CA: too close for comfort

[newsguyatl]

Why is California so dang close?

I saw two separate (and new) polls yesterday (sorry don't have a link) from California, one showed Kerry with a 6 point lead, the other with a FOUR POINT lead!

The one way to ENSURE a Bush victory is to have California go red.

Are the Republicans playing hard there?

Is Arnold having an effect?

Are the Dems taking it for granted?

[krkaufman]

1. If CA is damaged enough to elect Ahnold, then, yes...

... CA should not be taken for granted as Blue.

[newsguyatl]

5. I absolutely agree

and hope some higher up Dems who read here get the ball rolling there before it's too late.

heck, kerry could win OH, FL and NC, but if he loses CA, it's over.


this could be the shock of the election.

[krkaufman]

23. My new fear is that the election is dead-even again...

... and it comes down to Colorado and whether or not they elect to dump the winner-take-all apportionment of their electors.

Worst case... dead-even race, Kerry wins Colorado, but electors get split... giving the election to Bush.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

31. "this could be the shock of the election"

and as likely as monkeys flying out of my ass....

[newsguyatl]

32. did you ever thin ahhnold would be governor?

all right then.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

35. once he got in the race-yes

nt

[MallRat]

2. Whose polls?

Republican pollsters (like Strategic Vision & Rasmussen) have often shown California as a single-digit Kerry lead (+5, +6, +8). I have no idea how they justify it.

-MR

[TexasBushwhacker]

16. Well Rasmussen has Kerry up by 9

and American Research Group has Kerry up by 11. Anythings possible I suppose, but I don't think Arnold is having much of an effect. Remember, just like people talk about "Anyone But Bush", in California, they just wanted to boot out Gray Davis. I'll be interested to see if Arnold can get re-elected against a strong Democratic candidate.

[calimary]

55. Last Field Poll I saw had Kerry up by 15: 55 to bush's 40.

I can't speak for all of California. But in my little corner here in West L.A. (and the western end of the San Fernando Valley, on Sunday), it's Kerry over bush by probably six to one - just judging by the bumper stickers and yard signs I've seen.

And yes, I thought Arnold would get in, once he declared. People are star-drunk out here, sometimes. He had a lot of good street cred, and while a republi-CON, he's a moderate - pro choice, pro gay rights/marriage, anti gun control. I heard a report (in fact, I think I read it here on DU) from someone watching the republi-CONvention who'd seen some floor reporter interviewing a delegate. The reporter asked how the delegate could love Arnold so much, since he was pro-choice and in favor of gay marriage. The delegate responded with disbelief, saying that was something the liberal media made up. NOT SO. If most of the hardcores knew where Arnold really stood on some things, they'd probably self-immolate.

It's another reason why Arnold was even able to appeal as a candidate. A knuckledragger can't get elected to statewide office out here anymore. Bruce Hershenson, Michael Huffington, Evelle Younger, Houston Flournoy, and Bill Simon (who tried twice) to get anywhere - didn't. The last one was Mike Curb as Lt. Governor to Jerry Brown as governor. And Curb didn't go any farther. Ronald Reagan was the only conservative who got anywhere. Mainly because of his star-appeal, his powerful "kitchen cabinet," and the fact that he talked a good game.

[realFedUp]

3. taking CA for granted

yes, we are the ATM for the Democratic party
and we vote in larger numbers for Dems (aside
from that abborant recall election)....

I wouldn't worry about those polls.
Kerry could bone up on our propositions though...

[Carla in Ca]

53. That is my feeling as well, but it shouldn't be 'close'.

n/t

[flaminbats]

63. for most of 1992 Republicans took California for granted..

in 1996 and 2000 Republicans took it for granted that Democrats would carry California by huge margins. This year neither party is taking anything for granted! Kerry is spending considerably prolonged time than did Gore in northern California, but both candidates are now spending whopping amounts of money and time on southern California.

[demokatgurrl]

4. Are you in CA? What about Boxer-

she is kicking butt, maybe she should campaign for Kerry as well as herself.

[newsguyatl]

7. that's not a bad idea

we need to get big name kerry surrogates there, and quick.

[cheshire]

34. Diane Fienstein isn't all that busy, The union is doing a lot here though.

[tishaLA]

14. But Boxer doesn't even HAVE to campaign for herself

That's how lopsided this thing is. Everything is fine.

[Irishladdie]

6. We're working hard here byt....

The Kerry Campaign commercials are non-existent. I see Bush commercials all the time. Don't worry though California will go Blue. We have been precinct walking like crazy. Also it matters where the people polled are called. For instance OC and SD are predominately Republican.

Still I think the DNC should run some Commercials at least a few!!

[newsguyatl]

9. see, that's what i was afraid of

you say you see bush commercials constantly and NO kerry commercials.

sounds like the bush folks are quietly working on an upset.

this is not good.


no offense to your state, but don't hold its residents in such high regard, i mean, after all, you guys put arnold at the helm.

that's frightening.

[lancdem]

15. Relax

If Bush wants to waste money in CA, he's welcome to. The only way Bush would win CA is if he won nationally by at least 10 points, and in that case he'd win just about every damn state.

[ReadTomPaine]

18. Or if the vote is stolen while poll watchers are stationed elsewhere <n/t>

[DemocratSinceBirth]

27. As Always You Are Right....

Since Cali was twelve points more Dem than the rest of the country in 00 Kerry most likely would have to be down by at least that much in this election to lose Cali....


If Kerry is losing Cali he's on his way to a Dukakis or even Mondale like defeat....


I don't believe that's the case...


I remember the same crap in 00; that Cali might go red... Hell, even Zogby had a late October poll calling it a one point race....


I ain't buying...

[Ladyhawk]

48. I certainly didn't vote for Ah-nold.

You have to remember how many people were running for governor in the recall election. I can't even remember how many there were. It wasn't a two-pony race. Can someone post the candidates and the percentage of votes they got? I can't remember if the vote was split enough to allow Ah-nold to take over.

I live in a red county and even here I see a LOT of Kerry/Edwards bumper stickers. I will be working on election day to make sure Dems get to the polls. I'll be giving rides and making calls. Even votes from a red county are important.

Don't worry. I really don't see how in the hell * can win this state. People here are pissed and we ain't gonna take it anymore.

[marlakay]

8. I don't get it all I see is Kerry stickers

I live in Bay area though. I also work on the grass roots campaign and we have signed up a lot of new people but I will say that a lot of us have been doing tons of swing voter work thinking CA was in the bag.

I will be out door to door locally the last two weeks along with many others. I know some people were upset we didn't get any rallies, I understood they had to work harder in the red areas.

As far as Arnold, he is like a separate thing, all the dems I know are voting Kerry and all other dem for senate, congress, etc.

[hiphopnation]

38. I'm here too.

The Bush stickers I see (here in the city) is directly proportionate to how close to an ultra-rich neighborhood I am, I've begun to notice. Up in Pac Heights I see more "W" stickers than anywhere else in the city. Truly amazing.

[calimary]

56. Yes, but in the ritzier parts of Santa Monica, Bel Air, Brentwood, and

Beverly Hills, there are LOTS and LOTS of Kerry/Edwards stickers. On Cadillacs, Mercedeses, and some big-ass SUVs, too. Yes, there are also those "w' stickers. But they're seriously outnumbered. Even at my daughter's relatively chi-chi school. You'd expect it to be wall-to-wall bush/cheney out in the parking lot, and it's NOT.

[lancdem]

10. According to www.electoral-vote.com

A Survey USA poll through Oct. 4 has Kerry up 8.

California will go for Kerry. Otherwise, Bush would be spending time there. Remember, a poll showed Gore up by like 2 in CA a few weeks before the election and he took the state by 12 points. More state polls will start reflecting Kerry's momentum in the coming weeks.

[newsguyatl]

13. let's hope so

and i don't doubt your word, BUT, we can never be too safe.

better to spend a little more money there and work a little harder, than looking to the past to predict the future.

i used to have confidence in california, before last year.


let's take nothing for granted.

[lancdem]

19. I don't think the Kerry camp is taking it for granted

Remember, before the Bush-Kerry debate Bush had narrowed the gap in several solid blue states, like NJ. Now the pendulum is swinging back. I suspect Bush is spending money in CA not because he thinks he can win it but to narrow the gap enough so that Kerry will have to spend precious resources there to sew it up. Since Kerry isn't doing that, the race must not be very close.

[tishaLA]

11. No way CA is going for the chimp

The polls are wrong if they really say that. Even Boxer--who is not universally loved--has barely had to advertise.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

42. Who's More Popular In Cali- Arnold or DiFi?

[kentuck]

12. I think the Repub strategy is to sneak into CA in the last couple of week

and try to steal it. It would mighty difficult to win without CA.

[newsguyatl]

17. i think you could be right,.

that's what i'm beginning to fear.

and heck, they might not HAVE to steal it.

quiet but steady campaigning there, COULD pay off. ESPECIALLY when the "popular" gov there is in your back pocket.

then again, they COULD steal it, too.

[fob]

41. Only one problem with that theory newsguy, Ahnold is in no way

a republican in the same way bush* is (or isn't depending on what 'republican' means).

[Teaser]

20. Why do people keep asking this question?

Look at the body of polls. It ain't close. It ain't gonna be close.
Worry about states we need to worry about.

[West Coast Democrat]

21. Don't you remember California polls in 2000?

They were so far off, it wasn't even funny. The GOP was trying to convince everyone it was a swing state, and wasted money there, while Gore was smart enough not to take the bait.

[newsguyatl]

22. ok, i hope you're right BUT

do YOU remember who was governor in 2000?

[papau]

24. Today's Field poll shows no change from past polls that showed double

digit Kerry lead (although latest asked right direct and approval and position questions without asking a VOTE question. Still - it is 10/6 polling! :-)

http://field.com/fieldpollonline/subscribers/RLS2135.pdf

[West Coast Democrat]

26. Ahnold and Shrub are not the same candidate.

[papau]

51. Field poll release 2135 deals with George W Bush :-)

:-)

[demosincebirth]

25. Last week the Field Poll had Kerry by 12 points

[JCMach1]

28. Kerry wins CA by double digits... count on it.

[kentuck]

29. Another argument to do away with the Electoral College...

Just count the votes.

[cheshire]

30. Yes we need to do the work here too. GOTV, I worry about the voting mach-

ines too. I was worried B/C would pull a Florida here.

[WI_DEM]

33. Rasmussen latest poll has Kerry up by 11 53-42

Kerry's and Edward's debates will also help solidify alot of blue states.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/

[Jack_Dawson]

36. CA Taken for Granted?

Ummm...YES.

But oh...those Iowa and Ohio voters are soooo important.

:toast:

[nini]

37. That's BULL

sorry.. no way.

[Triana]

39. I think this is a ruse...

...in some states - to make it easier to steal the election via whatever gerrymandering they can - if the race isn't 'close' in those states, it'll be damn hard to steal it. If it's close, then it's easy - nothing to recount - nothing to verify. The usurping court just putsches bu$hit again and 'boom!' - we're done.

[DemMother]

40. Ridiculous.

Schwarzenegger is no indication that CA is going repub, as evidenced by the recent presidential polls and Barbara Boxer's huge lead.

My neighborhood--which is at best 50/50, and may lean a little more repub is filled with Kerry signs. On the two-mile walk I take with my dog--one-quarter of it through a park--there are 27 signs for Kerry; four for Bush. Four years ago I was one of the very few people with a Gore sign.

These threads seem to pop up every few weeks. Let's worry about the swing states. California is not one of them.

And where are the links to these polls? Are they Strategic Vision? Mason-Dixon? I'll stick with the Field poll, which as anyone who actually lives here knows, is one of the most accurate. Just checked the dubious electoral-vote.com, which shows a Kerry lead of 8 by Survey USA, which had the ridiculous outlier poll in August showing a three-point lead. (And by the way, even if the lead is as low as six-points, it would be a landslide in terms of votes--we're a much bigger state than Georgia).

As for the Bush commercials, they are running on cable, as are the Kerry commercials.

God, I get sick of the nonsense and needless panic.

From an October 5th story:

"Poll: Kerry Maintains Big Lead In California"

Field Poll director Mark DiCamillo said the fact that the debate made little difference to voters showed just how firm their preferences have been throughout the campaign.

"There's been real stability in the preferences among voters even though there's clear consensus that Kerry performed better in the debate," DiCamillo said. "Kerry has had a big lead over Bush in California since he won the Iowa caucuses last January. People see fairly large differences between the candidates, and they've decided which one better reflects their views."

http://www.foxreno.com/news/3784475/detail.html

[cyr330]

43. I don't think so

Although I live in San Francisco where Republicans are outnumbered by more than 6 to 1 (I love it!), I remember when the Bush campaign tried to say the same thing in 2000. I don't see any way in HELL that GWB* can take California.

[w4rma]

44. The polls were exactly the same way in 2000 and I had thought that Gore

should've send folks there to shore it up. However, if they had taken my advice, that would have been a mistake and a waste of resources that should have gone to Florida.

[unfrigginreal]

50. I was just going to post the same thing

I was a nervous wreck about how close the Gore/Bush race was in Ca. in 2000 and wanted the campaign to shore it up. The campaign was right.

[Bandit]

45. I personally believe the election will be over before California

even closes it's polls. Just like in 1980 when Reagan won. They announced Reagan's victory before the polls closed in California. I believe this election will be very similar. America is tired of the Bush* Cabal and it shows IMO by the total lack of signs and bumper stickers for Bush*/Cheney. In 2000 they were everywhere and I see almost none this year.

[CreekDog]

47. Bush's mistake was trying to win California in 2000

Campaigns need to make choices. Bush's campaign began to compete for California late in the 2000 election, but why did he do it?

*Did Bush's campaign think he could win California?

*If not, did he think he could fake Gore into wasting resources in California (hence taking some effort away from swing states that Bush was trying to win)?

Gore was right. Because Gore's campaign didn't take the bait and made the same calculation that Kerry's is making now, Gore won a number of swing states by very small margins when the nationwide numbers began to swing his way, his presence in those swing states made a difference and a small swing in California would have been costly and not have mattered.

Bush was wrong. Bush's move was seen as a blunder. Had he not wasted time and money in California, he could have been in Iowa, Florida, New Mexico, Wisconsin and so forth and possibly offset Gore's rising fortunes nationwide.

Kerry is right to work on the swing states. There will be a strong GOTV as there was in 2000 and that's probably enough.

[frylock]

46. don't believe the hype..

neither candidate is spending money here. Kerry has it sewn up. Even San Diego may go blue.

[cire4]

49. If California was that close, don't you think that.....

the campaigns would be actively advertising and campaigning in the state?

Bush has not visited CA, nor has he run any TV ads in the state. His internal polling shows that it can't be won, which is true.

So just relax. California will go to Kerry by at least 10 points.

[desertalien]

52. The tv is on all day

at my house in ca. I'm a caregiver and during almost every break on MSNBC there is a Bush ad or the Swifties ad with the POW wives. Time Warner cable. I'm in an extremely pug area and there isn't a single sign of Kerry or any other Dem around here. No Kerry commercials either.

My area is also largely retired seniors with $$$$, But if the Dems would come here and start talking about what Enron did to our energy costs they might listen. We also have a huge Hispanic population, largely evangelical. They love the shrub. Go figure.
I'm so glad I found DU.
I hope you're right about the 10 points.

[calimary]

58. True. They've been here in So Cal just a few times each.

In fact, bush came through Santa Monica a few weeks ago (BIG mistake - don't know who the hell told him THAT would be a good idea) and there were people out, days ahead of time, advertising the appearance so everyone could come and protest. There was such a huge group of protestors around the Santa Monica Airport that they pretty much outshouted him. He was outta here almost before you realized he'd arrived.

Furthermore, he also came to collect an endorsement from, and photo-op with, the grieving party dowager Nancy Reagan. Yeah, he got his picture taken with her, but that was about it. He gained no mileage out of that one, either. They were going to try to talk her into appearing at the convention, at the time, too, and we all know where that went.

California's safe. Hate to be neglected out here, but I'd rather see Kerry spend his money and his efforts where they're more seriously needed.

[Il_Coniglietto]

54. California's Def. Going for Kerry

The only Bush/Cheney signs I've seen (in the Pasadena area) have been in San Marino, which is a VERY wealthy, VERY Republican community. My grandmother lives there and has put up her Kerry/Edwards sign to the horror of the neighbors. Within a few days it was stolen so she just replaced it with another :)

California is safe for Kerry. A lot of folks here are trying to help out in Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, etc., but haven't forgotten to vote come November!

My advice: just ignore the polls.

[fujiyama]

57. If you want to worry

about CA, go ahead and worry. I'm glad the campaign doesn't start throwing money at any state that doesn't show Kerry with a lead larger than Gore's margin of victory.

Money is FINITE. It cannot be spent everywhere. It would be nice to have Kerry win the state by 20 points, but that's unlikely to happen. I can live with a 10 point margin of victory.

There are states to worry about this election. Florida, Ohio, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Iowa, Nevada, and even New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Minnesotta should be more of a concern.

Spending money in CA would be stupid.

[Thrill]

59. YAWN

I remember the 00 pre election polls being the same way

[desertalien]

60. Okay, I believe, I believe! n/t

[Democat]

61. Maybe California Democrats have been taking the state for granted?

Read this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=141x2864

Voter registration in Los Angeles is down when it should be way up.

Republicans are working hard to take over California and many Democrats are just assuming that we will always carry the state. Democrats need to realize that Republicans plan for the long term and they win that way - we need to do the same.

[meow mix]

62. i live in a ca freeper-zone, not buying it.. (although i did 6 months ago)

all i see is now a huge lack of enthusiasm for bush.

many republicans i know are have become "undecided wink-wink" and in general there is more kerry support.

it feels A LOT like 1992.

[CreekDog]

65. The "taking for granted" is a Republican soundbite

Parties do take care of constituencies they get large margins of votes with and California is not being ignored or "taken for granted". But that does not mean you run expensive ads in our media --that is not the solution. Clinton ran very few ads in California, but undoubtedly he did not ignore it.

I mean, do you have any sense of triage? Resources are finite, do we redirect them from Ohio, Florida, Wisconsin, etc. to keep California's margin what it was?

You know, Bush's margin in Mississippii is way down from where it was in 2000 --do you see him campaigning there?

All this whining by Democrats about how the campaign is forgetting this or that and the panicking that we will lose something is so counterproductive. I wonder if you are one of the voices who swore up and down we were going to lose a month ago and heaped shame on the campaign, feeding the Republican glee and amplifying their poll results to our disadvantage.

I'm not saying don't complain or criticize, but jeez, relax a little and put yourself in the role of campaign manager. Then you'll see why we are not running $50,000 ads in LA at this moment --they are expensive, they are not necessary (or not as necessary there as other places).

Sheesh Democrats, can we please have a little faith, just once?!

Besides, Kerry's lead in the Bay Area was 70% to 19%, Bush is not strong enough in the rest of the state to overcome that --it's a huge margin, a cushion and it's not going away.

[question everything]

64. How about 9 points?

The nonpartisan Field Institute interviewed voters before and after the candidates' Thursday match-up in Miami.

The resulting poll, produced for The Press-Enterprise and other California media subscribers, indicates that Kerry's debate performance did nothing to widen his lead over Bush in California.

The Field Poll found that 49 percent of likely California voters said they support Kerry-Edwards compared with 40 percent for Bush-Cheney - almost exactly the same margin as before the debate

http://www.pe.com/elections/2004/breakouts/stories/PE_News_Local_field05.eccd.html (registration required)

or

http://www.pe.com/cgi-bin/bi/gold_print.cgi (print version that some say can lead one directly to the story)