Comments
GELFAND’S WORLD - Can the Republicans really take control of California’s government next year, in spite of the state’s overwhelming majority of Democratic voters? It is theoretically possible, and this possibility has inspired some worried writing by some of our better commenters. Even Newsweek, reporting on this weekend’s California Democratic Party convention, mentioned that delegates recognized the problem.
But the danger is also something that can be avoided provided a bit of voter intelligence is brought to the matter.
The concern here is based on the way that we do our primary elections, in particular the way that we choose finalists for the November general elections. It works like this: Every candidate for governor goes on the same ballot, regardless of party affiliation. You will get to choose between Republican Hilton and Democrat Swalwell, among 10 or more candidates. Republicans, Democrats, Greens, Independents, and every other type – they all go on the same list, and you have to choose from among them.
Now here is the catch: The top two go onto the November ballot as the finalists. Nobody else. There is a structural issue that favors the Republicans this year, so the November runoff could in theory be between two Republicans. If they were to get, for example, 22% and 18% of the primary votes respectively, while the 8 Democrats split the votes randomly amongst their numbers, the highest Democratic Party vote-getter might receive only 15%. This would result in two Republicans in the runoff for who gets to be the next governor.
This system has been referred to as a “jungle” primary. Since the Republicans will be splitting roughly 35% of the votes among only 2 main candidates, while the Democrats will be splitting their 65% among as many as 8 candidates, the above described debacle is not only mathematically possible, it has some modest likelihood of actually happening.
This scenario was set forth by Harold Meyerson in the American Prospect. The Meyerson piece was recognized by Erik Loomis of the blog Lawyers Guns & Money, where the concern was expanded upon.
What is the actual likelihood of this kind of disaster happening, and what would be necessary to stave it off?
Let’s start with the kind of conditions that would lead to a runoff election with no Democrats. Basically, it comes down to the voters remaining non-involved in the race and just casting votes more or less haphazardly on election day. Here are some of the top contenders:
Katie Porter
Eric Swalwell
Xavier Becerra
Tom Steyer
Here are some other candidates:
Antonio Villaraigosa
The mayor of San Jose
a couple of elected officials from the state government of California
Journalists love to obsess over the idea of the low information voter. By this, they seem to be referring to somebody who was still undecided leading up to the last presidential election and, on election day, decided to vote for cheaper eggs and fewer immigrants, basing his decision on promises made by the Republican candidate. The fear is that Democratic voters will mirror that approach come the primary elections in June.
The remedy is easy. Democratic voters should coalesce around one or two (maybe three) candidates and cast their votes accordingly. In a normal year, we might expect to see a rousing race between Eric Swalwell (one of the participants in the January 6 congressional hearings) and former congresswoman Katie Porter, who is best known for her ability to grill witnesses during other congressional hearings.
The situation is complicated because Tom Steyer is pouring millions of dollars of his own money into television commercials. Becerra is reputed to be a genuinely good guy and has a credible record. Villaraigosa was once the mayor of Los Angeles. And lastly, the mayor of San Jose is now jumping into the race using tech-billionaire money. There are lots of votes that could go to these people based on television saturation and old loyalties. That’s where the pundit panic is coming from. A collection of voters who are otherwise distracted and people stressed by high rents and rising prices can split their votes among people who are making rash promises. (For example, how could Steyer lower utility bills and get zillions of units of cheap housing built?)
What I’m guessing will happen is twofold: There will be lots of debates featuring these candidates and out of this process, the top two or three will emerge. That will be reflected in the polls. I’m expecting the top three to include Swalwell, Porter, and perhaps Steyer, but (just like in presidential primary season) there could be surprises. Maybe a couple of candidates will have really poor debates, and will drop to the bottom of the list. As this process continues, half or more of the Democratic candidates should announce that they are dropping out. Under some circumstances, the November runoff could include two Democrats, simply because that’s where the votes are in this state. If there were only two or three main Democratic candidates, it would be the Republicans who would be moaning about the November election.
The problem of course is that there are only 3 months between now and election day, and even less time if you factor in all those people who will be casting early mail-in ballots. It is important that the televised debates start happening as soon as possible.
One comment about the process so far. There was a small amount of press coverage of the Democratic Party’s state convention this weekend. The fact that the convention did not endorse any one candidate is no surprise at all. The system is designed that way. It requires a supermajority of votes to endorse any candidate at this point. With all those candidates and a fluid electoral situation, it was inevitable that there would be no endorsement. It is marginally important that Swalwell got the most endorsement votes with 24% of the total. It is, however, indicative of who participates in these conventions that somebody called Betty Yee finished second, and that unlikely candidate Becerra finished third. In brief, the Democratic Party convention does not really represent the overall Democratic electorate.
(Bob Gelfand writes on science, culture, and politics for CityWatch. He can be reached at [email protected])
