comments likely change very little for the voters in her district, I would still contend that Tran/Huckabone in the race to more damage than losing the support of some Democrats that were not going to vote for Zapf or any Republican running.
The term “Damage” keeps being used to describe Kim Tran and Huckabone regarding the campaigns. Again, just my opinion, but, The Party needs to do a better job in recruiting and developing candidates for open seats. They need to bring in a someone with strong community support and name familiarity. Where is the Phil Thalheimer of Sixth District? I think Phil T. should have moved into the District as DeMaio did for his seat. I would bet that all conservatives would have rallied behind him. But here, does it really make any difference, Lorie Zaph is no Phil Thalheimer. As I said before, I had never heard of her before this election season. Therefore, if other candidates, such as Kim Tran and Ryan Huckabone want to run, more power to them.
As a side note, I live on Goodstone Drive in Linda Vista and I found a Kim Tran flyer on my doorstep this morning and saw at least eight Kim Tran signs pop up along Goodstone and Crandall Drive this afternoon. I went to the website listed on the flyer
votekimtranforcitycouncil.com. While I was not impressed by the website layout, I did notice that a bunch of small businesses and more then a few Asian Community Association leaders were supporting her campaign. I was kind of surprised because an earlier post indicated Zaph had the support of the Asian Community. From my perspective here in Linda Vista I would encourage Zaph to get busy in the neighborhoods.
Vern, it is Z-A-P-F, ending with an F, not an h. In most cases I wouldn’t correct one mispelling, but you have noted it incorrectly several times in comments, and I’ve edited it a few times, but I’m not going to be able to keep up. Just want to respect the correct names of anyone running and referenced here. Thanks.
Vern, you bring up Phil Thalheimer, and great point, but look what happened to him; another Republican cost him that seat. It has nothing to do with the Party being able to recruit good candidates, rather the opposite, the party has a hard time convincing the lost-cause candidates to step aside. Every Republican running for City office has to ask themselves one question, do I want what is best for my party, city and what I believe in, or do I want to go to bed at night with my delusions of grandeur?
If you’re in it for you then by all means run, but know that you are doing it for you and only you, and know that you’d rather see a Democrat win than a different Republican. That sounds terribly disillusioning, but it is reality, plain and simple cold hard reality.
In the last two City Council races we watched amazing Republicans be overcome by inferior Democrats and the common theme was the Democrats were united behind one candidate while we burnt ourselves. Let’s not let that happen again…
Who damaged the conservative cause in the June 08 primary in District 1, Thalheimer or Merrifield? Both of them yielded a substantial number of votes. Was it their delusions of grandeur? I don’t think so, each of them believed that they could prevail and each believed they had something to offer the city. Thalheimer had the greater name recognition and both were well funded. I think your argument in the 7th District have more validity as Daniel and Toss had a very minimal support base as shown by the results. I checked the past election results in June 08 primary and see that Tran did receive over 9,000 votes. I would have to check further to see how many came from the 6th District, but I would imagine quite a few given the number of signs in yards and businesses. Maybe I am an idealist, but I cringe when I see a candidate labeled a spoiler and or unqualified based on the lack of an official Party stamp of approval. Do we really want a system where either Party selects the candidates for us without benefit of challengers and the exchange of ideas that make a race in the first place. Doesn’t sound like a government of the People by the people, but like a government of the Party by the Party. Isn’t that where we stand at the national level today. a single Party, without the consent of the people is about to fundamentally change America. That is why I consider myself a Conservative first and a Republican second.
Please clarify which two November 2008, assume San Diego, city council races were there more then just two candidates in the race, a spoiler?
I would agree the June 2008 election, except for District 5, we saw more then two candidates in the race.
Mathew knows better than anyone the value of rallying behind the one candidate who has the best chance of winning, he helped the unions do it in ’08, and he should call Tos, Daniel, and Merrifield every day to thank them for making it that much easier for him.
The races weren’t lost in November, they were lost in June. You can attack me with idealistic banter all day but the fact remains, if in June 2008 all GOP votes went to the leading candidate then the City Council would be 4-4 with a GOP Mayor right now. These aren’t regular primary/general races, the free-for-all style of the City means we need to rally behind one candidate or be defeated, there is just no denying it. Just ask yourself this, do you want a moral victory or an actual victory?
November – GOP loss by 2922 votes
Sherri S. Lightner 40282 – 51.88%
Philip Thalheimer 37360 – 48.12%
June – GOP total win by 9347 votes
Sherri S. Lightner 12708 – 36.56%
Philip Thalheimer 11777 – 33.88%
Marshall Merrifield 10278 – 29.57%
November – GOP loss by 608
Marti Emerald 27836 – 50.55%
April Boling 27228 – 49.45
June – GOP total win by 2848
April Boling 13794 – 46.55%
Marti Emerald 13392 – 45.19%
David Tos 1442 – 4.87%
Bill Daniel 1004 – 3.39%
Unfortunately, there is no nice way to say it. There are candidates out there, that by virtue of their history of losses, inability to fund-raise or finance at the level required, inability to build coalitions and organizational support, and resulting lack of broad based support, will simply not win. An example is Bruce Ruff in the sheriff’s race, who after three attempts saw the light this year and pulled out. Tran is another example. Being a good person with the right beliefs is not enough. Being a potentially great elected official means little, because you have to get elected first. In races where an open, non-partisan primary means a free for all, a Tran is not only wasting her time, but ours as well. Candidates like this who aren’t politically astute enough to understand reality, simply cannot be reasoned with to support the candidate with an actual chance of winning. Beat me up now about my sentiments if you will, but come June, I will be able to say I told you so.
your comments on the traditional political strategy on how to win an election in San Diego is not inaccurate. I also would not “beat you up” for your frank comments. However, where has this traditional mindset regarding the election of public officials gotten us?
Democrat and Republican alike are responsible for the financial wreck San Diego has become. I believe we need regular people with common sense in these positions. I do not believe any special interest group will look out for the taxpayers. In an earlier post I mentioned the apparent support Kim Tran had in the small business’s in my community and no comment was forthcoming. Are these small business people not part of the community. We conservatives are constantly speaking of small business and how they are the driving force of our economy. It would appear that in some peoples view, only business’s with deep pockets are deemed part of the broad based support. If Kim Tran or Huckabone get other then mere token support this June that the recruitment of Zapf for this race was a mistake. Nevertheless, I will be polite and not say “I told you so”.
Vern: I agree that both Ds and Rs are responsible for the wreck. Fair enough, I will also not do the “I told you so” thing, regardless of the outcome.
Tran might get slightly more because of her past races, but if she pulls down 9 and Huckabone 5 that 14 points could be the difference between Zapf coming in first or missing the runoff. Every vote counts, look at the last totals.
When I read your comment after mine I heard a loud scratch like when the needle rips across a record. Did I date myself?
Anyway, your point about Republicans splitting the votes and denying a 4 Dem to 4 Rep council doesn’t hold water. District 7, I believe, both David and Bill were Democrats and by your own logic Marti would have gotten the votes outright and won it in June. I don’t agree with the logic that it’s only about party registration that wins city council races, even sometimes in partisan elections voters cross party lines too. It is about substance and a public relations campaign.
Also, I think people that are interested in running for office, whether they have a real chance or not should be thanked for stepping up and entering this very public stage. It takes a very brave person willing to put themselves out there for what they believe in. It isn’t easy being a candidate for office or an elected official.
Lastly, I don’t prescribe to winning at any cost. I want my kids to follow what I said and what I have done. So, I would say a moral victory is more important to me.
David Tos and Bill Daniel were both Republicans who ran highly fiscally and socially conservative campaigns, which means if they weren’t in it I would professionally guess that their votes would either have gone to Boling or no one, either way having the same outcome.
Winning at any cost is different, much more different, than graciously stepping aside for the greater good of one’s own cause. My frustration isn’t with the character of people running in that regard, it takes a whole lot to put yourself out there, front runner or long-shot, but being thanked is a different story.
Once again it comes down to what you ultimately want. Would you rather someone who almost completely opposes your views in office, or would you rather step aside and let someone who is much much closer to your beliefs win, even if they are not perfect in your eyes. Someone like Bill Daniel had two choices, sorry this is reality, April Boling or Marti Emerald, and he essentially looked around and said me first and my beliefs second. I think it is nobler and more courageous to accept the fact that you can’t win and throw your support behind the person who can. Do Kim Tran and Ryan Huckabone want a fiscally responsible Republican at City Hall or a union shill Democrat (nothing personal, Mathew). I am completely positive if they called up Zapf and said “I’m out but I want to play a part in shaping what we do” she would incorporate them into her campaign and office.
I’ve always been about 50/50 on Poizner/Whitman, but at this point Whitman is polling 3 points ahead of Brown and 50 points ahead of Poizner. What is the right thing to do for Steve Poizner, stay in and perhaps hurt Whitman (someone who is much closer to him and what he wants for California than Brown) enough that she loses in November, or step aside and help her defeat the real enemy (politically speaking, again nothing personal)? That is the dilemma for fringe candidates, is 3 to 9 points of the vote worth doing something that I know will hurt the City in the long run?
Healthy, respectful discussion. What’s wrong with you? LOL
I would contend, however, that a partisan primary election in which the strongest candidate does move on regardless (no chance for an outright win) is a far cry different than the equivalent of a non-partisan “open primary” with the chance of an outright win, 50%+1.
Yes, we can argue that a Poizner or Whitman could “hurt” the other in the primary, or we could argue that such competition prepares and strengthens the eventual nominee’s campaign for the general, but we can’t argue that had one of them not been in the race, the other might have won it outright in June.
Different scenario in City of San Diego and County elections.
I notice that you are very pessimistic when it comes to describing Kim Tran’s and Huckabone’s campaigns, but overly optimistic when it comes to Lorie Zapf. I think being more objective and holding every candidate to the same standard will make for a more convincing argument.
I did not have a problem with Lorie Zapf before (honestly I didn’t know much about her), until these recent emails were published. “I don’t think homosexuals should be allowed to run for public office” is extremely radical. Simply because she is still endorsed by two lgbt-supportive republican party leaders is not going to negate this comment with the rest of gay voters, republican or democrat.
I suppose you’re right, Lorie Zapf probably wasn’t going to get much of the gay vote anyway, so I can see why the damage in that community is minimal. But what about moderates in both parties, who may not have a strong opinion on the issue, or maybe prefer to leave people alone when it comes to social/moral issues? They google Lorie Zapfs name, and every hit besides her website is associated with her email comment. Moderates aren’t exactly going to be won over to her side.
James Hartline is very extreme. But your argument that because he is a hate filled active Christian, it won’t change christian voters minds in the district is relying on premises you did not clarify.
Lorie Zapf came out and pretty much denounced a core part of her christian beliefs in response to Hartline’s attack.
By endorsing other gay republicans and completely contradicting her previously stated belief that “homosexuality is a sin”, she is going to be quite unpopular with christian voters. Regardless of what Hartline says, her response is what is killing her reputation. This will not encourage many Christians to vote for her, much less actually come out and volunteer for her/support her.
You said the other candidates should unite behind the person who can win. I haven’t seen any evidence that shows Lorie Zapf has a chance of winning, besides the $30,000 and official endorsement from the party. Almost everything else points overwhelmingly against her, doesn’t it?
I can’t imagine Jim Hartline has ever convinced anyone to vote for his particular candidate or cause beyond his small band of extremists (real, real extremists). Most of the time, he winds up shooting his own candidate or cause in the foot by virtue of his “support”.
In fact, I’ll bet it’s really “all of the time” instead of just “most of the time”.
Maybe someone is aware of a Hartline endorsement equalling elective success? At the very least, anyone aware of a successful candidate or cause claiming Hartline as an endorsement? My guess is no one with a chance of success wants, or gets, that endorsement.
Zapf’s luck just improved without it.
Well I’d like to think I’m more realistic than optimistic. Zapf has a huge uphill battle against Hadley and Wayne, make no mistake about it, it won’t be easy for her If she can pull it off at all. Sure, I’d love it if Chuck DeVore was running for San Diego City Council, but he isn’t, and Zapf is still our party’s best chance of picking up that seat.
When you combined the Lincoln Club endorsement, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayer Association endorsement, the Republican Party endorsement, and all the money and support that come along with those things she can overcome the obstacles with all our help.
With that said, I think the average voter, not us political hacks reading here, care about one thing for the City races this time around, and it isn’t homosexuals in office. Look at the statement of qualifications for the candidates on the City Clerks website, even the union shill Democrats are talking about fiscal responsibility and pension reform.
If you think Kim Tran is the best candidate just come out and say so, tell us why she deserved all those endorsements, why she can connect to voters better, and why she deserves our support. I’d actually be interested to hear, because I also honestly know very little about Kim Tran other than hearing her speak once. My frustration with Tran/Huckabone is generic and would be with any Republican in any race where they are hurting our chances at winning.
Please tell me what percentage of the voters are going to “google Lorie Zapf’s name,” then I will know whether you are dealing in reality. Reality: Hadley, Wayne, Zapf – top three vote getters, only we don’t know yet what order and, thus, if a primary, which two will face off.
I guess pictures are the reality?
Greg: I have no evidence that people will research candidates beforehand. Maybe no one will google Lorie Zapfs name. (good yet not so good, huh?) I’m just pointing out that for any voter who read that ut article, or sign on san diego, or takes the time to research her, they will find the stuff, and will probably not be positively affected. Especially if they may be moderate and don’t like extremes.
If what you say is ‘reality’, and those three have a clear advantage, show me a recent and accurate poll of the sixth district that shows those three with a distinct advantage. I haven’t found one yet, but if you have one I’d honestly like to see the results.
Now I do support Kim Tran for the 6th district. Before I just had a preference. I noticed a lot of Tran signs up, especially in a lot of the Vietnamese restaurants I like to go to on convoy.
I had no problem with Lorie Zapf until I saw those email comments. Bad, but then she says she didn’t actually mean it. So what, she lied? Rather than have the integrity to take a stance on something, she just tells different people what they want to hear.
I guess I was upset to see how you were blogging on rostra, and you were in total support of Lorie Zapf, and kinda dismissed Tran. So I did some research on Kim Tran.
By research, I mean I went into one of the restaurants with a Kim Tran sign and talked to the owner in Vietnamese. I just found out that Kim Tran’s daughter is Captain Elizabeth Pham, the first Vietnamese (and first female) to fly F-18’s for the Marine Corps. Elizabeth Pham (and Kim Tran) have been featured in Vietnamese magazines and tv shows all over the west coast. She has name and face recognition in the Vietnamese community.
There’s more. Do you remember about the serial rapist at UCSD and in san diego who was targeting asian women? Kim Tran evidently printed out hundreds of fliers with his sketch and went door to door to businesses (not just vietnamese) and handing fliers out to people, to warn the community and try to catch this guy. (he was eventually caught, and the coward killed himself while in jail)
Here’s another cool thing: She’s been registering new voters. She’s using her name recognition as a former candidate to register more voters, many of them Vietnamese who simply weren’t registered before because no one had asked. She has thousands personally under her belt. The Vietnamese community knows Kim Tran, and they are on fire for her.
After finding out who she is, and seeing how hard she’s worked, I’m on fire for her too now. There’s just something about candidates who actually care about the community and take action to help, versus those who are just furthering their political careers, that makes you want to vote for the former. And write long entries about them on other people’s blogs.