UPDATE 9PM 6/5 to reflect the change in the SD-28 race.
As of right now, it looks like a string of stunning losses for the so-called establishment. This was made possible by the uber-low turnout created by the establishment-backed Prop 14.
SD-28 Bonnie Garcia, a liberal Republican in the mold of Abel Maldonado looks like the canvass has put her in the runoff. SD-28 is a Safe R seat. (There are still ballots outstanding)
Jeff Stone, the most conservative was hammered with all sorts of charges of corruption, etc. I am not sure how much validity there is to them – suffice to say Charles Munger spent big and other PACs spent big on Garcia. I have received additional info since the Tuesday Primary about the extent of the issues with Jeff Stone and am now not convinced that Bonnie Garcia would be a bad thing in the State Senate. What a bizarre situation.
IN AD-44, Pastor Rob McCoy defeated establishment pick Mario De La Piedra handily. AD-44 is a seat the GOP must defend. Charles Munger poured $350k in to De La Piedra, and other PAC’s chipped in to him. With McCoy as the nominee will these same PAC’s and donors look elsewhere?
In AD-73 the establishment was crushed. Nearly $500k ($414k of it from Mr. Munger) poured in to Anna Bryson. Lightly funded CRA-Endorsed Bill Brough finished second to the dem and will go to the runoff.
In AD-33 the CRA and the establishment agreed on Jay Obernolte who has a nearly insurmountable grasp on 2nd place.
Note – of the Four major races that the establishment picked, their only win was AD33 – the one that the CRA endorsed.
There is an important sidebar – Three of the four seats that drew huge money were Safe R seats. This has to stop.
We need money spent in AD-40, AD-44 – in addition to the Must-Pick-Up AD-36 and AD-65 where CRA-Endorsed candidates Tom Lackey and Young Kim had stellar showings.
We need money spent in SD-34 on Janet Nguyen who had an excellent showing in the primary. My fear is that with a pending R vs Jeff Stone runoff that the establishment will continue to pour money in to SD-28 emperiling Janet Nugyen.
In 2012, we saw the establishment impose their will on AD-05 and AD-78 forcing moderate/liberal Republicans in to safe R seats while we lost AD-08, AD-32, AD-36, AD-65 and nearly lost AD-63, 40, 44.
In CA-25 – CRA Endorsed Steve Knight is in a runoff against Tony Strickland. Once again, I am convinced that the establishment will spend huge on Strickland – and could do so whilst ignoring CA-07, CA-26, CA-36 and CA-09/CA-03 should those two make it on the radar.
We have to hold SD-28 and pick up SD-34 in order to get above 1/3.
We have to hold AD-40 and AD-44 while picking up AD-36 and AD-65 to get above 1/3. As a wildcard, AD-66, AD-32 and AD-16 are also on the radar screen.
As an aside, the establishment (particularly Mr. Munger) also poured significant money in to Catherine Baker in AD-16. This is a winnable seat in the east bay. Is it likely that the establishment chooses to sacrifice AD-44 because McCoy is “too conservative” in favor of the moderate Baker in AD-16 or David Hadley in AD-66? If you look at the deomgraphics of AD-16 or AD-66 versus AD-44… it seems that AD-44 is a much easier win. I don’t have a problem with Catherine Baker – she fits that district. I do have a problem if AD-44 gets abandoned just because the GOP candidate was not the original choice.
Which gets me to CA-07, CA-26, CA-36 and CA-52 – all four can go GOP. I will go berzerk if the establishment prioritize CA-25 while there are four winnable seats. The nominees in all four of those marginal districts are regarded as moderate/liberal Republicans. The establishment got their men, get out of the safe seat game and help the damn party gain territory! Please!
There is also an outside chance that CA-03 and CA-09 make it on to the national radar.
Lastly – there was some playing in Safe D seats as well, in an attempt to pick GOP Nominees. CA-22, Jonathan Madison was supported with $40k in IE’s, he lost to Pastor Mark Gilham. IN AD04, CRA Member Charlie Schaupp finished first despite money spent on his GOP opponent. In AD07 and AD09 no GOP candidate made the runoff despite spending in that primary.
IN CD-30 Mark Reed, endorsed by CRA, defeated Pablo Kleinman for the GOP nod despite the establishment spending on Pablo.
IN AD-69 Ceci Iglesias missed the runoff despite receiving establishment support (and a CRA endorsement 🙁 ).
In AD-24 and CD-18 – those candidates favored by the establishment made the runoff. In AD-24, there was only rep and the spending likely prevented a DvsD runoff and in CA-18, inexplicibly, there were 3 R candidates.
Overall, last night was a stunning defeat for the moderate establishment in district races.
This defeat was created by Prop 14 and the amazingly low turnout + the unpredictable dynamic of a blanket primary. The motivation of those that brought us Prop 14 was control – and in 2012, with the manipulation of several safe R seats foisting moderates on to conservative districts it looked like Conservatives would be hunted in to extinction.
It didn’t happen in 2014. Prop 14 is now fully erupted.
As I write this – there is a real possibility that David Evans could make the Controller Runoff creating an R vs R runoff in California for a Statewide office. Should that happen, watch the labor unions invest $20+ million in an attempt to repeal Prop14. They may well be plotting that anyway with several (GASP) Pro-business democrats winning primaries last night.