[mobile site, backup mobile]
[SoapBlox Help]
Menu & About Calitics

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

- About Calitics
- The Rules (Legal Stuff)
- Event Calendar
- Calitics' ActBlue Page
- Calitics RSS Feed
- Additional Advertisers


View All Calitics Tags Or Search with Google:
 
Web Calitics

June 2010 Election Liveblog

by: Robert Cruickshank

Tue Jun 08, 2010 at 20:00:00 PM PDT


We'll be liveblogging the results as they come in. Check in for results and commentary throughout the night. Get the latest election returns directly from Debra Bowen's office by clicking here. Check which counties have reported here (hint: LA won't be fully reporting for several hours).

ELECTION RESULTS

Last updated at: 7:45 AM
% reporting: 99%
* - declared winner by AP or opponent conceded

CA-Gov: Republican Nomination
Poizner: 27%
Whitman: 64%*

CA-Sen: Republican Nomination
Campbell: 22
DeVore: 19
Fiorina: 56.5*

Prop 14 Prop 15 Prop 16 Prop 17
Yes 54.2* Yes 42.5 Yes 47.5 Yes 47.9
No 44 No 57.5* No 52.5* No 52.1*

LtG - Dems LtG - Reps
Hahn 34 Aanestad 30
Newsom 55* Maldonado 43*

AG - Dems
Delgadillo: 10
Harris: 33*
Kelly: 16
Lieu: 11
Nava: 10
Torrico: 15

AG - Reps
Cooley: 47*
Eastman: 34
Harman: 19

Other races will be updated in the liveblog starting right below this paragraph. Latest updates are first.

1:02: So far Props 16 and 17 are narrowly failing. With each update the margin of defeat grows slowly, but steadily. Let's hope this trend sticks. This time I really am signing off for the night.

12:38: I'm as excited as everyone about Props 16 and 17 now trailing, but there are some cautions. Several big SoCal counties have a ways to go in their counting, and their initial numbers aren't good:

Orange: 60-40 for Prop 16, 55% reporting

San Bernardino: 65-35 for Prop 16, 16% reporting

Riverside: 65-35 for Prop 16, 44% reporting

San Diego: 57-43 for Prop 16, 36% reporting

Then again, Santa Clara and Alameda counties have only a fraction of their votes counted, and LA is just at the halfway point. So it's going to be a close one.

12:29 AM: Prop 17 is now trailing by about 5,000 votes. Prop 16 is losing by a steadily growing margin.

11:50: In CA-36, with about 30% reporting, Harman has a big lead over Winograd, 61.5-38.5. That's about what Winograd got in 2006.

11:44: In some of the legislative races, Das Williams has crushed Susan Jordan in AD-35, 62-38. Wow. Stunning. In AD-28, Luis Alejo leads Janet Barnes 49-38. Santa Cruz County hasn't reported yet, which is very good news for Alejo, since he's the mayor of Watsonville. And in AD-53, Betsy Butler has opened up a lead on James Lau, 25-20, but only 30% precincts are in.

11:41: AP calls AG races for Kamala Harris and Steve Cooley. Chris Kelly wasted $10 million on his vanity campaign for AG. What a loser. Meanwhile, No on 16 continues to widen a small lead, and Yes on 17's lead continues to ebb away.

11:20: I keep getting sucked back in. Prop 17 has been trending in our favor all night, and maybe once LA/Alameda/Santa Clara report, we might well see it too flip to the No column.

11:13: OK, one last update. SF finally reported, and with 99% of their precincts showing voters there rejected Prop 16 33-67, Prop 16 now clearly trails, if narrowly, in the statewide numbers. LA, Alameda and Santa Clara County still have reported only a small amount of votes, so Prop 16 might well go down. If so, it would be more than a David vs. Goliath victory - it'd be an ant taking down an elephant.

Older updates over the flip...

Robert Cruickshank :: June 2010 Election Liveblog
11:03: Given the slow pace of counting (something that could be fixed if California decided democracy was worth paying for) I'm going to turn in for the night. Pretty much everything is decided, except Prop 16. When SF, Santa Clara, and LA counties fully report, Prop 16 may well go down to defeat. Prop 15 will need huge Yes votes in those counties to pass, and there's an outside change Prop 17 could still go down to defeat. We'll wrap this up in the morning and deliver some assessments of what this all means. For now, buenos noches.

10:57: SF and Santa Clara County still haven't reported. If big No on 16 vote comes from there - as we might expect - then it might well go down.

10:55: Abel Maldonado declared winner by LA Times. This should be an interesting race between Newsom and Maldonado.

10:52: Janice Hahn concedes, asks supporters to back Newsom in November. I like Janice Hahn a lot, and she could be a strong candidate in the future. But she needs to learn from this campaign. Hiring Garry South was a mistake that ruined her campaign, and I told her so back when she let him attack Newsom.

10:45: Prop 16 now dead even, with No having a 2,000 vote lead. This will go back and forth all night. It's a remarkable achievement given that the No campaign was outspent something like 40,000 to 1 by PG&E. It would be even better if Prop 16 failed outright. Unfortunately, Prop 17 looks set to pass.

10:20: AP declares Dave Jones Democratic Insurance Commissioner nominee. Prop 16 regains narrow lead. Going to be back and forth all night.

10:14: At this point it looks like the only races where the outcome is in any doubt are Prop 16, maybe Prop 17, and the Republican Insurance Commissioner race (Mike Villines has a 52-48 lead over Brian Fitzgerald). Maybe a few state legislative races too - apparently Lau and Butler are close in AD-53.

10:07: Big batch of LA County votes just came in, and Prop 16 is now losing by about 16,000 votes. The Bay Area still has to report as well, so there is hope yet that 16 will go down. The other props look pretty much done, including Prop 15's defeat. Ugh.

9:55: And just like that, California's elections are completely and dramatically changed with the passage of Prop 14, which is only on the ballot because Abel Maldonado blackmailed the legislature in a moment of crisis. Prop 14 is designed to shift the Democratic Party to the right. Progressives will have to figure out how to respond, and fast.

9:42: The Boxer campaign is striking hard at Fiorina, launching FiorinaFacts.com and @Fiorina_Facts to tell the state about Carly Fiorina's miserable record of failure.

9:35: AP calls Republican Sec of State race for Damon Dunn. It wasn't even close. Orly Taitz got just 25% of the vote.

9:34: Prop 14 passes. The corporate effort to destroy progressive Democrats in CA now begins.

9:16: Jerry Brown speaking now in LA. LA County Sheriff Lee Baca introduced him as the man who "implemented Prop 13." Oh great. This campaign season is gonna suck. Back to the 1970s for Jerry Brown: we need "discipline, humility, live within our means." Brown sounds like he's going to run as the apostle of austerity.

9:00: With 25% reporting, Das Williams has a huge lead - 67-33 - over Susan Jordan for the Democratic nomination in AD-35. Was NOT expecting that.

8:47: Larry Aceves out to a lead in Superintendent of Public Instruction race with 21.7%, Torlakson at 18.7%, Romero at 15%.

8:45: AP calls Republican Governor's race for Whitman. Surprise, surprise.

8:41: Judging by the map from the SoS office Prop 15 is getting hammered across the state. 55% of Sacramento County is in and Prop 15 is losing 39-61. Ouch.

8:32: With 7.4% in, Harman leads Winograd 65-35. Should tighten up as night goes on.

8:13 LA County results (7%) show Prop 14 ahead 60-40, Prop 15 behind 45-54, Prop 16 ahead 57-43, Prop 17 ahead 58-42. Harris over Kelly in AG race, 23-18. Fiorina way up with 60%, Campbell 20%, DeVore 16%.

8:10: While we wait for the statewide numbers to update, OC elections show some interesting numbers from early voting. Aanestad has a 38%-33% lead over Maldonado. Damon Dunn is trouncing Orly Taitz in her home county, 71-29, which suggests Taitz is going to get crushed tonight. Oh well.

8:03: Apparently there's some concern that Mike Gatto might not win the special election in AD-43 tonight due to low Democratic turnout. That would be a crime. Dems have a huge problem to face in mobilizing voters.

7:56: Field Poll predicts 33% turnout. Their final numbers were Whitman 51, Poizner 25 and Fiorina 37, Campbell 22, DeVore 19.

Tags: , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

As of 8:59 (0.00 / 0)
there was nothing from Alameda or SF, which makes at least the Prop. 16 picture look a lot better.  

Is there any reason to think those initial 200k+ votes tilt especially conservative?


200k+ votes from LA, that is (0.00 / 0)


[ Parent ]
Yep (5.00 / 1)
That makes sense to me. They could come from more conservative voters in both the Valleys in LA County. It's still early for a lot of these races, especially the propositions. The votes are trickling in, really, and the numbers haven't really changed.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave

[ Parent ]
Early Absentees from L.A. (0.00 / 0)
   Most likely those first votes from L.A. are from absentee ballots that were mailed in and received by the elections department before today. Those are the first votes usually reported and they traditionally run a bit more conservative. Absentee ballots turned in today at the polls are the last to be counted and usually are similar to the polling place votes. It may be a long night for some candidates or ballot measures.  

[ Parent ]
that's not always true though. (0.00 / 0)
Alameda county had a HUGE surge in early and absentee voting because of the verified voting movement and distrust of the inauditable voting machines.

Not sure if that is a factor down there though.

I live in Oakland and I like talking about politics. Who'd have thunk I'd be writing here?!


[ Parent ]
Yes (0.00 / 0)
Back before they opened up absentee voting the absentee-only results were reliably conservative pretty much everywhere, but as you say it's ceased to be the case in at least some places.  But if it's still true for LA that's definitely very good news for 16 and maybe even 17.

[ Parent ]
Got any Orly Taitz results? (0.00 / 0)
If 14 and 16 pass Im gonna puke

AP called it for 14 (5.00 / 1)
Wasn't even close.

Orly Taitz is toast, with only 25% of the vote.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave


[ Parent ]
what a mess (0.00 / 0)
did you guys write anything about 14 that I should read? Is this thing as bad as I think it is?

I read a book called predictioneering where a guy wrote about how he used a top 2 voting system to rig the results of a corporate vote for CEO.


[ Parent ]
Interesting that the CV is going against the PG&E prop. (0.00 / 0)
I wonder if that is Tea Party "distrust of all institutions" at work. Of course, the appeal of "cheap insurance" seems to be winning out.

Too bad it will be cheap for anybody but the people voting for it.

I live in Oakland and I like talking about politics. Who'd have thunk I'd be writing here?!


The reason as I understand it (0.00 / 0)
is that the smart meter rollout hasn't gone well and has gotten lots of bad publicity there.  That's a good way to counteract the effect of all those feel-good image-building ads PG&E's been running since they crawled out of bankruptcy post-Enron.  I expect that some voters still remember the bonuses they shamelessly handed to their executives right before declaring bankruptcy.

[ Parent ]
at least in yolo-sac (0.00 / 0)
there's some serious bad blood with PG&E spending zillions of ratepayer dollars to block a grassroots attempt to join SMUD. and every time there's a big storm, PG&E has a pretty crap record of getting the lights turned back on.

[ Parent ]
bah (0.00 / 0)
i suppose it shouldn't be a surprise, given that the big contests are in the Republican primaries. but still. good job, Democratic Party.

Checking around the county sites (0.00 / 0)
I see there's no particular consistency in how fast they get their results up vs. sending them in to the state.  Some of the apparent differences in posting times are considerable.  (I say apparent since it's hard to tell exactly when a given county's results got onto the SoS page.)  

I won't rest (0.00 / 0)
until the Boxer team puts up DemonSheep.com.  

Challenging Prop 14 (0.00 / 0)
It is time to challenge the initiative process itself in federal court as unconstitutional.  Article IV, Section 4, of the U. S. Constitution begins:

The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican [meaning represenative] form of government, ...

An initiative process is direct democracy, not representative government.  This approach could also lead to Prop 8 (marriage) and Prop 11 (redistricting commission) from the previous election being struck down.


This is an unusually bad idea (0.00 / 0)
The move toward direct democracy has been a key element in the construction of greater equality in this country. Defining "republican" as leaving out any kind of direct democracy - which is NOT how it works in other republics in the world (France and Switzerland have had referendums, for example, and the Swiss vote on ballot props all the time) - is a path to government by the elite few.

You might say that's what we already have. But the answer is to go after the role of money in politics, not enshrine it by making a stupid "we want a republican government" play.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave


[ Parent ]
I'm not sure how we're going to even begin to get rid of money in politics (0.00 / 0)
if people won't even vote for public financing for the secretary of state's race.

Direct democracy is a failed experiment. The people aren't stupid, but it isn't their full-time job to look at legislation and inform themselves and thus they aren't qualified to vote directly on it. That being said, we should try to ensure that the representatives are as close to the people as possible.


[ Parent ]
If we don't figure it out (5.00 / 2)
Then we won't have a democracy at all.

Direct democracy can and does work just fine. The problem is the way it is done here in California. It needs to be reformed so that big changes like Prop 14 require a minimum turnout, or constitutional changes require a supermajority, or other things to that effect. Getting rid of it entirely will merely cause new problems.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave


[ Parent ]
I'm with Kevin Drum these last couple days (0.00 / 0)
It might work in Switzerland, but I can't imagine it working well in a diverse state the size of California.

[ Parent ]
what the heck does diversity have to do with it? (0.00 / 0)
the lack of media diversity and the cost of media markets, and years of low-density development that makes grassroots precinct-walking  more expensive in terms of man-hours and supporting funds (thus tilting the advantage to those who have a surplus of capital to buy expensive TV ads and away from grassroots groups and unions with a surplus of shoe leather), yeah, but the diversity of the population? i don't buy it.

[ Parent ]
It's the corporate money (0.00 / 0)
That's the flaw with our proposition system. Switzerland doesn't have that problem. Not because they're less diverse, but because their democracy isn't controlled by corporate money.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave

[ Parent ]
Huh? (0.00 / 0)
Direct democracy can and does work just fine

...except in California, but apparently it would work just fine if we enacted reforms that are less democratic (supermajority), or with some wishful thinking about getting the money out of politics.  

In Steven Schier's book, You Call This an Election? he concludes the chapter on Direct Democracy with this:

The initiative remains the least defensible direct democracy reform of all.  It bypasses legislative deliberation, permits direct agenda control by unelected political elites, facilitates influence by big spenders, creates a long ballot that exhausts voters, and produces election results that do not reliably reflect popular preferences.  There is no defense for the initiative and its politics.

Especially if you factor in California that the initiative has basically made most of the state budget off limits.  Our chronic budget mess is largely caused by the initiative process (Prop. 13, Prop. 98, term limits).

See also John Haskell, Direct Democracy or Representative Government? Dispelling the Populist Myth

I know we love our propositions in California, but maybe it's time to reconsider.


[ Parent ]
More Republicans turned out (0.00 / 0)
As of 10 PM, the Secretary of State site is showing more Republican votes than Democratic votes.  That might not hold up, since some of the big cities seem to take forever to count their votes.  But it's not good for the propositions.

Prop 14 and 16 passing (0.00 / 0)
The harder the corporations push, the closer we might come to finally calling a constitutional convention.

Look again (0.00 / 0)
16 has failed to pass this morning as 90% of the precincts have reported in, Yay! Hooray! PG&E has lost over $40 million, too bad, so(not) sad.

[ Parent ]
Lovely. (0.00 / 0)
I'll probably be hearing soon from this guy doing a celebratory dance over Prop. 14.

And yes, i love democracy, i love California's proposition system. Probably you don't because you've been on the losing side of it (recall of Davis, Prop 8, 13, etc).

....

Oh, I have no problem with super majority requirements. That's fine because it doesn't empower the minority to do nothing more than to maintain the status quo. Under the current Obama junta, the minority rules over the majority. The majority opposed Obamacare, but it still passed.



California is H.L. Mencken's quip made real (5.00 / 2)
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.

Ordinary Californians keep voting for initiatives that will screw them over structurally based on nice sound bites, but won't vote for anything that would actually change the state structurally for the better because they're afraid of being taxed (and see also the preservation of privilege argument that Robert has made so well over time).  I fear the state is in an accelerating death spiral begun back when the original Prop 13 passed.

We might as well just choose our government American-Idol-style with 900 number voting -- at least then the people would be paying attention over the course of a television season, not just in 30 second spots paid for by the deepest pockets over the course of a couple months.


Agreed (0.00 / 0)
The death spiral is indeed accelerating. Prop 14 alone should force a wakeup call for Democrats, who have been complacent about this for way too long.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave

[ Parent ]
Prop 16 Losing At This Moment at SOS Site (11:05 p.m.) (0.00 / 0)
http://vote.sos.ca.gov/returns...

First time tonight it's shown as going in defeat.  The numbers from San Francisco County were finally posted.


yolo county numbers don;t include davis (0.00 / 0)
so expect to see a significant shift in the county returns once they finish hauling those crates of ballots to woodland by bicycle.  

It's quite possible then (5.00 / 1)
That Prop 16 is going to go down. Most of Alameda County hasn't reported either, nor Santa Clara County. That would be a very positive outcome on this night, although it wouldn't totally remove the sting of Prop 15's defeat.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave

[ Parent ]
i'm already over 15 failing (4.00 / 1)
since the SCOTUS  seems set to outlaw public financing anyways. i'm most concerned about 14, 16, 17 and the superintendent of education.

more and more, i'm beginning to think the only way we get this state out of the constitutional mess it's in (to say nothing of water wars and the peripheral canal) is by splitting it on the line that divides monterey/kings/tulare/inyo counties and san luis obispo/kern/san bernadino counties.

sort of the "smash the wine bottle" method of getting out from under bad rules.


[ Parent ]
Which ironically enough (4.00 / 1)
Is the 36'30" line from the 1820 Missouri Compromise.

The real problems are in San Bernardino, Orange, Riverside, and San Diego counties. But the demographics are trending in our favor there. If we can figure out how to organize and mobilize those younger, diverse folks, we can win this state hands down.

Plus we'll probably need them to combat older white NorCal voters' drift to the right.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave


[ Parent ]
Norcal drifting right? (0.00 / 0)
You sure NorCal is moving that far right? According to the SOS site, Del Norte, Humboldt, Mendocino, Trinity, Shasta, Butte, Lake, and Yolo counties are all voting against 16 and 17. Additionally, Nevada and Placer counties are voting no on 16 while Sierra County is voting no on 17. Of the 21 counties north of Sacramento and the Bay Area, that's eight voting against both 16 and 17, three split, and ten voting for. Compare that to the 10 counties south of that 36'30" line, where only Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo are voting against 16 and none are voting 17.

[ Parent ]
The drift is only starting (0.00 / 0)
wu ming and I have been discussing this idea for a while now, that older white homeowners in NorCal are starting to turn conservative in their politics. It's showing up primarily in local issues and hasn't translated to legislative or statewide votes. It might not ever do that. Which would be good.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave

[ Parent ]
it's more of a goo-goo thing for me (0.00 / 0)
the state's broken, it's too damn big, too damn expensive to run a campaign in, the north and south remain pretty severely disconnected, they're stealing our water, and splitting it would get us out from under the constitution.

that being said, i'm as convinced that older white norcal voters are drifting right in a general sense, i think it's far more directly connected to local government issues and homeownership.  


[ Parent ]
NOT as convince, that is n/t (0.00 / 0)


[ Parent ]
I've taught in the IE (0.00 / 0)
and I think you're certainly right about the politics of the younger voters.  I think right now is a good time to engage them, as they're livid over the fubar situation in our state--especially as it affects tuition.  

[ Parent ]
Congrats Sen.Boxer on your victory! (0.00 / 0)
Since Republican voters didnt have the sensibility to vote for Tom Campbell, Sen.Boxer gets re-elected.

Also I hope Mike Gatto wins, I loathe the NOM. If the NOM endorses a candidate then I look the other way. I want it to be etched to the people in the Los Angeles County Republican Party, lie in bed with the NOM and prepared to get crushed in the ballot box.

I will be happy to campaign for pro-equality Republicans such as DA Cooley.

However Congrats Sen.Boxer.

Until Prop 14 gets implemented, I am voting Gail Lightfoot so id vote for the lesser of two evils.  


Not that this is a large number of votes (0.00 / 0)
but the SOS site is way behind on counting Butte County.

SOS has 20.9% of precincts reporting with the county going 51.1-48.9 against 16 and 51.0-49.0 against 17, while according to the Butte County registrar's site, 86.8% of precincts have reported, and the current total is 52.74-47.26 against 16 and 53.45-46.55 against 17.


heh (0.00 / 0)
"Progressives will have to figure out how to respond, and fast."

oh, irony.


At 12:30 A.M. (5.00 / 1)
16  Local Electricity Providers

Yes: 1,339,030 48.6% No: 1,411,367 51.4%

17 Auto Insurance Pricing
Yes: 1,375,638 49.9% No: 1,380,991 50.1

Now let's have both STAY under 50%.  


12:30 am: Tide has turned on Prop 17! (5.00 / 2)
For the first time, Prop 17 is down, by 5,000 votes!

And the Prop 16 gap continues to widen - now down by 70,000!

So we're getting some good news tonight after all :)

More bloggy goodness at Red Green and Blue


And Alameda has STILL only reportied 16.3% (n/t) (0.00 / 0)


[ Parent ]
10 minutes later... (0.00 / 0)
Prop. 17 is down by over 22,500 votes!

And Prop. 16 is now losing by over 83,000 votes.

Some good news, at least.

But Prop. 14 has 56.3% voting yes.


[ Parent ]
Prop. 17 now losing. (5.00 / 1)
With 56.9% of precincts overall in California having reported, Prop. 17 is now barely losing 49.6%-50.4%.  (And it was losing 49.9%-50.1% just a few minutes earlier, so the trend's definitely in our favor.)  Alameda's only got 16.3% of precincts reporting, and it's going down with 60.1% of the vote.  It's also going down with 63% voting no in Sonoma County.  In L.A. County, with 58.7% reporting, it's now also going down with 53.1% voting no.

Closer in Santa Clara County.  With 30.8% reporting, only 53.6% there are voting no.

BTW, as for Prop. 14, other than San Francisco County, where over 55% voted against it, it's currently losing in only ONE other county in the state.  Orange County.  Really.  49.9% to 50.1%, with 57.4% of precincts reporting.

Prop. 16 is now losing statewide 48.5%-51.5%.


That makes sense (0.00 / 0)
Because it hurts Orange County Republicans the way it hurts the Democratic Party in most of the rest of the state: By forcing the majority party away from its base.

[ Parent ]
But then why... (0.00 / 0)
didn't we see a similar pushback in heavily Dem areas in the state?  It's winning in Alameda County with over 58% of the vote!

[ Parent ]
Very little money was spent to fight it (0.00 / 0)
And there was no real organized opposition.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave

[ Parent ]
It's also pretty darned inside baseball. (0.00 / 0)
Take the slightest look at props 16/17 and you can see they're corporate giveaways. The ins and outs of election laws, though? That's a toughie.

[ Parent ]
BTW... (0.00 / 0)
check your Facebook inbox.  ;-)

[ Parent ]
because rank and file dems don't particularly like the party (5.00 / 1)
and are susceptible to an anti-partisan campaign hook, esp. if it's sold to them as curbing the extremist tendencies of the GOP.

[ Parent ]
Interesting. (0.00 / 0)
16 losing 61-39 in Fresno County.

Wouldn't have called that one.


I would have (5.00 / 1)
That's ground zero of where PG&E's "Smart Meters" have been causing mass public outrage.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave

[ Parent ]
Best Dem won Superintendent of Public Instruction (5.00 / 1)
Larry Aceves ran a grassroots campaign, has no personal focus other than schools and understands our public schools from the inside out. His priorities are in the right place and he's no fool in the Race for the Pennies. I'm very glad he won.  

Guess I still have San Francisco hippie values, although I'm an engineer

Well... (0.00 / 0)
He didn't really win, so much as now enter a runoff with Tom Torlakson. My guess is that CTA spends a fair bit of money backing Torlakson in that race for November.

I think?

[ Parent ]
Not sure I agree (0.00 / 0)
He backs merit pay and supports undermining teachers unions. He's not in league with the Wall Street privatizers the way Gloria Romero was, but I'm not sure he is the right person for this job. At least we have some time to find out.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave

[ Parent ]
Mm... (0.00 / 0)
I'm probably biased here, but Bruin Democrats were supporting Torlakson pretty strongly, and one of the big reasons was that he came to talk with us.  Not to give a speech or anything, but to actually listen to what our concerns were as college students.  He really wanted to learn the dynamics of how state issues like the budget were affecting college students, not in the abstract, but at the individual level.

He carefully listened to about a dozen of us a few weeks ago vent a lot of our concerns for almost two hours.  No politician-speak, no making empty promises about helping us, just listening to really understand what exactly our situation was.  I have to admit, it was pretty refreshing to be a part of that.

And as far as I know, Aceves never did any reaching out to us.  Heck, I didn't even know his name until last night; I had only known of him as the "third" candidate running, behind Torlakson and Romero.  I mean, if you want our support, at least make the initial gesture that you actually give a damn.  If he was running a grassroots campaign, put it this way... that grass wasn't growing on our campus.


[ Parent ]
Torlakson visited the IE too n/t (0.00 / 0)


[ Parent ]
Good For Larry Aceves..... (0.00 / 0)
I voted for him as well.  I have had it with the teachers unions and the whole issue of teacher tenure.  The goal of tenure is to protect good teachers, but in California it does not.  It protects ALL teachers, good and bad, allowing them to gain tenure after only two years.  

And many of these teachers who should be fired are the very one's who are partially responsible for another generation of minority children who are performing poorly in school.

The whole system needs to be turned upside down on its head, along the lines of what is taking place in LAUSD.  And Larry Aceves is just the person to do this.

I will no longer vote for property tax increases in order for school systems to avoid firing the very teachers who need to be booted.      


Thanks for proving my point (0.00 / 0)
There are a few bad teachers, this is true, but they're not the cause of our schools' problems, and we don't need to change the entire structure of our educational system, or engaging in a right-wing union-bashing project, to deal with it.

This whole "omg bad teachers" thing is the biggest mountain out of a molehill I've seen in some time. It's just not a major part of the problems facing our schools.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave


[ Parent ]
BTW... (0.00 / 0)
it seems that someone you banned from Calitics has a bone to pick with you.  :-)

[ Parent ]
Confession: Maybe I was a low information voter on this one (0.00 / 0)
I thought Aceves wason the side of teachers. I was basing opinion on candidate speeches at Dem Party events. It took Torlakson a long time to say anything specific or put actual content up on his website, Aceves gave good speeches.

Actually I didn't know Aceves was competitive so I voted for Torlakson to make sure Romero didn't win.

Are you sure there will be a runoff?

Guess I still have San Francisco hippie values, although I'm an engineer


[ Parent ]
Aceves is not an Arne Duncan type (0.00 / 0)
He does not seem to go in for the kind of teacher-bashing that our US Secretary of Education supports. But his policy positions are in support of things like merit pay and undermining union work rules, which will only hurt teachers' ability to be effective.

Yes, there will indeed be a runoff between Aceves and Torlakson in November. The SPI race operates as all races now will under Prop 14 - top two go on to November primary.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave


[ Parent ]
Calitics in the Media
Archives & Bookings
The Calitics Radio Show
Calitics Premium Ads


Support Calitics:

Advertisers


Referrals
Technorati
Google Blogsearch

Daily Email Summary


Powered by: SoapBlox