CA GOV 2021 - 2022 megathread

[wbrocks67]

Total ballots returned = 5,054,661
Dems 2,699,178 (53.4%)
Reps 1,230,796 (24.3%)
Ind/Other 1,124,687 (22.3%)

Turnout = Dems (26%), Reps (23%), Ind/Other (17%)

Total ballots returned = 5,420,220
Dems: 2,898,394 (53.5%)
Reps: 1,312,542 (24.2%)
Ind/Other: 1,209,284 (22.3%)

Turnout = Dems (28%), Reps (25%), Ind/Other (18%)

[Greedo punched first]

Will 2022 be Newsom vs. R or Newsom vs. D?

[Sir Mohamed]

Will 2022 be Newsom vs. R or Newsom vs. D?

Almost certainly Newsom vs. R because no highprofile Dem announces a challenge, so none will overcome the 1st place voter getter among GOP candidates.

There will be a bunch of registered Dems running, but neither will get above 3-4% due to the lack of name recognition and campaign ressources (which is particulary difficult in a state as large as CA).

[PSOL]

https://mobile.twitter.com/GPCA/status/1432845152624594945

Cowardly given the race is safe D.

[Lief 🗽]

lol... Newsom may end up beating his 2018 margin at this rate

https://twitter.com/cmarinucci/status/1433912010891087873

[Greedo punched first]

Since when did the Green Party become relevant statewide in California?

[Antonio the Sixth]

lol... Newsom may end up beating his 2018 margin at this rate

https://twitter.com/cmarinucci/status/1433912010891087873

My bold prediction is that Elder might not even come out ahead in the alternate election. Enough Democrats will be voting that I suspect Paffrath will probably win that ballot (not that it will matter).

[Хahar 🤔]

My bold prediction is that Elder might not even come out ahead in the alternate election. Enough Democrats will be voting that I suspect Paffrath will probably win that ballot (not that it will matter).

That's not going to happen. The PPIC survey that was released two days ago with No leading 58 to 39 also had Larry Elder at first place with 25% and Kevin Faulconer in second place with 5%. It's clear that Republicans have coalesced around a single candidate. That poll also made what I think was the clearly correct methodological decision in not asking about any particular Democratic candidate by name, since none of them have received any significant funding or media attention. There are going to be a whole bunch of Democrats on the ballot; even among No voters who choose to answer the second question, there's no real reason to think that they'll vote en masse for one particular Democratic candidate.

[Antonio the Sixth]

My bold prediction is that Elder might not even come out ahead in the alternate election. Enough Democrats will be voting that I suspect Paffrath will probably win that ballot (not that it will matter).

That's not going to happen. The PPIC survey that was released two days ago with No leading 58 to 39 also had Larry Elder at first place with 25% and Kevin Faulconer in second place with 5%. It's clear that Republicans have coalesced around a single candidate. That poll also made what I think was the clearly correct methodological decision in not asking about any particular Democratic candidate by name, since none of them have received any significant funding or media attention. There are going to be a whole bunch of Democrats on the ballot; even among No voters who choose to answer the second question, there's no real reason to think that they'll vote en masse for one particular Democratic candidate.

Including just one specific Democrat in a poll for the alternate election is bad methodology, but so is including no Democrat at all. When people open their ballots they will see people with a (D) next to their name, and for a lot of people that's the only cue they'll need. Now, they might all vote for the same (D), the one with relative name recognition, or scatter around a bunch of different (D)s. To have a sense of that, you'd need polls that mention all the candidates by name, which I guess no one wants to do because they're too expensive. But a Paffrath victory doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility to me.

[Pouring Rain and Blairing Music]

My bold prediction is that Elder might not even come out ahead in the alternate election. Enough Democrats will be voting that I suspect Paffrath will probably win that ballot (not that it will matter).

That's not going to happen. The PPIC survey that was released two days ago with No leading 58 to 39 also had Larry Elder at first place with 25% and Kevin Faulconer in second place with 5%. It's clear that Republicans have coalesced around a single candidate. That poll also made what I think was the clearly correct methodological decision in not asking about any particular Democratic candidate by name, since none of them have received any significant funding or media attention. There are going to be a whole bunch of Democrats on the ballot; even among No voters who choose to answer the second question, there's no real reason to think that they'll vote en masse for one particular Democratic candidate.

Including just one specific Democrat in a poll for the alternate election is bad methodology, but so is including no Democrat at all. When people open their ballots they will see people with a (D) next to their name, and for a lot of people that's the only cue they'll need. Now, they might all vote for the same (D), the one with relative name recognition, or scatter around a bunch of different (D)s. To have a sense of that, you'd need polls that mention all the candidates by name, which I guess no one wants to do because they're too expensive. But a Paffrath victory doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility to me.

I don’t think Packrat will win the replacement part, but I do think he’ll be the most popular Dem labeled replacement.

[Хahar 🤔]

My bold prediction is that Elder might not even come out ahead in the alternate election. Enough Democrats will be voting that I suspect Paffrath will probably win that ballot (not that it will matter).

That's not going to happen. The PPIC survey that was released two days ago with No leading 58 to 39 also had Larry Elder at first place with 25% and Kevin Faulconer in second place with 5%. It's clear that Republicans have coalesced around a single candidate. That poll also made what I think was the clearly correct methodological decision in not asking about any particular Democratic candidate by name, since none of them have received any significant funding or media attention. There are going to be a whole bunch of Democrats on the ballot; even among No voters who choose to answer the second question, there's no real reason to think that they'll vote en masse for one particular Democratic candidate.

Including just one specific Democrat in a poll for the alternate election is bad methodology, but so is including no Democrat at all. When people open their ballots they will see people with a (D) next to their name, and for a lot of people that's the only cue they'll need. Now, they might all vote for the same (D), the one with relative name recognition, or scatter around a bunch of different (D)s. To have a sense of that, you'd need polls that mention all the candidates by name, which I guess no one wants to do because they're too expensive. But a Paffrath victory doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility to me.

Why do you think that Democratic voters will coalesce behind one particular Democrat, considering that that none of the Democratic candidates have done any advertising or have any semblance of a campaign apparatus? I don't see any reason to think that such a thing would happen.

Moreover, considering what the polls tell us about the coalescence of the Republican vote, how would it be possible for a Democrat not only to capture more of the Democratic vote than Larry Elder will the Republican vote, but to do so by so much that it outweighs the fact that an enormous number of Democrats will not vote on the second question?

[Antonio the Sixth]

My bold prediction is that Elder might not even come out ahead in the alternate election. Enough Democrats will be voting that I suspect Paffrath will probably win that ballot (not that it will matter).

That's not going to happen. The PPIC survey that was released two days ago with No leading 58 to 39 also had Larry Elder at first place with 25% and Kevin Faulconer in second place with 5%. It's clear that Republicans have coalesced around a single candidate. That poll also made what I think was the clearly correct methodological decision in not asking about any particular Democratic candidate by name, since none of them have received any significant funding or media attention. There are going to be a whole bunch of Democrats on the ballot; even among No voters who choose to answer the second question, there's no real reason to think that they'll vote en masse for one particular Democratic candidate.

Including just one specific Democrat in a poll for the alternate election is bad methodology, but so is including no Democrat at all. When people open their ballots they will see people with a (D) next to their name, and for a lot of people that's the only cue they'll need. Now, they might all vote for the same (D), the one with relative name recognition, or scatter around a bunch of different (D)s. To have a sense of that, you'd need polls that mention all the candidates by name, which I guess no one wants to do because they're too expensive. But a Paffrath victory doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility to me.

Why do you think that Democratic voters will coalesce behind one particular Democrat, considering that that none of the Democratic candidates have done any advertising or have any semblance of a campaign apparatus? I don't see any reason to think that such a thing would happen.

Moreover, considering what the polls tell us about the coalescence of the Republican vote, how would it be possible for a Democrat not only to capture more of the Democratic vote than Larry Elder will the Republican vote, but to do so by so much that it outweighs the fact that an enormous number of Democrats will not vote on the second question?

Paffrath clearly is doing something to get his name out there, or else he would have reached the notoriety to even be included in these polls. If you assume that these polls get at something real in the breakdown of Democratic votes, but also think that the share of total Democratic votes is underestimated, it's not crazy to see him come out ahead of Elder. Of course those are big assumptions, but I think there's reasoning behind both of them. I wouldn't put money down on it, but I wouldn't be surprised if this happens either.

[Pouring Rain and Blairing Music]

My bold prediction is that Elder might not even come out ahead in the alternate election. Enough Democrats will be voting that I suspect Paffrath will probably win that ballot (not that it will matter).

That's not going to happen. The PPIC survey that was released two days ago with No leading 58 to 39 also had Larry Elder at first place with 25% and Kevin Faulconer in second place with 5%. It's clear that Republicans have coalesced around a single candidate. That poll also made what I think was the clearly correct methodological decision in not asking about any particular Democratic candidate by name, since none of them have received any significant funding or media attention. There are going to be a whole bunch of Democrats on the ballot; even among No voters who choose to answer the second question, there's no real reason to think that they'll vote en masse for one particular Democratic candidate.

Including just one specific Democrat in a poll for the alternate election is bad methodology, but so is including no Democrat at all. When people open their ballots they will see people with a (D) next to their name, and for a lot of people that's the only cue they'll need. Now, they might all vote for the same (D), the one with relative name recognition, or scatter around a bunch of different (D)s. To have a sense of that, you'd need polls that mention all the candidates by name, which I guess no one wants to do because they're too expensive. But a Paffrath victory doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility to me.

Why do you think that Democratic voters will coalesce behind one particular Democrat, considering that that none of the Democratic candidates have done any advertising or have any semblance of a campaign apparatus? I don't see any reason to think that such a thing would happen.

Moreover, considering what the polls tell us about the coalescence of the Republican vote, how would it be possible for a Democrat not only to capture more of the Democratic vote than Larry Elder will the Republican vote, but to do so by so much that it outweighs the fact that an enormous number of Democrats will not vote on the second question?

Paffrath clearly is doing something to get his name out there, or else he would have reached the notoriety to even be included in these polls. If you assume that these polls get at something real in the breakdown of Democratic votes, but also think that the share of total Democratic votes is underestimated, it's not crazy to see him come out ahead of Elder. Of course those are big assumptions, but I think there's reasoning behind both of them. I wouldn't put money down on it, but I wouldn't be surprised if this happens either.

I think that that is fair reasoning. The polls for the replacement question have been all over the place (especially in regards to blank, other, etc), but there’s still a lot of room for a Dem to grow and Packrat would be the one that would at least be more recognizable to folks.

I don’t think that the number of blank votes will be as high as some of the polls are saying. It’s not like a top two race without a Republican. There are at least Democrats on the ballot. If there weren’t, then I think I’d buy a higher number of blanks on the second question.

The Republican coalescing around Elder is honestly what fascinates me more. At this rate, I don’t think any other Republicans will win any counties. I’m still unsure of where he came from, though admittedly, I don’t follow right-wing radio other than what I’ve heard about a lot of their hosts dying of Covid lately.

[Хahar 🤔]

My bold prediction is that Elder might not even come out ahead in the alternate election. Enough Democrats will be voting that I suspect Paffrath will probably win that ballot (not that it will matter).

That's not going to happen. The PPIC survey that was released two days ago with No leading 58 to 39 also had Larry Elder at first place with 25% and Kevin Faulconer in second place with 5%. It's clear that Republicans have coalesced around a single candidate. That poll also made what I think was the clearly correct methodological decision in not asking about any particular Democratic candidate by name, since none of them have received any significant funding or media attention. There are going to be a whole bunch of Democrats on the ballot; even among No voters who choose to answer the second question, there's no real reason to think that they'll vote en masse for one particular Democratic candidate.

Including just one specific Democrat in a poll for the alternate election is bad methodology, but so is including no Democrat at all. When people open their ballots they will see people with a (D) next to their name, and for a lot of people that's the only cue they'll need. Now, they might all vote for the same (D), the one with relative name recognition, or scatter around a bunch of different (D)s. To have a sense of that, you'd need polls that mention all the candidates by name, which I guess no one wants to do because they're too expensive. But a Paffrath victory doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility to me.

Why do you think that Democratic voters will coalesce behind one particular Democrat, considering that that none of the Democratic candidates have done any advertising or have any semblance of a campaign apparatus? I don't see any reason to think that such a thing would happen.

Moreover, considering what the polls tell us about the coalescence of the Republican vote, how would it be possible for a Democrat not only to capture more of the Democratic vote than Larry Elder will the Republican vote, but to do so by so much that it outweighs the fact that an enormous number of Democrats will not vote on the second question?

Paffrath clearly is doing something to get his name out there, or else he would have reached the notoriety to even be included in these polls. If you assume that these polls get at something real in the breakdown of Democratic votes, but also think that the share of total Democratic votes is underestimated, it's not crazy to see him come out ahead of Elder. Of course those are big assumptions, but I think there's reasoning behind both of them. I wouldn't put money down on it, but I wouldn't be surprised if this happens either.

It's just not true that he has to be doing something to get his name in polls. I've mentioned last year's Georgia special election before on this thread, but I'll do it again. Matt Lieberman and Ed Tarver (particularly the former) were routinely included in polls and routinely showed up with a significant percentage in polls, enough that people online were worried that Raphael Warnock would be shut out of the runoff altogether. Their poll numbers fell off as the candidates with actual money used that money to define the campaign, and then on Election Day they combined for 3.3% of the vote. Deborah Jackson, a no-name with no campaign who was also running as a Democrat, got 6.6%, twice as much as those two put together. Does that experience not tell us anything?

Surely we are all agreed that Larry Elder is the overwhelming choice of Republican voters at this point. (If not, I'm going to need to hear a reason that the PPIC survey is wrong on that front.) Now, in the 2018 election, Newsom received 62% of the vote. Let's say that the recall election turns out similarly, and turnout ends up being about 60% Democratic voters and 40% Republican voters. Let's also say, for the sake of argument, that only a third of Democratic voters heed the California Democratic Party's recommendation not to vote on the second question, and the other two-thirds go ahead and vote for a Democrat. Even with these very conservative assumptions, we're left with a 50-50 split between Democrats and Republicans among people who vote on the second question. (If more than 40% of voters on the first question are Republicans, or if more than a third of Democratic voters leave the second question blank like I expect, then the voters on the second question will be mostly Republican.) If you disagree with either of these assumptions and think that a clear majority of voters on the second question will be Democrats, I'd like to hear why.

Carrying on with this thought experiment, of those 50% of voters on the second question who are Republicans, Larry Elder will clearly win the vast majority. For a Democrat to do better than Elder, he would have to capture a larger share of the Democratic vote than Elder will the Republican vote; if Elder wins 70% of the Republican vote, which seems reasonable to me, the Democrat would have to get more than 70% of the Democratic vote. What you're suggesting is that one of the half-dozen Democrats on the ballot will coalesce the Democratic vote to that extent, even though he has no campaign and no prior name recognition and Larry Elder has both, and the entirety of the argument that he'd be able to do this that you've provided is that clearly there's some reason he's been in polls. On every possible level I find myself unconvinced.
I'm not as confident in this as I am in the obvious fact that Elder will win the second ballot, but my own prediction is that Elder will win every county in the state.

[wbrocks67]

Total ballots returned = 5,420,220
Dems: 2,898,394 (53.5%)
Reps: 1,312,542 (24.2%)
Ind/Other: 1,209,284 (22.3%)

Turnout = Dems (28%), Reps (25%), Ind/Other (18%)

Total ballots returned = 5,730,338
Dems: 3,051,561 (53.3%)
Reps: 1,399,655 (24.4%)
Ind/Other: 1,279,122 (22.3%)

Turnout = Dems (29%), Reps (26%), Ind/Other (20%)

[Ferguson97]

https://twitter.com/chris_notcapn/status/1434006501849542659

[Telesquare]

https://twitter.com/chris_notcapn/status/1434006501849542659

He's obviously not trying to imply that's a good thing.

[Holmes]

I’m so tired. When Newsom wins the recall, I hope he takes it as a mandate to ban Republicans.

[Antonio the Sixth]

My bold prediction is that Elder might not even come out ahead in the alternate election. Enough Democrats will be voting that I suspect Paffrath will probably win that ballot (not that it will matter).

That's not going to happen. The PPIC survey that was released two days ago with No leading 58 to 39 also had Larry Elder at first place with 25% and Kevin Faulconer in second place with 5%. It's clear that Republicans have coalesced around a single candidate. That poll also made what I think was the clearly correct methodological decision in not asking about any particular Democratic candidate by name, since none of them have received any significant funding or media attention. There are going to be a whole bunch of Democrats on the ballot; even among No voters who choose to answer the second question, there's no real reason to think that they'll vote en masse for one particular Democratic candidate.

Including just one specific Democrat in a poll for the alternate election is bad methodology, but so is including no Democrat at all. When people open their ballots they will see people with a (D) next to their name, and for a lot of people that's the only cue they'll need. Now, they might all vote for the same (D), the one with relative name recognition, or scatter around a bunch of different (D)s. To have a sense of that, you'd need polls that mention all the candidates by name, which I guess no one wants to do because they're too expensive. But a Paffrath victory doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility to me.

Why do you think that Democratic voters will coalesce behind one particular Democrat, considering that that none of the Democratic candidates have done any advertising or have any semblance of a campaign apparatus? I don't see any reason to think that such a thing would happen.

Moreover, considering what the polls tell us about the coalescence of the Republican vote, how would it be possible for a Democrat not only to capture more of the Democratic vote than Larry Elder will the Republican vote, but to do so by so much that it outweighs the fact that an enormous number of Democrats will not vote on the second question?

Paffrath clearly is doing something to get his name out there, or else he would have reached the notoriety to even be included in these polls. If you assume that these polls get at something real in the breakdown of Democratic votes, but also think that the share of total Democratic votes is underestimated, it's not crazy to see him come out ahead of Elder. Of course those are big assumptions, but I think there's reasoning behind both of them. I wouldn't put money down on it, but I wouldn't be surprised if this happens either.

It's just not true that he has to be doing something to get his name in polls. I've mentioned last year's Georgia special election before on this thread, but I'll do it again. Matt Lieberman and Ed Tarver (particularly the former) were routinely included in polls and routinely showed up with a significant percentage in polls, enough that people online were worried that Raphael Warnock would be shut out of the runoff altogether. Their poll numbers fell off as the candidates with actual money used that money to define the campaign, and then on Election Day they combined for 3.3% of the vote. Deborah Jackson, a no-name with no campaign who was also running as a Democrat, got 6.6%, twice as much as those two put together. Does that experience not tell us anything?

Surely we are all agreed that Larry Elder is the overwhelming choice of Republican voters at this point. (If not, I'm going to need to hear a reason that the PPIC survey is wrong on that front.) Now, in the 2018 election, Newsom received 62% of the vote. Let's say that the recall election turns out similarly, and turnout ends up being about 60% Democratic voters and 40% Republican voters. Let's also say, for the sake of argument, that only a third of Democratic voters heed the California Democratic Party's recommendation not to vote on the second question, and the other two-thirds go ahead and vote for a Democrat. Even with these very conservative assumptions, we're left with a 50-50 split between Democrats and Republicans among people who vote on the second question. (If more than 40% of voters on the first question are Republicans, or if more than a third of Democratic voters leave the second question blank like I expect, then the voters on the second question will be mostly Republican.) If you disagree with either of these assumptions and think that a clear majority of voters on the second question will be Democrats, I'd like to hear why.

Carrying on with this thought experiment, of those 50% of voters on the second question who are Republicans, Larry Elder will clearly win the vast majority. For a Democrat to do better than Elder, he would have to capture a larger share of the Democratic vote than Elder will the Republican vote; if Elder wins 70% of the Republican vote, which seems reasonable to me, the Democrat would have to get more than 70% of the Democratic vote. What you're suggesting is that one of the half-dozen Democrats on the ballot will coalesce the Democratic vote to that extent, even though he has no campaign and no prior name recognition and Larry Elder has both, and the entirety of the argument that he'd be able to do this that you've provided is that clearly there's some reason he's been in polls. On every possible level I find myself unconvinced.
I'm not as confident in this as I am in the obvious fact that Elder will win the second ballot, but my own prediction is that Elder will win every county in the state.

Well, I guess we'll see. I'm not confident on either outcome, but I think there's a more plausible case that Paffrath has consolidated the Democratic vote.

I don't really care either way, I obviously despise Paffrath (and in fact if Newsom were to be recalled I'd rather have an obvious clown like Elder who'd go down in flames in 2022 than a terrible Democrat who might entrench himself). But that's all a moot point anyway because Newsom will win.

[Blair]

How likely is it that the recall process gets changed if Newsom wins?

[Adam Griffin]

I really do think the recall choices for Ds will follow the top-of-the-ballot dynamic that we see throughout most of the South in contests where multiple, no-name candidates often run in primaries and subsequently overperform. I do imagine Pattrath will benefit at least some from this - for multiple reasons (though whether earns the most votes as a D or not is completely debatable). First, at least a miniscule handful of voters probably have heard of him over the other contenders due to media machinations. Secondly, he's fairly close to the "top" of the ballot.

However, "top of the ballot" in CA is two-dimensional in this case rather than simply up-and-down the ballot. Some will scan the ballot in a predominantly left-to-right fashion; others top-to-bottom.  Start factoring all of this in and I think the top-of-the-ballot status in CA gets more complex.

If it follows this, then Drake may be the best-performing Democrat, but McGowan, Paffrath & Serrato will all benefit to varying degrees as well.

[Oryxslayer]

How likely is it that the recall process gets changed if Newsom wins?

High. But any serious change will have to go before the voters as a constitutional amendment, so probably 2022 when the Dems can point to 2021 and say "that was stupid, lets tighten things so the recall can be used only in the most rational of situations."

[Telesquare]

I’m so tired. When Newsom wins the recall, I hope he takes it as a mandate to ban Republicans.

Banning political parties? Seriously?

[DrScholl]

The easiest reform would probably be to remove the replacement option and just have the Lt. Governor take over. This would eliminate partisan motivations for recall unless there was a partisan split between Governor and Lt. Governor (not very likely these days).

[Oryxslayer]

The easiest reform would probably be to remove the replacement option and just have the Lt. Governor take over. This would eliminate partisan motivations for recall unless there was a partisan split between Governor and Lt. Governor (not very likely these days).

That works for Governor races, obviously the most prominent of the recalls, but CA recall law applies to the whole state. Plenty of examples of other offices getting a petition, for example the recent 2018 OC state senate recall, who lack a successor position.