California Midterm Election Discussion Thread

It'll be interesting to see what happens, everyone is predicting a Newsom/Villarogsa runoff (which means Villar will be Governor as LA has more votes than SF, and most of SF hates Newsom for not preventing the housing crisis) but it all depends on turnout. With mail-in ballots by default, a huge amount of Democrats might vote or a huge amount of previously untapped Republicans might vote. A major factor here is that there are eight Democrats on the ticket, all of which have their own cults of support. Meanwhile the CA GOP is rallying around Cox with Allen as a potential spoiler.

In other words: it's a fucking mess and it's exactly why Brown was against the top-two system when it was passed four years ago.

(Also don't defend the CA GOP ever, every single CA GOP Governor has passed gun control with Arnold going so far to ban all .50 cal weapons and most handguns, building off the handgun safety act Wilson passed. At their recent convention they couldn't even give Cox their official endorsement because he only had 55% of the delegates and not the minimum 60%. The party is fucking garbage and you are all seriously better off writing in Little or voting Green).

Attached: Car-Accidents[1].jpg (1440x560, 160.82K)

I hope so because then Newsom is guaranteed to loose. But more likely the beaners will not be able to read their ballots (the default ones sent are in English) or know how to properly fill them out causing the election to be dominated by white liberals and centrist Republican cucks like every other CA election is.

Thanks for the hard autism, user. My only addition is that Gavin Newsom and Antonio Villaraigosa both want to be president someday, and Gavin "HIV 4eva" Newsom is a real danger. He's got the inside track to win here, and if he does we can pack it in. Every evil of the Clinton era will be in full force here, with a Getty Oil SJW fag-enabling major money anti-white kike loving sociopath in charge. He is the face of the enemy.

Newsom isn't on track to be President though. He's against three things that most urban Democrats support: California High Speed Rail, California Public Employees' Retirement System, and SB827 (zoning reform deregulation). Newsom's main strategy is to appeal to centrist Republicans who are all fiscal conservatives first even if it means letting in millions of illegals or subsidizing abortions (which means less food stamp costs).

If he's Governor and is successful on those three points he'll pretty much destroy the CA Dem party. Valley Dems will fight him hard for CAHSR while unions fight for CalPERS and urban renters get frustrated and stop turning out. He'd skirt this by working with the remaining CA Republicans and centrist/urban Dems who have no shame and will destroy the entities that support them. On the other side is Villarogsa who is pro fracking which soyboys refuse to accept.

Such is driving the current angst within the CA Dem party, which is why Chiang is in the running at all.

Gavin Newsom isnt appealing to any centrist Republicans , he is a staunch supporter of single payer health care in California. I'm pulling for Villaraigosa just because he's an incompetent who won't be able to inflict as much damage to the state. He just wants the perks, chicks, and photo ops.

I can shorten the list considerably with just one idea: Don't consider anyone who won't declare a party. If their convictions aren't strong enough to at least declare themselves a libertarian or independent, then they're not going to be strong enough to stand up for our interests against a sea of liberal voices. Hell, most of them probably ARE liberals.

The thing that stood out to me the most about this ballot is how many dems are running, dividing the vote. In the ling run this may work in our favor. Libertarians aren't exactly our guys, and neither are neocons these days, bit they're a damn sight better than committed liberals or stealth liberals running as undeclared.

single payer is cheaper than calpers, if Newsom slays that he'd also slay the unions too. For a centrist, "sane" fiscal conservative there's a lot to like.

Well constructed and informative, thanks OP. I hope we can have this level of information and organization for the remainder of the midterms. Trump can't do much without throwing out the republicucks and bluejew democrats.

It all depends on turnout. Everyone gets a postal ballot now, which can result in anything since the CA Dems failed to make official endorsements. 18 y/o teens will obviously lean Dem but they won't have a clue who to vote for beyond what they see in the news, and in the news every Dem on the ballot has something wrong with them (Newsom is against transit, Villaraiagosa supports fracking, Chaing is a gook (a problem for mexicans) and Eastin represents the CTA). However the CA GOP fucked up too as their stupid internal policies prevented them from endorsing Cox, who only got 55% of the vote not the 60% needed for an endorsement. But despite that the CA GOP is also much less split, with them it'll either be Cox or Allen.

Really it's just a shitshow. Chaing and Eastin (and everyone beneath them) exist only to spoil the ballot against Newsom and Villaraiagosa. Even if Dems get one on the ballot they've basically lost a spot because they fucked up and couldn't just make a god damn endorsement which the CA GOP can't exploit either because they didn't make any endorsements either.

It's just shit shit shit shit. And not even in a Zig Forums way but just a "wow this is fucking stupid and doesn't help anybody" way.

For example let's break down these numbers: 7,362,490 Californians voted for Hilary in 2016 and 3,916,209 for Trump with a record 75.3% turnout. Let's up that to 7,500,000 Dems and 4,000,000 Reps for simplicity.

Split amongst Cox and Allen is 2,000,000 votes each. If each of the four top Democrats receives the exact same amount of votes then each Dem will only have 1,875,000 votes each resulting in two Republicans facing off in the general election.

Democrats would need 500,000 new voters to break even, assuming votes are split equally. But for their best case scenario assuming 100% turnout AND a 2% increase in the total voting population who all vote Democrat gives us 9,973,094 Democratic voters, which split four ways is 2,493,274 votes per candidate, but the CA GOP would only have to increase their total voters by 1,000,000 in order to take the two top spits. However, if turnout returns to the 2014 primary level then only about 30% of eligible voters will participate meaning only about 3,000,000 voters total, which is about 1,800,000 Democrats and 1,200,000 Republicans. If Dems split four ways then they'd only get 450,000 votes per candidate while Republicans get 600,000 votes for their two candidates.

So again the CA GOP could eek out a long shot victory from this, but it all depends the division within CA Dems > division within CA Reps. Are there 600,000-2,000,000 people willing to vote for Chaing or Eastin? I doubt it but there's no way to know for certain because everyone will get a ballot with no information about the candidates. If people just choose based on hearsay or what they see on Twitter, anything could happen because each of the four Dems have some sort of non-liberal element or position about them that the media will exaggerate.

(disclaimer: not that it would be change much since the CA GOP are hardcore cucks especially Cox and Allen. Never forget that.)