Jeffers Dodge is the Republican Nominee in the 47th AD. The 47th is a Dem dictrict represented by Karen Bass. It takes in big parts of LA, Culver City and Westwood. It actually takes in the apartment I lived in when at UCLA. Jeffers Dodge comes out of the entertainment industy, which is a big part of that district.
Jeffers is more than a candidate fillinng a slot. To prove it he has Ann Coulter coming out to headline a fundraiser for him this Friday.. See information here.
This is the kind of candidate the party should get behind and make a run at growing the party in this area. I know it has bad registration etc… But if not when we have a candidate that can put stuff together, when will we try to become a majority.
August 1st, 2006 at 12:00 am
Voter registration in AD 47 is 64.55% Democrat, 12.4% Republican. There are only five other assembly districts in California with WORSE registration: AD 13 and 16 (SF), AD 46, 48 and 52 (LA).
Clearly, California needs redistricting reform.
August 1st, 2006 at 12:00 am
How do you propose fixing that? Including Dana Point in the district? Los Angeles is a Democratic district, any way you slice it.
August 1st, 2006 at 12:00 am
You’re right. It’s a totally Dem district. Hey, how are the public schools doing in those districts? Not so well, huh? Not performing? Democrats not coming through for their constituents? Failing the children? Hmmm…
Oh, wait, Phil has a plan to “fully fund” education. Why fund it 100% when you can fund it 110%? Education: Fully fund it? Or MORE fully fund it?
August 2nd, 2006 at 12:00 am
Mike:
As you state, Jeffers is definitely not just a name on the ballot for the sake of having a name on the ballot. He has attended some of our events regarding illegal immigration and I know he has put in work for the GOP.
I am not in any way questioning his ability/loyalty/effort, etc.
However, I have a hard time supporting a candidate when there is really no hope for that individual to win or succeed. I don’t really know that district all that well and just by looking at the percentage totals with respect to registration it seems an insurmountable task.
Honestly, could Jesus Christ with an R next to his name win in that district?
Let me explain a little further. I used to work in the financial markets with a derivatives trading firm in Chicago. One of the axioms that all successful traders follow is that you cut your losses.
I am not saying that Jeffers is a “dog of a stock”, but that it is a “dog of a seat” and that investing time, energy and resources seems pointless. I think the argument could be made that it is worse than pointless…that in fact it is harmful to the party and that said resources should be redirected to more competitive seats.
The flip side to that argument is that we should step up to the plate and help our activist faithful. Abandoning our candidates discourages others from engaging and that it is disloyal on the part of the party to forsake a “son”.
I also think that it is a fair question to ask, if not now, when? If we are never going to invest our time and resources in a district, we can never hope to build a presence in a district and thus, the points I made above about cutting our losses leads to a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Not sure what the answer is, but these are the primary points I weigh when thinking about a situation like the one presented here.