Why was the GOP never able to take out Barbara Boxer in CA?

[sg0508]

Yes, the CA democratic party has a death grip on the statewide politics. We know that, but this lady just keeps finding ways to walk between the raindrops.  In '98, Matt Fong was tied with here until the final two weeks and then proceeded to lose by 10 points.  In 2010, it was practically the same story. 

True, it's not like the GOP put up terrific opponents, particularly a moderate who could neutralize her "too conservative for CA" nonsense rhetoric, but it really amazes me.  While I've voted for more democrats lately at most levels than Republicans, I wouldn't vote for her.  She pulls the constant "proud liberal" thing every freakin' time she's up for re-election and it works. 

Even in '92 when she was first elected, there were rumors about her passing bad checks (or something in that nature) and she still won. 

Maybe she retires before 2016, but for a lady who gets up there in the Senate and often doesn't sound very intelligent from her rhetoric, it amazes me how she can constantly just use her knowledge of the CA electorate to her advantage and not pay for it, which a lot of other politicians (liberal and conservative in other solid blue/red states, respectively) can't get away with it.

[RogueBeaver]

Scandal in '92, proto-WOW in '98. Wasn't Fong a moderate though? Past that, one-party state.

[Phony Moderate]

She pulls the constant "proud liberal" thing every freakin' time she's up for re-election and it works. 

Why is that surprising? California is obviously a pretty left-leaning state (in American terms) and while Boxer stands to the left of 90ish U.S. Senators, she's not Dennis Kucinich.

[hopper]

She pulls the constant "proud liberal" thing every freakin' time she's up for re-election and it works. 

Why is that surprising? California is obviously a pretty left-leaning state (in American terms) and while Boxer stands to the left of 90ish U.S. Senators, she's not Dennis Kucinich.

I think 1998 was the last election cycle that the GOP candidate could have beaten her. After that no probably not. I did think in 2010 the GOP had a shot to defeat her but the Demography of the state is going against the GOP. I think if the 1992 and 1998 environment was a GOP environment like 2010 was she would have been defeated.

[windjammer]

Boxer is the 4th/5th best senator!

[Joshgreen]

Boxer is a credible senator and it's California....no chance for a federal Republican.

[Bojack Horseman]

Even big money Carly Fiorina couldn't buy Boxer's Senate seat in a good year for the GOP...Californians actually get it!

[CountryClassSF]

From my perspective as a California conservative, the party registration disadvantage combined with the Meg Whitman debacle is what doomed Fiorina's campaign in 2010.

If you take a look at the polling, you'll see that Fiorina and Boxer were tied in the early fall.  When Meg Whitman dropped due to being (in my opinion, falsely) accused of intentionally hiring an illegal alien housekeeper, Fiorina went down with her.

It's true that Barbara Boxer has lower approval ratings than she should for a socialist liberal state like this one, but ultimately it comes down to the fact that there are many more D's than R's, and I think any Decline to Staters who were flirting with going Republican chose not to after the woman at the top of the ticket's campaign.

If you look at 1998, almost the same thing happened with Matt Fong as Gray Davis's numbers went up. Gubernatorial candidates (I suppose with the exception of Schwarzenegger in '06) seem to have a lot of coattails  carrying them through.

Even in 1994, Senator Feinstein came very close to being tossed out of office by Michael Huffington when Gov. Pete Wilson won his re-election.

Not sure how any Republican will win statewide here without an insane number of crossovers. Registration is teetering at 28%.