The primary election in California’s 10th Congressional District is set for September 1, with the general election on November 3.  If nobody gets 50%+1 on September 1, the top vote-getters in each party advance to the general election, and given the orientation of the district, the top Democrat on September 1 will be the next Congressmember from CA-10.

The New York Times read off the conventional wisdom yesterday:

The lieutenant governor, John Garamendi, is considered the early favorite to replace Ms. Tauscher. Mr. Garamendi, a Democrat who had considered running for governor next year, said he opted instead for Congress in large part because of the abbreviated campaign […]

Mr. Garamendi’s principal challengers among the Democrats, some polls show, are State Senator Mark James DeSaulnier and Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan. Both were elected to their current posts last fall […]

The rest of the Democratic field is not as well known, though one candidate has attracted some national attention: Anthony Woods, a 28-year-old graduate of the United States Military Academy at West Point and a veteran of the Iraq war who was awarded the Bronze Star for two tours of duty. Shortly after his return from combat, while at Harvard working toward his master’s degree, Captain Woods told military superiors that he is gay, resulting in an honorable discharge […]

Others in the Democratic field include Tiffany Attwood, a local planning commissioner and self-described “mom who plays soccer” – do not call her a soccer mom – and Adriel Hampton, a former reporter for The San Francisco Examiner who said he was entering politics because of a “Howard Beale moment,” referring to the fictional insane anchorman from the 1976 film “Network.”

We’re slowly starting to learn further details.  While candidates don’t need to announce fundraising totals until July 15, Anthony Woods got the jump by announcing that he raised over $100,000 from 800 donors, which his campaign reports as twice as many as the number of donors John Garamendi announced a week earlier.  He’s pushing his online efforts:

Woods’ campaign is also leading his CD 10 competitors in online fundraising and online organizing. According to ActBlue.com, Woods is far outpacing the two other Sacramento politicians in the race-State Senator Mark Desaulnier and Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan-in internet fundraising, and Woods has organized more supporters on Facebook (more than 4,700) than every other CD 10 candidate combined.

Woods has captured some national attention, particularly in the blogosphere, and we’ll see if that translates to a quick-sprint campaign.  John Garamendi seems not to think so:

Garamendi said it’s a three-way race, and he’s not counting Woods as a top-tier candidate: “He’s a serious young man that’s capable, and he’s got a national issue and a good story to go with it. And that’s to his benefit.”

But he said Woods is similar to the half-dozen or so other confirmed or prospective candidates who lack a natural base for their campaigns: “Everybody regards me as the front-runner.”

To that end, Garamendi secured a local labor endorsement, from the Alameda County Central Labor Council.  There’s a small patch of Alameda County in the district, particularly around Livermore.  But the dynamic in the race thus far has been that Mark DeSaulnier locked up all the early local support, including Contra Costa County’s Labor Council, and Garamendi had roped in the national labor groups.  The Lt. Governor getting local labor support helps him with manpower.

I hope to have much more on this race as it moves forward, including some discussions on the issues currently facing Congress.

…couple updates.  I hadn’t realized that Garamendi announced a $300,000 haul for the last quarter about a week ago.  Also, per babaloo in comments, the Alameda County Central Labor Council made a dual endorsement of Garamendi and DeSaulnier.

Given the relative ambivalence in recent special elections in California, where members of Congress have been elected with 10,000 votes or less, I’d consider it an accomplishment that hundreds of people flocked to the Walnut Creek Jewish Community Center last night, on a Friday night, to hear from six of the Democratic candidates who will seek to replace Ellen Tauscher in CA-10, once she is confirmed to an appointment at the State Department and resigns her seat.  Reader dslc has a short on-site commentary here, and Lisa Vorderbrueggen has provided lots of multimedia over at Political Blotter.  The audio recording doesn’t seem to be working right now, but she had videos of every candidate’s closing statement.  In case you’re just tuning in, those candidates include:

Lt. Governor John Garamendi

State Sen. Mark DeSaulnier

Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan

Adriel Hampton

Anthony Woods

Tony Bothwell

(Bothwell is a San Francisco-area attorney who doesn’t yet have a campaign website, but here’s his law office site.)

Sadly, this is pretty much the extent of major media coverage that exists of yesterday’s event, despite several hundred residents and a Congressional race that impacts hundreds of thousands.  Our dwindling press corps is definitely a problem.  But based on the closing statements, you can decide for yourself who performed well last night.  I’ll just throw around some other links as the race really kicks into gear.  As a side note, apparently Garamendi brought out the giant golden bear clearly planned as his mascot for a gubernatorial race.

• Luke Thomas interviews Joan Buchanan for the Fog City Journal, and Buchanan comes of as pretty knowledgeable about the challenges we face.  She foregrounded her support of mass transit and BART expansion, health care reform (she supports single payer but wouldn’t commit to supporting HR 676, and thinks that a plan currently moving through the House with a robust public option could be a “stepping stone” to single payer) and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (she generally supports Obama’s position).

• Also in the Fog City Journal, Harold Brown has an op-ed about Adriel Hampton, claiming that “SF lefties are missing an opportunity” by not rallying to his campaign.

• Anthony Woods is getting a fair amount of attention on the blogs.  AR Dem profiled him in this MyDD user diary, and today, Woods took questions at Firedoglake in a live chat session with Howie Klein.  I thought he served himself well.

• There’s another Democratic forum scheduled for July 2 in Antioch (Antioch City Hall, Second and H streets).

A couple updates:

• Lisa V. fixed the audio feed, which you can find here.  Her story on the forum is here.

In the first central Contra Costa County showdown of Democratic candidates vying for the chance to replace Rep. Ellen Tauscher, a packed room Friday night heard little in the way of substantive policy differences but saw vastly disparate approaches.

Relative youngsters Adriel Hampton and Anthony Woods, 30 and 28 respectively, emphasized their lack of ties to the establishment […]

The high-profile candidates with decades of political experience – Lt. Governor John Garamendi; Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan, D-Alamo; and state Sen. Mark DeSaulnier, D-Concord – stressed their individual policy strengths.

Also, there’s actually another forum this Tuesday, June 23, sponsored by the El Cerrito Democratic Club.  It starts at 6:30 p.m. at Fellowship Hall, El Cerrito United Methodist Church, 6830 Stockton Avenue (at Richmond Avenue), El Cerrito.

…additional analysis of the forum from Halfway to Concord.

First, kudos to Brian Leubitz, out tonight talking blogs to a more traditional crowd who hopefully will take opportunity to get more involved in self-publishing. It’s so easy to preach to the choir when it comes to social media, and Brian is expanding the base for the progressive blogosphere. You can check out some of my live tweets from Brian’s discussion with the Diablo Valley Democratic Club over at @adriel4congress.

A bit disappointing tonight in that we expected to have a brief candidates forum, but it was called off due to the apolitical library venue. Chris Buchanan was again subbing for his mother, Joan, Lt. Gov. John Garamendi was a no-show. I got some good advice on weaknesses in my first forum from a local delegate.

This looks to be a real fight, no quarter asked, none given.

Just wanted to drop a note about the great candidate’s forum in Dublin tonight. It was my first time seeing Anthony Woods speak and I join in the assessment that he’s got a great future in political leadership. Sean Mykael McMullen of Bear Flag Blue and the DeSaulnier campaign did some great live tweeting, and my friend Kaushal Khalla took a bunch of photos (OK, most of them are of me) and posted to Facebook.

http://twitter.com/seanmykael

http://www.facebook.com/album….

As I mentioned a few days ago, I attended the East Bay DFA meeting last night. It was great to hang out with some folks who are regular contributors to Calitics.

The meeting began with a recap of the CDP convention, where a member of the group, Hilary Crosby, was elected to the position of CDP Controller.  Several other members of East Bay DFA were elected to caucus positions, including Karen Weinstein to Women’s Caucus Chair.  This is really a remarkably successful club.

Once all the collective high-fives were issued and the pizza was devoured, the CA-10 candidates got up there and did their thing. You might want to check Matt Lockshin’s twitter feed for the live tweeting action.  

Joan Buchanan began, pointing out that No Child Left Behind is still vastly underfunded. But, once she finished up with her schpiel, the first question was from a supporter of Nancy Skinner. Skinner, the progressive Assembly Member from AD-14, sent her volunteers over the East Bay Hills to get Buchanan elected. It seems many of these progressive folks are a smidge bitter that she’s ready to run for another office so soon after a bitter fight to get her elected in AD-15. She handled it fairly well, saying if she won, she would do everything to ensure that AD-15 stays in Democratic hands.

John Garamendi went next, and gave a patented John Garamendi speech. It was fiery and passionate. He addressed the issues of why he is running for the seat, why he would be the most effective candidate, and all the people he knows.  He’s been in this game for a while.  Which is a contrast to…

Anthony Woods, who went next.  You could tell Woods wasn’t quite so seasoned. He spoke off of notes, which I think did him a bit of a disservice. He knew the issues, and in a small room like that, getting people to feel like you are really addressing them is more important than getting every word right.  That being said, he did get pretty much every word right. The speech was great, people liked his story and his positions.  Whether he wins this race or not, Woods is well positioned to be a leader in the area in the future.

Finally, Sen. Mark DeSaulnier mentioned how Reps. Tauscher and Miller both called him about running for the seat. How he had all the big name endorsements. He’s really quite progressive, from the Constitutional Convention bill he’s carrying in the Senate to his legislative scorecards.

In the questions, we got views on Afghanistan, the death penalty, and a range of issues. I’m sure the voters will hear quite a lot from these four going forward.

Finally, I had a little debate with Sen. DeSaulnier about the propositions.  I will grant him that it was a friendly room to me; the people in DFA strongly oppose Prop 1A and the rest of the package.  And DeSaulnier recognized that, and to his credit acknowledged that it was a result of extortion. He admitted it was not his idea of good policy, but said that it was the best deal they could get in the Legislature.  I of course disagree, but props to him for being honest about.  More props to him for pushing Prop 1C over the rest of the measures while still acknowledging that he didn’t think that there was actually $5 billion to be had in lottery liquidity.

X-posted at The Progressive Connection

The more I find out about the CA-10 poll John Garamendi released on Monday, the worse it smells. The press release about this poll from the Garamendi campaign gave out limited information as to how the poll was conducted, which raised a number of questions. However, Peter Charles left a comment at Calitics where he shared more information about the details of the poll. Those details exposed three glaring errors that jumped out from the information that was provided to the poll’s participants.

When the participants were given bios of the three Democratic candidates, here’s what they heard about Mark DeSaulnier, Joan Buchanan, and John Garamendi:

3a. Democrat State Senator Mark Desaulnier has served in the state legislature since 2004. Before that he served on the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors from 1996 to 2004. His top priority issues will be rebuilding the country’s economy, implementing clean energy programs, and regulating Wall Street banks. He is endorsed by Congress members Ellen Tauscher and George Miller, local firefighters, teachers, police and environmental groups.

3b. Democrat State Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan was elected to the State Assembly last November. Before that she served for 10 years on the San Ramon (ruh-MOAN) Valley school board. Her top priority issues will be more jobs and improving the economy, increasing renewable energy programs, and reforming public education. She will likely be endorsed by local elected leaders, school board members, teachers, and civil rights and womens groups.

3c. Democrat John Garamendi is California’s Lieutenant Governor. He has lived in the Sacramento portion of Congressional District 10 for 30 years. He previously served as Deputy Secretary of the Interior for Bill Clinton. He is running for Congress to continue reforming health care, rebuild our economy around clean energy, and reform bank and credit card laws. He will be endorsed by local nurses, firefighters, teachers, police officers as well as former President Bill Clinton and Al Gore.

The problem here is that the pollster misrepresented all three candidates, and he did it in a way that predictably favored the candidate who hired him.

As we’ve noted extensively at The Progressive Connection, John Garamendi does not now, nor has he ever “lived in the Sacramento portion of Congressional District 10.” That’s just an outright falsehood, as are the representations made about both DeSaulnier’s and Buchanan’s record of public service.

Mark DeSaulnier joined the state legislature in 2006, not 2004. Before that, DeSaulnier served on the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors from 1993 to 2006. Thirteen years, not eight. Four terms, not two.

And Joan Buchanan served on the San Ramon Valley school board from 1990 to 2008.  Eighteen years, not ten. Five terms, not three.

You have to ask yourself this question. If a pollster will lie about both his own candidate’s and the opposing candidates’ biographies, what else will he lie about?

And those aren’t the only problems. To get into the really wonkerific world of why Garamendi’s polling sample is all wrong, flip it…

This is how the Garamendi press release described the polling sample:

The poll was conducted between May 1st and May 4th by Jim Moore and JMM Research. Interviews were conducted with a 400-person sample from the 10th congressional district. Turnout was projected at 30 percent, and likely turnout was projected to be 55 percent Democratic, 33 percent Republican, and 12 percent independent. The poll had a +/- 5 percent margin of error.

For starters, a +/-5 percent margin of error is large. For those of you who are new to polling, +/-5 means that you need to give a five percent leeway to each candidate in the race. Relative to this particular poll, that means that Garamendi’s numbers could be as much as 5 points higher or lower, AND DeSaulnier’s and Buchanan’s numbers could also be as much as 5 points higher or lower. So while, at one extreme, it could reflect a blowout with Garamendi at 29 and DeSaulnier/Buchanan at 8/6, the converse could also be true. You could also have Garamendi at 19 and DeSaulnier/Buchanan at 18/16 — or a dead heat.

But there are also real and significant flaws in the poll’s underlying assumptions.

To explain this part, I’ve gathered the following data from the March 2009 SoS registration statistics, along with the CA-10 primary results from June 2008, and the Proposition results from CA-10 in the June 2008 primary.

Voter Data for CA-10

	Total Voters	%	Total Dems	%	Total Reps	%	Total DTS	%	Other	%
March 2009 Registration for CA-10	367,306	100%	173,498	47.24%	106,275	28.93%	73,015	19.88%	14,518	3.96%
June 2008 CA-10 Primary Results w/win %	85,814	N/A	55,427	64.59%	30,324	35.34%	N/A	N/A	63	.03%
CA-10 Voter Turnout as a % of Registration	85,814	23.36%	55,427	31.95%	30,324	28.53%	N/A	N/A	63	.43%

Got that? 23.36% voter turnout in last June’s Congressional primary.

But what’s fascinating about this is that Democratic and Republican registration amounts to 76.17 of the total voters; DTS and the others account for the remaining 23.84%. Now, if you were registered either Democratic or Republican for the June primary, you automatically received a partisan ballot. If you were DTS, you would have received a partisan ballot only if you specifically requested it; otherwise, you would have received a ballot that did not allow you to vote in, specifically (for our purposes), the Congressional race. Of the remaining parties, only Peace & Freedom fielded a candidate, so the members of the other parties would also not have had a Congressional vote.

Now, there were two propositions on the ballot as well, where all voters could cast their vote, regardless of party affiliation. It’s interesting to note that the total number of votes cast on Props 98 and 99 (regarding eminent domain) in CA-10 was significantly higher than the number of votes cast in the CA-10 Congressional race.

	Total Voters	% Turnout
CA-10 Congressional Race	85,814	23.36%
Prop 98	113,139	30.8%
Prop  99	112,584	30.65%

So we can assume that at least 113,139 voters turned out in CA-10 in the June primary. But of those 113,139, only 85,814 cast a ballot in the partisan Congressional race — or 75.84% — almost exactly equivalent to the 76.16% who are registered with the two major parties. That would tend to prove the notion that DTS voters seldom pull Democratic or Republican ballots in primaries.

All of which is a really long-winded explanation for why I don’t see any way to justify setting up a poll to reflect a 12% DTS participation in the coming CA-10 special primary.  That pretty much leaves us with a deeply flawed +/-5 MoE poll that, in all likelihood, overestimates turnout and takes 12% of its data from people who are demonstrably unlikely to vote in the upcoming special election (remember, the margin of Garamendi’s lead is 11%), while undersampling Democrats by 10%.

Obviously, the Garamendi campaign was hoping to make a big splash with this poll and establish its candidate as the strong frontrunner. Instead, because the poll is so thoroughly riddled with errors of both fact and judgment, they’re just looking desperate.

That’s the verdict according to a J. Moore Methods poll that dropped over the weekend and that found its way into my hands this afternoon. Remember that this is an open primary – if someone gets more than 50% they win; if not then the top candidates from each party go to a runoff. According to the poll, Lt. Gov. John Garamendi leads among likely voters (36% have no opinion):

(Rupf is Republican Warren Rupf, Sheriff of CoCo County)

The personal ratings are included, which show that Garamendi also has a big name ID and favorability advantage over all his challengers. Voter turnout is projected to be 30%, with 55% Dem, 33% Rep, and 12% DTS.

Of course, Garamendi doesn’t have a 50% lead here, and the election hasn’t even been scheduled yet. There’s time for either DeSaulnier or Buchanan to try and catch up, but it’s going to be a difficult climb. Garamendi’s high public profile and ability to raise money for this campaign will be significant advantages. DeSaulnier, a solid progressive who would also make an excellent member of Congress, can counter with strong on-the-ground support, but it’s unclear if that can trump Garamendi’s built-in advantages.

This leads me to wonder if Buchanan plans to stick around in the race – I can’t see her getting very far against this kind of opposition. Or perhaps DeSaulnier might step back and let Garamendi take it. So far as I can tell, however, both fully intend to continue their run.

Neither Anthony Woods nor Adriel Hampton were included in this poll, but I can’t imagine either one would meaningfully impact the outcome.

So as far as I can tell this is Garamendi’s to lose. We’ll see if this poll shifts the landscape at all.