As many of you know, I'm a proponent of the "Drill Now" coalition that believes that the laws of supply and demand still govern modern day economics, and that increasing domestic supplies of oil will not only reduce the price of oil and reduce our dependency on foreign oil, it will increase revenues for the state & local jurisdictions without raising taxes on hard-working families.
Today, this was in the Long Beach Press Telegram & the Daily Breeze:
"By John Canalis, Staff Writer
Article Launched: 08/27/2008 11:31:22 PM PDT
LONG BEACH - A bill by Assemblywoman Betty Karnette, D-Long Beach, could lead to the discovery and extraction of additional oil from the Wilmington Oil Field beneath the harbor and pour hundreds of millions of dollars into city, port and state coffers, officials said Wednesday.
Assembly Bill 2165 would allow the State Lands Commission to negotiate a contract with the city and Occidental Petroleum Corp. to search for reserves and open new wells in the western end of the nation's third-largest oil field.
The agreement could mean an estimated $130 million to the city, $150 million to the port and $200 million to the state over 10 years, according to a bill summary.
'As we face difficult budget times at both state and local levels of government, this bill has the potential to help protect us from cuts to important city services, such as public safety,' Karnette said in a prepared statement.
'And as a Long Beach resident, I'm all for that.'"
Has the issue of higher gas prices reached a boiling point for voters, including Democratic voters throughout Long Beach? As many of you have correctly advised me as early as June, the answer appears to be "YES". With Senator McCain edging past Senator Obama in the Gallup Daily Tracking Poll within days AFTER both the Democratic VP selection and the start of their convention, Democratic pollsters appear worried. Both of these events usually trigger a measurable increase in polling for the party candidate, and the state Democrats need voters to be excited about their presidential candidate in order to hide all of their failings here in California. Because this is not the case, and with 20%-30% of former Hillary voters stating their support for McCain (plus another roughly 20%+ of former Hillary voters still undecided), State Democrats are going to start feeling the pinch.
Assembly member Karnette's legacy will mean little if she cannot successfully hand off her termed-out seat to her mirror-image candidate, Bonnie Lowenthal. With California, and especially Long Beach, being a big source of Hillary supporters, the Democrats need to try to win those voters back. Because Senator Obama's campaign has not yet been successful in securing much more than 50% of them, this leaves open opportunities not only for Senator McCain to compete in California, but for Republican Assembly nominee Gabriella Holt to entertain Democrats & Independents that formerly supported Karnette, and are now taking serious looks at Senator McCain.
I believe this is an attempt by Assembly member Karnette and fellow Democrats to try and take the oil issue off of the table, and I hope our Republican nominees and leadership call them out for what this is...blatant pandering. I understand that Democrats will like this bill because it will provide more funds for them to waste; do you really think that public safety has such a low priority in the state budget that their services would be the first to go? And if so, why aren't Republicans calling for an open, public look at how all state services are funded, and where they are on the Democrat's list of priorities? If Public Safety and Education are so high on their lists, why are they the two subjects always threatened to be cut if another bond isn't passed?
We'll have to see how serious Assembly member Karnette is in ensuring this bill actually gets passed, or if this is merely a political stunt to say "See, Democrats want to solve the oil crisis! We introduced a bill!". I suspect that the worst thing that the Legislature could do, as far as Karnette and the Democrats are concerned, is actually pass this bill. I hope the Republicans call her bluff and pass it!
Then Bonnie can go back to the PV Land Conservancy & the Sierra Club and explain whether she supports Karnette's bill to drill in the district. I think you all know my position...
Showing posts with label McCain. Show all posts
Showing posts with label McCain. Show all posts
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Saturday, August 9, 2008
South Bay / San Pedro Republican Get-Out-the-Vote 2008
Fellow 54th AD Republicans,
It's time to kick off the fall campaign season with a motivating rally for the Republican ticket! August 14th is McCain Nation Night, so let's get together for John McCain's first national event day and get organized for the election. All of our local GOP candidates need our support!
South Bay / San Pedro Republican Get-Out-the-Vote 2008
August 14th, 2008 7:00pm
1891 N. Gaffey St. San Pedro, CA
Please come to my event to talk about John McCain's agenda for America and to discuss what we can do to help him win. Then listen to other local candidates or their representatives to learn how you can help them get elected. As the election is only a few months away, this event will focus on making sure every supporter is empowered to get out the vote in their neighborhood.
John McCain consistently puts his country before his political interests and is committed to addressing the tough issues America cares about most. Our Republican candidates are also taking on the special insterests killing California, and they need our help! Please join us for this important and fun event!
Invited speakers include (partial list):
Lydia Gutierrez – Republican Nominee, 25th Senate District
Brian Gibson – Republican Nominee, 36th Congressional District
Gabriella Holt – Republican Nominee, 54th Assembly District
I hope you can join us for this important event!
Very Best Regards,
John S. Stammreich
Chairman - 54th AD Republican Central Committee
It's time to kick off the fall campaign season with a motivating rally for the Republican ticket! August 14th is McCain Nation Night, so let's get together for John McCain's first national event day and get organized for the election. All of our local GOP candidates need our support!
South Bay / San Pedro Republican Get-Out-the-Vote 2008
August 14th, 2008 7:00pm
1891 N. Gaffey St. San Pedro, CA
Please come to my event to talk about John McCain's agenda for America and to discuss what we can do to help him win. Then listen to other local candidates or their representatives to learn how you can help them get elected. As the election is only a few months away, this event will focus on making sure every supporter is empowered to get out the vote in their neighborhood.
John McCain consistently puts his country before his political interests and is committed to addressing the tough issues America cares about most. Our Republican candidates are also taking on the special insterests killing California, and they need our help! Please join us for this important and fun event!
Invited speakers include (partial list):
Lydia Gutierrez – Republican Nominee, 25th Senate District
Brian Gibson – Republican Nominee, 36th Congressional District
Gabriella Holt – Republican Nominee, 54th Assembly District
I hope you can join us for this important event!
Very Best Regards,
John S. Stammreich
Chairman - 54th AD Republican Central Committee
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Term Extensions: Which is worse – "Bush" or Karnette? (Part I)
The Wall Street Journal ran a very interesting op-ed on Tuesday titled “Bush’s Third Term”. Most of us have heard that slogan used by the Democratic spin doctors to describe Senator McCain’s campaign, but the Journal was talking about the other candidate: Senator Obama. The op-ed points out Senator Obama’s quick re-direction away from the far left agenda to the center by suddenly adopting many of President Bush’s policies & positions. Examples include NAFTA, Nuclear Power, faith-based programs and even support for General Petreaus.
This is proof of acknowledgement by even the Democrat’s top of the ticket that in order to win on issues, candidates need to be centered, and maybe even close to the moderate right. After all, even Democratic voters tend to seek honesty, integrity, family values & fiscal responsibility in their elected representatives. The issue of which candidate’s platform more closely resembles President Bush’s gave me two thoughts: 1) Even Senator Obama has had to acknowledge that not all of President Bush’s policies are bad for the country; and 2) more locally, are we content with extensions of our state and local representation by electing those that would carry on the same policies and voting records as those they are replacing?
In our own district, the two termed-out incumbents are 25th District State Senator Ed Vincent and the 54th District State Assemblymember Betty Karnette. Because most of those in the overlap between the 25th Senate District and the 54th Assembly District are from the Palos Verdes Peninsula and have not been strong areas for Senator Vincent anyway, I will instead focus on the Assembly race that involved all of us here in the 54th AD. Long Beach Vice Mayor Bonnie Lowenthal is running to (literally) replace Assemblymember Karnette, and we need to decide if we as voters are content with 6 more years of the same representation. To do so, we need to see how Karnette has voted on important legislation and decide how they align with the goals of Long Beach, San Pedro, Avalon and the Palos Verdes Peninsula.
To start, voters throughout the 54th AD had a chance to extend the assembly terms of Karnette through last February’s Proposition 93, the deceptively-named “Term Limit Reduction” measure that would have allowed Karnette another 6 years in the Assembly. The measure tried to assert that it was reducing the terms of the current legislative membership, but most voters knew that voting for the measure would extend the number of terms of their respective legislator. The measure was expected to pass because it was assumed that on both Democratic and Republican districts, voters liked their representative and would vote to extend each of their careers. What Speaker Nunez and his political advisers failed to realize is that most voters do not have a favorable opinion of the state (or federal) legislative branch, and are willing to remove their own representative if it means removing all of the other do-nothing legislators faster as well. Combine that with most of our Republican leadership standing behind the Republican platform of term limits, the measure failed across the state. What is interesting to note is that the measure also failed in key regions where it should have passed, according to the Democratic strategy, including within Los Angeles County, and most importantly, within our own 54th Assembly District.
It seems district voters in February decided that Karnette was not worth saving and that new leadership was desired.
So the next logical question is: If voters did not choose to extend Karnette’s representation in the Assembly, do they want a “new” assembly member who will most likely continue to vote & perform the same way that Karnette did?
This is the question I will dive into in Part II of this series by comparing both Bonnie Lowenthal’s platform and Republican Assembly nominee Gabriella Holt’s platform to that of Betty Karnette’s to see whether either candidate can be given the label “Karnette’s Third Term”.
In Part III, I will tie in the Journal’s or-ed about Senator Obama by discuss whether his run to the center, and specifically his embracing of key Republican positions, will help or hinder legislative candidates at the federal, state and local levels, and how the Democratic Party will need to reconcile its messages to have both credibility to the centrists & moderates, as well as maintaining the interest if it’s far-left base to turn out in November.
This is proof of acknowledgement by even the Democrat’s top of the ticket that in order to win on issues, candidates need to be centered, and maybe even close to the moderate right. After all, even Democratic voters tend to seek honesty, integrity, family values & fiscal responsibility in their elected representatives. The issue of which candidate’s platform more closely resembles President Bush’s gave me two thoughts: 1) Even Senator Obama has had to acknowledge that not all of President Bush’s policies are bad for the country; and 2) more locally, are we content with extensions of our state and local representation by electing those that would carry on the same policies and voting records as those they are replacing?
In our own district, the two termed-out incumbents are 25th District State Senator Ed Vincent and the 54th District State Assemblymember Betty Karnette. Because most of those in the overlap between the 25th Senate District and the 54th Assembly District are from the Palos Verdes Peninsula and have not been strong areas for Senator Vincent anyway, I will instead focus on the Assembly race that involved all of us here in the 54th AD. Long Beach Vice Mayor Bonnie Lowenthal is running to (literally) replace Assemblymember Karnette, and we need to decide if we as voters are content with 6 more years of the same representation. To do so, we need to see how Karnette has voted on important legislation and decide how they align with the goals of Long Beach, San Pedro, Avalon and the Palos Verdes Peninsula.
To start, voters throughout the 54th AD had a chance to extend the assembly terms of Karnette through last February’s Proposition 93, the deceptively-named “Term Limit Reduction” measure that would have allowed Karnette another 6 years in the Assembly. The measure tried to assert that it was reducing the terms of the current legislative membership, but most voters knew that voting for the measure would extend the number of terms of their respective legislator. The measure was expected to pass because it was assumed that on both Democratic and Republican districts, voters liked their representative and would vote to extend each of their careers. What Speaker Nunez and his political advisers failed to realize is that most voters do not have a favorable opinion of the state (or federal) legislative branch, and are willing to remove their own representative if it means removing all of the other do-nothing legislators faster as well. Combine that with most of our Republican leadership standing behind the Republican platform of term limits, the measure failed across the state. What is interesting to note is that the measure also failed in key regions where it should have passed, according to the Democratic strategy, including within Los Angeles County, and most importantly, within our own 54th Assembly District.
It seems district voters in February decided that Karnette was not worth saving and that new leadership was desired.
So the next logical question is: If voters did not choose to extend Karnette’s representation in the Assembly, do they want a “new” assembly member who will most likely continue to vote & perform the same way that Karnette did?
This is the question I will dive into in Part II of this series by comparing both Bonnie Lowenthal’s platform and Republican Assembly nominee Gabriella Holt’s platform to that of Betty Karnette’s to see whether either candidate can be given the label “Karnette’s Third Term”.
In Part III, I will tie in the Journal’s or-ed about Senator Obama by discuss whether his run to the center, and specifically his embracing of key Republican positions, will help or hinder legislative candidates at the federal, state and local levels, and how the Democratic Party will need to reconcile its messages to have both credibility to the centrists & moderates, as well as maintaining the interest if it’s far-left base to turn out in November.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Drill now...or $8 per gallon gas? What is your choice?
Like many of you, I've been listening to the daily talk shows on both the radio and on cable discuss the oil crisis. I believe that unless the Democratic Congress figures out how to get gasoline back down under $4 per gallon, the energy crisis will be a much bigger factor on the November election than the Iraq War or anything else Democrats can stir up. Let's face it: the Iraq War has not been the primary factor in the November elections since 2002 (yes, BEFORE we went in!) when Republicans (and Democrats) campaigned on a strong forceful approach to Iraq. In 2004, Senator Kerry had plenty of skeletons in his closet that our Swift Boat friends were happy to enlighten us about. In 2006, the Republican Party had both entangled itself with various scandals and Democrats did a good job of exposing the wasteful government spending of Republicans. In 2008, I believe the issue that will eclipse the Iraq War will be the cost of gasoline and what each candidate (at all levels) proposed to do about it.
This is where we have a HUGE advantage! Regardless of your income level, political affiliation, or other concern, everyone is affected by the price of gasoline. Even my mass transit friends who still ride the MAX bus from San Pedro to El Segundo (and hence do not commute in a car) have to purchase groceries and other things that are becoming more expensive due to the cost of transportation. Lower income families are affected the most, as they are seeing a higher percentage of their disposable income having to go to the rising cost of gasoline and related expenses. So...our new leaders HAVE to have viable solutions to this growing problem.
The ideas coming from the Democrats center around this basic premise: We have to find someone to BLAME! It's either the speculators, or the naughty SUV drivers (like me) or maybe even the greedy oil companies that want to (heaven forbid) actually make a profit doing business. The latter two "causes" have recently become less promoted by Democrats, likely because most of their fellow voters are also driving SUV's, and voters are starting to see that adding taxes to businesses like oil companies will simply raise the prices at the pump. (Remember - businesses don't pay ANY taxes! Consumers do when the increase costs are flowed into the prices of goods and services.) I particularly like the recent emphasis on blaming the speculators, particularly because Democrats won't admit that the solutions proposed by Republicans would actually address the issue of speculation.
Republicans have been leading the fight to declare now as the time to consider drilling oil domestically. Presidential candidate John McCain has recently acknowledged that high prices combined with our dependency on foreign oil have re-prioritized our need to explore and utilize our natural resources while our technological advances are busy working to strengthen viable energy alternatives. While I hope that all states with oil resources will choose to tap into them, I think McCain has the proper position that gives states the right to decide whether they will drill. (This is one of the basic tenets of the Republican Party - states' rights over federal rights as much as possible). All three states with the most oil reserves, Alaska, California and Florida, are experiencing recent increases in their unemployment rates. Opening the opportunities for oil companies to invest in drilling operations in each of those states will almost assuredly increase employment. What else will it do? Increase supply, of course!
But Democrats claim that we would not see any significant amounts of oil from these operations for 10+ yuears. Thought more credible engineers state that we wold see significant amounts within 3 years, wouldn't forecasts of higher oil amounts (even later than sooner) have a significant impact on the speculation of oil volume? So wouldn't increasing the oil supply take away the alleged "power" of the speculators?
This is more of the Democrats' need to have issues with parties to blame, rather than viable solutions that could dry up an issue. Such is the case with the homeless, the state education system and affirmative action. If any of these issues were to suddenly be declared resolved, activists of these issues would be without purpose. Unfortunately for them, they underestimated the will of their allies, the far-left environmentalists, to drive the price of gasoline so high.
Even Senator Obama has been quotes as saying that he thinks prices should be this high, but that he wishes it hadn't risen so fast. I guess he was hoping that we'd all have to wait for him to be elected before paying so much for gas.
Don't worry Senator! With your party in control of Congress, we're on a pace to see $8 a gallon gasoline by October. What will Americans do then?
This is where we have a HUGE advantage! Regardless of your income level, political affiliation, or other concern, everyone is affected by the price of gasoline. Even my mass transit friends who still ride the MAX bus from San Pedro to El Segundo (and hence do not commute in a car) have to purchase groceries and other things that are becoming more expensive due to the cost of transportation. Lower income families are affected the most, as they are seeing a higher percentage of their disposable income having to go to the rising cost of gasoline and related expenses. So...our new leaders HAVE to have viable solutions to this growing problem.
The ideas coming from the Democrats center around this basic premise: We have to find someone to BLAME! It's either the speculators, or the naughty SUV drivers (like me) or maybe even the greedy oil companies that want to (heaven forbid) actually make a profit doing business. The latter two "causes" have recently become less promoted by Democrats, likely because most of their fellow voters are also driving SUV's, and voters are starting to see that adding taxes to businesses like oil companies will simply raise the prices at the pump. (Remember - businesses don't pay ANY taxes! Consumers do when the increase costs are flowed into the prices of goods and services.) I particularly like the recent emphasis on blaming the speculators, particularly because Democrats won't admit that the solutions proposed by Republicans would actually address the issue of speculation.
Republicans have been leading the fight to declare now as the time to consider drilling oil domestically. Presidential candidate John McCain has recently acknowledged that high prices combined with our dependency on foreign oil have re-prioritized our need to explore and utilize our natural resources while our technological advances are busy working to strengthen viable energy alternatives. While I hope that all states with oil resources will choose to tap into them, I think McCain has the proper position that gives states the right to decide whether they will drill. (This is one of the basic tenets of the Republican Party - states' rights over federal rights as much as possible). All three states with the most oil reserves, Alaska, California and Florida, are experiencing recent increases in their unemployment rates. Opening the opportunities for oil companies to invest in drilling operations in each of those states will almost assuredly increase employment. What else will it do? Increase supply, of course!
But Democrats claim that we would not see any significant amounts of oil from these operations for 10+ yuears. Thought more credible engineers state that we wold see significant amounts within 3 years, wouldn't forecasts of higher oil amounts (even later than sooner) have a significant impact on the speculation of oil volume? So wouldn't increasing the oil supply take away the alleged "power" of the speculators?
This is more of the Democrats' need to have issues with parties to blame, rather than viable solutions that could dry up an issue. Such is the case with the homeless, the state education system and affirmative action. If any of these issues were to suddenly be declared resolved, activists of these issues would be without purpose. Unfortunately for them, they underestimated the will of their allies, the far-left environmentalists, to drive the price of gasoline so high.
Even Senator Obama has been quotes as saying that he thinks prices should be this high, but that he wishes it hadn't risen so fast. I guess he was hoping that we'd all have to wait for him to be elected before paying so much for gas.
Don't worry Senator! With your party in control of Congress, we're on a pace to see $8 a gallon gasoline by October. What will Americans do then?
Thursday, May 22, 2008
California now a "Battleground State", thanks to the CA Supreme Court
No doubt many of your have already heard about the California Supreme Court decision last week to overturn the will of the voters in declaring marriage as being between a man and a woman to be "unconstitutional". This is despite the fact that California voters have been very open to the opportunities of domestic partnerships, including child adoption, partner benefits and other laws protecting members of the homosexual community. Rather than accept California as the role model state for others looking for the middle ground to satisfy large majorities on this issue, activist groups like Freedom to Marry and others are challenging California with an "All or Nothing" attitude.
Because of this irrational persistence, there is an increasing tide of conservatives and moderates who just may ensure that the latter is the case.
I have been in Washington, DC this past week, and I read this editorial in USA Today this morning that makes this same assertion. (You know there's problems on the far left when conservatives like me start agreeing with media outlets like USA Today.) Here are the opening paragraphs from the editorial:
"Our view on same-sex marriage: California ruling invites backlash against gay rights
Civil unions, the best solution, are jeopardized by court decision.
Last week, when California became the second state after Massachusetts to allow gay marriage, same-sex couples celebrated and began planning June weddings. Good for them. But the unfortunate and unnecessary impact of the California Supreme Court ruling might well have been to set back the cause of gay rights more broadly.
"The judges ruled 4-3 that gays' inability to get married amounts to discrimination under California's constitution, even though the state's domestic partnership laws give them the benefits and responsibilities of marriage.
"In other words, pragmatic political compromise on the intensely controversial issue is not allowed in California. It's all or nothing, and recent political history leaves little doubt about what will follow.
"In the three years after Massachusetts' top court legalized gay marriage in 2004, 23 states rushed to adopt constitutional bans on gay marriage. This presidential election year is likely to bring more of the same.
"In effect, California's high court fixed something that wasn't broken. The state's domestic partnership laws have been a model for other states searching for the needed middle ground that addresses the deep-felt national division over gay marriage."
The full editorial, plus opposing views from both sides of the issue, are located here: http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2008/05/our-view-on-sam.html#more
My take on the ramifications of this ruling is this: the California Republican Party now has a November issue to motivate ultra-conservatives to turn out (and vote for the full Republican ticket), and for moderates (who accepted the domestic partnership middle-ground) to hold Democratic politicians responsible for risking California's status as the original middle-ground state. In my opinion, the persistence of the ultra-left wing activists in the gay-rights community has made California a potential battleground state for McCain.
Why do I believe this?
First, did you notice how quickly Senator McCain scheduled a trip to Stockton after the ruling? Second, have you heard a press release from either Democratic Presidential campaign since the ruling? Senator McCain has already gone on the record as being a defender of the sanctity of marriage between a man & woman, which is still supported by 56% of voters nationwide, according to the Gallup Poll cited in the USA Today editorial. Finally, the right-wing groups that had been pushing for a constitutional amendment about marriage have been given new life, and are now collecting more signatures at a feverish pace.
In our own assembly district, the issue of homosexual marriage will be a volatile one. With Long Beach being a stand-out city on gay-rights issues and activism, no doubt the ruling has been the topic of many local conversations and speeches. But with the heavy concentration of Catholic/Christian Democrats in both East Long Beach and San Pedro who will not be comfortable sacrificing their religious tenants in favor of a secular movement, the 54th Assembly District is going to have plenty of debates and discussions on this topic. Especially after the constitutional amendment measure is confirmed for the November ballot.
If Republicans claim the established middle-ground on this issue by accepting the premise of domestic partnerships while holding the line and protecting the sanctity of "marriage" as being between a man and a woman, I believe we will see moderate districts, including our own 54th AD, lean heavily toward McCain and our other great Republican candidates.
Let's hope the far-left Democrat candidates running this fall feel the pressure from the gay-rights special interest groups to keep leaning even more left. The irrational insistence to claim the "M" word (marriage) for themselves has re-opened a Pandora's Box that conservatives and moderates can work together to close in the best interests of all voters.
Because of this irrational persistence, there is an increasing tide of conservatives and moderates who just may ensure that the latter is the case.
I have been in Washington, DC this past week, and I read this editorial in USA Today this morning that makes this same assertion. (You know there's problems on the far left when conservatives like me start agreeing with media outlets like USA Today.) Here are the opening paragraphs from the editorial:
"Our view on same-sex marriage: California ruling invites backlash against gay rights
Civil unions, the best solution, are jeopardized by court decision.
Last week, when California became the second state after Massachusetts to allow gay marriage, same-sex couples celebrated and began planning June weddings. Good for them. But the unfortunate and unnecessary impact of the California Supreme Court ruling might well have been to set back the cause of gay rights more broadly.
"The judges ruled 4-3 that gays' inability to get married amounts to discrimination under California's constitution, even though the state's domestic partnership laws give them the benefits and responsibilities of marriage.
"In other words, pragmatic political compromise on the intensely controversial issue is not allowed in California. It's all or nothing, and recent political history leaves little doubt about what will follow.
"In the three years after Massachusetts' top court legalized gay marriage in 2004, 23 states rushed to adopt constitutional bans on gay marriage. This presidential election year is likely to bring more of the same.
"In effect, California's high court fixed something that wasn't broken. The state's domestic partnership laws have been a model for other states searching for the needed middle ground that addresses the deep-felt national division over gay marriage."
The full editorial, plus opposing views from both sides of the issue, are located here: http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2008/05/our-view-on-sam.html#more
My take on the ramifications of this ruling is this: the California Republican Party now has a November issue to motivate ultra-conservatives to turn out (and vote for the full Republican ticket), and for moderates (who accepted the domestic partnership middle-ground) to hold Democratic politicians responsible for risking California's status as the original middle-ground state. In my opinion, the persistence of the ultra-left wing activists in the gay-rights community has made California a potential battleground state for McCain.
Why do I believe this?
First, did you notice how quickly Senator McCain scheduled a trip to Stockton after the ruling? Second, have you heard a press release from either Democratic Presidential campaign since the ruling? Senator McCain has already gone on the record as being a defender of the sanctity of marriage between a man & woman, which is still supported by 56% of voters nationwide, according to the Gallup Poll cited in the USA Today editorial. Finally, the right-wing groups that had been pushing for a constitutional amendment about marriage have been given new life, and are now collecting more signatures at a feverish pace.
In our own assembly district, the issue of homosexual marriage will be a volatile one. With Long Beach being a stand-out city on gay-rights issues and activism, no doubt the ruling has been the topic of many local conversations and speeches. But with the heavy concentration of Catholic/Christian Democrats in both East Long Beach and San Pedro who will not be comfortable sacrificing their religious tenants in favor of a secular movement, the 54th Assembly District is going to have plenty of debates and discussions on this topic. Especially after the constitutional amendment measure is confirmed for the November ballot.
If Republicans claim the established middle-ground on this issue by accepting the premise of domestic partnerships while holding the line and protecting the sanctity of "marriage" as being between a man and a woman, I believe we will see moderate districts, including our own 54th AD, lean heavily toward McCain and our other great Republican candidates.
Let's hope the far-left Democrat candidates running this fall feel the pressure from the gay-rights special interest groups to keep leaning even more left. The irrational insistence to claim the "M" word (marriage) for themselves has re-opened a Pandora's Box that conservatives and moderates can work together to close in the best interests of all voters.
Friday, February 15, 2008
Why John McCain can help us win the 54th AD
The past two weeks have proved to be both unpredictable and opportunistic. As most of you know, I was the CD 46 chair for Rudy Guliani, whom I believe would have given voters of all demographics someone to consider. We also saw the biggest flaw in the "big state" strategy during his campaign: the early primaries offer free media coverage that literally feeds one's campaign. McCain, Romney & Huckabee figured this out, and were hence the three that survived to Super Tuesday. (I don't consider Ron Paul a serious candidate; send me a comment if you'd like me to debate this on a future posting.)
After Super Tuesday's performance by Senator McCain, I noticed something that may have been lost on most ultra-conservatives of our Party. Despite our state Party's exclusion of non-Republicans from our primary, McCain took an overwhelming majority of California's delegates. The hypothesis of the state leadership was having solely Republican votes in the presidential primary would yield a more conservative presidential nominee. I believe that California Republicans know what the state Republican activists haven't comprehended yet; that having a moderately conservative candidate gives us the best chance of not only winning the White House, but also many of our closer legislative battles by competing for independent voters.
Our Congressional, State Senatorial, and Assembly candidates will appear on their respective November ballots directly after the presidential candidates, meaning that a voter's choice for President will be immediately followed by their choices for the state-level races. Because of this, our nominees will have a significant portion of their vote intertwined with that of our presidential nominee within their districts. If our nominee does well in a district, so will our state-level nominees there. If our nominee cannot lure the independent vote, currently estimated at 22% in our own 54th Assembly District, then our district and others currently held by Democrats will have little chance of changing hands.
The one thing John McCain brings over all else is his ability to attract the growing number of independent and third-party candidates throughout California, as well as traditional Democrats (aka. JFK/Reagan Democrats) that have turned away from the MoveOn.org activists controlling their party. In the 54th AD, the Democratic registration advantage is still close to an 8% gap at 43%-35%. This means that with even split of independents, our nominee still loses in the 54th 54%-46%. Where we stand a chance to win is by winning more independents & some Democratic voters. This requires both a presidential nominee able to capture independents, and an assembly nominee who can hold on to those independents when they reach the assembly member portion of the ballot.
The liberal press will continue to "report" that Senator McCain needs to focus on patching up the conservative voters and making his platform more appealing to our own Party members. I think most of us would attest that neither Clinton nor Obama will be luring many Republican voters to their camp; what they can do is lure more independent and moderate voters if McCain is forced to make his platform ultra-conservative to the point where he alienates most of the independent vote. The Democrats are relying on the far-right activists within our party to create dissention within it. Because of their current situation with Obama & Clinton both garnering 49% of their delegates, they can only hope that Republicans also continue to battle within. DNC Chairman Howard Dean has gone on record as being concerned about their eventual nominee only having 8 short weeks to campaign for the independent vote due to having no clear nominee until their convention. If we are foolish enough to wait until then to ally ourselves around one nominee as well, then we've taken away the opportunity to start talking to the independent 22% in our district, as well as the independent 30% state-wide.
I hope our party leaders have realized the opportunity we now have; not only to keep the White House in safe Republican hands, but a genuine opportunity to take batteground legislative districts, like our own 54th AD, by giving 22% of our district a presidential candidate worth voting for. Issues like the economy, taxes & national defense are those we've been successful at luring independent voters; issues such as abortion, gay rights and illegal immigration will only keep our candidates pinned down in a quagmire of debates that will take moderate voters away. There's a difference between "staying true to all of one's principles" & having to live in a world where any of those principles cease to exist. Senator McCain may not have been the most ultimate conservative in the past few years; but this may be the very characteristic that keeps our country out of the hands of the Democratic Party.
And having a nominee who can get independent voters gives us the opportunity to have them continue down the ballot to our other fine candidates.
After Super Tuesday's performance by Senator McCain, I noticed something that may have been lost on most ultra-conservatives of our Party. Despite our state Party's exclusion of non-Republicans from our primary, McCain took an overwhelming majority of California's delegates. The hypothesis of the state leadership was having solely Republican votes in the presidential primary would yield a more conservative presidential nominee. I believe that California Republicans know what the state Republican activists haven't comprehended yet; that having a moderately conservative candidate gives us the best chance of not only winning the White House, but also many of our closer legislative battles by competing for independent voters.
Our Congressional, State Senatorial, and Assembly candidates will appear on their respective November ballots directly after the presidential candidates, meaning that a voter's choice for President will be immediately followed by their choices for the state-level races. Because of this, our nominees will have a significant portion of their vote intertwined with that of our presidential nominee within their districts. If our nominee does well in a district, so will our state-level nominees there. If our nominee cannot lure the independent vote, currently estimated at 22% in our own 54th Assembly District, then our district and others currently held by Democrats will have little chance of changing hands.
The one thing John McCain brings over all else is his ability to attract the growing number of independent and third-party candidates throughout California, as well as traditional Democrats (aka. JFK/Reagan Democrats) that have turned away from the MoveOn.org activists controlling their party. In the 54th AD, the Democratic registration advantage is still close to an 8% gap at 43%-35%. This means that with even split of independents, our nominee still loses in the 54th 54%-46%. Where we stand a chance to win is by winning more independents & some Democratic voters. This requires both a presidential nominee able to capture independents, and an assembly nominee who can hold on to those independents when they reach the assembly member portion of the ballot.
The liberal press will continue to "report" that Senator McCain needs to focus on patching up the conservative voters and making his platform more appealing to our own Party members. I think most of us would attest that neither Clinton nor Obama will be luring many Republican voters to their camp; what they can do is lure more independent and moderate voters if McCain is forced to make his platform ultra-conservative to the point where he alienates most of the independent vote. The Democrats are relying on the far-right activists within our party to create dissention within it. Because of their current situation with Obama & Clinton both garnering 49% of their delegates, they can only hope that Republicans also continue to battle within. DNC Chairman Howard Dean has gone on record as being concerned about their eventual nominee only having 8 short weeks to campaign for the independent vote due to having no clear nominee until their convention. If we are foolish enough to wait until then to ally ourselves around one nominee as well, then we've taken away the opportunity to start talking to the independent 22% in our district, as well as the independent 30% state-wide.
I hope our party leaders have realized the opportunity we now have; not only to keep the White House in safe Republican hands, but a genuine opportunity to take batteground legislative districts, like our own 54th AD, by giving 22% of our district a presidential candidate worth voting for. Issues like the economy, taxes & national defense are those we've been successful at luring independent voters; issues such as abortion, gay rights and illegal immigration will only keep our candidates pinned down in a quagmire of debates that will take moderate voters away. There's a difference between "staying true to all of one's principles" & having to live in a world where any of those principles cease to exist. Senator McCain may not have been the most ultimate conservative in the past few years; but this may be the very characteristic that keeps our country out of the hands of the Democratic Party.
And having a nominee who can get independent voters gives us the opportunity to have them continue down the ballot to our other fine candidates.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
