As a general reminder if you ever see a comment that you consider to be offensive in a serious way, violates someone's privacy, threatens, or goes beyond hard ball political debate, send me an e-mail with what blog entry it was on and the name of the author.

Voters very often will use party registration as guidance for their votes because they have little time to study and research each candidate and their agandas. Sometimes voters are tricked, however, when someone changes party registration just to get elected.

Thanks Michael, I'll make sure to add you to my caller ID blocking list. LOL!

So if what is all over this blog is to be believed, the Republicans are going to come on heavy in the non-partisan Ventura City Council races and remind their party members who is a Republican? Is this a good strategy in a Democratic leaning city to remind voters who is a member of a party in decline?

While a race with low voter turnout -- as this race is expected to be -- generally favors Republicans, this city has a lot of public service employee unions who turn their members out in force. The current council members who are up for re-election were elected in the lowest voter turnout race in city history. Morehouse and Fulton are curently registered as Democrats. Weir is registered as Non Partisan.

Public safety people always vote Republican, even if they are union, because the GOP always takes care of them. Some candidates might tell people to just vote for one or two, instead of three. Or maybe the GOP will just do a trade-off and play hands off of one or 2 Democrats and just target one incumbant. Does anyone know the breakdown of registered voters in the city of Ventura? Laura? Marie?

Report Date 2/01/07

Democrat 50.6 %
Republican 43.7 %
Decline to State 18.4
American Ind 2.1
Green 1.7
Peace & Freedom .1
Natural Law .1
Libertarian .8

Uh, sorry about the double post above. My computer froze. The police and fire unions in this town are NOT happy with a particular group of (mostly) Republicans who helped torpedo the Public Safety Initiative last fall. Any candidate who comes out and says he didn't support this intiative will have a hard time getting police and fire support.

62 percent of the voters supported this measure. But it needed a super majority to pass. Mike Gibson is already on record in this blog as saying he didn't support it. I don't think he will be getting endorsements from police and fire.

Marie,

Your math is wrong. Your numbers total up to 117.5 per cent.

The actual numbers are Dems about 41%, Reps 35%, DTS 17%, there are about 3700 more Dems than Reps.

Not a bad number considering the Reps turn out model.

I was giving you non-traditional household figures.

Except of course when Republicans don't support them. Case in point, the NYFD union, which is elected by its members, does not support Rudy because of what he did to them.

Also, the local FD did not support Mikels if I remember correctly and in the general election supported Dantona.

And in addition to that most cops favor some gun control laws being they need to deal with people that while aren't street criminals, might have a history of mental illness or violence.

But I guess besides that public safety employees vote Republican.

Democrats or Republicans can make it a partisan campaign. But the trick is to make it stealth. You don't tell the whole city what party you are, you only tell people who will respond favorably to the news.

So, if you target the 40% that are in your party with one mailer talking about your Reagan Republican past and the other 60 % with your long history of working with the other party you can win.

The strongest issue to many voters is party ID. You lock them in and you win.

That is why people scramble to get endorsements of key office holders. If you have Lois Capps and you on the cover of a flyer going to democratic households they get the message.

There will never be a Ventura Republican billboard with their picks on it and a picture of George W. Bush. You won't see many of the flyers unless you are a party member. But they will be mailed.

Since politicians typically belong to one of two parties all elections are partisan, even for the so-called non partisan offices. Party affiliation matters to the special interest groups that finance campaigns. And so-called non-partisan offices often make budgetary decisions, and when a politician has a say in how money gets spent then special interest groups have an interest in who occupies that office. Just follow the money.

There is a pretty big Decline to State registration in Ventura.

Bubba, are the park board elections in Simi Valley partisan contests? Should they be?

In my post I said that parties do get involved in nonpartisan races. But Hiram Johnson created nonpartisan races so that voters could not vote on party ID alone. I don't think party is the largest issue in park board races in Simi Valley. Kate O'Brien who is a member of that board is a Libertarian. What special interest libertarian groups backed her?

Is big lawn a large influence on park board elections?

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28432

Brian,

I don't know of too many special interests that care too much about how the parks board spends their money. Which is why you'll find that unions, developers, corporations, trial lawyers, and Indian gaming pretty much stay out of those elections. However some of those same groups may be very interested in the outcome of things such as school board, Supervisor, or City Council election. All you need to do is frame it in terms of whether the actions of that governing body can positively or negatively impact the interests of certain groups. Park boards are pretty benign and therefore generally don't see a lot of money flowing to finance campaigns.

I know what Himam Johnson intended, but in any political system all you need to know is whether there is real money and influence involved. That is the benchmark for whether an office will truly remain non-partisan or whether the special interests will take over and make them partisan.

Tell me Brian, why does does it take over a million dollars to run for a seat on the LAUSD school board?

I'll answer this for you. Because the board has oversight over a multi-billion dollar annual budget and can influence the pay and benefits of tens thousands of union employees. There are lots of groups that stand to gain or lose depending on the composition of the school board. You are talking about control over a serious amount of money. And that attracts the attention of influential special interest groups and, by extension, the political parties that can raise money and put soldiers on the ground in order to win elections. That's why the UTLA has scores of lobbyists working full-time in Sacramento crafting legislation favorable to their interests. That's why large developers employ their own army of lobbyists to push through bond measures to build new schools. That's just how the game works my friend.

Bubba, I agree with a pot of money as big as LAUSD there is many interest groups involved.

BUT, that doesn't make it a partisan battle between Republicans and Democrats. I think it is obvious to most people that being listed as a Republican in LA would be a hindrance in most areas. Nonpartisan races help Republicans in LA as nonpartisan races help Democrats in places like Thousand Oaks and Simi Valley.

Unions will back the candidate that will help their members the most. Same with developers.

But I think you are missing the D VS R part of the debate. Should we change the laws that make certain seats nonpartisan? Should Mayor Paul Miller be listed as a Republican in the next Simi Valley Mayoral election?

Do you want to change the current laws that shield the party registration from voters or keep the status quo?

Locally, we aren't looking at non-partisan races being Dem versus Republican. We are looking at special interest driven elections. By special interests I include unions, churches, existing elected officials and/or candidates. If they are providing money or manpower, this information shouldn't be hidden from the voters. The California Association of Political Centrists website should be live by the end of the month and will have information on all the candidates.

Just a few more days for filing for the Ventura City Council race. I've heard that Kimble Ouerbacher won't be running - he is a Republican. And I know many people would like Mike Tracy to run - he is also a Republican. We have heard that Michael Gibson (R) is interested. I have to say I didn't like his responses to Laura Winchester (D) on the other thread but he did try to repair the damage so I will chalk it up to him being a "newbie" on this blog.

Looking at the numbers given previously, it looks like the DTS voters will need to be courted to ensure a win.

School Boards, County School Boards, City Council, Supervisor...etc, are the farm leagues for both parties. It a shame people use these positions for personal and political gain. Strom Thurman started as a school board member.

I've been talking to folks out in the Ventura community the past few days about rumors of the two parties doing multiple mailers and generally interfering in what have traditionally been non-partisan and fairly tame Council elections. For example, Brian Brennan easily won two years ago by doing nothing but putting his name on the ballot!

I can tell you the idea of mass party intervention has been met with universal revulsion by people registered to both parties. While you people live and breathe politics, most people are sick to death of it all because of what they have witnessed on the national scene.

Venturans are a different breed. Grassroots activism works really well here. Slick partisan mailers will find the round file fast!

Brian,

I'm not in favor of changing the laws to eliminate non-partisan offices. In theory I believe that Hiram Johnson had it right. But that is in an ideal world, and in the real world there is just too much money and power at stake to not meddle in elections.

It doesn't take very long for political parties and special interests to figure out loopholes to circumvent the intent of the law. The same applies to things like campaign finance reform. It is just human nature to find creative ways to achieve your own self interests. So what I'm saying is that on this issue I agree with your ideals but also feel that the process will, unfortunately, never work the way it was intended because there is too much at stake for the interested groups.

Bubba, being that currently party labels are not shown, but parties are involved doesn't this just benefit the special interest that communicate the most? Wouldn't it help voters to have party ID's on the ballot to counteract this end run?

Marie, it is only partisan when the other side does it.

I find it fascinating that, when it suits their purpose, so many people want to champion a position from a hundred years ago.

I wonder if these same people would like to institute Hiram Johnson's beliefs on gun ownership, anti-immigrant positions and racism. Should I go on?

I like to champion a position from 230 years ago. The U.S. Constitution has some pretty good stuff.

When it suits me - I like to champion a position from two hundred thirty one years ago.

Marie - I didn't see yours before I posted mine - but my math is better! Too funny!

Not to put too fine a point on it, but the U.S. Constitution was written in 1787, 220 years ago. The Bill of Rights (first 10 amendments) became effective in 1791, four years later, 216 years ago.

If we're going to talk history we should know our dates, especially you Leslie.

But who's counting?

Voter gets a gold star for accuracy.

Brian, I suppose listing party affiliation would help voters to understand the basic political position of a candidate. However it often causes voters to make assumptions about candidates as well. Astute voters will be able to easily figure out the political alignment of the candidates, while less informed voters (the majority) will rely on campaign advertising or hearsay.

There are pros and cons to each approach. Without publishing party affiliation candidates can more easily mask their true political positions and masquerade to be something they are not. On the other hand, broadcasting party affiliation will immediately alienate many candidates from voters who are party loyal.

In principle I feel that more information is always better and candidates should not be trying to hide their party affiliation. It is for voters to decide if that information is relevant. So on the whole I would support the publication of party identification on all ballots.

Remind me - what year was the Declaration of Independence?

Voter has excellent Googling skills. Good for him!

Leslie,

You commented on Marie's math with your post. She was talking about the Constitution.

But, giving you the benefit of the doubt, what does the Declaration of Independence have to do with this thread?

Allow me to enlighten you, voter. Hiram Johnson was about ideas and a political movement. Ron's post inferred it is not a good idea to look back at those who have come before us with ideas - as if somehow the ideas of a hundred years ago could not apply to today's world. Marie and I were reminding him that we can learn a lot from bright people or movements that have come before us, such as those of our forefathers. Did you get it now?

Leslie,

My post was to point out that many who post here will hold up, with reverence, an idea and the ideas creator (Hiram Johnson) as infallible if it suits their purpose. I was pointing out that something that was used for a singular reason (anti-railroad barons) a hundred years ago, and hardly on a par with the DoI or the Constitution, was an absolute today. Hiram Johnson had many flawed ideas and many good ones, but that is no reason to consider him the final word in today's political world.

And by the way, I agree with voter. You responded to Marie, who said,

"I like to champion a position from 230 years ago. The U.S. Constitution has some pretty good stuff."

You them went on to correct her math by saying,

"Marie - I didn't see yours before I posted mine - but my math is better! Too funny!"

Sorry, but your attempt to side-step your mistake is spin.

So instead of understanding the general concept, you decided to nit-pick. I was teasing Marie because we were on the same train of thought, and you got critical. Where's your sense of humor, Ron?

I'm guessing the debates and ideas over a new constitution had their beginnings earlier than it's final issue. It didn't appear by magic one year. It came from thoughtful, civil and strong intellectual debate over many years, with many beginnings in England and France. (per my post on another thread)

Brian,
The L.A. Times just reported that the State GOP party in California is broke! They owe millions and have collected almost nothing in donations. These are the same clowns holding up the State Budget! What a joke! The GOP cannot even balance their own books and they think they know best for the Ca budget! LOL!!!!! Meanwhile the Ca Dems have over 5.2 million in the bank and no debt! If Boss Hogg wants to send out literature to all the members (big joke!) in VC he better start begging for money because he won't be getting any from the state party anytime soon! The dem to rep numbers in VC keep getting closer. Looks like the reps are all moving to Riverside! Boss Hogg is involved in non-partisan races because he wants the far right Christian Coalition message force fed to five year olds in public schools! In the news, I see a big bridge collapsed in Minn, maybe Bush should have spent money on bridges here in the U.S., AS HE WAS TOLD TO DO BY THE ARMY CORP OF ENGINEERS, instead of spending 600 billion in Iraq, which is expected to grow to 1.6 trillion, as America crumbles and American citizens are hurt, all this so Cheney can get rich off his Halliburton stock! Meanwhile, Tom McClintock has taken 12k from tobacco companies and he won't vote for a bill to make it illegal to strap a baby into a car seat, roll up the windows and smoke for three hours as they drive to San Diego blowing smoke in the baby's face, Tom say's this is okay to do. It should be the GOPOC "The Grand Old Party Of Clowns".

Blaming Bush for the bridge collapse in Minnesota takes liberal lunacy to a whole new level. I suppose the president is busy at work at this very moment blowing cigarette smoke into the faces of defenseless little children. LMAO!!

You can't blame Bush for a specific bridge collapsing but it does play into priorities of the administration. Bush was elected in 2000 because as a governor he had a handle on state government and the importance of infrastructure, etc. He lacked international diplomacy skills. He had only been out of the country once or twice in his life before becoming president, which considering his means is shocking. He preferred focusing on domestic issues. Unfortunately, in his first year, 9/11 happened, and he dropped the infrastructure priorities to focus on fighting terrorists. He should have done both, but fighting terrorists had a better chance of helping him get reelected because people were still afraid.

Hey stupid! Bubba, congratulations! I understand you won assh*le of the year at your last meeting, very good, given the crowd you run with!

And once again we have Bozo the clown giving liberalism a bad name with his cheap insults. How embarassing.

Bubba, c'mon now, you're giving us rednecks a bad name. Stop intellectualizing over everything. Just use your good 'ol redneck common sense approach and everything will be fine. Lately, you're starting to sound like Carroll Dean Williams. Now that is scary.

LOL! HAHAHAHAHHA! Works every damn time! I say "Hey Stupid" and Bubba say's, "that's me!" Bubba everything you have ever written was lame and stupid, no one wants you on this blog. Your nothing but a coward and everyone knows it.

Whatever you say Bozo the clown. Hey, maybe you should come up with your own name instead of trying to be a cheap imitation.

Why should he, Blimpo Breath?!? You're a one man comedy store, Bubba.

Blimpo breath? LOL!! Did you come up with that one all by yourself? Ha ha ha ha!! You and your clown friend aren't even bright enough to come up with decent insults. Blimpo breath! LMAO!!!