Dynasty Party Politics in Cali. This is how far it has gone..

[Syriusly]

Good for them! Now maybe people won't just vote straight ticket... and it allows for a system where no matter the party the best person can run and win.

What the hell you talking about? They toss EVERY party candidate into ONE list and you CHOOSE ONE. How does that prevent "straight ticket voting".. It ends up in a General Election with NO party choice even RUNNING or eligible to run. I'm sure you're cool with only 2 choices on the ballot BOTH being Dems. But if this happened in North Carolina and they PROHIBITED Dems from the General election -- you'd be up in arms. Wouldn't you?

If Republicans were prohibited from the General election you would have a point- but they aren't.

The top two candidates from the primary go on the general ballot. If they are both Republicans- then we get to vote between two Republicans.

So excluding dissident parties from the General election is fine with you. Muzzle them. Gate them out. Before the election even starts? Who even ASKED California to choose their party candidates for them anyway? Isn't that a function of political party? To represent their constituency? How is that Cali gets to BAR them from a General Election? And WHY the top TWO? Why not the top 4? Are Californians too stupid or lazy to deal with FOUR choices?

Anyone not outraged by this insertion of the state into party candidate selection isn't right in the head..

Who says that political parties should decide who gets to be on the ballot in a general election?
Why should political parties get to decide on who I get to vote for in the general election?

What annoys me about your ignorance on this subject is that this was argued out in California years ago.

No one is being 'muzzled'- the election process has changed- it changed 5 years ago.

The Top Two Candidates Open Primary Act, which took effect January 1, 2011, created "voter-nominated" offices. The Top Two Candidates Open Primary Act does not apply to candidates running for U.S. President, county central committees, or local offices.

Most of the offices that were previously known as "partisan" are now known as "voter-nominated" offices. Voter-nominated offices are state constitutional offices, state legislative offices, and U.S. congressional offices.

How are primary elections conducted in California?
All candidates for voter-nominated offices are listed on one ballot and only the top two vote-getters in the primary election – regardless of party preference - move on to the general election. A write-in candidate will only move on to the general election if the candidate is one of the top two vote-getters in the primary election.

California’s new primary system expected to change political landscape
“The Republican Party and the Democratic Party despise this.” Schwarzenegger said as he took a victory lap on Wednesday. “Why? Because it takes power away from them and gives it back to the people.”

Governor Schwarzenegger backed Proposition 14 to free politicians from party ideology so they’d be more accountable to voters.

“What the parties like is to control their politicians. They like to tell them what to do and how they have to vote up here at the Capitol and that’s why we don’t get things done.” Schwarzenegger said.

 

[Syriusly]

Sounds a bit like LA, they're having a runoff next month for the top two for the senate.

Which senate? You mean state senate right?
Because the US Senate seat now belongs to Kamala Harris. Never had any party opposition in getting it. Total Democrat show.. They ELIMINATED the competition.. .

Kamala Harris had to fight a tough campaign against Democrat Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez.

LOS ANGELES — Two Democrats will battle each other to become California’s next United States senator, after winning the top two spots in an open primary on Tuesday.

The intraparty fight between Kamala Harris, the state’s attorney general, and Loretta Sanchez, a congresswoman from Orange County, will be the first to shut out Republicans since California approved nonpartisan primaries in 2010.

Ms. Harris and Ms. Sanchez defeated a crowded field that included two former chairmen of the State Republican Party. Ms. Harris, who has received the official backing of the State Democratic Party, captured 40 percent of the vote, and Ms. Sanchez 17 percent, with 55 percent of the precincts reporting.

Oh SURE IT WAS.. A "tough" fight. Like the Hilliary - Bernie fight that was over before it began?? With superdelegates? When the DEM party ENDORSES Harris --- it was all over before the bell rung. .

Would really be a CRIME to ruin such a "tough" battle by including TOP 3 or 4 -- wouldn't it?? Betcha that's how the Commie apparatchik in the Soviet Union looked at it also... .

Actually it was a tough fight- far tougher than it would have been against any Republican opponent that everyone knew would lose- since both Harris and Sanchez had gotten more votes- and were well funded.

 

[Harry Dresden]

When I lived in California I paid $4,500/year property tax on a relatively modest house.
Where I live now I pay no property tax.
When I lived in California I paid 12% of my income in state income tax.
Where I live now I pay no state income tax.
When I lived in California I paid about 6% in state and local sales tax.
Where I live now I pay no sales taxes.
When I lived in California I paid over $200/year for auto registration.
Where I live now I have permanent auto registration (1 vehicle only when over 65) at $0.
When I lived in California I paid full price for groceries.
Where I live now I (and everyone over 55) gets 10% off all groceries one day a week.
California is a great place!
To be from.

i hear ya henry.....i just moved....and the difference in living is quite noticeable.....especially the freeways at rush hour.....much nicer.....

 

[hazlnut]

Sounds a bit like LA, they're having a runoff next month for the top two for the senate.

A bit?

 

[OKTexas]

Sounds a bit like LA, they're having a runoff next month for the top two for the senate.

A bit?

Yeah, a bit, you know like a little.

 

[Kosh]

Did you know that Senator Barb Boxer was replaced in the last election? Found that out yesterday. The election media coverage was that bad. Are you aware that the race for that US Senate seat was TWO DEMOCRATS?? No Repub, Libertarian or Green even qualified for General election. They were not allowed to even challenge the 2 candidates.

Because the mindless ones in Cali apparently approved the "consolidated primary" idea that I helped oppose for YEARS out there. The STATE decides that all primary candidates are on ONE ballot. And that only the top TWO make it to the General Election.. How many people in the US realize that the STATE of Cali has stepped in to interfere with the party nominating process to that degree? The "Top TWO rule" applies to most State offices and the US CONGRESS races. (not the Prez, probably because they couldn't get away with that)

Voting in the Primary Election

Can you imagine restricting ballot access to that degree? Especially if it's LIKELY that important races will have 2 candidates from the Dem party and no other choices !!! If folks who care wait TOO LONG -- it will too late to fix things peacefully within the process. I found out that Cali passed this POS idea since I left -- just yesterday. Never thought they would actually get away with it. Put too much trust into the general fairness and inclusiveness of the electorate in a place like Cali. That's partly why I left.

When this "consolidated primary" goes on the ballot now in Cali -- the Party affiliations are NOT EVEN ALLOWED to appear. It usurps the right of the parties to nominate their candidates and place them into the race. Time is short. Have had lots of people laugh at me and other 3rd party folks about calling the 2 brand name parties "dynasties". But they are getting their hooks in the roots of the process and consolidating their monopoly power and influence. And time is getting VERY short to oppose this and preserve ballot access and choice.

WAKE dafuq up people. The 2 parties are now all about WINNING. And not about respect of the American political heritage or serving the people with humility.

Whose ballot access has been restricted?

I voted in California- I voted in the primary and in the general election. I wasn't restricted at all.

What I find amusing about your ranting is that this is old news.

You're really amused?? How amused would you be if the 2 choices Cali gives you to run in a General is a Repub and a Libertarian? I think your amusement is situational and you're not seeing the serious dicking around that's built into this arbitrary law..

I would be fine with that- if the voters decide that the two best candidates are a Republican and a Libertarian then I would vote for whichever candidate I thought was the best of the two.

No you would not, since a far left candidate would not be on the ballot, so you would stay home like a good little drone!

 

[Kosh]

Good for them! Now maybe people won't just vote straight ticket... and it allows for a system where no matter the party the best person can run and win.

What the hell you talking about? They toss EVERY party candidate into ONE list and you CHOOSE ONE. How does that prevent "straight ticket voting".. It ends up in a General Election with NO party choice even RUNNING or eligible to run. I'm sure you're cool with only 2 choices on the ballot BOTH being Dems. But if this happened in North Carolina and they PROHIBITED Dems from the General election -- you'd be up in arms. Wouldn't you?

If Republicans were prohibited from the General election you would have a point- but they aren't.

The top two candidates from the primary go on the general ballot. If they are both Republicans- then we get to vote between two Republicans.

They WERE EXCLUDED from the General election in this case. So were ALL THE OTHER political voices like Greens and Libertarians. The process is something the state should not even be involved in. PRIMARIES were always intended to NOMINATE PARTY candidates. Not to "prune the field" and exclude all voices in the General..

But the two parties did that on the national scale after Perot and made it even harder for any other party to challenge their stance of power.

 

[emilynghiem]

So basically they feel the millions of Republicans in California don't even deserve the change to run someone for senate, wow shocker. Now if you want to see real corruption where the outcome of elections is determined by the parties look no further than NY.

I didn't even bring up the corruption aspect as you rightfully did.. But when you've installed your one party dynasty -- that's pretty inevitable isn't it?

So many examples of Dems disenfranchising voters. No wonder that's a mantra with them.. Screw dissent. Screw competition.. Screw the independent nominating processes of OTHER parties.... And screw the 40% who are not the majority party.. Good job Cali...

Dear flacaltenn thanks for a VERY informative post.

Since the Democrats are set on establishing their own Political Religion,
why not make it official? It's not forced socialism if everyone in the group AGREES
to share ownership of schools, health care, and marriage benefits through
a collective organization. CA has enough members and leaders, why not run
their own programs under their own govt?

Similar to states operating as separate sovereign entities under one union,
and not imposing on each other's members,
why can't parties do the same? Religious groups like Catholics and Protestants
have their own hierarchies and even branch out, as independent subgroups,
while still working under a collective identity.

If progressives have socialistic values, how is that different from a political religion.
Why can't that operate as a corporation and be responsible to its shareholders
and people participating or receiving services?

 

[emilynghiem]

Did you know that Senator Barb Boxer was replaced in the last election? Found that out yesterday. The election media coverage was that bad. Are you aware that the race for that US Senate seat was TWO DEMOCRATS?? No Repub, Libertarian or Green even qualified for General election. They were not allowed to even challenge the 2 candidates.

Because the mindless ones in Cali apparently approved the "consolidated primary" idea that I helped oppose for YEARS out there. The STATE decides that all primary candidates are on ONE ballot. And that only the top TWO make it to the General Election.. How many people in the US realize that the STATE of Cali has stepped in to interfere with the party nominating process to that degree? The "Top TWO rule" applies to most State offices and the US CONGRESS races. (not the Prez, probably because they couldn't get away with that)

Voting in the Primary Election

Can you imagine restricting ballot access to that degree? Especially if it's LIKELY that important races will have 2 candidates from the Dem party and no other choices !!! If folks who care wait TOO LONG -- it will too late to fix things peacefully within the process. I found out that Cali passed this POS idea since I left -- just yesterday. Never thought they would actually get away with it. Put too much trust into the general fairness and inclusiveness of the electorate in a place like Cali. That's partly why I left.

When this "consolidated primary" goes on the ballot now in Cali -- the Party affiliations are NOT EVEN ALLOWED to appear. It usurps the right of the parties to nominate their candidates and place them into the race. Time is short. Have had lots of people laugh at me and other 3rd party folks about calling the 2 brand name parties "dynasties". But they are getting their hooks in the roots of the process and consolidating their monopoly power and influence. And time is getting VERY short to oppose this and preserve ballot access and choice.

WAKE dafuq up people. The 2 parties are now all about WINNING. And not about respect of the American political heritage or serving the people with humility.

Whose ballot access has been restricted?

I voted in California- I voted in the primary and in the general election. I wasn't restricted at all.

What I find amusing about your ranting is that this is old news.

You're really amused?? How amused would you be if the 2 choices Cali gives you to run in a General is a Repub and a Libertarian? I think your amusement is situational and you're not seeing the serious dicking around that's built into this arbitrary law..

I would be fine with that- if the voters decide that the two best candidates are a Republican and a Libertarian then I would vote for whichever candidate I thought was the best of the two.

No you would not, since a far left candidate would not be on the ballot, so you would stay home like a good little drone!

Dear Kosh
Syriusly is far from a drone but actually does a great job explaining in full detail the thinking behind
rights and beliefs promoted on the left.

I am also a progressive Green Democrat, and where we don't agree, that shows there is plenty of room for diversity in the party. We just have to organize, the elitists with elitists and the grassroots supporting grassroots.
And not let the elitists monopolize all the media, credit, collecting and controlling of resources the party members have to work with collectively.

I would say the elitist politicians are getting split off from the
grassroots progressives who don't want the Clintons and corporatists in charge anymore.

And the TRUE power comes in exercising rights in action and managing resources directly.
We don't have to rely on elected leadership in govt roles to appoint, hire and organize our own
leadership to get the work done in reality.

So I think that's what going to come out of this election and the aftermath.
No "drones" are going to be in the lead, because it takes proactive innovation,
but once a good lead or direction gets going, even the drones and sheep following along
will have plenty of opportunity to contribute to the movement toward self-government
and equal political power and representation.

Syriusly is FAR from a blind follower, but is the type of person who will be needed in the massive consulting and negotiations it will take to organize social and financial programs
outside the limitations on govt that conservatives believe in restricting it to.

 

[flacaltenn]

Good for them! Now maybe people won't just vote straight ticket... and it allows for a system where no matter the party the best person can run and win.

What the hell you talking about? They toss EVERY party candidate into ONE list and you CHOOSE ONE. How does that prevent "straight ticket voting".. It ends up in a General Election with NO party choice even RUNNING or eligible to run. I'm sure you're cool with only 2 choices on the ballot BOTH being Dems. But if this happened in North Carolina and they PROHIBITED Dems from the General election -- you'd be up in arms. Wouldn't you?

If Republicans were prohibited from the General election you would have a point- but they aren't.

The top two candidates from the primary go on the general ballot. If they are both Republicans- then we get to vote between two Republicans.

So excluding dissident parties from the General election is fine with you. Muzzle them. Gate them out. Before the election even starts? Who even ASKED California to choose their party candidates for them anyway? Isn't that a function of political party? To represent their constituency? How is that Cali gets to BAR them from a General Election? And WHY the top TWO? Why not the top 4? Are Californians too stupid or lazy to deal with FOUR choices?

Anyone not outraged by this insertion of the state into party candidate selection isn't right in the head..

Who says that political parties should decide who gets to be on the ballot in a general election?
Why should political parties get to decide on who I get to vote for in the general election?

What annoys me about your ignorance on this subject is that this was argued out in California years ago.

No one is being 'muzzled'- the election process has changed- it changed 5 years ago.

The Top Two Candidates Open Primary Act, which took effect January 1, 2011, created "voter-nominated" offices. The Top Two Candidates Open Primary Act does not apply to candidates running for U.S. President, county central committees, or local offices.

Most of the offices that were previously known as "partisan" are now known as "voter-nominated" offices. Voter-nominated offices are state constitutional offices, state legislative offices, and U.S. congressional offices.

How are primary elections conducted in California?
All candidates for voter-nominated offices are listed on one ballot and only the top two vote-getters in the primary election – regardless of party preference - move on to the general election. A write-in candidate will only move on to the general election if the candidate is one of the top two vote-getters in the primary election.

California’s new primary system expected to change political landscape
“The Republican Party and the Democratic Party despise this.” Schwarzenegger said as he took a victory lap on Wednesday. “Why? Because it takes power away from them and gives it back to the people.”

Governor Schwarzenegger backed Proposition 14 to free politicians from party ideology so they’d be more accountable to voters.

“What the parties like is to control their politicians. They like to tell them what to do and how they have to vote up here at the Capitol and that’s why we don’t get things done.” Schwarzenegger said.

Political parties don't belong to the state. They are PRIVATE interest orgs just like AARP or the NRA. They have a RIGHT to organize. To choose their own candidates and set their own agendas. Taking the NAMES of the parties OFF the Cali Primary ballot is fooling no one. Folks are still looking for THEIR brand.

Cali has turned "the primary" into THE ELECTION. and the ELECTION into a huge victory lap for the Dem party or whoever dominates the TWO positions. You know that minor candidates stand ZERO chance of being seen or heard during a primary. Because the vast majority of voters dont give a fuck about primaries.

Cute use of terminology. I say muzzled -- you say "changed". Both may be correct. But my assessment is an accurate description of the result. The whole concept of RESTRICTING general elections to just TWO CHOICES is very arrogant and undemocratic.

 

[flacaltenn]

Sounds a bit like LA, they're having a runoff next month for the top two for the senate.

Which senate? You mean state senate right?
Because the US Senate seat now belongs to Kamala Harris. Never had any party opposition in getting it. Total Democrat show.. They ELIMINATED the competition.. .

Kamala Harris had to fight a tough campaign against Democrat Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez.

LOS ANGELES — Two Democrats will battle each other to become California’s next United States senator, after winning the top two spots in an open primary on Tuesday.

The intraparty fight between Kamala Harris, the state’s attorney general, and Loretta Sanchez, a congresswoman from Orange County, will be the first to shut out Republicans since California approved nonpartisan primaries in 2010.

Ms. Harris and Ms. Sanchez defeated a crowded field that included two former chairmen of the State Republican Party. Ms. Harris, who has received the official backing of the State Democratic Party, captured 40 percent of the vote, and Ms. Sanchez 17 percent, with 55 percent of the precincts reporting.

Oh SURE IT WAS.. A "tough" fight. Like the Hilliary - Bernie fight that was over before it began?? With superdelegates? When the DEM party ENDORSES Harris --- it was all over before the bell rung. .

Would really be a CRIME to ruin such a "tough" battle by including TOP 3 or 4 -- wouldn't it?? Betcha that's how the Commie apparatchik in the Soviet Union looked at it also... .

Actually it was a tough fight- far tougher than it would have been against any Republican opponent that everyone knew would lose- since both Harris and Sanchez had gotten more votes- and were well funded.

Bullshit. The Dem party endorsed, aided and funded Harris. They Bernied Sanchez.. Wasn't even close in the end was it? Don't shine people on about how tough it is to run 2 people in same fucking party when they are both left of left progressives.. You want coke or pepsi?

 

[Lewdog]

Sounds a bit like LA, they're having a runoff next month for the top two for the senate.

Which senate? You mean state senate right?
Because the US Senate seat now belongs to Kamala Harris. Never had any party opposition in getting it. Total Democrat show.. They ELIMINATED the competition.. .

Kamala Harris had to fight a tough campaign against Democrat Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez.

LOS ANGELES — Two Democrats will battle each other to become California’s next United States senator, after winning the top two spots in an open primary on Tuesday.

The intraparty fight between Kamala Harris, the state’s attorney general, and Loretta Sanchez, a congresswoman from Orange County, will be the first to shut out Republicans since California approved nonpartisan primaries in 2010.

Ms. Harris and Ms. Sanchez defeated a crowded field that included two former chairmen of the State Republican Party. Ms. Harris, who has received the official backing of the State Democratic Party, captured 40 percent of the vote, and Ms. Sanchez 17 percent, with 55 percent of the precincts reporting.

Oh SURE IT WAS.. A "tough" fight. Like the Hilliary - Bernie fight that was over before it began?? With superdelegates? When the DEM party ENDORSES Harris --- it was all over before the bell rung. .

Would really be a CRIME to ruin such a "tough" battle by including TOP 3 or 4 -- wouldn't it?? Betcha that's how the Commie apparatchik in the Soviet Union looked at it also... .

Actually it was a tough fight- far tougher than it would have been against any Republican opponent that everyone knew would lose- since both Harris and Sanchez had gotten more votes- and were well funded.

Bullshit. The Dem party endorsed, aided and funded Harris. They Bernied Sanchez.. Wasn't even close in the end was it? Don't shine people on about how tough it is to run 2 people in same fucking party when they are both left of left progressives.. You want coke or pepsi?

Sorry, but that is a HORRIBLE analogy. Anyone that drinks soda knows you are either a coke or a Pepsi person. They are NOt interchangeable.

 

[flacaltenn]

So basically they feel the millions of Republicans in California don't even deserve the change to run someone for senate, wow shocker. Now if you want to see real corruption where the outcome of elections is determined by the parties look no further than NY.

I didn't even bring up the corruption aspect as you rightfully did.. But when you've installed your one party dynasty -- that's pretty inevitable isn't it?

So many examples of Dems disenfranchising voters. No wonder that's a mantra with them.. Screw dissent. Screw competition.. Screw the independent nominating processes of OTHER parties.... And screw the 40% who are not the majority party.. Good job Cali...

Dear flacaltenn thanks for a VERY informative post.

Since the Democrats are set on establishing their own Political Religion,
why not make it official? It's not forced socialism if everyone in the group AGREES
to share ownership of schools, health care, and marriage benefits through
a collective organization. CA has enough members and leaders, why not run
their own programs under their own govt?

Similar to states operating as separate sovereign entities under one union,
and not imposing on each other's members,
why can't parties do the same? Religious groups like Catholics and Protestants
have their own hierarchies and even branch out, as independent subgroups,
while still working under a collective identity.

If progressives have socialistic values, how is that different from a political religion.
Why can't that operate as a corporation and be responsible to its shareholders
and people participating or receiving services?

We should all wait on that. I think the results from California are coming in soon. And the exodus and changes there will be a testament to their "ingenuity" and embracement of political monopoly.. .

 

[Kosh]

Sounds a bit like LA, they're having a runoff next month for the top two for the senate.

Which senate? You mean state senate right?
Because the US Senate seat now belongs to Kamala Harris. Never had any party opposition in getting it. Total Democrat show.. They ELIMINATED the competition.. .

Kamala Harris had to fight a tough campaign against Democrat Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez.

LOS ANGELES — Two Democrats will battle each other to become California’s next United States senator, after winning the top two spots in an open primary on Tuesday.

The intraparty fight between Kamala Harris, the state’s attorney general, and Loretta Sanchez, a congresswoman from Orange County, will be the first to shut out Republicans since California approved nonpartisan primaries in 2010.

Ms. Harris and Ms. Sanchez defeated a crowded field that included two former chairmen of the State Republican Party. Ms. Harris, who has received the official backing of the State Democratic Party, captured 40 percent of the vote, and Ms. Sanchez 17 percent, with 55 percent of the precincts reporting.

Oh SURE IT WAS.. A "tough" fight. Like the Hilliary - Bernie fight that was over before it began?? With superdelegates? When the DEM party ENDORSES Harris --- it was all over before the bell rung. .

Would really be a CRIME to ruin such a "tough" battle by including TOP 3 or 4 -- wouldn't it?? Betcha that's how the Commie apparatchik in the Soviet Union looked at it also... .

Actually it was a tough fight- far tougher than it would have been against any Republican opponent that everyone knew would lose- since both Harris and Sanchez had gotten more votes- and were well funded.

Bullshit. The Dem party endorsed, aided and funded Harris. They Bernied Sanchez.. Wasn't even close in the end was it? Don't shine people on about how tough it is to run 2 people in same fucking party when they are both left of left progressives.. You want coke or pepsi?

Congressional Races in California, 2016 cycle | OpenSecrets

Senate Kamala D Harris (D)

$13,507,961
Loretta Sanchez (D)

$4,116,580

 

[flacaltenn]

Which senate? You mean state senate right?
Because the US Senate seat now belongs to Kamala Harris. Never had any party opposition in getting it. Total Democrat show.. They ELIMINATED the competition.. .

Kamala Harris had to fight a tough campaign against Democrat Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez.

LOS ANGELES — Two Democrats will battle each other to become California’s next United States senator, after winning the top two spots in an open primary on Tuesday.

The intraparty fight between Kamala Harris, the state’s attorney general, and Loretta Sanchez, a congresswoman from Orange County, will be the first to shut out Republicans since California approved nonpartisan primaries in 2010.

Ms. Harris and Ms. Sanchez defeated a crowded field that included two former chairmen of the State Republican Party. Ms. Harris, who has received the official backing of the State Democratic Party, captured 40 percent of the vote, and Ms. Sanchez 17 percent, with 55 percent of the precincts reporting.

Oh SURE IT WAS.. A "tough" fight. Like the Hilliary - Bernie fight that was over before it began?? With superdelegates? When the DEM party ENDORSES Harris --- it was all over before the bell rung. .

Would really be a CRIME to ruin such a "tough" battle by including TOP 3 or 4 -- wouldn't it?? Betcha that's how the Commie apparatchik in the Soviet Union looked at it also... .

Actually it was a tough fight- far tougher than it would have been against any Republican opponent that everyone knew would lose- since both Harris and Sanchez had gotten more votes- and were well funded.

Bullshit. The Dem party endorsed, aided and funded Harris. They Bernied Sanchez.. Wasn't even close in the end was it? Don't shine people on about how tough it is to run 2 people in same fucking party when they are both left of left progressives.. You want coke or pepsi?

Sorry, but that is a HORRIBLE analogy. Anyone that drinks soda knows you are either a coke or a Pepsi person. They are NOt interchangeable.

It's NOT a horrible analogy if I drive up to A&W ask for a root beer float and they ask if I want Coke or Pepsi. You know --- some folks are Yoohoo people. End result is STILL ONE PARTY DOMINATION. And they made it sadisticly harder for dissident voices to be heard..

 

[Lewdog]

Kamala Harris had to fight a tough campaign against Democrat Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez.

LOS ANGELES — Two Democrats will battle each other to become California’s next United States senator, after winning the top two spots in an open primary on Tuesday.

The intraparty fight between Kamala Harris, the state’s attorney general, and Loretta Sanchez, a congresswoman from Orange County, will be the first to shut out Republicans since California approved nonpartisan primaries in 2010.

Ms. Harris and Ms. Sanchez defeated a crowded field that included two former chairmen of the State Republican Party. Ms. Harris, who has received the official backing of the State Democratic Party, captured 40 percent of the vote, and Ms. Sanchez 17 percent, with 55 percent of the precincts reporting.

Oh SURE IT WAS.. A "tough" fight. Like the Hilliary - Bernie fight that was over before it began?? With superdelegates? When the DEM party ENDORSES Harris --- it was all over before the bell rung. .

Would really be a CRIME to ruin such a "tough" battle by including TOP 3 or 4 -- wouldn't it?? Betcha that's how the Commie apparatchik in the Soviet Union looked at it also... .

Actually it was a tough fight- far tougher than it would have been against any Republican opponent that everyone knew would lose- since both Harris and Sanchez had gotten more votes- and were well funded.

Bullshit. The Dem party endorsed, aided and funded Harris. They Bernied Sanchez.. Wasn't even close in the end was it? Don't shine people on about how tough it is to run 2 people in same fucking party when they are both left of left progressives.. You want coke or pepsi?

Sorry, but that is a HORRIBLE analogy. Anyone that drinks soda knows you are either a coke or a Pepsi person. They are NOt interchangeable.

It's NOT a horrible analogy if I drive up to A&W ask for a root beer and they ask if I want Coke or Pepsi. You know --- some folks are Yoohoo people. End result is STILL ONE PARTY DOMINATION. And they made it sadisticly harder for dissident voices to be heard..

But, you are forced to buy either a Coke or Pepsi based on what they carry because they have non-compete clauses. In these elections there aren't non-compete clauses... they all have a chance starting in the primaries.

 

[flacaltenn]

Which senate? You mean state senate right?
Because the US Senate seat now belongs to Kamala Harris. Never had any party opposition in getting it. Total Democrat show.. They ELIMINATED the competition.. .

Kamala Harris had to fight a tough campaign against Democrat Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez.

LOS ANGELES — Two Democrats will battle each other to become California’s next United States senator, after winning the top two spots in an open primary on Tuesday.

The intraparty fight between Kamala Harris, the state’s attorney general, and Loretta Sanchez, a congresswoman from Orange County, will be the first to shut out Republicans since California approved nonpartisan primaries in 2010.

Ms. Harris and Ms. Sanchez defeated a crowded field that included two former chairmen of the State Republican Party. Ms. Harris, who has received the official backing of the State Democratic Party, captured 40 percent of the vote, and Ms. Sanchez 17 percent, with 55 percent of the precincts reporting.

Oh SURE IT WAS.. A "tough" fight. Like the Hilliary - Bernie fight that was over before it began?? With superdelegates? When the DEM party ENDORSES Harris --- it was all over before the bell rung. .

Would really be a CRIME to ruin such a "tough" battle by including TOP 3 or 4 -- wouldn't it?? Betcha that's how the Commie apparatchik in the Soviet Union looked at it also... .

Actually it was a tough fight- far tougher than it would have been against any Republican opponent that everyone knew would lose- since both Harris and Sanchez had gotten more votes- and were well funded.

Bullshit. The Dem party endorsed, aided and funded Harris. They Bernied Sanchez.. Wasn't even close in the end was it? Don't shine people on about how tough it is to run 2 people in same fucking party when they are both left of left progressives.. You want coke or pepsi?

Congressional Races in California, 2016 cycle | OpenSecrets

Senate Kamala D Harris (D)

$13,507,961
Loretta Sanchez (D)

$4,116,580

Yep --- she was Bernied.. And Syrius and LewDog can claim all day long it's about the "people" , but in the end, it just made it super easy for the 2 Brand Name parties to be the only game in town and have a BLAST doing it.

Why don't you post up the Vote totals from this PHONY "contested" and "close" election ???

 

[Lewdog]

Kamala Harris had to fight a tough campaign against Democrat Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez.

LOS ANGELES — Two Democrats will battle each other to become California’s next United States senator, after winning the top two spots in an open primary on Tuesday.

The intraparty fight between Kamala Harris, the state’s attorney general, and Loretta Sanchez, a congresswoman from Orange County, will be the first to shut out Republicans since California approved nonpartisan primaries in 2010.

Ms. Harris and Ms. Sanchez defeated a crowded field that included two former chairmen of the State Republican Party. Ms. Harris, who has received the official backing of the State Democratic Party, captured 40 percent of the vote, and Ms. Sanchez 17 percent, with 55 percent of the precincts reporting.

Oh SURE IT WAS.. A "tough" fight. Like the Hilliary - Bernie fight that was over before it began?? With superdelegates? When the DEM party ENDORSES Harris --- it was all over before the bell rung. .

Would really be a CRIME to ruin such a "tough" battle by including TOP 3 or 4 -- wouldn't it?? Betcha that's how the Commie apparatchik in the Soviet Union looked at it also... .

Actually it was a tough fight- far tougher than it would have been against any Republican opponent that everyone knew would lose- since both Harris and Sanchez had gotten more votes- and were well funded.

Bullshit. The Dem party endorsed, aided and funded Harris. They Bernied Sanchez.. Wasn't even close in the end was it? Don't shine people on about how tough it is to run 2 people in same fucking party when they are both left of left progressives.. You want coke or pepsi?

Congressional Races in California, 2016 cycle | OpenSecrets

Senate Kamala D Harris (D)

$13,507,961
Loretta Sanchez (D)

$4,116,580

Yep --- she was Bernied.. And Syrius and LewDog can claim all day long it's about the "people" , but in the end, it just made it super easy for the 2 Brand Name parties to be the only game in town and have a BLAST doing it.

Why don't you post up the Vote totals from this PHONY "contested" and "close" election ???

Maybe if your party promised more freedoms and more free shit it would do better in the elections.

 

[Kosh]

Kamala Harris had to fight a tough campaign against Democrat Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez.

LOS ANGELES — Two Democrats will battle each other to become California’s next United States senator, after winning the top two spots in an open primary on Tuesday.

The intraparty fight between Kamala Harris, the state’s attorney general, and Loretta Sanchez, a congresswoman from Orange County, will be the first to shut out Republicans since California approved nonpartisan primaries in 2010.

Ms. Harris and Ms. Sanchez defeated a crowded field that included two former chairmen of the State Republican Party. Ms. Harris, who has received the official backing of the State Democratic Party, captured 40 percent of the vote, and Ms. Sanchez 17 percent, with 55 percent of the precincts reporting.

Oh SURE IT WAS.. A "tough" fight. Like the Hilliary - Bernie fight that was over before it began?? With superdelegates? When the DEM party ENDORSES Harris --- it was all over before the bell rung. .

Would really be a CRIME to ruin such a "tough" battle by including TOP 3 or 4 -- wouldn't it?? Betcha that's how the Commie apparatchik in the Soviet Union looked at it also... .

Actually it was a tough fight- far tougher than it would have been against any Republican opponent that everyone knew would lose- since both Harris and Sanchez had gotten more votes- and were well funded.

Bullshit. The Dem party endorsed, aided and funded Harris. They Bernied Sanchez.. Wasn't even close in the end was it? Don't shine people on about how tough it is to run 2 people in same fucking party when they are both left of left progressives.. You want coke or pepsi?

Congressional Races in California, 2016 cycle | OpenSecrets

Senate Kamala D Harris (D)

$13,507,961
Loretta Sanchez (D)

$4,116,580

Yep --- she was Bernied.. And Syrius and LewDog can claim all day long it's about the "people" , but in the end, it just made it super easy for the 2 Brand Name parties to be the only game in town and have a BLAST doing it.

Why don't you post up the Vote totals from this PHONY "contested" and "close" election ???

Well the Trump defense begins for the far left which may end the old Bush defense.

 

[Kosh]

Oh SURE IT WAS.. A "tough" fight. Like the Hilliary - Bernie fight that was over before it began?? With superdelegates? When the DEM party ENDORSES Harris --- it was all over before the bell rung. .

Would really be a CRIME to ruin such a "tough" battle by including TOP 3 or 4 -- wouldn't it?? Betcha that's how the Commie apparatchik in the Soviet Union looked at it also... .

Actually it was a tough fight- far tougher than it would have been against any Republican opponent that everyone knew would lose- since both Harris and Sanchez had gotten more votes- and were well funded.

Bullshit. The Dem party endorsed, aided and funded Harris. They Bernied Sanchez.. Wasn't even close in the end was it? Don't shine people on about how tough it is to run 2 people in same fucking party when they are both left of left progressives.. You want coke or pepsi?

Congressional Races in California, 2016 cycle | OpenSecrets

Senate Kamala D Harris (D)

$13,507,961
Loretta Sanchez (D)

$4,116,580

Yep --- she was Bernied.. And Syrius and LewDog can claim all day long it's about the "people" , but in the end, it just made it super easy for the 2 Brand Name parties to be the only game in town and have a BLAST doing it.

Why don't you post up the Vote totals from this PHONY "contested" and "close" election ???

Maybe if your party promised more freedoms and more free shit it would do better in the elections.

Yes that worked so well for the far left which you worship!

Silly far left drone!