None of the Above, the People have Spoken, uh, NOT

(Satire alert - I hope)  

In sunny California this June, sitting poolside beat out voting as the main activity on Election Day. A record low of 18% overall means that None of the Above was the big winner on Election Day. A new law (which no one read, because "Dude, who cares?!") went into effect this year providing that when the turn-out dips below 50%, no one wins the election. That is, more people not voting then voting is now interpreted to mean the people of the State of California want no one to represent them. So no one will.

No Governor, no Attorney General, not so much of a Legislature. Of course those already elected and not facing election this year get to serve until the next regularly scheduled election. So that means half the Senate remains in effect (all Assembly members face election eery two years; so every one of those suckers is SOL as the kids say), and some County Supervisors and City Council members get to keep their jobs, for another two years that is, until the next record low turnout in 2016.

Of course, as unlikely as it seems, when people find out their potholes won't get fixed, their libraries will go out of business, their schools close and criminals go free, they may find themselves hying it to the polls next time.

On the other hand when they find out their taxes won't be collected either, who knows. Maybe they'll take their savings and buy a personal arsenal and hunkering down instead.

Nightmare before Election Day

High anxiety the day before Election a day.  The S.F. Chronicle says turnout will be low, lower than ever even. And that Republicans vote in higher numbers traditionally in primaries. This is disheartening, as it may well mean my candidate has less of a chance than I would have wanted, much less.  If the Reps vote as they will they get an automatic 20+%. Maybe more and the big red postcard calling them to arms, will boost their vote even more,

Dems will naturally split the vote against the incumbent and voila, here in a solidly Democratic District, the Rep comes out on top (or on the top of the second place).  The so called "moderate" Dem wins easily in the fall.

Is this what top two voting is all about  the outcome hoped for?  Instead of a vigorous intra-party race in the primary for the best Democrat to go head to head with the Rep, it's all up for grabs as once, and the best Democrat may well be left in the dust,

.

I suppose that is what many wanted when they voted for top two, and open voting at that.  The Moderate Dem faces the weak Rep. The election is over in the primary, which it may  have been anyway in a strong Dem District, but it may have been more exciting, more issue driven, and a better Dem may have won. Traditionally the stronger candidate with more progressive values wins in the primary, while the one with the more conservative views wins in the Republican primary. That’s why Tea Party candidates often win primaries, then g on to tank in the General. Or not, of course, depending on the geography and demographics of the District.

Bah humbug. This all leads to inaction all around in the legislature. Good bills stalled as the moderate Dems kowtow to their corporate masters.  Who loses? Poor people, the environment, kids in school, minorities, older people, the disabled, the disenfranchised.

It's the age of gilt and steam and back room deals all over again. Is this what voters really wanted when they voted in the top two?  What were they thinking? may be the question to ask, if you thought there might be an answer.  

Can you still win with less money?

The easy answer is yes, but it's harder. The more nuanced answer and the approach used by this campaign consulting team who often represents the underdog, hence less well funded, candidate, is that you can, if you plan wisely, strategize carefully, prioritize your spending and most of all, craft your message to perfecton.

Then it's a matter of shoe-leather and targeting. Shoe leather for you and volunteers who will walk with you to voters' homes as you deliver your walk pieces. And targeting to the voters who will vote in your election; the ones who vote most frequently, the ones who are most likely to "get" your message, when they get it at the door or in their mailbox.

Use humor, color and eye catching visuals on your materials. Make the best use of the space provided. Don't use the most words, Use the wisest, most appealing words to get the message across.

Walk precincts, stand in front of supermarkets; put something in your voters' hands, at their front doors, at community events, debates and the evening commute.

Phone, phone phone. If you must, use robo calls, but again, target carefully. Have a "celebrity" whose name will resonate with your voters. (It's not always the Mayor or the local representative who people want to hear from; it might be a well-loved high school coach or the lady who sells organic peaches at the Farmer's Market. It all depends on your district, your race, your message, your voters).

And never stop raising money. You don't have to have the most money, but you do have to have the most votes, and the money pays for printing, postage and all the incidentals. It's the last week? get that last $1000 for a targeted phone call, a humorous radio ad, or a much needed answer to a last minute "hit" by your opponent.

Win or lose, you will have done your very best, and can enjoy the party on Election Night with your loyal volunteers, who, believe me, will already by plotting the next campaign.

If the incumbent attacks first, they're scared

Candidates, especially first time candidates, hate to "go negative." They think it makes them look bad, that people will accuse them of not playing fair. And some people will. But if you don't tell people why you are the better choice for the job, you do yourself a disservice. People need to know your qualifications. Just as importantly, they need to know the other guy's shortcomings.

This is especially true if you are running against an incumbent. Then you really do have to tell the public why they should fire him and hire you.

If the incumbent attacks you first you know he's running scared. Incumbents usually try to stay above the fray. They have a record to run on, unless that record is not so stellar. Then it's your job to tell people about that record. Why it does not serve the constituents and what you will do differently.

If his record were so great, you probably wouldn't be running at all, now would you?

But what if the incumbent goes on the attack? if they do it first, you know they're running scared. You know there is indeed something they don't want to call attention to. What a gift! Unless you are a raving loony tunes, you know you've got the upper hand.

Now make sure your polls are all on track and that the skeletons in your closet are not going to come tumbling out. If they do, own them and move on. Better yet, make sure your campaign team has all the information on you before launching. Then don't be afraid to letting the voters know why you're the better choice.

Why the Candidate Needs to Make Calls for Money

Dialing for Dollars they call it and that's just what it is. You dial; they give money. That's the idea anyway. Some candidates think their fundraising committee or campaign manager or random volunteers should do it, and for some things, like small donor events, reminders, follow ups and the like, that's just fine.

But if you want to land a big donation from a major donor, you, the candidate, have to pick up the pone and call. The donors expect it. They want to hear your voice on the other end of the line, not an underling's.  They want your ear to bend on the issues they care about before they untie the purse strings.

Sometimes they want to meet in person first, to size you up, to see how committed you are, to get a look at you. If so, make the time for the meeting. This is where those underlings can come in handy. They can arrange the meeting with the donor, once the initial contact has been made. Sometimes a campaign team member will have the connection to the donor and is the perfect person to introduce you. And sometimes you make a cold call and ask for a meeting.

But if you don't make the call, or take the meeting, you won't get the donation. It's as simple of that.

Donors, like voters, need to be courted. Voters get your mail, meet your volunteers at their door, hear your message on the radio or TV. Donors need to connect with you in person. Or in phone.

Make the call.

Those "No Party Preference" Voters - What do they want?

I attended a conference yesterday at the Institute for Government Studies at UC Berkeley. It consisted of three panels, one academics who gave off a decidedly right of center flavor, although it was hard to get their gist, with tiny graphs on the screen, and their continual use of the word "moderate" as if that is necessarily a good thing.

The theme of the conference was the Top-Two primary in California. Has it changed the political landscape, how and why?

 

The Top-Two and other factors influencing voting patterns

 

First off, what is a top-two primary? It means the top two vote getters, no matter what party they belong to, face off in November, which often leads to two Democrats in blue districts or two Republicans in red districts. 

Secondly, other newly enacted factors influence the patterns of voting as well, such as the open primary, where any voter can vote for any candidate in the primary, no mater the party of the voters, and the 2010 redistricting, which changed the make-up of many of our State and Federal districts.

They seem to think, although it is really too early to tell, it has, in that legislators, mostly Democrats, have "moderated" their voting patterns. They seemed to think this was a good thing, as opposed to, say, polarization, which is a bad thing in anyone's mind.

However, without defining their terms, who knows just what moderate means. Looking at voting patterns, it seems to mean wimpy. Democrats, even with a two thirds majority, are having a tough time getting legislation passed. Why? Because some of the more "moderate" Dems elected in the last cycle either vote against some of the most progressive bills, or abstain from voting altogether.

 

That M word: Money

No one on the first panel mentioned the influence of corporate money pouring into these campaign to elect the moderate Democrats as a factor in this new behavior. 

Yours truly did bring it up during question and answer time, and they said, "interesting, yes, that could be a factor."

 

Panel number two was more balanced and in touch with the real world, consisting of campaign operatives, including a Democratic pollster, two Rep consultants and one Dem consultant.

They saw the money issue as big, forcing the Dems to spend heavily in the primary to protect their incumbents, even in safe seats, thereby leaving less for the Party to spend in Dem on Rep elections in swing Districts.

 The No Party Preference Voter 

 

And then there is the issue of the No Party Preference Voter, (formerly known as Decline to State, or DTS, maybe they didn't like the association of those initials with the tremors experienced by people undergoing alcohol withdrawal). The Dem pollster said, "They just don't vote in primaries."

 

Later, a professor type, himself a NPP,presented charts and graphs showing that more than one third the population now identifies as NPP. "This group," he said, "They're all confused."

When I asked him where this group came from, former members of other parties or new voters, and didn't he himself vote, he laughed and couldn't answer the question.

Tell me what YOU think

So, if anyone reading this is a NPP voter, tell me, what made you register that way, and do you vote in primary elections, now that you can vote for candidates from any party, and if so, what motivates you? And if not, why not?

Now there is a petition

Want to stop the rise of corporate Democrats? aren't corporate Republicans bad enough; we now have to fend off the takeover of our own Party by Big Money? Unfortunately, too many Democrats find it hard to resist the lure of the lucre.

Now there is a petition. See it here and decide for yourself if you want to join. http://diy.rootsaction.org/petitions/assemblymember-marc-levine-stop-being-a-corporate-tool