CA-25 Special Election Tuesday-- Top Democratic Strategist Predicts Christy Smith Is Toast

As you may recall, about a month and a half ago I predicted that the awful Democratic candidate, Christy Smith, would narrowly beat the awful Republican candidate, Mike Garcia. The election is this coming Tuesday, although, many (most ?) voters have sent in their ballots already. And that doesn't look good for my prediction. I asked a top political strategist, someone who makes the big bucks, to write it as a guest post. He agreed but said I couldn't use his name unless I paid $5K. So... we'll just call him "An Anonymous Strategist."

Microcosm-- CA-25
-by Anonymous Strategist
This coming Tuesday’s Special Election (for Katie Hill’s congressional seat) in Southern California is on a lot of people’s minds. Some people are seeing Trump’s tweets calling the election rigged. Some people are hearing about congressional Democrats’ hysterical attempts to lower expectations. While these instances represent the extremes of the right (Trump’s GOP) and the left (not the progressive left, the corporate/establishment left), a really interesting finale to what should have been an easy win for Democrats is coming together.

In my opinion, there is a greater than 60% chance that Democrats lose this election on Tuesday, and it flips from Blue to Red.

Why do I think that?

Given the vote by mail nature of California (and the COVID-19 realities), election day doesn't matter as much as trends in ballots returned. Remember that as you read the next three paragraphs. Ballots, ballots, ballots...

By this point, there are far too many likely GOP ballots returned to the registrar and far too few likely DEM ballots returned. Given the Democratic registration advantage in the district, we should be seeing about an even return at this point. It’s fair to argue that Republican voters do tend to return ballots quicker (upon receiving them in the mail) however by this weekend (GOTV weekend) you should see an uptick in Democratic ballots that would make DEM totals about even with GOP totals. That’s currently not happening. And it's actually not that close.

Additionally, the ballots being returned skew heavily older than the electorate as a whole (particularly the 2018 electorate which sent Katie Hill to Congress for a few months). Given COVID-19, it’s not as though you will see a surge of poll voters on Tuesday large enough to make up for this heavily skewed (older) electorate.

Finally, the ballots being returned are skewing heavily White (Anglo) in a district that is Majority Minority (Hispanic). Yes, it’s true, that like Democrats as a whole, Latinos vote “late.” But this is too late. Again, it’s not as though you’ll see a surge in Latino vote at the polls large enough to make up for the current trend.

So, that’s why I think we (Democrats) are headed for a loss Tuesday.

There’s no doubt the Democratic Party and organized labor machines are flooding the district with paid election workers trying to “collect” (yes, it’s legal) as many Latino ballots as possible this weekend. I’m sure that’s why Trump is crying “rigged election” -- namely due to the fact he’s unable to comprehend that ballot collection is legal in California. If he were able to cool his jets and understand this basic concept, he’d actually see a way to use it to his advantage in November. I bet Brad Parscale (his savvy manager) understands this.

All kidding and levity aside, this is a big problem for Democrats, granted it’s not a new problem. They consistently use a wildly flawed methodology when recruiting candidates (and stifling potentially good ones). They recruited Christy Smith because they knew that given her corporate/establishment ties, she’d be able to have the best chance at raising the money necessary to advertise in such an expensive district (L.A. Media Market). However, they keep forgetting that these elections (especially special elections) are about motivation, not persuasion. Persuading the so called “middle” does not matter at all. ZERO. Base turnout does, and it seems as though the base doesn’t give a shit.

That’s a microcosm for November.

A couple more things to consider:

1- In the jungle primary 2 months ago, Smith got 57,423 votes (36.1%) and Garcia got 40,311 votes (25.4%).

2- Garcia has a Hispanic name; Smith sounds like a Republican name.

3- As of April 22, Smith had spent $1,946,261 and Garcia had spent virtually the same amount ($1,908,185). The DCCC spent $1,687,850 and Pelosi's Super PAC spent $501,839 and the NRCC spent $1,470,366 while McCarthy's Super PAC spent $637,264. So it's all about even.

4- Top Democratic Party officials agree with Anonymous Strategist that Smith is going to lose, not with my prediction that she's going to squeak through despite what a truly terrible candidate she is.

5- In a district like CA-25, where Hillary beat Trump and where Trump is generally despised, this endorsement Saturday morning should do more harm than good:

The Democrats Completely Control Sacramento-- So Why Is It Such A Cesspool Of Corruption?

If the old maxim is true that absolute power corrupts absolutely, then California Democrats have a very real problem. As the power and legitimacy of the GOP has waned, Democrats have seized control of a supermajority in the state, with both hands. With their power now left unchecked by a viable opposition party, the party politics of the left have drifted into corruption, led by party power players like Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon and Christy Smith, an unaccomplished freshman legislator running for the CA-25 seat abandoned by Katie Hill, as well as a wide cadre of party apparatchiks.

Their goal has been to put their thumbs on the scales of primary elections across the state in order to elect moderate back benchers who will maintain the status quo and not rock the boat for party leadership. The internal party bias has been especially hard on the progressive wing of the party, where the California Democratic party routinely tries to pick the winners of primary races.

The Young Turks recently reported one such story of unethical influence into races that are supposed to be democratic in nature. The story featured Eric Ohlsen who is running for State Assembly in District 36, the Antelope Valley district that is contained within the boundaries of CA-25. According to Ohlsen, he was told at a meeting with Christy Smith that the decision had already been made behind the scenes to support his opponent, Jonathan Ervin, so Ohlsen should just try again in a few years. She also took umbrage with his messaging to get big money out of politics and fight corruption. Ohlsen had said in a speech-- up top-- at the California Democratic Convention, "Democrats have a supermajority in Sacramento and they keep telling us that we need to learn how to compromise. We’re not compromising with Republicans to pass legislation, we’re compromising with industry because they’re donors." Regarding that anti-corruption stance, Ohlsen said, "Christy told me that my anti-corruption messaging was 'personally offensive' to her." Which is probably a good self-assessment because both Smith and Rendon had pushed Ervin from behind the scenes and made sure that opposing candidates did not get any endorsements, which gave Ervin a $121 thousand advantage over everyone else in his race.

Ohlsen confirmed in a follow up interview that during his meeting with Smith, she had noted that both herself and Rendon had endorsed Jonathan Ervin before any primary races had even begun, effectively removing any democracy from the Democratic Primary.

Rendon has a long track record of using his influence with the unions and special interest groups to deny funding and endorsements to any candidates that he does not hand pick. His position as Speaker of the House in the State Assembly gives him leverage over groups that may potentially offer endorsements to candidates. By offering to reduce access to legislators, Rendon can control or eliminate the flow of money to candidates that he does not approve of. Encouraging his membership in the Assembly to direct funds at particular candidates is another tactic that Rendon has used to starve out competition from progressive candidates, and favor ones, like Ervin, who will act as an empty vessel for his agenda.

Threats of the denial of funding have also been used against other progressive candidates such as those who support Cenk Unger. Alaina Brooks, SEIU delegate for California's 36th Assembly District, executive board member for Local 2015, made it very clear to the Ohlsen camp that if he continued to support his fellow progressive candidate that his political future would be in jeopardy.

"The amount of pushback that we have gotten is surprising to me," Ohlsen said, "Nearly every Democrat in Sacramento ran on talking points to get money out of politics, but as soon as you ask, 'that sounds great, so where is your bill?' they start working like crazy behind the scenes to block you from competing." With a supermajority of Democratic votes in the California Legislature, passing any anticorruption measures would be a simple task, the problem is that the measures would need the support of people who have spent their careers benefiting from the money in politics.

This is the reason why many states have enacted publicly funded elections, which limit the ability of party elites and special interests to pick and choose the winners of elections before they have even began. It is a proposition that has been supported on the national level by several Presidential candidates including Tom Steyer, who said, "I think the point about publicly funded campaigns means that if you are running, the public will fund a campaign that’s at least comparable to what anyone’s going to spend on their campaign," Steyer told reporters. "And that’s actually I think the easiest way to go about this and the proper way."

Also on the national level, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) has faced many of the same problems by bucking the party establishment. She rose to prominence by defeating Joseph Crowley, a corporate Democrat who portrayed himself as being a progressive liberal while simultaneously taking money from Goldman Sachs, Facebook, Google, BlackRock, amongst others. AOC has continued to garner criticism from her own Democratic colleagues for holding House Democrat’s feet to the fire regarding financial corruption within the party.

The GOP lost their position as a viable opposition party in the state, but by quashing the voices of opposition within their own ranks, Democrats could undo any gains they have been given. The activities of Rendon and Smith to put their thumbs on the scales of party elections could create a culture of corruption that will bring down their own house. Matt Stoller summed the problem up nicely in a 2019 column for the Washington Post, "For too long, disagreements in the Democratic Party have been kept behind closed doors, and the result was the protection of powerful financial interests. It is time to start talking about this dynamic, so that voters can make a democratic choice about what kind of politics they actually want to build. That, in the end, is why it’s called the Democratic Party."

Not Any Goo Will Do, Part Two

Oligarch now has a "D" next to his name. Is that enough of a reason to vote for him?

And by "Part Two," I'm just talking about the past 24 hours! Part Three, for those who plan ahead, comes this evening at 9pm (PT). Some would say that's practically the theme of the whole DWT blog; period. OK, fair enough; it is a frequent topic. And when I saw this Akela Lacy tweet yesterday (just below)... well, you can probably imagine! That was the end of the post I was planning to write about the Georgia and Alabama Republican Senate primaries. Part One, as you can see by clicking on the first link above, was in the intro to the guest post our newest candidate, Jim Harper, wrote:

Indiana’s 1st congressional district is a rare deep-blue territory in Mike Pence’s home state. Incumbent Democratic Congressman Pete Visclosky-- retiring after 18 terms-- won the district by 31 points in 2018. The primary on May 5 will decide whether the next representative from this district is a conservative, a lobbyist, an anti-impeachment former Republican, or a truly bold progressive.

Any blue will do? Not really. Not in the presidential race, not in the Senate race (see Kyrsten Sinema) and certainly not in House races either.

I asked a bunch of California Congress members what Bustos was up to. One wrote back to say that she could be worried that if no Democrat comes in in the top two in the jungle primary, the Democrats would lose the purple-district seat. I responded with another question: "So is Bustos going to ask everyone to pressure that Republican-lite candidate who looks like Katie Hill to get out of the race so Cenk can sail to victory? If she does, I'll publicly apologize for all the unkind things I've ever said about her." No response. But after the meeting one of the freshmen called me to told me what actually happened at the meeting. The freshmen are worried that the DCCC is dumping too much money to prop up Christy who they say is too lazy and entitled to raise enough money to fund an aggressive campaign. The freshmen have a vested interest in the DCCC spending money to protect their seats and not waste it on someone who is unwilling or unable to stand on her own two feet. This was completely shocking for me to hear. And then there was some off-the-record stuff that I hope to be able to share eventually, but the idea of the DCCC even considering backing off from Christy Smith is nothing short of astounding.

I wonder if Bustos is also calling meetings of all the Texas and Illinois Democrats too, since it certainly looks like Blue Dogs Henry Cuellar and Dan Lipinski are finally about to be flushed down the toilet. Tuesday, in fact the Chicago Sun-Times endorsed progressive Democrat Marie Newman for IL-03, noting that Lipinski is "a closet Republican", just like Bustos' candidate Jeff Van Drew Christy Smith in California is. Lipinski, wrote the Sun-Times editorial board "is a reluctant Democrat. He voted against the Affordable Care Act in 2010 before coming around and doing so later on. Lipinski, we should add, also has voted against key legislation on immigration-- measures widely favored by his own party-- before coming around. And he’s been slow to support full rights and equality for LGBTQ folks, though of late he’s been coming around. And why does Lipinski, who has never distinguished himself in Washington, finally keep coming around? ... Our endorsement goes to Newman. Nobody will have to give her a push to champion the values and policies of her own party."

Like Lipinski and Cuellar, Van Drew Christy Smith is the kind of candidate who, if she wins, will have be constantly pushed to do the right thing. (Unlik Cenk, who would be leading the charge, something that may be a bit scary for many "more establishment Democrats." It's meant to be. The L.A. Times, when endorsing Smith yesterday, explained why they passed on Cenk, the very clearly much better candidate: "While we agree with him about the corrupting influence of money in politics and some other subjects, we find his pugnacious style off-putting and not conducive to a more civil Congress." Yep... no, doubt he'll fight way too hard for anyone to feel comfortable, especially if they oppose fundamental change. No possibility of anyone fearing Van Drew Christy Smith on that count. Besides, what would you rather have, a civil Congress or an honest Congress?

As for Bustos' special friend Henry in south Texas, he is so spooked by the gigantic grassroots Jessica Cisneros campaign that he released a TV ad smearing her, with the same kinds of lies Republicans use.

Cuellar, for example, claimed she just moved into the district to run against him. She was born and raised there and was recruited to run by her Laredo high school teacher. Here's the fact check on the ad's content; maybe someone should show it to Cheri Bustos and Pelosi, who are both backing Cuellar and have threatened anyone who works for Cisneros:

No wonder Cuellar became Trump's favorite Democrat after Cheri Bustos' favorite Democrat, Jeff Van Drew, migrated, officially, to the GOP, where he and Cuellar and Lipinski and Christy Smith and Bustos all belong! I spoke with Cisneros last night and she told me that Cuellar's "brand of 'bipartisanship' means sticking the Democratic stamp of approval on Republican legislation and Republican talking points." It's taken some members of Congress years to learn that lesson. It's uplifting that Jessica Cisneros understands it before she even gets into Congress. Speaking off which, please consider contributing to her campaign by tapping on that thermometer up above.

Want To Shake Up Congress For Real? Like To The Foundations? Cenk Uygur's Your Man

Many progressive activists seem not so progressive when they try analyzing the race to replace Katie Hill in CA-25. Some worry that Cenk Uygur's entry into the race might somehow result in a Republican victory in this relatively new district with a Democratic registration advantage whose special election jungle primary takes place on March 3, the same day Californians flood to the polls to pick the Democrat they want to see take on Trump in November.

New district? Yes. CA-25, when it was a GOP bastion, was, geographically, the biggest district in California, stretching from northern L.A. County all the way up along the Nevada border nearly as far north as Sacramento. After the last redistricting, CA-25 became a compact district that is basically 3 adjacent valleys-- Antelope Valley in the east, Santa Clarita Valley in the center and Simi Valley in the west. In 2006, the PVI was a daunting R+7. Two years later-- even before the redistricting-- Obama beat McCain there by 1 point. In 2016, Hillary beat Trump far more convincingly-- 50.3% to 43.6%. And last year, first-time candidate Katie Hill came out of nowhere and beat the incumbent Republican-- longtime local lawmaker Steve Knight-- even more convincingly: 133,209 (54.4%) to 111,813 (45.6%). The Santa Clarita and Antelope valleys went strongly blue and Simi Valley was basically the scene of a tie leaning ever so slightly red. The latest PVI-- always a lagging indicator-- is now "even." It should be a D+1 or D+2. The voter registration has been trending consistently blue and here's the latest registration-- as of October 1, 2019:

• Democrats- 154,450 (37.56%)
• Republicans- 129,587 (31.51%)
• No party preference- 101,678 (24.72%)

Republicans don't win districts what that kind of a registration disadvantage-- not in California, not anywhere. From now on, Democrats can always win CA-25 by turning out their base and by winning their natural share of independent voters. In 2020, accomplishing both, thanks to Trump's toxicity among Californians, are absolute no-brainers. Democrats and independents hate Trump with an intensifying passion and they are eager to go to the polls to register that passion.

Now, listen to Cenk being interviewed by Chris Cuomo on CNN in the video above. It's important, not just because of the specifics of the CA-25 race but for the 2020 election in general and everywhere.

A jungle primary means that all the candidates run on one ballot and unless one candidate gets 50% + one vote, there's a run-off between the two top vote-getters, regardless of party. So far there are 6 Republicans in the race with another 6 or so considering getting in, including some with big name recognition. Because several of the candidates will actually draw Republican votes, the Republican base will be split up. Former Congressman Steve Knight will get many, but so will the NRCC-endorsed candidate Mike Garcia (who has already raised over half a million dollars) and possibly the 2 Trump World joke candidates-- George Papadopolous ("I went to prison instead of ratting out Trump") and conspiracy-theorist, misogynist and neo-fascist Mike Cernovich from down in Orange County.

Democrats in the district get to choose between two classic prototypes, a pointless careerist establishment shill and a progressive reformer/revolutionary. The latter you will get to know by watching the video above. The former has already been anointed by everything that makes the Democratic Party nothing more than "well, yeah they suck but they're not as bad as the Republicans."

Christy Smith was elected to the Assembly last year where she has served without distinction as a garden variety corporate Democrat who always follows the leaders. Katie Hill and her supporters are all in for Christy and Christy went on CNN to brag that Katie, an unrepentant New Dem, "has passed the torch to me." In a meeting with another Democrat running for another office, Smith told him that his anti-corruption in government messaging-- which happens to be similar to Cenk's anti-corruption messaging-- was personally offensive to her. Yeah, shoe fits.

Smith also mentioned that Santa Clarita has a loitering ban and homeless men and women were either arrested or bussed up to the Antelope Valley. Maybe that's why, as an Assembly member, she's been so intensely disliked in the Antelope Valley, part of the congressional district but not her assembly district. Do you support Medicare-for-All and the Green New Deal? Cenk does too but Christy doesn't. We need more people in Congress who support and are motivated by these and similar initiatives, not more who are afraid of them, can't understand them and refuse to back them.

Click to read