PDA

View Full Version : CA State Senate Districts: PICK ONE!


choprzrul
04-02-2010, 11:46 AM
I would really like to see one house in Sacramento be controlled by pro-gun forces. I don't think that we could sway enough elections to take the assembly, but the senate might be another story.

The CA state Senate currently has 25 Democrats, 14 Republicans, and 1 empty seat for a total of 40 members. 21 is the magic number to have control, so we need 7 more Republican wins in November to change the balance. Obviously, this must be done while not losing any currently held seats. I have identified several state senate districts with a % of registered Democrats that is below 50%. I figure that a district with over half the population registered Democrat will make for a much harder battle to defeat the incumbent Democrat. So, here is the list:

District 2: 49.6% Dem
District 5: 48.8% Dem
District 7: 47.6% Dem
District 11: 47.5% Dem
District 21: 48.3% Dem
District 34: 46.1% Dem
District 37: 47.8% Dem
District 39: 41.1% Dem
District 40: 47.8% Dem

Republicans currently hold these districts:

1
4
12
14
15
17
18
19
29
31
33
35
36
38

I propose that we pick one of the 9 listed at below 50% Dem registration and adopt that district for CalGuns to focus our resources upon. I would also like to identify 8 other organizations that would like to see a Republican win those races and have them adopt a district for their organization to focus upon.

This is a work in progress, so comments and ideas are welcome. If we can gain control of one house, it should stop a vast majority of the bs gun laws we see coming from Sacramento.

Here are some useful links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:California_State_Senate_2009-2010.svg

http://www.legislature.ca.gov/legislators_and_districts/districts/senatedistricts.html

http://www.sen.ca.gov/ftp/sen/senplan/Senate.htp

Aegis
04-02-2010, 12:15 PM
It would be nice, but unlikely in this state. California has about 13% of the US population and about 33% of the US welfare recipients. Those welfare cases are going to almost always vote for the Democrat, because that is the party that insists on endless taxpayer subsidized welfare benefits.

I seriously doubt the Republicans could ever take control of the CA legislature or senate.

Flopper
04-02-2010, 12:28 PM
It would be nice, but unlikely in this state. California has about 13% of the US population and about 33% of the US welfare recipients. Those welfare cases are going to almost always vote for the Democrat, because that is the party that insists on endless taxpayer subsidized welfare benefits.

I seriously doubt the Republicans could ever take control of the CA legislature or senate.

It wouldn't be as tough as you think.

You're using flawed logic; you have to keep in mind that the vast majority of welfare recipients don't vote, because of ineligibility, ignorance, indifference, etc.

choprzrul
04-02-2010, 12:42 PM
Even if CalGuns chooses a single district and is successful, it will demonstrate how effective we can be when focused. Let's just say we choose district 34, Orange County. We then manage to get 10% of our members to send $100 to that candidate. That's nearly a half million dollars. Serious money for an individual trying to win a state senate seat. I for 1 think that CGN can swing the vote if we try.

choprzrul
04-02-2010, 12:43 PM
Which district is Lisa Saldana in? She's the one that wants to make OC illegal. From what I've read, Paul Koretz, a city councilman in L.A., is supporting this effort as well. So I think we should concentrate on getting rid of her.

She is in the 76th Assembly district.

State Senate-wise, I can tell you that odd number districts elect on years divisible by 4, and even number districts elect on the mid term elections.

Roadrunner
04-02-2010, 12:48 PM
She is in the 76th Assembly district.

State Senate-wise, I can tell you that odd number districts elect on years divisible by 4, and even number districts elect on the mid term elections.

My bad. Lori Saldana is an Assembly member, not a Senator. But, she still needs to go.

choprzrul
04-02-2010, 12:55 PM
My bad. Lori Saldana is an Assembly member, not a Senator. But, she still needs to go.

What happened to your posting that I replied to above? It disappeared!

I agree that she needs to go away. I can't find the voter registration numbers for the 76th, but I would think that it should be similiar to the 39th senate numbers.

Aegis
04-02-2010, 1:04 PM
It wouldn't be as tough as you think.

You're using flawed logic; you have to keep in mind that the vast majority of welfare recipients don't vote, because of ineligibility, ignorance, indifference, etc.

Really. The current regime in Washington DC received a great number of votes from the welfare recipient crowd.

Throwing out the Democrats in California who keep handing out the welfare benefits is not going to happen, regardless of how easy you think it may be or as much as I would like to see it happen. And don't forget, the unions always back Democrats.

choprzrul
04-02-2010, 1:55 PM
Really. The current regime in Washington DC received a great number of votes from the welfare recipient crowd.

Throwing out the Democrats in California who keep handing out the welfare benefits is not going to happen, regardless of how easy you think it may be or as much as I would like to see it happen. And don't forget, the unions always back Democrats.

Ok, you don't want to try. That is fine. Myself, I would rather go down swinging and be able to say that I at least tried.

Window_Seat
04-02-2010, 2:08 PM
I didn't see D10 or assembly D20 on the list, but I think that the Bay Area would be a great spot for a chapter location. D20 (for the Assembly) is up in November & this is where Adnan Shahab is running. Although he is pro-OC (No I'm not anti OC, just pro wait until McDonald, and then OC when CGN/F organizes efforts in S.F.), I like his other ideas much better than the others, especially the incumbents.

Erik.

choprzrul
04-02-2010, 2:54 PM
I didn't see D10 or assembly D20 on the list, but I think that the Bay Area would be a great spot for a chapter location. D20 (for the Assembly) is up in November & this is where Adnan Shahab is running. Although he is pro-OC (No I'm not anti OC, just pro wait until McDonald, and then OC when CGN/F organizes efforts in S.F.), I like his other ideas much better than the others, especially the incumbents.

Erik.

I am not opposed to getting behind any pro 2A candidate. I am, however, concerned when the district has more Dem registered to vote than Rep. That being said, it would certainly be a CGN coup d'état to snatch away a Bay area district.

I am hoping to gather some insight from people living in these districts to see what information they can offer.

Flopper
04-02-2010, 3:01 PM
Really. The current regime in Washington DC received a great number of votes from the welfare recipient crowd.

This just in: WATER, STILL WET!

The overwhelming majority of those on the welfare rolls who ACTUALLY voted, of course, cast their lot for anti-gun legislators.

But those on welfare don't actually have a very high level of participation at the polling booth.

In summary:

Percentage of votes from bumbs for anti's: HIGH.

Total number of votes from bumbs for anti's: LOW.

Roadrunner
04-02-2010, 3:03 PM
What happened to your posting that I replied to above? It disappeared!

I agree that she needs to go away. I can't find the voter registration numbers for the 76th, but I would think that it should be similiar to the 39th senate numbers.

It was completely wrong, so I deleted it. I was hoping to delete it before someone quoted it.

Apocalypsenerd
04-02-2010, 6:43 PM
pick the weakest anti-gun target in relation to a pro-gun candidate and I got $100 on the pro-gun candidate.

Aegis: Better to try and change things than sit with the status quo as a defeatist.

Aegis
04-02-2010, 8:20 PM
pick the weakest anti-gun target in relation to a pro-gun candidate and I got $100 on the pro-gun candidate.

Aegis: Better to try and change things than sit with the status quo as a defeatist.

Any real change in CA gun laws is going to have to come through victories in the courts. My thinking is not defeatist, it is the reality. Even if Republicans were to win majorities in the legislature and senate, there are some Republican lawmakers in this state who are not pro 2A.

Apocalypsenerd
04-02-2010, 10:30 PM
True, but the NRA pretty much showed what concentrated voting power and money can do to politicians in 1994. Simply focusing on one district and tipping the election so the gun-banner loses would get another ball, besides court cases, rolling.

Elections do work and they do have consequences. Otherwise no one would be lamenting the current course of Obama and Congressional Democrats.

choprzrul
04-03-2010, 8:27 AM
True, but the NRA pretty much showed what concentrated voting power and money can do to politicians in 1994. Simply focusing on one district and tipping the election so the gun-banner loses would get another ball, besides court cases, rolling.

Elections do work and they do have consequences. Otherwise no one would be lamenting the current course of Obama and Congressional Democrats.

I agree with both Aegis and Apocalypsenerd. I do not believe that we can afford to ignore neither the ballot box or the courts. While a court case may very well reach its end much quicker than changing the complexion of a legislative body, we will always be chasing our tails in the courts if we ignore the ballot box. I dare say that I fully believe that our concentrated efforts could very well swing 1 state senate seat from Dem to Rep. While one seat might seem small in stature, the effect is what will be noticed. It it time to leverage our power to further our pursuit of re-establishing our 2A rights to their fullest.

Doug L
04-04-2010, 11:48 AM
...I would rather go down swinging and be able to say that I at least tried.

Well said!