CA-10: I Expect to Run for Congress

Garamendi (5.00 / 2)

This move makes good career sense for Garamendi -- if he wins, it's potentially a long-term position, and one he should excel in.  Perhaps it also enhances him as a possible Senate candidate, down the road somewhere.

But I'm sorry to lose the most progressive candidate in the governor's race -- the only Dem to speak out against these lousy propositions.  He was also, arguably, the most electable (if nominated).  In choosing from the remaining candidates, progressives will have to be very clear about what they expect in terms of repealing the 2/3 rules, and not going backwards on critical services and equitable distribution of tax burdens.

I'm also sorry that if he wins, Dems would be handing over another statewide office to the GOP (assuming a Republican is nominated and confirmed).  Yes, it's not the most significant office in the world (though Garamendi made the most of it that anybody could).  Still, it's one the GOP has not earned and does not deserve.

---

by: DavidT @ Wed Apr 22, 2009 at 18:00:42 PM UTC

I've seen a very interesting (4.50 / 2)

scenario put out there.  Simply put, the legislature gets to confirm any Schwarzenegger appointment for LG.  So they have a bit of leverage.  They could deal that Arnold gets his candidate in exchange for him accepting a majority-vote fee increase to fill the budget gap.

---

by: David Dayen @ Wed Apr 22, 2009 at 18:10:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hmmm... (4.00 / 1)

I would love to see Tom Campbell appointed for Lt.Governor.
It would wreck the Poizner/Whitman billionaires club.  

---

by: mmunson @ Wed Apr 22, 2009 at 23:40:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

assuming he wins... (3.50 / 2)

If one of the legislators win, it screws the state as it will take one more GOP vote to pass the budget. But if Garamendi wins and if Arnold picks a GOP legislator, it is great news as it takes one less vote to pass the budget.

Garamendi's announcement actually gives us a chance of a net 2 legislative seats from where we were yesterday.

Twitter: @BobBrigham

---

by: Bob Brigham @ Wed Apr 22, 2009 at 18:49:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

There are a bunch of candidates in this race (8.00 / 1)

There are a lot of candidates in this race, and not all of them are legislators.  I know you used to be very excited about Adriel Hampton, but there is also still the impressive figure of Anthony Woods.

This race is going to be quite competitive, whenever the election is held.

I think?

---

by: Brian Leubitz @ Wed Apr 22, 2009 at 20:24:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

a legislator would be a mistake (2.00 / 1)

Adriel's good people, Woods would be better than either of the crap-ass legislators.

Garamendi winning would not hurt state government like the legislators winning would, but he is also the only candidate whose victory could actually help the budget mess in Sacramento.

Twitter: @BobBrigham

---

by: Bob Brigham @ Wed Apr 22, 2009 at 20:37:21 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Propositions (5.00 / 1)

Not sure I follow your comment about the propositions.  Garamendi is the only one to speak out against them.  The other candidates support the propositions.  Bully for John Garamendi.

http://www.ibabuzz.com/politic...

 

---

by: hilltopper @ Wed Apr 22, 2009 at 19:46:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Garamendi's decision (4.50 / 2)

I am so sad that we are losing John as Gov. candidate.  He is an outstanding person and has always represented the people with courage and integrity.  Of course, he will be an effective champion in D.C. but I hate losing him to deal with our California issues on the State level.  No matter what, I will always support him.

---

by: Carole Lutness @ Wed Apr 22, 2009 at 20:50:42 PM UTC

it's the lonly logical move (4.00 / 1)

I'm a firm believer that Mr Garamendi would make the best governor of all the candidates, but (and it's a very big but) Brown and Newsom between them had managed to lock up most of the major money and endorsements.  So continuing in the Governor's race would be a fairly quixotic pursuit.  He's smart enough to take a realistic look and see that he can be a very viable candidate even in this rather crowded field.  And, if elected, he'll clearly be one of those "better democrats" we all want to see.  And even if the LG position moves from D to R, that's pretty much a "so what" event, given the power of that office.  I might add that a bunch of people who worked very hard to elect Buchanan to the Leg. have not been at all happy about her trying to jump to congress so soon.  

---

by: Chico David RN @ Wed Apr 22, 2009 at 21:00:41 PM UTC

Uhm, no the logical decision was to run for CA-3... (5.00 / 1)

Garamendi could have kicked out zombie Lungren, increasing his statewide clout even higher.  Stumping adjacent to Charlie Brown might even flip CA-4, something to inspire grassroots and national netroots during a midterm year.  

University students flock to Garamendi, finding his passion and authenticity engaging.  They could've been boots on the ground in the summers of 2009 and 2010.

Down ticket Assembly and Senate races might've looked very different across a whole swath of Northern California. Forget changing 2/3rds rule, win 2/3rds of the seats!

CA-3 would then be blue for the 2011 redistricting, when he could hand it off to candidates that aren't yet developed or ready to run.  After two productive years in the House, he could make a credible run for DiFi's Senate seat in 2012.

This may all seem rather speculative and optimistic but Democrats have been insufficiently greedy, I feel, over the last few years - the opposition is disorganized and discredited, why not think big?

---

by: SPD @ Thu Apr 23, 2009 at 00:14:30 AM UTC

[ Parent ]