GOVERNOR
DEMS: Well, JERRY obviously.
REPUBS: Hey, do whatever you want but, barring a some force majeure, it’ll be Whitman. I
My personal attitude is a pox on both their houses for their endlessly negative and mendacious campaigns and for both trying to (falsely) position their generally moderate records as slightly to the right of Ivan the Terrible. But if I were registered Republican I’d vote for Poizner, who is quite capable in many ways (even if doomed). And the main thing that recommends him is—he’s not Whitman who, before getting herself on the ballot, hardly ever lowered herself to the plebeian act of voting in this state she wants us to let her run. During her eBay tenure, she was accused of making money for herself at the expense of her shareholders.
Now the woman has decided she wants to buy herself a governorship.
I won’t be voting for either of them in the general election. I’m rooting for the old guy, EGB—Edmund G. Brown, Jr.
However, this is a liberal state that has a habit of electing Republican governors. And the thought of it being Whitman, is not a good one.
LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR
DEMS: GAVIN NEWSOM The Lt. Gov doesn’t do a hell of a lot. At least Newsom is a bright, ambitious guy who will liven up the place. Janice Hahn is perfectly fine too. Having a woman would be nice. But Newsom has my vote.
REPUBS: Vote for the guy who’s already there, ABEL MALDONADO.. He’d be fine. (He already has been fine.)
ATTORNEY GENERAL
DEMS: KAMALA HARRIS. Despite her recent problems with the San Francisco crime lab, Harris is far more qualified and suited for the job than any of her opponents She’s Intelligent, a strong prosecutor, and has run a big agency well. But she’s also refreshingly progressive on such issues as lowering the prison recidivism rate. And she’ll aggressively go after environmental and corporate lawbreakers, among others.
It’s nice that people like Feinstein and Pelosi have endorsed her but, except in the political sense, they don’t really matter. It does, however, matter that she’s been endorsed by most of the major law enforcement figures in the state, save Sheriff Lee Baca, who has endorsed Cooley. Even Bill Bratton has reached out to endorse the woman.
SFPD Chief George Gascon (formerly the Assistant Chief of the LAPD), who is most in a position to know how she’s performed as SFDA, has endorsed Harris—and it does not appear to be a proforma endorsement.
There are, however, two issues that Harris is going to get slammed over.
The first is the death penalty. Harris campaigned for SF DA as an anti-death penalty candidate. When she won, it should have come as a surprise to no one that, given the opportunity to ask for the death penalty in a big murder case, she instead made good on her campaign promise and didn’t.
The case that has caused some controversy for Harris was the 2004 murder of San Francisco police officer Isaac Espinoza. Many in the police community feel that Harris should have asked for death. However, it turned out to be a mute point when the jury came back with a second degree murder conviction. This meant that the death penalty was off the table, no matter what Harris wished.
The far bigger issue for Harris is going to be the crime lab a scandal. The basis of the scandal is the revelation that an SF crime lab tech who was supposed to be testing narcotics evidence, instead made a habit of snorting the stuff. To make matters worse, the evidence-Hoovering tech had a criminal record.
Now, keep in mind that the crime lab is run by the SFPD, not the DA’s office. And the lax atmosphere that produced the druggie tech can be chalked up to the colossally dysfunctional nature of the SF police department prior to the hiring of SF Chief of Police George Gascon.
However, some have accused Harris and her office of failing to report to defense attorneys the unreliability of the tech once the DA’s office suspected that something was amiss with the woman, which—if true—is a ginormous no-no. (See Brady v. Maryland.)
All this said, Harris is still a far stronger choice than any of her Democratic opponents.
AND ABOUT HER OPPONENTS:
CHRIS KELLY, while a smart man who has demonstrated that he is skillful at memorizing nice sound bite-length statements on the various policy issues, has no experiential understanding of the job and is simply not close to qualified. Plus his primary selling point is that he was the guy in charge of privacy on Facebook, among the most notoriously privacy-challenged corporations in the nation
As for THE REST OF THE FIELD, the three legislators, Ted Lieu, Pedro Nava and Alberto Torrico, each have some strengths, but none comes within a country mile of having the experience necessary to hit the ground running as a DA, and a couple of them sound downright naive on criminal justice issues.
And then there’s ROCKY DELGADILLO, who does have experience But we in LA have been there, done that.
ON THE REPUBLICAN SIDE OF THINGS…STEVE COOLEY, no question.
It’s going to come down to Harris and Cooley. We’ll talk more about the differences in November. But we can’t go terribly wrong with either one.
INSURANCE COMMISSIONER
DEMS: DAVE JONES & HECTOR DE LA TORRE both have strong resumes as consumer advocates. I’m leaning toward Dave Jones, who I think has the most aggressive kick-butt attitude, which the post needs. (For more info, the Modesto Bee has a good rundown on the Jones/de la Torre match up.)
REPUBS, MIKE VILLINES. The only Republican. I don’t know a lot about him but, by all accounts, he is independent minded and simply wants to do a good job in the post, without dragging politics into it.
LAST BUT ASSUREDLY NOT LEAST….
STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION – GLORIA ROMERO
The LA Times has endorsed Larry Aceves over Romero, and they’re wrong-headed. They point out that Aceves is a swell guy and he’s been a school superintendent for a number of California school districts.
But in this troubled educational environment we don’t need another business-as-usual school bureaucrat, no matter how nice he (or she) may be.
We need a reformer. Romero is that person. Over the past year, she has more than proven that she is completely fired up to do the job. She was the prime mover in the legislature who pushed for the statewide changes necessary to be competitive for the federal Race to the Top money. Romero didn’t get everything she wanted, but some tracks got laid for the next go-round. We have Romero to thank for that.
Gloria Romero’s our gal.
TOMORROW…..THE PROPOSITIONS.
PLUS I’LL BE ON THE FILTER TONIGHT at 7:30 PM, talking about the elections, of course—specifically some of the propositions.
PS: I realize I didn’t comment on the Campbell/Fiorina/DeVore U.S. Senate primary. Okay, here’s the condensed version: All three are anti-health care reform, anti gay marriage, and extremely anti-regulation.
Fiorina, the front runner’s main claim to fame is that she was tossed out of Hewlett-Packard after she wrecked the place but walked away with a $21 million parachute. But she too is hoping to buy an election.
Cambell’s a bright, principled guy (even though I don’t happen to agree with some of his principles, on a policy level). He’d be my pick of the three. (DeVore’s the farthest right, and the Tea Party darling.) But right now Fiorina and her money have got the lead.
For Attorney General, my vote is for John Eastman who is the Dean of the Chapman University School of Law.
He has a weekly segment on the nationally-syndicated radio show debating current legal issues (mostly constitutional law) with UCI Law School Dean Erwin Chemerinsky.
He is a conservative, and intellectually holds is own or bests Erwin Chemerinsky during the many debates I have witnessed between them.
Kamala Harris is a first class liar. The people who back her are apparently ok with that. The following shows once again what I’ve said more than once about her. A triple murder with more three special circumstances attached still, according to Harris, is not worthy of the death penalty not because Harris is anti-death penalty but because…
“We reviewed this case over many, many months,” Harris said.
“We have thoroughly reviewed the facts and the evidence and the law in this case, and arrived at a decision based on that review,” she said.
Total crap, she arrived at her decision before looking at anything bout this case, anyone who thinks otherwise is an idiot. The woman is a liar and I think we have enough of those in public office. Amazing that you’re ok with that Celeste.
Here’the whole story….http://cbs5.com/crime/SF.gang.killings.2.1175921.html
I appreciate your input on all these election issues and understand you are a busy woman, but tomorrow is a little late!
I heart Fiorina on Peter Tilden’s show/KABC this morning and she spinned H-P’s failing fortunes under her watch as being part of the whole dot-com bust, but better than competitors. Not the most persuasive. It’s concerning that she, Whitman, Poizner and Kelly are all rich people with no civic history (except Poizner) trying to buy the election – so maybe I’d agree with you that on the Republican side, Poizner comes out ahead just for that reason. Though he flip-flopped on key issues, like having supported environmental legislation as did Arnold, but now, slamming Arnold Schwarzenegger for it.
As for the DA job, I agree about Harris, though you didn’t mention her also being vulnerable on the illegal immigration issue, where some juveniles enrolled in a solid program she was involved with to reduce recidivism, turned out to have been illegal immigrants who should have been turned over to ICE or SOMETHING – I don’t recall the details except it was a big deal to her opponents and the likes of Sure Fire will surely remind us. As he has again. “The woman is a liar and I think we have enough of those in public office. Amazing that you’re ok with that Celeste.” Well, I sure don’t want any more liars, but worse to me, are the phony-pompously pious, simple-minded and coarse Republicans that his opponent represents.
As for Cooley, I’m really concerned about allegations from his own Assn. of Deputy DA’s that were confirmed by the Superior Court Decision I ref’d earlier, a Judge Wright II slapping an injunction on him to desist rampantly retaliation and discriminating against those who don’t play ball with his clique or speak up. I read all over the blogs comments by alleged Asst. DA’s and others in the office who insist they have to be more concerned with watching their backs than just doing their jobs, that it has led to cronyism, blatant prosecutorial misconduct (the Bruce Lisker case keeps cropping up too, as a cause of shame with details that the office doesn’t want us to know) and mediocrity with the best and brightest often leaving. About how Cooley was a very mediocre prosecutor as well, and weak in constitutional law, starting with the First Amendment rights of his own staff. Having said this, I’m appalled by Harmon’s hard-line on not releasing any prisoners even those literally comatose and requiring armed guards, and by how he and Eastman also grandstand on Third Strikes.
Eastman may be the most conservative of the bunch but Pokey has a point that he’s the intellectual equal of Chemerinsky and liberal icons, so at least, the man bases his positions on a solid understanding and articulation of the law, and his intellectual sharpness seems not driven by the thirst for more and more power, human lives in his way be damned, or retribution — or the sort of rigidity that’s the hobgoblin of small minds. I get the sense he could be persuaded by logic and decency. Of all the Republicans, he’s the one who would least scare me.
Agree with Mavis on #3 – with so many people including me, voting absentee, this last-minute flurry of tv ads seems too late. However, as last year’s and other elections showed, someone can have a lead with absentees, but then the last day the opponents can get out a huge get-out-the vote drive, especially if they’re conservatives who can rely on retired homeowners and homemakers who are also voting down taxes. This time the only real tax is LAUSD’s parcel tax, which doesn’t seem to have become a huge rallying cry like the DWP rate hikes and measures were – and the primaries are down party lines, so it won’t do much to hurt the Democrats. But the general will be influenced at least in part by how many conservatives are out to vote down tax increases. If there are no major taxes on the ballot, the Democrats will do relatively better.
Guys, I’ll try to put up a list on the propositions later today. I don’t guarantee to write a lot about them.
I agree that Eastman is interesting. At most, however, voting for him would be a protest vote. Ditto a vote for any of the legislators on the dem side. But protest votes are worthwhile.
Surefire, I don’t love Harris, quite frankly. But I like Chris Kelly less. And the legislators don’t have a chance. Ted Lieu is really quite okay. Of the three, I prefer him, with Torrico second of those three. Pedro Nava, whom I’ve met and chatted with at some length, is not even close to being prepared.
I don’t like any of the DA candidates very much, from either party, but need to do a little more research. I’d at least respect Harris a bit if she’d tell the truth that no matter the circumstances of a murder she would never go after it, not the idiotic spin she puts out when she tosses that penalty aside.
Agreed.
I think she’s actually not bad. Law enforcement people whom I respect think she’s very good. I’ve never met her, but in interviews she reads as quite intelligent and genuinely knowledgeable about the kind of issues the AG will be facing, not just spouting sound bites like most of the rest of the dem candidates.
But also when I hear her interviewed, I resent the spin you’re talking about.
If you’re not mad about Cooley (whom, paradoxically, I actually like personally, even though I’m furious at his office on a near constant basis), vote for Pokey’s guy, Eastman. I think it’s snowball/hell and all that, but he’d be a satisfying protest vote, and would actually register. He’s a very smart dude.
I’ll be interested to know what you decide.
Celeste wrote: this is a liberal state that has a habit of electing Republican governors.
……………….
Ever consider that maybe it’s not a liberal state? Look at the money we spend on throwing people in prison. And, yes, explain Arnold, Pete Wilson, Dukemejian, etc. Liberals don’t elect Republican governors, especially ones like the afformenetioned, unless they’re fucking retarded. And, that could very well be the case too. Seems like Northeastern liberals have the real liberal backbone, where perhaps California liberals just like the idea of being liberal, yet when it comes down to it, are so easily scared into voting republican by right wing propoganda. You can’t be a liberal state and put as many people in prison for non violent crimes as california does.
Torrico for AG, btw. Spoke truth to power about money taken away from education goes right to prisons…and so do the children. A real liberal, who actually puts the inner city in mind and isn’t afraid to say it. Breath of fresh air in this state. We need someone like him under Jerry Brown, who is undoubtedly controlled by prisons and police.
Welcome back Robbie, I love hot dogs.
Good catch, SF. Rob has come in with three new IP addresses in the last 24 hours. I’ve blocked two. Hot Dog is attached to the third. It’s getting boring playing with children.
An adult who wanted to reenter as a commenter would have written me to discuss the matter rather than playing hide-and-go-IP-change.
Did my homework. Fiorina gets my vote and so does Whitman. Cooley’s personal vendetta against some people in his office, one who I don’t like anyway and they could ship him to Siberia and wouldn’t be far enough, was juvenile and I’ll give my vote to Eastman, not that it will do any good.
SBL, as a former union honcho we didn’t always play fair and a couple of Cooley’s whipping boys probably didn’t either.
I’m ok with Celeste’s props.
Let Robbie back, he’s the board Helen Thomas.
SF, Thanks for the conservative take. I just hope people go to the polls. And although, agreed, Eastman doesn’t have a chance, I think that particular vote still sends a message, so is worthwhile.
Eastman’s showing at 34% vs. only 19% for Harman was quite an upset given the conventional wisdom that Eastman was just a protest vote and “doesn’t have a chance.” Coming so close to a long-time incumbent without much money or name ID going into the election, reflects an awful lot of protest votes.