Sunday, May 10, 2020

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:




Labels: , , , ,

3 Comments:

At 6:29 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The fact that the Party did the same to Smith's opponents as they always do to progressives, they deserve to lose. We the People are fed up with lying losers who pose as what they are not only to end up doing as their Republican opponents would.

I find it interesting that "Anonymous Strategist" still provided analysis without receiving the usual fee. There is a brewing story in that detail!

 
At 10:49 PM, Anonymous ap215 said...

Once this seat is lost Tom Perez's establishment goons the lobbyists & money will put the full blame on progressives & voters when it's the actual opposite.

 
At 4:32 AM, Blogger sink dish washing said...

یخچال دیپوینت

ست شیرالات شودر

تلویزیون الیویا

فر آلتون

 

Post a Comment

<< Home