When the smoke cleared in June from our state’s first “open” primary, one thing was plain. The LGBT and progressive movements in our state face new challenges to electing candidates who will be long-term leaders for our policy goals.

The new primary system, winnowing the field of candidates for a contested seat to just two, regardless of party, may actually increase, not decrease, the cost of campaigning in our state. This isn’t the only concern for progressives and LGBT activists, whose considerable resources often cannot match those of moderate to conservative business interests in state campaigns. Voters’ approval of Prop 28 modifying term limits to allow 12 years’ service in one chamber may slow the churn of new lawmakers through the legislature and limit the openings for progressive and LGBT candidates. This puts a premium on opportunities to send one of our own to Sacramento.

And it makes the campaign of Luis Lopez, an openly LGBT Latino running for the Assembly from Eastside Los Angeles, all the more significant. Running in the 51st District, spanning the neighborhoods of El Sereno, Eagle Rock, Lincoln Heights, and Silver Lake, Luis is the only new LGBT candidate from L.A. or the Southland to advance to the general election–of the six who initially ran. LGBT people and progressives throughout the region have a stake in helping to ensure he wins on November 6.

In particular, Westside Angelenos need to recognize the importance of LGBT power on the Eastside. The outcome of Prop 8 four years ago, which very narrowly passed in liberal L.A. County on its way to statewide approval, should be a lesson. The road to winning any lasting victories for human rights, especially on statewide ballot measures, goes through L.A.’s Latino electorate.

Luis’s district includes East L.A. and is a cornerstone of the city’s Latino voting base. In 2006 he actually co-founded the statewide organization devoted to mobilizing LGBT Latinos. In 2008, he helped open the No on 8 field office in L.A. for reaching out to Latino voters. Guided and tested by these battles, he is set to lead the drive for equal-rights legislation in Sacramento.

Proven leadership on LGBT rights is only the start of what sets Luis apart. When we talk about progressive candidates who know and truly represent their districts and are more focused on service and results than politics and personal advancement, Luis is exactly what we mean. A native of his district, Luis has worked for a decade in nonprofit healthcare, jumpstarting the Latino Coalition Against AIDS and pushing for inclusive health reform and single payer legislation. Luis’s roots and wide-ranging relationships throughout his district have translated into a huge base of individual donors, accounting for more than 90 percent of his fund-raising dollars. This makes him a progressive advocate impressively independent from the special interests who pull the strings on most candidates.

Campaign price tags are going up, with candidates facing pressure to frontload their money in primaries that are prequels to the general election. In this year’s primary, some races exceeded $2 million and even $3 million, with a few candidates who surpassed $800,000 in fund-raising not even placing in the top two. Again, this dynamic does not bode well for LGBT people or progressives, or candidates like Luis who are both. But yet again, it makes his advance and the promise of his campaign all the more important to both movements.

One side effect of the passage of Prop 28 is reduced vacancies. Breakthroughs for LGBT candidates for the legislature may be fewer and farther between in coming years. With 8 members, California’s caucus of openly LGBT lawmakers is among the largest in the country. But one LGBT lawmaker, Sen. Christine Kehoe, retires this year. And two more, John Perez and Tom Ammiano will be nudged out by term limits in 2014. The caucus could be nearly cut in half.

The class of 2012 is the first to enjoy the chance to stay in one chamber for 12 years. Luis, if victorious, would have the potential to serve for six terms. This equips him to hold leadership roles in the Assembly. Considering his background in presiding over municipal commissions, his adeptness at coalition-building, and his non-reliance on special interest sponsors, Luis is likely to emerge as a respected dealmaker. He also has shown his chops as a mentor and organizer. In him, Angelenos will have a steady, progressive champion in state policy leadership for many years to come. We just need to ensure he gets there.

In this post-Citizens United landscape, special interest dollars loom even larger in state political campaigns, with added temptation for sponsored candidates to move into districts where they don’t have deep roots, much less a readiness to take courageous stands that might miff their funders.

In such a landscape, Luis Lopez represents great promise. A proven grassroots leader and the only new LGBT candidate for the legislature from Southern California to make it to the general election, he needs the help of all LGBT and progressive supporters to ensure he wins on November 6. If we succeed, he will exert the force for change in Sacramento that we so manifestly need and that’s he’s so ready to be.

**

Rich Gordon, Assemblymember for the 21st District representing parts of San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties, chairs the LGBT Caucus of the California legislature. Wallace Albertson of West Hollywood is a former Democratic National Committee member and, as a lifelong LGBT ally, a founding member of the Gay Caucus of the California Democratic Council.

I was honored to receive the endorsement of Assemblymember Rich Gordon and long-time gay rights activist Wallace Albertson.  Their statement is as follows:

**

When the smoke cleared in June from our state’s first “open” primary, one thing was plain. The LGBT and progressive movements in our state face new challenges to electing candidates who will be long-term leaders for our policy goals.

The new primary system, winnowing the field of candidates for a contested seat to just two, regardless of party, may actually increase, not decrease, the cost of campaigning in our state. This isn’t the only concern for progressives and LGBT activists, whose considerable resources often cannot match those of moderate to conservative business interests in state campaigns. Voters’ approval of Prop 28 modifying term limits to allow 12 years’ service in one chamber may slow the churn of new lawmakers through the legislature and limit the openings for progressive and LGBT candidates. This puts a premium on opportunities to send one of our own to Sacramento.

And it makes the campaign of Luis Lopez, an openly LGBT Latino running for the Assembly from Eastside Los Angeles, all the more significant. Running in the 51st District, spanning the neighborhoods of El Sereno, Eagle Rock, Lincoln Heights, and Silver Lake, Luis is the only new LGBT candidate from L.A. or the Southland to advance to the general election–of the six who initially ran. LGBT people and progressives throughout the region have a stake in helping to ensure he wins on November 6.

In particular, Westside Angelenos need to recognize the importance of LGBT power on the Eastside. The outcome of Prop 8 four years ago, which very narrowly passed in liberal L.A. County on its way to statewide approval, should be a lesson. The road to winning any lasting victories for human rights, especially on statewide ballot measures, goes through L.A.’s Latino electorate.

Luis’s district includes East L.A. and is a cornerstone of the city’s Latino voting base. In 2006 he actually co-founded the statewide organization devoted to mobilizing LGBT Latinos. In 2008, he helped open the No on 8 field office in L.A. for reaching out to Latino voters. Guided and tested by these battles, he is set to lead the drive for equal-rights legislation in Sacramento.

Proven leadership on LGBT rights is only the start of what sets Luis apart. When we talk about progressive candidates who know and truly represent their districts and are more focused on service and results than politics and personal advancement, Luis is exactly what we mean. A native of his district, Luis has worked for a decade in nonprofit healthcare, jumpstarting the Latino Coalition Against AIDS and pushing for inclusive health reform and single payer legislation. Luis’s roots and wide-ranging relationships throughout his district have translated into a huge base of individual donors, accounting for more than 90 percent of his fund-raising dollars. This makes him a progressive advocate impressively independent from the special interests who pull the strings on most candidates.

Campaign price tags are going up, with candidates facing pressure to frontload their money in primaries that are prequels to the general election. In this year’s primary, some races exceeded $2 million and even $3 million, with a few candidates who surpassed $800,000 in fund-raising not even placing in the top two. Again, this dynamic does not bode well for LGBT people or progressives, or candidates like Luis who are both. But yet again, it makes his advance and the promise of his campaign all the more important to both movements.

One side effect of the passage of Prop 28 is reduced vacancies. Breakthroughs for LGBT candidates for the legislature may be fewer and farther between in coming years. With 8 members, California’s caucus of openly LGBT lawmakers is among the largest in the country. But one LGBT lawmaker, Sen. Christine Kehoe, retires this year. And two more, John Perez and Tom Ammiano will be nudged out by term limits in 2014. The caucus could be nearly cut in half.

The class of 2012 is the first to enjoy the chance to stay in one chamber for 12 years. Luis, if victorious, would have the potential to serve for six terms. This equips him to hold leadership roles in the Assembly. Considering his background in presiding over municipal commissions, his adeptness at coalition-building, and his non-reliance on special interest sponsors, Luis is likely to emerge as a respected dealmaker. He also has shown his chops as a mentor and organizer. In him, Angelenos will have a steady, progressive champion in state policy leadership for many years to come. We just need to ensure he gets there.

In this post-Citizens United landscape, special interest dollars loom even larger in state political campaigns, with added temptation for sponsored candidates to move into districts where they don’t have deep roots, much less a readiness to take courageous stands that might miff their funders.

In such a landscape, Luis Lopez represents great promise. A proven grassroots leader and the only new LGBT candidate for the legislature from Southern California to make it to the general election, he needs the help of all LGBT and progressive supporters to ensure he wins on November 6. If we succeed, he will exert the force for change in Sacramento that we so manifestly need and that’s he’s so ready to be.

**

Rich Gordon, Assemblymember for the 21st District representing parts of San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties, chairs the LGBT Caucus of the California legislature. Wallace Albertson of West Hollywood is a former Democratic National Committee member and, as a lifelong LGBT ally, a founding member of the Gay Caucus of the California Democratic Council.

Here is Part 3, the last part of my analysis of this fall’s elections in California, which will cover the state legislative races.

Cross-posted at Swing State Project, Daily Kos, and Democracy for California.

STATE SENATE (District size: ~846,791) (Composition: 25 Democrats, 15 Republicans)

Districts to watch:

SD-12 (Part of Central Valley and inland Central Coast): Ceres Mayor Anthony Cannella (R) vs. St. Asm. Anna Caballero (D) – vacated by Jeff Denham (R)

Registration: 50.2% DEM, 31.1% GOP, 14.9% DTS, 3.8% Other

Profile: In spite of the hefty registration advantage, Denham managed to win twice in this district because many Democrats here are more conservative than most California Democrats. Nonetheless, this is still the best (and only) opportunity for a Democratic pickup in the State Senate for the first time in a decade. Caballero also got more votes than Cannella in the primary (neither had primary challengers), even though Republican turnout was higher due to competitive statewide office primaries on that side and few on the Democratic side. If Caballero could get more votes even in spite of lower Democratic turnout (though I’m not sure what the numbers in the 12th were), then she probably will be able to do so again in the general, with higher Democratic turnout.

10/27/2010 Outlook: Toss-up/tilt Caballero (Dem pickup)

SD-34 (Central Orange County): Lou Correa (D) vs. Anaheim Councilwoman Lucille Kring (R)

Registration: 44.5% DEM, 32.4% GOP, 19.3% DTS, 3.8% Other

Profile: This was a close call in 2006, with Correa hanging on by just about a thousand or so votes. The registration gap was also much smaller, with Democrats having only a 39%-37% edge, and for those that may remember, turnout in 2006 was depressed due to bitterness in the governor’s race. Now, though, with a 12-point Dem registration advantage and turnout likely to improve over 2006, Correa’s prospects for a second term look brighter.

10/27/2010 Outlook: Likely Correa

Safe:

SD-01 (Sierras): Special election to replace the deceased Dave Cox (R)

SD-02 (North Coast): Noreen Evans (D) – vacated by Pat Wiggins (D)

SD-04 (Sacramento Valley and Del Norte County): Doug LaMalfa (R) – vacated by Sam Aanestad (R)

SD-06 (Sacramento): Darrell Steinberg (D)

SD-08 (San Mateo, western part of San Francisco): Leland Yee (D)

SD-10 (Southern Alameda County, northern Santa Clara County): Ellen Corbett (D)

SD-14 (San Joaquin, Yosemite, eastern Fresno): Tom Berryhill (R) – vacated by Dave Cogdill (R)

SD-16 (Central Valley including parts of Fresno and Bakersfield): Michael Rubio (D) – vacated by Dean Florez (D)

SD-18 (Bakersfield, Tulare, Big Empty): Jean Fuller (R) – vacated by Roy Ashburn (R)

SD-20 (San Fernando): Alex Padilla (D)

SD-22 (South Pasadena, part of L.A.): Kevin de León (D) – vacated by Gil Cedillo (D)

SD-24 (Covina, Baldwin Park, part of L.A.): Ed Hernandez (D) – vacated by Gloria Romero (D)

SD-26 (Culver City): Curren Price (D)

SD-28 (Beach Cities): Vacant (Jenny Oropeza (D) died October 20, 2010. If she “wins”, a special will be held)

SD-30 (Eastern L.A. suburbs): Ron Calderon (D)

SD-32 (Pomona, San Bernardino): Gloria Negrete-McLeod (D)

SD-36 (Eastern San Diego County): Joel Anderson (R) – vacated by Dennis Hollingsworth (R)

SD-38 (San Juan Capistrano, Oceanside, Carlsbad): Mark Wyland (R)

SD-40 (Imperial County, southeastern Riverside and San Diego Counties): Juan Vargas (D) – vacated by Denise Ducheny (D)

STATE ASSEMBLY (District size: ~423,388) (Composition: 50 Democrats, 29 Republicans, 1 Independent)

Districts to watch:

AD-05 (Northern Sacramento suburbs): Businessman Andy Pugno (R) vs. Dr. Richard Pan (D), Elizabeth Martin (PF) – vacated by Roger Niello (R)

Registration: 40.1% GOP, 37.7% DEM, 17.9% DTS, 4.3% Other

Profile: In this evenly-divided district just outside Sacramento, we have a very formidable candidate in Pan against Prop. 8 author Pugno. This district overlaps the 3rd congressional district and will likely see a lot of activity.

10/27/2010 Outlook: Toss-Up

AD-10 (Eastern Sacramento suburbs): Alyson Huber (D) vs. businessman Jack Sieglock (R), Janice Bonser (L), Albert Troyer (PF)

Registration: 40.9% DEM, 39.1% GOP, 16.1% DTS, 4.0% Other

Profile: In another evenly-divided Sacto-area seat that also happens to partly overlap CA-03, we have another exciting race, where in 2008 Huber won by under 500 votes and was declared the winner after her opponent went to the capital for orientation. He is back for a second round, and while Huber doesn’t have coattails working in her favor, she does have incumbency (no incumbent in the state legislature has lost reelection in a decade) and a Democratic trend in registration on her side.

10/27/2010 Outlook: Toss-Up/tilt Huber

AD-15 (Inner East Bay): Joan Buchanan (D) vs. San Ramon Mayor Abram Wilson (R)

Registration: 41.5% DEM, 35.3% GOP, 19.3% DTS, 3.9% Other

Profile: This district includes parts of San Joaquin County and conservative parts of Contra Costa and Alameda Counties, much of which overlaps the hotly-contested CA-11 race. Buchanan ran in the CA-10 special election last year, so that may be a liability for her, but she is still favored to win because of an increasing Dem advantage in registration, incumbency, and the fact that rematches rarely succeed for the challenger.

10/27/2010 Outlook: Tilt/Lean Buchanan

AD-30 (Southern San Joaquin Valley): Farmer David Valadao (R) vs. businesswoman Fran Florez (D) – vacated by Danny Gilmore (R)

Registration: 45.7% DEM, 36.1% GOP, 14.3% DTS, 3.9% Other

Profile: This was the only legislative gain for the GOP in 2008 because the outgoing Democrat Nicole Parra endorsed Gilmore. This time Gilmore is not running, while Florez is again, having defeated Nicole Parra’s father Pete in the primary. Parra endorsed Valadao, plus a poll has shown him with a double-digit lead, so I’ll leave it as a retention for Team Red.

10/27/2010 Outlook: Lean Valadao

AD-33 (Part of southern Central Coast): SLO County Sup. Katcho Achadjian (R) vs. Santa Maria Mayor Pro Tem Hilda Zacarias and Paul Polson (L) – Vacant; Sam Blakeslee (R) was elected to the State Senate

Registration: 40.6% GOP, 35.4% DEM, 18.4% DTS, 5.6% Other

Profile: In this open seat on the Central Coast, we have another formidable Democratic challenger. The registration gap does make things a little challenging for us here, but from what I heard Hilda has had a strong ground campaign.

10/27/2010 Outlook: Lean Achadjian

AD-36 (Lancaster, Palmdale): Steve Knight (R) vs. school board member Linda Jones (D)

Registration: 39.1% GOP, 38.6% DEM, 17.0% DTS, 5.2% Other

Profile: This race was closer than expected in 2008 due to presidential coattails and many minorities moving into the Antelope Valley area. This time around, though, the lack of coattails and incumbency will make this race less competitive than last time.

10/27/2010 Outlook: Lean to Likely Knight

AD-68 (Garden Grove, Costa Mesa): (D) – Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor (R) vs. entrepreneur Phu Nguyen – vacated by Van Tran (R)

Registration: 41.0% GOP, 32.4% DEM, 22.0% DTS, 4.6% Other

Profile: Here is another strong candidate we have in Nguyen, who has the backing of public safety unions (even though Mansoor is a former deputy) and has led in campaign spending and cash-on-hand. While this is a very traditionally Republican area that has long been a tough nut for Democrats to crack, look for this to be the closest a Democrat has come to winning in this area in a long time if Nguyen can rally the Vietnamese and Hispanic communities in the district.

10/27/2010 Outlook: Lean Mansoor

AD-70 (Irvine, Laguna Beach): CC Trustee Don Wagner (R) vs. attorney Melissa Fox (D) and Deborah Tharp (L) – vacated by Chuck DeVore (R)

Registration: 43.0% GOP, 29.8% DEM, 23.2% DTS, 4.0% Other

Profile: In another OC district, Democrat Fox is mounting a strong, serious challenge, and Democrats are becoming more competitive here because of the bluing of Irvine (going from Bush by 8 in 2000 to Bush by 5 in 2004 to Obama by 16 in 2008).

10/27/2010 Outlook: Lean to Likely Wagner

Safe:

AD-01 (North Coast): Wesley Chesbro (D)

AD-02 (Sacramento Valley): Jim Nielsen (R)

AD-03 (Northeast): Dan Logue (R)

AD-04 (Tahoe): Ted Gaines (R)

AD-06 (North Bay): Jared Huffman (D)

AD-07 (Napa Valley): Michael Allen (D) – vacated by Noreen Evans (D)

AD-08 (Sacramento River Delta): Mariko Yamada (D)

AD-09 (Sacramento): Roger Dickinson (D) – vacated by Dave Jones (D)

AD-11 (Northern Contra Costa County): Susan Bonilla (D) – vacated by Tom Torlakson (D)

AD-12 (Western San Francisco): Fiona Ma (D)

AD-13 (Eastern San Francisco): Tom Ammiano (D)

AD-14 (Berkeley, Richmond): Nancy Skinner (D)

AD-16 (Oakland): Sandré Swanson (D)

AD-17 (Stockton, Merced): Cathleen Galgiani (D)

AD-18 (Eastern Oakland suburbs): Mary Hayashi (D)

AD-19 (Most of San Mateo County): Jerry Hill (D)

AD-20 (Southern East Bay): Bob Wieckowski (D) – vacated by Alberto Torrico (D)

AD-21 (Silicon Valley): Rich Gordon (D) – vacated by Ira Ruskin (D)

AD-22 (Western San Jose): Paul Fong (D)

AD-23 (Downtown San Jose): Nora Campos (D) – vacated by Joe Coto (D)

AD-24 (Southern San Jose): Jim Beall (D)

AD-25 (Mother Lode, Yosemite): Kristin Olsen (R) (unopposed) – vacated by Tom Berryhill (R)

AD-26 (Stockton, Modesto): Bill Berryhill (R)

AD-27 (Northern Central Coast): Bill Monning (D)

AD-28 (Inner Central Coast region): Luis Alejo (D) – vacated by Anna Caballero (D)

AD-29 (Eastern Fresno): Linda Halderman (R) – vacated by Michael Villines (R)

AD-31 (Western Fresno): Henry Perea (D) – vacated by Juan Arambula (I)

AD-32 (Bakersfield): Shannon Grove (R) – vacated by Jean Fuller (R)

AD-34 (Big Empty): Connie Conway (R)

AD-35 (Santa Barbara, Oxnard): Das Williams (D) – vacated by Pedro Nava (D)

AD-37 (Most of Ventura, small part of L.A.): Jeff Gorell (R) – vacated by Audra Strickland (R)

AD-38 (Santa Clarita): Cameron Smyth (R)

AD-39 (San Fernando): Felipe Fuentes (D)

AD-40 (San Fernando Valley, including Van Nuys): Bob Blumenfield (D)

AD-41 (Oxnard, Malibu, Santa Monica): Julia Brownley (D)

AD-42 (Beverly Hills, West Hollywood): Mike Feuer (D)

AD-43 (Burbank, Glendale): Mike Gatto (D)

AD-44 (Pasadena): Anthony Portantino (D)

AD-45 (East L.A.): Gil Cedillo (D) – vacated by Kevin de León (D)

AD-46 (East L.A., Huntington Park): John Pérez (D)

AD-47 (Culver City): Holly Mitchell (D) – vacated by Karen Bass (D)

AD-48 (Part of South Central L.A.): Mike Davis (D)

AD-49 (Inner Northeastern suburbs of L.A.): Mike Eng (D)

AD-50 (Bellflower): Ricardo Lara (D) – vacated by Hector De La Torre (D)

AD-51 (Inglewood, Hawthorne): Steven Bradford (D)

AD-52 (Compton): Isadore Hall (D)

AD-53 (Beach Cities): Betsy Butler (D) – vacated by Ted Lieu (D)

AD-54 (Palos Verdes, Long Beach, Avalon): Bonnie Lowenthal (D)

AD-55 (Carson, Long Beach): Warren Furutani (D)

AD-56 (Norwalk, Buena Park): Tony Mendoza (D)

AD-57 (Covina, Baldwin Park): Roger Hernandez (D) – vacated by Ed Hernandez (D)

AD-58 (Inner Eastern suburbs of L.A.): Charles Calderon (D)

AD-59 (Parts of L.A. and San Bernardino Counties): Tim Donnelly (R) – vacated by Anthony Adams (R)

AD-60 (Western Inland Empire): Curt Hagman (R)

AD-61 (Pomona, Ontario): Norma Torres (D)

AD-62 (San Bernardino, Fontana): Wilmer Carter (D)

AD-63 (Rancho Cucamonga, Redlands): Mike Morrell – Vacant; Bill Emmerson (R) was elected to the State Senate

AD-64 (Riverside, Palm Desert): Brian Nestande (R)

AD-65 (Yucca Valley, Big Bear): Paul Cook (R)

AD-66 (Temecula, Riverside): Kevin Jeffries (R)

AD-67 (Huntington Beach): Jim Silva (R)

AD-69 (Anaheim, Santa Ana): Jose Solorio (D)

AD-71 (Corona, part of inland Orange County): Jeff Miller (R)

AD-72 (Inland Northern Orange County): Chris Norby (R)

AD-73 (San Clemente, Oceanside): Diane Harkey (R)

AD-74 (Coastal Northern San Diego suburbs): Martin Garrick (R)

AD-75 (Inner Northern San Diego suburbs): Nathan Fletcher (R)

AD-76 (Northern San Diego City): Toni Atkins (D) – vacated by Lori Saldaña (D)

AD-77 (Most of inland San Diego County): Brian Jones (R) – vacated by Joel Anderson (R)

AD-78 (Chula Vista, Lemon Grove): Marty Block (D)

AD-79 (Southern San Diego City, Imperial Beach): Ben Hueso (D) – vacated by Mary Salas (D)

AD-80 (Imperial County, eastern Riverside County): Manuel Perez

Cross-posted at Swing State Project.

Here is my analysis of the 2008 election in my home state of California. As I mentioned in my 50-state analysis, California was a mixed bag on November 4, 2008. The presidential results were anything but disappointing, while we came up short further down the ballot, from the House races to the state legislature and the 12 ballot measures.

I was amazed as I saw polls leading up to Election Day showing Obama up by more than 20 over McCain, and was astonished at the 61-37 Obama blowout that ended up occurring on Election Night (and the calling of the whole Left Coast for Obama, putting him over 270 electoral votes and making him the winner!). I couldn’t wait to check out the county results and see which ones flipped for Obama and which ones were close.

As the final absentee ballots rolled in, I was able to check out the numbers, and see that Obama way outperformed Kerry, winning by 3 million votes and pumping up his national popular vote numbers very nicely. In fact, Obama outperformed every single Democratic presidential candidate except one, scoring the second-best Democratic presidential performance in California’s history after Franklin Roosevelt in 1936. As you can see, Obama gained 1.5 million votes over Kerry, while McCain, who claimed he could compete in California, lost half a million votes from Bush.

2008: Obama 8,274,473; McCain 5,011,781

2004: Kerry 6,745,485; Bush 5,509,826

Looking through the voting histories of the California counties that went to Obama, I found that Obama broke some longtime Republican streaks in quite a few counties. Obama won a majority of the vote in two counties that last voted Democratic presidentially with more than 50% of the vote in 1976, Merced and Trinity.

Most significant are the six counties that in 2008 voted Democratic presidentially with more than 50% for the first time since 1964: Nevada, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Joaquin, San Luis Obispo, Ventura

And finally, San Diego County, which last voted for a Democratic presidential candidate with a majority of the vote in 1944, also delivered a majority of the vote to Obama!

Obama also came close to winning majorities, instead winning close pluralities, in Butte, Fresno, and Stanislaus Counties. The last Democrat to win a majority in Butte and Fresno was Lyndon Johnson in 1964, and the last Democrat to win a majority in Stanislaus was Jimmy Carter in 1976.

Now I will do a tour of the state, north to south. I will give a bit of an overall summary of California’s counties: Obama improved upon Kerry’s performance in all 58 of them. The amount of improvement varies from region to region, and the numbers are over the flip.

North Coast

Counties = Del Norte, Humboldt, Mendocino, Lake, Sonoma

Combined population = 800,932

2004 = Kerry 63%, Bush 34% (D+29)

2008 = Obama 69%, McCain 28% (D+41)

Obama improved considerably over Kerry’s margins in this part of the state, growing Democratic margins in Humboldt, Mendocino, Lake, and Sonoma, while cutting McCain’s margin in Del Norte County to half of Bush’s. These growing Democratic numbers in this formerly swingy region (CA-01 changed parties 4 times in the 1990s alone) suggests this region will continue to trend Democratic for the foreseeable future.

Northern Mountain

Counties = Butte, El Dorado, Lassen, Modoc, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Shasta, Sierra, Siskiyou, Tehama, Trinity

Combined population = 1,205,952

2004 = Bush 61%, Kerry 38% (R+23)

2008 = McCain 54%, Obama 44% (R+10)

Our next stop is this sprawling, low-density region. I figured McCain would crush Obama in this small town-heavy region, even overperforming Bush’s numbers. When I examined the counties in this region, all of which went for Bush in 2004, I was shocked. Not only did McCain underperform Bush here, he actually got FEWER votes than Bush did. Obama even won 3 counties outright: Butte, Nevada, and Trinity. This region will likely continue to be considerably Republican, but Democrats can become more competitive here if they grow their margins in Butte County (home of UC Chico) and the Tahoe region. Some of this area, most notably Placer, is becoming more like suburban Sacramento and may also continue to trend Democratic. These numbers show that we can win here, and if we can find more Charlie Browns, we might be able to pull off wins in this region, namely Congressional District 4 (which will very likely be open in 2010 when McClintock runs for governor) and Senate District 4 (which will be open in 2010 due to term limits). A couple of Assembly seats here will be open in 2010 as well. Let’s jump-start that 58-county strategy!

San Francisco Bay Area

Counties = Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano

Combined population = 6,791,908

2004 = Kerry 69%, Bush 29% (D+40)

2008 = Obama 74%, McCain 24% (D+50)

A very blue region in a very blue state just keeps on getting bluer with each election. Republicans will be extremely lucky if they can get even a third of the vote here again! In addition to overwhelming Democratic numbers, every single Congressional, State Senate, and State Assembly district is in Democratic hands, almost parallel to the shutout Republicans suffered on the House level in New England. Only if the Republicans return to being the party of Earl Warren and Hiram Johnson will they have a prayer of winning here again. The funny thing is that this region used to be a very Republican region in a very Republican state back in the early 20th century, and San Mateo County was the origin of powerful Republican governor Hiram Johnson and the Progressive movement in California, which Republicans of that time embraced. The region shifted strongly to the Democrats in the 1950s, with 1956 being the last time San Francisco and Alameda Counties voted Republican presidentially, and has not looked back since.

Sacramento Valley

Counties = Amador, Calaveras, Colusa, Glenn, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Sutter, Yolo, Yuba

Combined population = 2,606,646

2004 = Bush 51%, Kerry 48% (R+3)

2008 = Obama 56%, McCain 42% (D+14)

This is a swing area, with Democratic strongholds in the city of Sacramento and Yolo County, home of UC Davis, and Republican strongholds in the Sacramento suburbs (though their majorities here are getting smaller and smaller by the year), and Amador, Calaveras, Colusa, Glenn, Sutter, and Yuba Counties. San Joaquin County, the second-biggest county in the region, has been a Republican-leaning county in recent history until the influx of people from the Bay Area and the overall Democratic trend of suburbs near the Bay Area, culminating in a double-digit win for Obama in the county and the region. This region is also trending Democratic on the congressional and state legislature level, giving victories to Democratic Congressman Jerry McNerney, and Democratic Assemblywomen Alyson Huber and Joan Buchanan.

Eastern Mountain/Yosemite

Counties = Alpine, Inyo, Mariposa, Mono, Tuolumne

Combined population = 108,338

2004 = Bush 58%, Kerry 40% (R+18)

2008 = McCain 53%, Obama 44% (R+9)

Like the northern mountain region, McCain got fewer votes here than Bush did and Democrats saw a modest improvement from 2004 here. The 2 Democratic counties, Alpine and Mono, used to be two of the strongest Republican counties, even voting for Bush in 2000, but an influx of young people from the San Francisco area to work on the ski resorts shifted these counties to Kerry and even more for Obama. If we can get a similar trend in the other counties, then this region too may become Democratic before long.

Central Coast

Counties = Monterey, San Benito, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz, Ventura

Combined population = 2,275,917

2004 = Kerry 54%, Bush 45% (D+9)

2008 = Obama 60%, McCain 37% (D+23)

This region was normally divided in half, with the northern half of the region (Monterey, San Benito, Santa Cruz) leaning strongly Democratic and the southern half (San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Ventura) leaning Republican aside from the Democratic stronghold of Santa Barbara. Now that barrier has been shattered, with all 6 counties (yes, including San Luis Obispo!) going for Obama. This provides us with great opportunities to expand our majority in the upcoming State Assembly elections in 2010 and the State Senate elections in 2012. You will also notice that this region is generally the bellwether region for determining how California will go in statewide/presidential elections. Not surprisingly, the bellwether county of San Benito is also in this region.

San Joaquin Valley

Counties = Fresno, Kern, Kings, Madera, Merced, Stanislaus, Tulare

Combined population = 3,270,343

2004 = Bush 62%, Kerry 37% (R+25)

2008 = McCain 52%, Obama 46% (R+6)

Here is another Republican stronghold, though unlike the mountain regions, this one is more populous, with population centers in Fresno and Bakersfield. Every county here was Republican in 2004, and then Obama punched holes in the Republican firewall, winning Merced and Stanislaus Counties, as well as the big prize of Fresno County. We still have work to do here on the state level though, since we lost the 30th Assembly district last year. Though maybe with that Yacht Dog Nicole Parra gone and the Democratic trend here, we may have a chance to regain that district in 2010.

Southland

Counties = Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego

Combined population = 20,951,621

2004 = Kerry 52%, Bush 46% (D+5)

2008 = Obama 59%, McCain 38% (D+21)

And finally, our tour ends in the Southland, the most populous region in the state, which alone holds more than half of the state’s population in a mere 6 counties and is home to the state’s 2 largest cities, L.A. and San Diego, and the state’s 3 most populous counties (L.A., Orange, and San Diego). As recently as 2004, L.A. and Imperial Counties were the only Democratic counties in the region. Obama changed that, blowing even more holes in Republican strongholds, turning 3 more counties blue with majorities in Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego, and falling just two points short in Orange County, nearly staging a complete sweep in this former Republican stronghold. That spells trouble for certain Republican Congressmen/women, as well as State Senators and Assemblymembers, some of which are term-limited in 2010 and/or scored weak wins in 2008. Probably the most exciting part of California to watch in the 2010 elections will be right here in the Southland. My hometown of Rancho Cucamonga in San Bernardino County went for Obama. I can only hope it and many more cities in the region continue to trend to the good guys! If the Democrats have a lockhold on the population centers in Northern and Southern California, then there will be ZERO chance of Republicans winning this big prize again!

Whew! Now that I’ve finished the marathon tour of my big, beautiful home state, I can give the region-by-region breakdown of Democratic improvements from 2004 to 2008, ranked from the smallest shift to the largest shift. Here they are:

Eastern Mountain/Yosemite: 9%

San Francisco Bay Area: 10%

North Coast: 12%

Northern Mountain: 13%

Central Coast: 14%

Southland: 16%

Sacramento Valley: 17%

San Joaquin Valley: 19%

Every region shifted considerably more Democratic, though the biggest shifts occurred in the regions that up through 2004 were swing or Republican-leaning areas. These are the areas we need to target heavily to make the biggest gains.

With some legislative seats open in 2010 due to term limits, we can take some of them and further inflate our Democratic majority in this state. If the California Democratic Party, with the new fresh faces of Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) and Assembly Speaker Karen Bass (D-Los Angeles) actually invests in the legislative races, we can make major gains and have no more disappointments that we had in 2008’s U.S. House and legislative races, where Democrats, especially in swing districts in Southern California, underperformed Obama. Also, with enough investment, we will hopefully also have no more disappointments in the ballot measures such as Prop H8. And a suggestion I have for reforming our dysfunctional ballot measure system is to not have any repeat ballot measures such as Prop 73 (2005)/85 (2006)/4 (2008) and also require a supermajority (say 60%) on passing some measures. And of course we need major reforms in the legislative system, such as doing away with the ridiculous 2/3 rule for taxes and budgets.