The GOP is Going Extinct in California (Davis, Campbell: homes, restaurants)

[californio sur]

Originally Posted by majoun

I was surprised by how few votes Dennis got.

He was polling much better than Republicans usually do in the 8th District as long as he was being ignored. Once the Bay Guardian and SF Weekly started turning their hatchets on Dennis (due to his poll numbers suggesting that he'd be a real threat), his support seemingly evaporated, and he wound up doing no better than other Repubs have against Pelosi in the end (and worse than some). I wasn't under the illusion he'd win but I thought she'd win by a narrower margin than usual. Turns out I was wrong.

At least I voted for him in what may be my final election in SF considering I want to go back home down south and join you and the other L.A. peeps on C-D back home.

The Greens didn't run a candidate in the 8th District this year. In fact Matt Gonzalez endorsed Dennis due to his views on gay marriage and weed.

Well several polling organizations were way off it appears. The LA Times\USC polling was as close to being the most accurate & their exit polling was so good that they called the election within 10 minutes after the polls closed. But, of-course, it is easy to predict that the Democrats will win in California though the state attorney general race is still be tabulated and it may take several more weeks to count all the mail-in ballots.

[majoun]

Originally Posted by ZhugeLiang

I can't believe anyone takes their opinion pages seriously. They generally double as the funny papers.

Unfortunately, enough people did so as to dash Dennis' hopes of giving Pelosi a serious challenge. As long as he was ignored, his poll numbers were rising, but once they and the liberal blogs turned their hatchets on him (because they were scared of him, just like the liberal blogs turned their hatchets on Tom Campbell because they were scared of him) he got far fewer votes than I expected.

[californio sur]

Originally Posted by SacTown11

I voted Democrat in 2006 and mostly in 2008. I doubt you can say the same in regards to voting Republican. I am not an ideologue for either corrupt party... nice try. I pushed Bill Durston hard against Lungren in 2008, but I wouldn't expect you to understand the importance of fighting for Individual liberty. You and the Republican hacks are only interested in forcing your ideology upon the entire country.

Although, i am sure in your mind I am lying...for that i don't really give a damn.

You don't have to prove anything to me and I beleive you though it doesn't matter what I think anyway so don't have a cow. I don't know what you are referring to as "ideology" when it applies to the Democrats. If being concerned about economic justice, the environment, education for all and human rights then I guess I am an "ideologue" in your mind. The ideology of the GOP that puts an emphasis on gay people and abortions is absurd in my mind since neither issue has anything to do with a secular world. That is my biggest issue with Republicans; they are hypocrites of the worst kind that repulse many many Californians and, therefore, the GOP is anemic and impotent here, which is good.

[californio sur]

Originally Posted by majoun

Unfortunately, enough people did so as to dash Dennis' hopes of giving Pelosi a serious challenge. As long as he was ignored, his poll numbers were rising, but once they and the liberal blogs turned their hatchets on him (because they were scared of him, just like the liberal blogs turned their hatchets on Tom Campbell because they were scared of him) he got far fewer votes than I expected.

The liberals didn't have to go after either Dennis or Campbell since the Republicans did the dirty work themselves. Don't know much about the San Francisco congressional race since it did not receive much media attention in southern California but it seems logical that any Republican in the Bay Area needs to be extraordinary to ever win against someone of Nancy Pelosi's stature. But with Campbell the GOP went after him since they were afraid that he might be pro-gay marriage. I've read that if Campbell had actually been the candidate for either governor or senator that he would have done very well among independents and some Democrats. So, as usual, Republicans eat their own in their blind adherence to the Bible-belt.

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by majoun

I was surprised by how few votes Dennis got.

He was polling much better than Republicans usually do in the 8th District as long as he was being ignored. Once the Bay Guardian and SF Weekly started turning their hatchets on Dennis (due to his poll numbers suggesting that he'd be a real threat), his support seemingly evaporated, and he wound up doing no better than other Repubs have against Pelosi in the end (and worse than some). I wasn't under the illusion he'd win but I thought she'd win by a narrower margin than usual. Turns out I was wrong.

At least I voted for him in what may be my final election in SF considering I want to go back home down south and join you and the other L.A. peeps on C-D back home.

The Greens didn't run a candidate in the 8th District this year. In fact Matt Gonzalez endorsed Dennis due to his views on gay marriage and weed.

wow, when you said I want to go back home, down south I thought, Holy Cow, you are moving to AR or Al, then I realized you meant So Cal. Darn, I would love to see you living somewhere around here. It would be interesting to say the least...

[ZhugeLiang]

Originally Posted by majoun

just like the liberal blogs turned their hatchets on Tom Campbell because they were scared of him) he got far fewer votes than I expected.

That's a different situation entirely. Campbell didn't get the GOP nomination because the CA GOP only wants "real Republicans."

The senate race was like the 2002 gubernatorial race all over again. Nominate the guy who's a sure winner? Nah, we want REAL REPUBLICANS!

[Fontucky]

Originally Posted by californio sur

but avoid the label "Republican" at all costs. But who can blame them if they hope to keep friends and employment in California.

Surely you can't be serious.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by SacTown11

You act like having one party rule is a good thing....I will never understand people like you. Every nation ruled by one party in all of history has been dictators over the lives of their citizens...mostly brutal

Most of my views are pretty much in line with Cal Surs. However this one I share with you. Whether liberal or conservative, strict or benign, one party systems are troublesome at best and disastrous failures at worse.

While I don't think todays GOP is good for Ca. and what Ca. stands for, I would like to see another party in the state rise up and compete with the dems.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by californio sur

I don't know what you are referring to as "ideology" when it applies to the Democrats. If being concerned about economic justice, the environment, education for all and human rights then I guess I am an "ideologue" in your mind. The ideology of the GOP that puts an emphasis on gay people and abortions is absurd in my mind since neither issue has anything to do with a secular world. .

This is right here. First off, a secular world is exactly what the GOP does not want. They want the USA to be a Christian Saudi Arabia in many ways. You're right though, they do seem to have an unhealthy obsession with gays don't they? LOL

[Lovehound]

Originally Posted by Gentoo

Whether liberal or conservative, strict or benign, one party systems are troublesome at best and disastrous failures at worse.

Indeed. Just take for example the US national government as created in 1776, with governmental power being divided up into legislative (Congress), judicial (Supreme Court) and executive (Presidency), and Congress itself being divided into two houses (HR, Senate). The intent of this design is to have checks and balances, balancing power against itself to keep too much from being concentrated in one place.

With a single party system there are no checks and balances. The single party just does whatever it wants with nothing to restrain it. It would have to be a pretty damned good party for that to work out well, and human nature being what it is that is either unlikely or impossible.