Rep. Scott Peters (D-CA-52) could perform an odd trick over the next few months: lose his primary but win the general election. How? California’s all-party primary offers a tempting opportunity to compare candidates ahead of the general election, but the Golden State has a track record of spitting out very different results in June and November.
— In 2012, nearly every Democratic House candidate matched against a Republican in California improved on their party’s primary vote share in the general election. (See the results in graphical form here.) That includes 8 districts, like Rep. Mark Takano‘s (D), where Democrats got less than half of the primary vote but went on to win the general. Takano got 59% in CA-41 after he and another Democrat combined for just 46% in the primary — leading some forecasters in DC and California to downgrade Takano’s chances after he won the nomination.
— The 2012 results confirm the trend from California’s previous two all-party primaries, in 1998 and 2000. In those years, Democrats improved their standing in 66 House races between primary and general, while Republicans only did it 17 times — mostly by marginal amounts in seats that were safely Democratic.
— Young people and especially Latinos are far less likely to turn out in California’s primaries, pushing the results away from what they look like with a full electorate in the fall. It’s the same effect that hurts Democratic performance in midterms versus presidential elections.
That’s not to say California Dems like Peters shouldn’t be worried about November; he and others will have tough races. But no one should use Tuesday’s primary results to write them off. Even though they match up potential opponents early on, all-party primaries are not as useful for comparing candidates as they seem.
— Scott Bland
- 1 EMILY’s List Recruiting for Open Governors Races
- 2 Democrats Should Think Beyond Race in Drawing Districts
- 3 EXCLUSIVE: Former JET, Ebony Editor on Suspicion that Woman Passed for Black, Led NAACP Chapter
- 4 Withdrawal from Climate Deals Would Have Diplomatic Ripple Effects
- 5 Kushner a Subject of FBI Russia Probe
What We're Following See More »
"American spies collected information last summer revealing that senior Russian intelligence and political officials were discussing how to exert influence over Donald J. Trump through his advisers." The conversations centered around Paul Manafort, who was campaign chairman at the time, and Michael Flynn, former national security adviser and then a close campaign surrogate. Both men have been tied heavily with Russia and Flynn is currently at the center of the FBI investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.
"Former FBI Director Robert Mueller has been cleared by U.S. Department of Justice ethics experts to oversee an investigation into possible collusion between then-candidate Donald Trump's 2016 election campaign and Russia." Some had speculated that the White House would use "an ethics rule limiting government attorneys from investigating people their former law firm represented" to trip up Mueller's appointment. Jared Kushner is a client of Mueller's firm, WilmerHale. "Although Mueller has now been cleared by the Justice Department, the White House may still use his former law firm's connection to Manafort and Kushner to undermine the findings of his investigation, according to two sources close to the White House."
Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Richard Burr (R-NC) and ranking member Mark Warner (D-VA) will subpoena two businesses owned by former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn. Burr said, "We would like to hear from General Flynn. We'd like to see his documents. We'd like him to tell his story because he publicly said he had a story to tell."