Tag Archives: Public Policy Institute of California

I still expect Bernie to take California

Updated below (on Friday, June 3, 2016)

In five days, the nation’s most populous state finally weighs in on the race for the Democratic Party presidential nomination.

The two California polling outfits that I trust the most, the Field Poll and the Public Policy Institute of California, both polled Californian voters recently, and both put Billary Clinton at only two percentage points ahead of Bernie.

The Field Poll put Bernie at 43 percent to Billary’s 45 percent, and the PPIC poll put Bernie at 44 percent and Billary at 46 percent.

Alas, a recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Marist poll of Californian voters also found only a 2-percent difference, with Billary at 49 percent to Bernie at 47 percent.

If I had to put a large sum of money on it, I’d bet for Bernie. My best guesstimate is that he’ll win by within a few percentage points, but it doesn’t strike me as impossible that he’ll actually win by low double digits.

Real Clear Politics’ average of the California polls right now has Billary at 4.7 percent ahead of Bernie, and the Huffington Post’s average of the California polls right now has Billary at 6.2 percent ahead, but these averages include polls from outfits that are outside of California and don’t know my state like the Field Poll and the PPIC know my state.

True, it all will come down to turnout, as the Field Poll’s director, Mark DiCamillo, wrote:

… While it is a truism that turnout is a key factor in determining who will win any close election, it is especially true in this race. This is because there are unusually wide differences in preferences across many key subgroups of the [California] Democratic presidential primary electorate, and even modest changes in the relative sizes of each subgroup could significantly alter the standings.

The widest differences [between Bernie and Billary] are generational, with Sanders the overwhelming choice of voters under age 30 and Clinton preferred by a two-to-one margin among Democratic primary voters age 65 or older.

There are also big differences between registered Democrats, who favor Clinton by nine points, and nonpartisans intending to vote in the Democratic presidential primary, who are now backing Sanders two to one. …

So: If you’re a Californian who is eligible to vote on Tuesday, June 7, and you haven’t already voted for Bernie by mail (as I have), be sure to turn out on Election Day! If you can’t, check here to see if your county offers early voting. (More general California elections information is here.)

As California goes, so goes the nation, and if Bernie wins California on Tuesday, admittedly that massive political embarrassment for her might not be enough to doom DINO Billary’s second presidential bid, but it would spell doom for the bu$ine$$-a$-u$ual DINOs.

A Bernie victory in California next week at the bare minimum would be the wake-up call that the DINOs finally can’t ignore; it would be gargantuan writing on the wall that even the blindest of the DINOs couldn’t miss.

Bernie’s revolution will come sooner or later; Billary’s elderly supporters will die — they have many, many more days behind them than they have ahead of them — but the progressivism that Bernie represents will live on.

P.S. On Tuesday, the corporately owned and controlled mass media are going to report that the corporately owned and controlled Billary Clinton has reached the number of delegates (2,383 of them) that she needs to win the 2016 Democratic Party presidential nomination.

This will be bullshit.

This delegate count will include the number of super-delegates who have said that they will vote for Billary at the Democratic Party convention in late July.

However, Billary doesn’t actually have those super-delegates’ votes before the fucking convention.

There remains time for the super-delegates to realize that Bernie Sanders is more likely to beat Donald Trump in November; indeed, here are the latest polling averages:

Real Clear Politics:

Bernie vs. Trump: Bernie up by 10.4 percent

Billary vs. Trump: Billary up by 1.5 percent

Huffington Post’s Pollster:

Bernie vs. Trump: Bernie up by 11 percent

Billary vs. Trump: Billary up by 4.2 percent

The super-delegates who truly want to prevent a President Trump will vote for Bernie Sanders at the Democratic Party convention in Philadelphia in late July.

Update (Friday, June 3, 2016): A new University of Southern California Dornsife College/Los Angeles Times poll — another homegrown and thus more reliable poll of Californian voters — has put Bernie Sanders at 44 percent and Billary Clinton at 43 percent, the first poll I’ve seen that has put Bernie ahead of Billary in California, albeit by 1 percent.

Over the past month or so Bernie has been “Bernstorming” California (I attended his May 9 rally here in Sacramento) — which very apparently has been paying off — while Billary has made fewer appearances (and drawing much smaller crowds), apparently arrogantly believing that she already had California in the bag. D’oh!

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Bernie, soon to debate Trump, is poised to win California’s primary on June 7

Updated below (on Friday, May 27, 2016)

Bernie Sanders, Jane O'Meara Sanders

Associated Press photo

Progressive presidential candidate Bernie Sanders and his wife Jane appear at a rally in Los Angeles in March. Sanders is within striking distance of Billary Clinton in the latest poll of California, and plans to debate Donald Trump before California votes in its presidential primary election on June 7. (Billary cravenly reneged on her previous agreement to debate Bernie one last time this month, so this is her karmic return.)

The latest polling of California by the Public Policy Institute of California – the California polling outfit that I trust the most – has Billary Clinton at only 2 percent ahead of Bernie Sanders, 46 percent to 44 percent.

In March, Billary had been beating Bernie in California 48 percent to 41 percent in PPIC’s polling; the momentum in the nation’s most populous state is Bernie’s.

Bernie’s massive rallies and TV ads in the state appear to have been helping him. (Billary, by contrast, has been having expensive, exclusive fundraisers at rich people’s homes instead of rallies, and has been using her husband as her surrogate, and, to my knowledge, has yet to air any TV ads here in California.)

I stand by my recent prediction that Bernie will win California, although probably within single digits. I had predicted that he’d win by low single digits, but now I can see him winning by high single digits or perhaps even low double digits. We’ll see.

Don’t get me wrong – I still expect Billary to drag her tired, center-right/Democrat-in-name-only, 1990s-era carcass into the July Democratic Party convention with more pledged delegates than Bernie, but her losing the most populous blue state so close to the convention sure would help Bernie’s argument that he’s the stronger candidate to face off with Donald Trump.

Continuing along the lines of that note, while Billary has reneged on her promise to participate in a tenth and final debate with Bernie this month, it looks like Bernie and The Donald are going to have a debate before the June 7 California presidential primary election – which is a wonderful upstaging of the suddenly-now-debate-shy Billary.

True, it’s unusual for a candidate who has yet to sew up his or her party’s presidential nomination to debate the opposing party’s presumptive presidential nominee, but what has been normal about this presidential election cycle?

Regardless of its level of orthodoxy (which is quite low), I love the symbolism, the visuals, of an imminent Sanders-Trump debate: Billary is “too busy” to debate Bernie a final time before the June 7 California primary, but/so Bernie is going to debate Trump.

The political optics will be of Bernie already taking on Trump even before the Democratic Party primary convention. Sweet.

Only if Bernie does horribly in the debate with Trump could it harm him politically, but I don’t expect him to do horribly.

Of course, it strikes me that there still is time for the Democratic National Committee to try to quash the Sanders-Trump debate – because it’s brilliantly unorthodox and because it circumvents the DNC’s (that is, Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s) iron fist – and if they (well, if she) can try, she probably will try.

After all, the “Democratic” National Committee isn’t about democracy; it’s about installing Billary Clinton in the White House.

And under a President Sanders, that would change in short order, starting with his promise to fire the corrupt Billarybot Debbie Wasserman Schultz as head of the DNC and to return the Democratic Party to its progressive roots.

Update (Friday, May 27, 2016): Reuters, in a two-paragraph news item, reports today that Trump has pulled out of a debate with Bernie. Reuters reports (in full):

Washington — U.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said [today] he would not debate Democrat Bernie Sanders ahead of California’s June 7 primary.

“Based on the fact that the Democratic nominating process is totally rigged … it seems inappropriate that I would debate the second-place finisher,” Trump said in a statement.

That’s a bullshit reason, and because of the poor wording I’m not even certain what the hell it means — my impression is that Trump just chickened out and that, just like Billary did, he reneged on a promise to debate Bernie — but I guess it’s nice to see Trump point out, as he has before, that “the Democratic nominating process is totally rigged.” Because it is. It has been tilted in Billary’s favor from Day One.

P.S. Per McClatchy News, here is Trump’s statement in its entirety:

Based on the fact that the Democratic nominating process is totally rigged and Crooked Hillary Clinton and Deborah Wasserman Schultz will not allow Bernie Sanders to win, and now that I am the presumptive Republican nominee, it seems inappropriate that I would debate the second-place finisher.

Likewise, the networks want to make a killing on these events and are not proving to be too generous to charitable causes, in this case, women’s health issues. Therefore, as much as I want to debate Bernie Sanders — and it would be an easy payday — I will wait to debate the first-place finisher in the Democratic Party, probably Crooked Hillary Clinton, or whoever it may be.

That’s a fuller statement, but I still call chicken shit on Trump. He did not give a good reason to back out, and apparently his word is as good as is “Crooked Hillary’s.”

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Duuude! 2011 in Cali is going to ROCK!

So in November, I predict, not only will a majority of California’s voters put “Governor Moonbeam” back into office, but they will make marijuana legal in the state. And there’s the possibility that they will make it legal again for same-sex couples to wed.

It will be like the ’70s all over again.

Yes, the ’70s, the decade of free love and weed that I missed out on because I was born in 1968 and spent the ’70s first in day care (the boomers were such great fucking parents) and then in elementary school. When I finally was of partying age, I got — President Ronald Fucking Reagan. And AIDS.*

Don’t get me wrong — Repugnican California guv wannabe Nutmeg Whitman, a billionaire former CEO who never has held public office but wants to buy the governorship of the nation’s most populous state, must be brought down. We can’t act as though Jerry Brown already has won the election. We have to fight (… for our right … to paartaaay!**).

But when all is said and done, even if Nutmeg doesn’t make some major campaign-killing fuckup, I expect that the majority of California’s voters, hit hard by the economy brought to them by the Repugnican Party, aren’t going to vote for another fucking Repugnican to lead the state.

Megalomaniac wants us to believe that she’s great because she’s a billionaire. But a majority of Californians, I think, are much more resentful of what the super-rich have done to the nation and to the state than they want to emulate the plutocrats.

Plus, Nutmeg is fugly. She is. That shouldn’t matter in elections, but it does. Ask former Cosmo centerfold Scott Brown, who is, I believe, the only U.S. senator whose pubes I have seen. (I, um, rather doubt that a Nutmeg sex tape is going to surface… Although if one does, it’s probably sex that she had to pay for... And we know that she can afford the best that money can buy…)

And yesterday it was big news in the state that a ballot initiative to legalize marijuana in the nation’s most populous and greatest state has qualified for the November ballot. (I would have blogged on it yesterday, but I was too stoned. No, kidding — I was too tired after work yesterday to blog on it, actually.)

Anyway, The Associated Press reports:

The [ballot] initiative would allow those 21 years and older to possess up to one ounce of marijuana, enough to roll dozens of marijuana cigarettes. Residents also could grow their own crop of the plant in gardens measuring up to 25 square feet.

The proposal would ban users from ingesting marijuana in public or smoking it while minors are present. It also would make it illegal to possess the drug on school grounds or drive while under its influence.

Local governments would decide whether to permit and tax marijuana sales.

Proponents of the measure say legalizing marijuana could save the state $200 million a year by reducing public safety costs. At the same time, it could generate tax revenue for local governments.

A Field Poll taken in April found a slim majority of California voters supported legalizing and taxing marijuana to help bridge the state budget deficit.

My guess is that at least 55 percent of the voters will vote “yes” on the marijuana measure — and that many, many of us Californians will discover a new love for gardening.

(Of course, pot dealers aren’t happy about their impending business losses, but hey, they should have had a back-up plan anyway.)

Not only can the state sorely use the tax revenue from marijuana sales, but there is absofuckinglutely no reason to allow alcohol and tobacco to remain legal but not marijuana.

(My only concern is whether or not the feds will try to step in and block the legalization of marijuana in California like Cruella de Vil coming for the doobies — er, doggies. I haven’t researched that possibility yet.)

So I can envision a California with a Democratic governor again — and not just any Democratic governor, but Gov. Jerry Fucking Brown — and a state that has legalized marijuana, which should have been legalized long ago and which only those who decry a “nanny state” inconsistently hold should remain illegal.

OK, now I’m really going to do some California dreamin’ here:

There is an effort also to put same-sex marriage back on the November 2010 ballot, to reverse Proposition 8, which in November 2008 passed with only 52 percent of the vote. (You can sign the petition, and perhaps also collect petition signatures, by going here. The effort needs to collect a total of 1 million signatures of registered California voters by April 5, so you need to mail your signature[s] in quickly.) 

Now that the main pushers of Prop 8 — the Mormon cult and the pedophilic Catholick church, which bankrolled the last-minute multi-million-dollar pro-Prop 8 media blitz of homophobic lies — have been exposed, I surmise that same-sex marriage could pass this November, or no later than in November 2012.

The Public Policy Institute of California just released a poll that shows that 50 percent of Californians support same-sex marriage, with 45 percent opposed and 5 percent undecided. That’s good news, given that the multi-million-dollar campaign of lies induced 52 percent of the voters to vote down same-sex marriage in November 2008.

The Field Poll found a year ago that 48 percent of Californians then supported same-sex marriage, with 47 percent opposed and 5 percent undecided.

It seems to me that most of the undecideds will end up in the pro-same-sex-marriage column, as the haters already know that they’re haters, and I put the state’s haters at just under 50 percent (somewhere around 45 percent to 49 percent, tops).

My best guess is that if the issue were voted upon by California voters today, it would be a reversal of the November 2008 results, with around 51 percent to 52 percent for same-sex marriage and around 48 percent to 49 percent opposed.

Come January 2011, we Californians could be smoking (and even growing!) weed freely and marrying whom we wish to marry, under the wise and loving governance of Governor Moonbeam.

Hell yeah!

*No, I mean, I’m not HIV-positive, but before I could even think about getting it on with another dude, fucking AIDS burst onto the scene, ruining gay sex for me and my cohorts, who still can recall seeing images of AIDS victims who looked like concentration camp victims, and some of us, such as I did, as a hospice nurse, watched people die of the disease with our own eyes.

**Kidding! Mostly…

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized