Will the tide turn this Fall?



John Cox is doing something remarkable for a Republican. A recent survey indicates he is now within striking distance of being elected governor of the infamously liberal state in November.

According to the Public Policy Institute of California, Cox (who I greatly respect and have worked with for years) has been gaining support since January and is now the second-place pick for governor among likely California primary voters. This puts him right behind the leading Democrat and represents a great potential for Cox to win the governorship seven months from now.

The poll result is important because California’s primary system for congressional and statewide elections is unusual.

Instead of running in individual party primaries, all candidates for governor of California – regardless of political party affiliation – will appear on a single ballot June 5. The two candidates who earn the most votes move on to the Nov. 6 gubernatorial election. Washington is the only other state that elects both congressional and state-level candidates this way.

California’s primary setup is a great system for silencing and drowning out political minorities, and it has likely been a big help to California Democrats since it was adopted in 2010. This is why Cox’s polling gains are so important.

In the Public Policy Institute of California survey, Cox earned 14 percent support against the five other primary candidates, as well as options for “someone else” and “don’t know.” This was up from 7 percent support in January. The top Democrat still has a significant lead on Cox, but nearly a quarter of likely voters in California remain undecided.

This race is also important for Republicans across the United States, because having Cox on the election ballot in November will be vital for keeping the Republican majority in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Republicans currently hold only 14 of California 53 House seats, all of which will be on the ballot this November. Any losses or gains in California could have a serious impact on the ability of Republicans to keep control of the House.

A survey by SmithJohnson Research found that 99.6 percent of California Republicans said they planned to vote in the June primary, with 97 percent reporting they “definitely will vote.”

However, when asked if they would vote in the November election if there were only Democratic candidates for governor on the ballot, only 56.1 percent of these Republican voters responded affirmatively, and only 42.8 percent reported they “definitely will vote.”

If California Republicans do not turn out in force in June and November, the Republican majority and President Trump’s agenda could be in trouble.

Clearly, Californians would benefit from Cox’s conservative leadership. The state is ranked worst for individual income taxes and 48th overall by the Tax Foundation’s 2018 State Business Tax Climate Index.

Cox would work to cut state taxes so that Californians would see more take-home pay and small businesses would be more able to grow, succeed, expand and create more jobs. This includes the hugely unpopular gasoline tax that the Democratic California Legislature and Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown imposed on drivers last year.

The expensive welfare and government dependency programs that California’s liberal leadership has embraced and enacted over the years have also made it the “poverty capital of America,” as Kerry Jackson wrote in a Los Angeles Times op-ed.

Jackson, a fellow of California studies at the Pacific Research Institute, pointed out that duplicative state and local welfare programs in California have resulted in nearly $958 billion in spending from 1992 to 2015. Yet when the cost of living is factored in, California has the highest poverty rate among states in America.

California is home to 12 percent of the national population but about one in three of America’s welfare recipients live in the state. As Jackson puts it: “The generous spending, then, has not only failed to decrease poverty; it actually seems to have made it worse.”

Establishing a system that promotes work and capability over welfare and dependency would do wonders to bring struggling Californians out of poverty.

We know this system works. We saw it work when we put work requirements on welfare benefits when I was serving in Congress, and we’ve seen it work in states such as Maine, where Republicans leadership moved 80,000 people out of the Medicaid program and 70,000 off food stamps.

Following these pro-work models, Cox could do wonders for replacing poverty with prosperity in California. You can bet the Democratic candidates will simply double-down on the government spending model and make the problem worse.

Democratic leadership has also made California a haven for criminals who are in the country illegally. Cox has pledged to end California’s lawless sanctuary policies and work with federal officials to get those who are in the country illegally and committing crimes off the streets and out of the country.

As governor, Cox would put the safety and interests of Californians over those of criminal non-citizens.

If Republicans are serious about keeping and growing our governing majority – and making America great again – we need to engage and build momentum in every election, at every level. Each fight we win will make winning the next ones more and more likely.

There’s no doubt: California will be a difficult battleground. Our opponents are entrenched and well-funded. However, if we can win there, it will show the nation that we can win everywhere.



http://www.foxnews.com/opinion...-as-that-sounds.html

The previous Governor of California was a "Republican"... Arnold Schwarzenegger. For the past 50 years, California has tended to alternate between Democratic and Republican governors.

Just because the governor may be a Republican doesn't mean the state is going to slow its headlong plunge into nanny-state socialism. The legislature and judiciary will continue to be dominated by die-hard liberals, and the overwhelmingly liberal big cities in Southern California control most of the economic and political clout in the state.

Plus, even the Republican politicians in California tend to be more liberal than their party-mates in other areas of the country.

It's a step in the right direction, for sure. But sadly I fear it's much too little, too late.

I'd bet a "republican" govenor in CA would be much like a "republican" govenor in MA, or NJ, or MD.

They just spell leftist with an "R" instead of a "D". They may change the designator but the policies stay they same.

California deserves Democrats!

A lot of people in Cali are fed up with the poor fiscal management of the government. Hopefully something will change this fall.

And the Dem candidates just get stranger and stranger, which puts many moderates off.

I would welcome California back as the prodigal son...

It all comes down to "actions speak louder than words". That is IF an 'R' is elected. We all know what they'll continue getting with a 'D'.

quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:
I'd bet a "republican" govenor in CA would be much like a "republican" govenor in MA, or NJ, or MD.

They just spell leftist with an "R" instead of a "D". They may change the designator but the policies stay they same.

I'd have to disagree. Arnold slid in and pulled the nomination from a real conservative. It was conservatives that recalled the previous Democratic governor and it was a chance to bring in a conservative Republican governor but Arnold took that away.

quote:

Originally posted by Rey HRH:
I'd have to disagree. Arnold slid in and pulled the nomination from a real conservative. It was conservatives that recalled the previous Democratic governor and it was a chance to bring in a conservative Republican governor but Arnold took that away.

Rey HRH, you are right about Arnold. His celebrity made it possible to slide in and pull the nomination from a real conservative. Very unfortunate for CA.

You are close to the situation...
1. Do you think it likely that John Cox could win?
2. RogueJSK makes a valid point:
Just because the governor may be a Republican doesn't mean the state is going to slow its headlong plunge into nanny-state socialism. The legislature and judiciary will continue to be dominated by die-hard liberals, and the overwhelmingly liberal big cities....

What say you?

quote:

This race is also important for Republicans across the United States, because having Cox on the election ballot in November will be vital for keeping the Republican majority in the U.S. House of Representatives.

While it may be nice to have an R Governor in CA, I don't see it as a must have for maintaining the majority in the house and senate (it certainly didn't matter the last election). I lay that squarely on the shoulders of the house and senate. They have clearly not lived up to their campaign promises and have not done much with control. At times appearing to be against the very people that voted them in. Some of them have not really distinguished themselves from the other party, seemingly funding and following the opposite agenda and not the one they promised. While I don't think they will lose control of the house, is unclear on the senate. But if they lose either, they can put the blame squarely on themselves and their leaders Bitch McConnell and Paul Lyin.

quote:

Originally posted by c1steve:
A lot of people in Cali are fed up with the poor fiscal management of the government. Hopefully something will change this fall.

And the Dem candidates just get stranger and stranger, which puts many moderates off.

I thought Moonbeam got the budget to a 6 billion dollar surplus?

A California "Republican" is about as conservative as an Illinois one.

It would be nice if Cox could win and help reverse some of the mess in California, but the likelihood of the second happening EVEN IF the first does seems small. However, he doesn't have to win; if he can get California Republicans to the polls and help save the endangered House seats, we'll be a step up in keeping the Dems from retaking the House. They're making a real push for this and can play havoc with the president's agenda if they do.

Newt's been drinking. I have a better chance getting elected mayor of Berkeley by running as a carbon copy of Trump than this guy has of getting elected governor. He might sneak through the primary if he can get the republican vote behind him while the dems split their vote between two or three candidates but he'll get crushed in November. His pro-gun, anti-sanctuary, pro-life credentials don't play with a large part of the electorate. Residing in an ultra fancy zip code won't help either. CA needs to crash and burn for any turn around.

The dems have a stranglehold on the state legislature and wouldn't need to play nice with a republican governor.

His presence or not in November shouldn't impact the handful of house seats that need to be held. If that were the case there'd be no republican house seats since the GOP hasn't run a credible candidate for governor in years.

quote:

Posted by Rogue:

Plus, even the Republican politicians in California tend to be more liberal than their party-mates in other areas of the country.

It's a step in the right direction, for sure. But sadly I fear it's much too little, too late.

That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t take the step, though. If we in CA admit defeat then we are in-fact defeated. A defeated CA is no good for anybody in this country, right? Sure the impact on you good people across the country might be small but good is always better than bad. As they say a long journey begins with a single step. We must start somewhere.

Seems like a lot of defeatist attitudes in this thread. While I understand the sentiment it is not helpful. Conservative voters in this state are getting fed up. That’s good for conservatives across the country, right? Continual attacks on gun rights here will help push people to the polls in June. The wins that Trump has achieved will help push people to the polls. Many conservative voters in this state don’t vote because they feel defeated and like their voice hasn’t mattered in a long time because it hasn’t. But that energy is building.

Combine that with a liberal base who is hopefully about to be caught slipping... maybe about to be caught off-guard. Maybe they think they’ve got it in the bag. Sound familiar? Who else in recent history thought they were a sure winner to public office? Many here believed the garbage but not all. That can happen in CA if it we ALL support it.

Look, I get it: CA sucks. It’s terrible. We’re awful. We’ll never change. Blah blah blah. Take your crap tasting defeatism elsewhere. Do you want to see more concervatives in office or less, whether that office is in Sacramento or Austin? I choose to continue fighting where I live because that is the very same spirit that created this country. This cancer in CA needs to be removed (for the good of the nation, not just CA) and this here is our best chance at this moment so we better do our part.

If you’re not on board fine, but take your crap with you.

quote:

Originally posted by berto:
Newt's been drinking. I have a better chance getting elected mayor of Berkeley by running as a carbon copy of Trump than this guy has of getting elected governor. He might sneak through the primary if he can get the republican vote behind him while the dems split their vote between two or three candidates but he'll get crushed in November. His pro-gun, anti-sanctuary, pro-life credentials don't play with a large part of the electorate. Residing in an ultra fancy zip code won't help either. CA needs to crash and burn for any turn around.

I think you’re probably right about needing a crash and burn. Amongst friends I’ve said that countless times. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t support this opportunity while it exists. If Nov. 6 it doesn’t exist anymore than we move on and wait for the crash.

I also think your perspective is somewhat tainted by your location. You are surrounded and likely forget about the vast areas of CA that are very very different from your area. Is it enough? I don’t know, but we need to try.

quote:

Originally posted by thumperfbc:

I also think your perspective is somewhat tainted by your location. You are surrounded and likely forget about the vast areas of CA that are very very different from your area. Is it enough? I don’t know, but we need to try.

The area is vast but the population not so much. I'd love to see a stunning upset in November but the math isn't there. I'm not entirely convinced a republican will actually make the November ballot. A fired up GOP and a less active dem primary electorate allows a republican to slide to the general election. High turnout by the dems maybe puts two of them through.

Moonbeam won in '14 by almost 1.5 million votes.

Hillary carried CA in '16 by almost 4.3 million votes, almost a two to one margin, and even once reliable Orange County went blue.

Gavin Newsom has some potentially exploitable personal issues but they've never hurt him before and the GOP can't criticize him for his indiscretions while absolving the president on similar if not worse behavior. His policy positions stink but CA voters have already proven they're ok with his agenda.

Tony Vilar is a hack but he's got the right look and manufactured name.

Both can point to experience running major cities. Newt's supposed winner will be painted as just another intolerant rich white guy.

Nothing changes here until there are consequences for giving away money.

The problem is the primary system has been Jimmy’d So the top 2 vote getters regardless of party are on the ballot in November. In my area the last few elections have had commie or commie for Congress the Republicans didn’t even run anybody one of those times the district is so bad.

quote:

Originally posted by berto:

quote:

Originally posted by thumperfbc:

I also think your perspective is somewhat tainted by your location. You are surrounded and likely forget about the vast areas of CA that are very very different from your area. Is it enough? I don’t know, but we need to try.

The area is vast but the population not so much. I'd love to see a stunning upset in November but the math isn't there. I'm not entirely convinced a republican will actually make the November ballot. A fired up GOP and a less active dem primary electorate allows a republican to slide to the general election. High turnout by the dems maybe puts two of them through.

Moonbeam won in '14 by almost 1.5 million votes.

Hillary carried CA in '16 by almost 4.3 million votes, almost a two to one margin, and even once reliable Orange County went blue.

Gavin Newsom has some potentially exploitable personal issues but they've never hurt him before and the GOP can't criticize him for his indiscretions while absolving the president on similar if not worse behavior. His policy positions stink but CA voters have already proven they're ok with his agenda.

Tony Vilar is a hack but he's got the right look and manufactured name.

Both can point to experience running major cities. Newt's supposed winner will be painted as just another intolerant rich white guy.

Nothing changes here until there are consequences for giving away money.

As I said, I think you’re probably right. However, let’s try. If we can at least get him on the ballot maybe we’ll be surprised by the number of R voters that come out of the woods. Maybe even some non-typical crossover votes from closet conservatives who don’t typically talk much or vote much. I feel like we should give it our best and if it fails, as seems likely, then continue waiting for the derailment we are surely heading for. Trying won’t hurt anything at this point.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:

Rey HRH, you are right about Arnold. His celebrity made it possible to slide in and pull the nomination from a real conservative. Very unfortunate for CA.

You are close to the situation...
1. Do you think it likely that John Cox could win?
2. RogueJSK makes a valid point:
Just because the governor may be a Republican doesn't mean the state is going to slow its headlong plunge into nanny-state socialism. The legislature and judiciary will continue to be dominated by die-hard liberals, and the overwhelmingly liberal big cities....

What say you?

This thread is the first time I heard about the possibility. Berto is right that Cox's branding is going to lose votes, unfortunately. Tom McClintock was a smart conservative that should have been the nominee instead of Arnold. He was smart enough to thrive on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors as an independent for a long time before moving on.That's the kind of conservative that we need in CA; the equivalent of a gray man but somehow known and supported by conservatives.

I'm thinking Gavin Newsom is a shoe-in. He has the right liberal credentials and is a pretty boy.

Getting a real Republican governor would be a start. I won't complain. I don't know about a head long plunge to socialism; I would like to think there's hope for a state that gave us Reagan and gave tax rebates under Republican governor Deukmejian.