California 10th Congressional District -- Special Election to replace Ellen Tauscher.
The Candidates: California Lieutenant Governor John Garamendi, Democrat
David Harmer, Republican
Various minor party candidates
The Polling: The only poll of the race, from SurveyUSA, shows Garamendi with a 50-40 lead.
Analysis: The ballyhooed race in New York's 23rd Congressional District is not the only special election today; voters will also go to the polls to select a successor to Ellen Tauscher in California's 10th Congressional District in Northern California's inland East Bay. Actually, they've already been going to the polls, or at least to their driveways, since a majority of the voters in the district are expected to use California's vote-by-mail option.
On paper, this race ought not to be close. Against Republican opponents in 2004, 2006 and 2008, Tauscher was re-elected with margins ranging from 65.2 to 66.5 percent of the ballots. In the special "jungle" primary in September, five Democratic candidates earned a collective 64.4 percent of the vote (closely matching Tauscher's historical figure), with Garamendi taking the fairly narrow plurality at 25.7 percent. The district went for Barack Obama nearly 2:1 last November, and Democrats have a 47-29 registration edge in the district. Garamendi, being the state's Lieutenant Governor, is quite well known, and had previously been considering a gubernatorial bid.
Still, the Republicans have made it a somewhat competitive campaign, with Harmer collecting a respectable $670,000 toward the race, not that far behind Garamendi's $942,000. The SurveyUSA poll shows them within 10 points. The district did vote for Arnold Schwarzenegger by an 18-point margin in 2006. And Garamendi has one major liability: he is associated with S-a-c-r-a-m-e-n-t-o, that horrible place where budgets and incumbents go to die. Could Harmer actually pull off the upset?
It's not very likely. The most immediate problem is that 51 percent of the district has already voted, according to SurveyUSA, with those votes going to Garamendi by 10 points. Now, to be clear, these aren't "hard" numbers -- this is still just a poll, with all the usual inexactitudes owing to sampling error and the like. But the Garamendi campaign claims that there have been 25,000 Democratic absentee ballots returned so far to 19,000 Republican ones -- not, actually, all that impressive a margin for the Democrats, but probably enough to keep them out of trouble. Indeed, the fact that voting is comparatively easy in California because of mail balloting ought to hedge against the possibility of hugely lopsided turnout in this heavily Democratic district.
Meanwhile, independents who are dissatisfied with Garamendi will have the option of voting for the Peace and Freedom or Green Party candidates, which may hold down Garamendi's margin but also take potential votes off the table from Harmer.
A final point: I'm not a huge fan of this inference-by-absence stuff, but the fact that the NRCC is not putting much effort into the race suggests that they don't think it's winnable. If Harmer had some internal polling showing himself within striking distance, you'd certainly think they'd have thrown a few hundred thousand in.
The Odds: I might take about a 15-1 flier on Harmer -- and if Republicans do win here, or perhaps even pull close enough that the outcome will be uncertain for several days as California finishes counting mail ballots, they'll really have something to crow about. With that said, I suspect that Garamendi will more likely than not win by larger than the 10-point margin that SurveyUSA projects. By the way, this race is not without upside to the Democrats, as Garamendi should be significantly more liberal than Tauscher, who has not always been a reliable vote for her party on issues like national security.
11.03.2009
2009 Elections Preview: CA-10
by Nate Silver @ 12:30 PM...see also 2009 elections, california, special elections
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

31 comments
My district! Headed out to the polling place right now. Garamendi will take it no problem. Just adding a little extra security.
I'm on my way also. However, I never received a sample ballot and the registrar of voters site can't find my address for the polling location. I had to call the Garamendi office to help me find where my polling place actually exists.
Not a good sign if I'm not alone in the district.
Will ANYONE make the court case that vote-by-mail is unconstitutional?
Doesn't the Constitution mandate that Election day is on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November and not the six weeks leading up to that?
The opportunity to vote by mail seems to exponentially increase the possibility for mischief.
@chuquito
The Constitution leaves the method of conducting elections up to the States.
The opportunity to vote by mail seems to exponentially increase the possibility for mischief.
There has been no evidence of widespread vote fraud in the states which have vote-by-mail systems. These states have methods of confirmation against registered voter rolls. In general, it seems at least as safe as vote-in-person methods, and it seems to encourage more people to participate in our democracy.
"Doesn't the Constitution mandate that Election day is on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November and not the six weeks leading up to that?"
chuquito, early in-person voting is allowed in many states, and personally, I think that's a good thing. It gives people who might not be able to get to the polls on Election Day a chance to have their voices heard. If a court case overturned that as well as vote-by-mail, I'd be very upset, and I'm sure I'm not the only one.
I do agree that voting by mail seems to allow for shenanigans with the vote, but I'm not too familiar with it (we don't have it in my home state of CT). On the other hand, it should increase voter turnout substantially if you don't have to actually travel to the polling place. Is there a way to figure out if there actually is any increase in voter fraud in states that allow voting by mail?
The Odds: I might take about a 15-1 flier on Harmer -- and if Republicans do win here, or perhaps even pull close enough that the outcome will be uncertain for several days as California finishes counting mail ballots, they'll really have something to crow about.
Something to crow about? The Earth will have shifted its axis. Conservatives are a plurality, not a 90% majority. The fact that a GOP candidate is even remotely competitive in this deep, deep blue district is the only item of note here.
CA-10 is not a counterpart to NY-23, where the first conservative candidate in forever should win in a RINO district taken easily by Obama in 2008. NY-23 is to the left of over 80 Blue Dog districts won by Bush and/or McCain.
NY, NY...If a conservative can win there, he or she can win anywhere.
@chuquito: while I agree with you that vote by mail opens up risks of fraud (bipartisan fraud, to be sure), I don't think you can make the constitutional case against it. They count the ballots on election day.
But the larger plus for voting by mail, or for permitting absentee ballots, is that it gives people a chance to vote who happen to be on the road or who are for other reasons not able to vote in person on that day (e.g., hospitalized, in military service, etc.).
Will ANYONE make the court case that vote-by-mail is unconstitutional?
Doesn't the Constitution mandate that Election day is on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November and not the six weeks leading up to that?
Er, no, I don't think so. Article 1, Section 4:
The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Place of chusing Senators.
Article 2, Section 1:
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors...
@chuquito
Mail-in certainly carries risks associated with not requiring a body with a pulse to show up. But Oregon has gone with completely mail-only for a while now and they haven't had the wheel drop off.
@Bart DePalma
NY-23, where the first conservative candidate in forever should win in a RINO district
Love it. It's fun watching the wingers eat their moderates. It contracts the Republican Party. Maybe they're shooting for 10% party identification, rather than 20%?
Shrinkers:
You are missing the entire point of the Tea Party rebellion. We are working to put conservatives in office to stop or reverse the socialist policies of the current government. It matters not at all what party banner those conservatives are running under.
If the GOP wants to increase its party identification numbers, it will run conservative candidates we can support. If the GOP wants to continue to hemorrhage members, it is free to continue Dubya's "big government conservatism" oxymoron. Its their choice.
If the Blue Dogs want to keep their jobs, they will vote down Obamacare and Cap & Tax, cut taxes, cut spending and balance the budget so we can vote for them. If not, they will be roadkill in 2010. Its their choice.
This is a conservative wave. Its up to the candidates whether they ride the wave or wipeout.
"NY, NY...If a conservative can win there, he or she can win anywhere."
Yeah, let's see how Democrats have been doing in what is undoubtedly a liberal NY district:
2008 - 35%
2006 - 37%
2004 - 29%
2002 - 0%
2000 - 23%
1998 - 21%
1996 - 25%
1994 - 18%
1992 - 21%
1990 - 38%
1988 - 25%
1986 - 0%
1984 - 29%
1982 - 28%
Oh. Hrm. Well, I'm sure if a conservative can win that district, he can win anywhere! Green Lantern politics!
@Bart DePalma
You are missing the entire point of the Tea Party rebellion. We are working to put conservatives in office to stop or reverse the socialist policies of the current government. It matters not at all what party banner those conservatives are running under.
I take your point on "party banner". As far as that goes, I wish you luck. Personally, I'm convinced a multi-party system would be a lot more healthy than a two-party system. So to that extent, I support such efforts wholeheartedly, and if the end result is many more major American parties, that is all to the good.
For the rest of it - I'd say that is a cogent and reasonable cause to pursue, if there actually were any "socialist" policies being advanced by the Obama administration. I'd still disagree with your direction, because I don't have the same knee-jerk fear of the word "socialism" that you seem to have - but at least I'd be able top respect your position as a rational one.
However, since the Obama administration is most definitely not pursuing any "socialist" policies, your goal seems to be merely to throw a term you hope will be offensive, and then just oppose the attempts of our current President to address America's problems. That's not a very productive agenda, is it?
Do you really feel that kind of reactionary negativity will attract many more people than the fearful handful it already has? Didn't 2008 prove that sort of negative political campaigning is vulnerable to a more positive and solution-oriented approach?
Adam:
I would much rather lose the RINO voters and have a conservative win NY-23 by a narrower margin than have Scozza win and vote for Obamacare, Cap & Tax and more spending and taxes in conformance with her NY track record.
Once again, the goal here is to elect conservatives.
I am unsure why you as a Dem would be comforted by the election of a conservative over a liberal kos certified RINO simply because the conservative won by a less than historical margin. Hoffman will be in office either way.
"I am unsure why you as a Dem would be comforted by the election of a conservative over a liberal kos certified RINO simply because the conservative won by a less than historical margin. Hoffman will be in office either way."
Why would I be comforted? Because I want the same thing you do: for candidates like Hoffman to gain control of the Republican party. I want the more conservative candidate to win every Republican primary.
I want this because I believe their views are wildly out of touch with the actual American electorate and doing this will remove any hopes they have of regaining power. They can be a very loud, very powerless minority.
You obviously disagree, and think if you nominate more arch-conservative candidates you'll win more. But at the very least, we're united in the desire to have more of them. So let's hope that happens, and then see which one of us is right about the result.
shrinkers:
You have a point about the necessity of the Tea Party movement to offer a positive agenda ala Reagan and Gingrich as compared to Goldwater.
Adam said...
Why would I be comforted? Because I want the same thing you do: for candidates like Hoffman to gain control of the Republican party. I want the more conservative candidate to win every Republican primary. I want this because I believe their views are wildly out of touch with the actual American electorate and doing this will remove any hopes they have of regaining power. They can be a very loud, very powerless minority.
Why do you believe this apart from simple hope?
The reason I am thrilled about NY-23 is because this district is to to the left of over 80 normally Red districts which have gone Dem over recent cycles. If Hoffman can win without party support in NY-23, conservatives with party support should have an easier time winning in the Blue Dog districts.
If the GOP wants to increase its party identification numbers, it will run conservative candidates we can support.
lol, so is Sarah Palin going to stump for conservative candidates in all 435 House districts? Are all those conservative candidates going to be able to loan themselves about 25% of their total fundraising? (Hoffman's campaign actually has more debt than fundraising.)
You guys have focused the entire conservative movement on a single district in a special election to replace a Republican representative, which should STRONGLY favor you, and it appears like the district is going to go less Republican than it has in 25 years.
Where's the conservative momentum for Harmer? Oh that's right, there isn't any, and he's going to lose. So the conservative movement managed to get their candidate elected in a Republican district in a special election. This is GREAT NEWS for the Republican Party! :P
WV: eysiberg... "Ey si berg dead ahead, Captain!" Sorry, I suck at WVs. :D
"Why do you believe this apart from simple hope?"
Because whenever polling is done on the actual stands the various parties have (without noting who has them), liberal positions win by a wide margin. Decades of "liberals are bad" propaganda has made it so the country self-identifies as 40% conservative, 40% moderate, 20% liberal, but the stances they actually believe don't line up with those labels.
So I think the more honest Tea Party types are about what they actually believe, and the more we have an actual debate on the issues instead of treating red vs blue like a football game, the more my side will win. And I'm sure you believe that too. So let's work towards more honest discourse so we can have those debates in the future.
@Bart DePalma
You have a point about the necessity of the Tea Party movement to offer a positive agenda ala Reagan and Gingrich as compared to Goldwater.
There ya go. I agree here, Reagan (or his handlers) was brilliant at presenting a positive, upbeat image, and that was probably the biggest factor in his election and his re-election. Bush I could not sustain the image, particularly when the economy tanked and the debt skyrocketed.
Gingrich also offered a coherent (if wrong-headed) set of proposals, his "Contract with America", and this, more than anything else, contributed to the Republican successes of that era. They lost it when they went negative, as with the Clinton impeachment - the more they went on the attack, the better Clinton and the other Dems did at the ballot box and in public opinion polls.
To be a success, the tea party people need to outline a positive and plausibly productive approach. Anti-tax, anti-"socialism", and anti-Obama is not enough - Regan and Bush/Bush have proven the first of the three is a disaster, the second is meaningless, and the third is not effective as long as Obama's positives outweigh his negatives. If the tea goers want to gain ground, they have to describe what they will replace the current approaches with - and it has to be different from what we've seen from the last three Republican administrations.
Bart De Publican
When less than two-hundreds of one percent of the population participates in a protest that’s hardly a “rebellion”. And the “wave” you’re seeing must be in your bathtub.
You first need a national party behind you. Say, I know—why not take over the GOP? Destroy all those commie-liberal-RINOs like Lindsay Graham, Richard Lugar, and Orrin Hatch. Start a grassroots conservative movement and call it Bachmann-Turncoat-Overweight. (As in Michelle Bachmann, Joe Lieberman & Rush Limbaugh.) Kinda catchy, ya think?
Sarah Palin could be the darling of the movement. Of course you’ll have to cough up 100 grand just to have her speak anywhere, but if every single member of the Teabagger movement gave $10,000, you could probably stage three or four big Palin events. Wouldn’t that be something? Teabaggers would swarm to them like flies on sh—
Well you get the idea.
How’s that big Teabagger rally planned for Denver going? Don’t tell me you guys had to cancel it for lack of interest. I haven’t seen anything about it in the papers lately, or is that because of some conspiracy in the press to downplay the Bagger-birther movement?
What's odd is that so much emphasis is put on NY-23, even though by doing so it has completely changed it from a case in point to a special case. The national spotlight on it has jumbled up all the variables and made it completely independent from how a regular election might go in a regular election year along with all the other regular elections going on dividing media attention. Thus, each group of people on the political spectrum have a narrative for what it means if their team wins or loses, with not two of the narratives being able to coexist in a logical argument.
Bart De Publican…
If you could get Newt Gingrich to be the head of your Teabagger Party then you would be off and running.
Gingrich was the most thoroughly despised American politician in the past forty years (until Dubya came along) so having him head your “movement” would be a real “mavericky” thing to do.
By the way—how do arrive at the conclusion that NY-23 is so liberal when it returned its incumbent Republican congressman to Washington in 2008 with 65% of the vote? If I didn’t know you better I’d say you were trying to spin something here…
By the way—how do arrive at the conclusion that NY-23 is so liberal when it returned its incumbent Republican congressman to Washington in 2008 with 65% of the vote?
Duh, that's easy. New York is not real America, as we all know. They are all effete arugula-eating white-guilt-having black homosexuals working for the liberal media while on welfare. DUUUUUR. That's why they're electing a conservative candidate! What is so confusing about this?
NATE
my thanks for posting this analysis of the other special election.
hopefully, if any news outlets are really 'fair & balanced' they will FINALLY compare results between these 2 congressional elections.
the DEM will most likely HOLD in CA-10, and the GOP/CON will HOLD in NY-23...
now the analysts can parse the size of the margins & demos inside the voting data - but overall it will be a wash in DC.
actually, as Nate noted, not quite.
CA-10 will go MORE progressive/left
NY-23 will most likely go MORE conservative/right
Q - this proves ???
A - NOTHING in such a small sample
NJ & VA have little if any difect reflection on DC politics [they are local issues]
ME SSM referendum will be a reflection on the ability of the hard-line evangelical righ-wingers to continue to use HATE & fear to troll for votes for the GOP imho
let us hope that the haters lose this time...
BD:If the GOP wants to increase its party identification numbers, it will run conservative candidates we can support.
Persuter said... lol, so is Sarah Palin going to stump for conservative candidates in all 435 House districts? Are all those conservative candidates going to be able to loan themselves about 25% of their total fundraising? (Hoffman's campaign actually has more debt than fundraising.)
Sarah will campaigning and raising money in all the swing districts and many of the safe seats to pick up political IOUs from the GOP for 2012. No one in the GOP comes close to Palin's ability to bring in crowds and cash.
Pragmatus said... Sarah Palin could be the darling of the movement. Of course you’ll have to cough up 100 grand just to have her speak anywhere, but if every single member of the Teabagger movement gave $10,000, you could probably stage three or four big Palin events. Wouldn’t that be something?
Sarah has been active in the Tea Party movement for some months now...without charge. She was the first one to pick up on the movement's potential, long before her supposed intellectual betters in the GOP and Team Obama.
Sarah has been bypassing the old media and communicating with the Tea Party movement and other conservatives through the social networking media. Taking a page from the Dean and Obama campaigns, Palin and the Tea Party folks have been very active on Facebook and Twitter. When Sarah writes a Facebook post, it is picked up first across the conservative (and often the lib) blogosphere, then by Fox News and then by the Dem media. most recently, Palin gutted Biden on Facebook after his crack that she did not understand energy policy, to general hilarity around the conservative blogosphere.
I agree with Pan. The nation has created an observer effect (woot physics reference) by observing/interfering/funding/over-analyzing/hyping the race. NY 23 on its own would not have been all that interesting. This is the rest of the country's debate for the soul of the Republican Party.
@BDP: No one in the GOP comes close to Palin's ability to bring in crowds and cash.
Well, there's a fact that both sides can agree on.
Palin gutted Biden on Facebook after his crack that she did not understand energy policy
Leaving aside whether or not this was the case, what about a comment posted on her facebook page shows in any way that Palin wrote it? Seriously, take off the blinders for a moment and switch around the party labels if you have to. If you had a liberal politician that you thought was an idiot when they were interviewed and were in one-on-one debates and they suddenly posted something cogent and intelligently argued, wouldn't you be skeptical?
Adam said...
"NY, NY...If a conservative can win there, he or she can win anywhere."
Yeah, let's see how Democrats have been doing in what is undoubtedly a liberal NY district:
2008 - 35%
2006 - 37%
2004 - 29%
2002 - 0%
2000 - 23%
1998 - 21%
1996 - 25%
1994 - 18%
1992 - 21%
1990 - 38%
1988 - 25%
1986 - 0%
1984 - 29%
1982 - 28%
Sooo, if Owens gets more than 38% it will be a moral victory for the Dems in NY-23 lol
and BDP, you can rationalize until the cows come home re: the party of No wanting to totally purify itself of all non-conservatives, but this is this best case scenario for Obama in 2012 ie the wingers, like yourself and Beck/Limbaugh etc., totally taking over your dwindlin' flock of extremists!
take care, blessings
Sarah will campaigning and raising money in all the swing districts and many of the safe seats to pick up political IOUs from the GOP for 2012. No one in the GOP comes close to Palin's ability to bring in crowds and cash.
You've said that there are 80 districts which are farther right than NY-23. Will she be campaigning in all of them plus a bunch of safe seats? How many moderate Republicans is she going to go after? And how many Senate seats will she be campaigning for? I absolutely agree that no one else in the GOP can bring in crowds and cash better than Palin - that's precisely why I think you're going to have a problem when she's trying to win a hundred elections rather than one.
Maybe she can make a Facebook post every day from mid-July to Election Day asking her supporters for money. I'm sure that it will work just as well as it did for Hoffman every time. Who, of course, was outraised by Owens, even with Hoffman's $100,000 loan to his own campaign.
GREAT NEWS for the Republican Party!
That is my district.
I think MSM is avoiding mentioning the race because they are afraid illegal spying might sneak into the conversation.
As an activist in favor of legalizing marijuana, I have been illegally spied on among other things. I blog about it in the comments at AlterNet.
When I complained to Ellen Tauscher about the press covering up the war crimes I was exposing, Congress voted to immunize the press.
I have been a BIG embarrassment for them so they just don't want to go there. They would rather ignore us.
Post a Comment