.
.
.
Jay Chen (with mic) also serving his party a few years ago, speaking at a CAIR-PAC function for then-Michigan Congressional candidate Syed Taj, (far left), with (between them) then-Rep. Loretta Sanchez (at left). Faisal Qazi, and CAIR Los Angeles Executive Director Hussam Ayloush. Taj lost, but Jay did the right thing then too.
The Democratic side of this year’s Congressional races has been typified by enormous and egotistical stubbornness, leading to gluts of candidates that could conceivably lead to shut-outs of Democrats in all four targeted races in the June primary. In such a context, the choice of the most qualified Democratic candidate in any of the four races, Jay Chen, to step away from his race the day before filing ends may seem crazy. If it seems that way, that’s because it’s noble — like a Naval officer abandoning a lifeboat that already holds too many people to stay afloat — and therefore the last thing that you’d expect to see in politics.
Let’s be clear: Jay is the leading Democratic candidate in CA-39th polling. (Forget the custom-made in-house attack polls from other candidates. Everyone else has.) He is the last one who should be exiting the race. But his own decision is the only one that he can control. And so that’s what he is doing.
To be fair, it’s possible to characterize Jay’s decision as self-interested. With so many Dems in the race — and the possibility still existing, with only two days of filing left, that the third “varsity”-level Republican Bob Huff won’t enter the race at all, meaning that Young Kim and Shawn Nelson would be dividing up the lion’s share of Republican votes in the primary only TWO ways instead of three — Jay is in a sense sacrificing nothing. His campaign was already dead in the water, stalled by the seaweed surrounding him. And in his statement — to which Ryan has linked in a companion story (and I put into a comment) — he lays claim to being the first entry in the race for 2020 (probably another theoretically good Democratic year in President Trump survives in office that long) if a Democrat doesn’t win this time out.
One other thing distinguishes Jay from any other Democrat in the race other than Sam Jammal — who should be taking a huge hint from Jay’s action right now, as it is practically an IQ test — in that, rather than being a dilettante, he has a future in Democratic politics. The difference between this and a sailor nobly abandoning an overcrowded lifeboat is that he doesn’t die nobly as a result of this; he just lives to fight another day. What he does do is evade his share of collective responsibility for the coming clustercrash. And that’s worth way more than being the last person in the lifeboat to drown.
I’ve tried to put this gently to the other candidates who remain in the race, but I’ll do it less gently now: when the clustercrash comes and Dems are off of the November ballot, your names will be absolute shit. If you’re large donors, people will curry your favor and be nice to your face — but behind your back you’ll forever be one of the bunch who stubbornly refused to leave the lifeboat when it was the only path to a plausible victory for the party.
I understand why the centi-billionaires remain in the race; the phrase “fuck-you money” exists for a reason. I understand why Janowicz remains in the race; he doesn’t need to care what the party establishment thinks of him, and his presence on the June ballot would at least perk up party activists. And maybe the party could still have a chance if they were the only three Democrats left. But Mai Khanh Tran should get out of the race, because she does have a potential future ahead of her and she should not want to be tarnished by what is to come. Sam Jammal — for God’s sake, man, GET OUT! This race no longer does anything for you but to stain your future reputation. This is what you’ll be known for, for years! Jay has shown you the way and give you the argument you need: dive into the icy water — which is surprisingly shallow — and survive. Rusk will stay in the race because he’s an anti-Democrat; Park Leggett can justify staying in the race if her purpose is to sabotage Young Kim, but it’s not like staying does her any real good; as for the others, who are you?
But none of that will likely matter: even if a candidate who has been sworn in leaves the race now, their name remains on the ballot, a dead hand grasping for votes that could otherwise contribute to Democratic victory. Jay is the only Democrat who could actually improve the party’s chances by leaving, because he had had the foresight NOT to file when idiots (well, me, specifically) were texting him to get into the race damn already. (Needless to say, I did not see this decision coming, though given Jay’s character and intelligence it made perfect sense the moment I heard about it.)
For more than six years now, before this action, I’ve held Jay in what I thought was the highest esteem. I was wrong. My esteem for him could grow higher — and has. The DPOC should endorse him for the 2020 nomination the day after the 2018 primary if no Democrat makes the runoff — yes, this is hyperbole — and foreclose any repeat of this fiasco.
Meanwhile, the question remaining is whether any other Democratic candidates in CA-39 will profit by his good example. I’ll predict that none will — and would be very happy to be wrong, five or six times.
Greg, poll results at https://www.ca7project.com/single-post/2018/03/13/Fight-Back-California-Polls-Show-Likelihood-of-Democratic-Shutout-in-Districts-39-and-49
How did they miss 48?
At the moment, I don’t think that we’ll be shut out in 49. I don’t know that our party establishment will support our remaining candidate, though.
You mean the OC party establishment right? Most of the district is fortunately in SD county, where I believe they’ll do the right thing.
Francine Busby, who co-authored Fran Sdao’s letter, is a former San Diego party leader, who I think probably reflects establishment opinion there. But I know less about them.
Oh shit that’s right. I think she was even the sacrificial lamb against Issa herself once.
Greg, Change Research’s poll results for CA-48 is at https://www.sfchronicle.com/file/288/7/2887-CA-48%20Poll.pdf and FM3 Research’s poll results for CA-49 is at https://www.flip-the-49th.org/pollhp/
I know — but this post is about CA-39.
But regardless: the 48th results look weird to me. I’ve wanted to write about the 49th poll, but haven’t had time.
With Jay withdrawn, how could this poll’s results change assuming Bob Huff doesn’t file? (Note it omitted Ted Rusk and Michael McKay.)
James,
(1) If Huff doesn’t file, it would get worse for Democrats as the remaining Republicans (and maybe Schatzle and Rusk) would receive a greater share of the Republican electorate (which goes well beyond the party members.)
(2) With Rusk in the race, you’d expect some extra votes taken from Dems, but also maybe some from populist Republicans. (Seriously, though, he won’t be able to get out his message unless Republican IEs fund it.)
(3) Who the hell is Michael McKay?
I like Shawn Nelson in this one.
Reasonable Republicans on a comeback.
Why is there still speculation about whether Huff will file?
He completed in LA County on March 12 (Monday).
*Bob Huff will file….because it is the right thing for him to do!
In other news..here is quite the quote of the day:
“Rep. Mimi Walters, R-Calif., said Tuesday night’s outcome doesn’t worry her. “I’m going to be fine,” she said.
Walters is also a Democratic target since Hillary Clinton won her district by 6 points.”
We like Mimi going down by 6 points to anyone who cares to run against her. Namely Katie Porter.
But Mimi has the Republican philosophy down so perfectly though: “I’m going to be fine!”
Pub: Because this was published before that record was updated.
The gist of your post seems to be that everyone should drop out except for the two millionaires who won’t because they’re rich. While I understand and share your attitude towards the fracturing of the Democratic vote, and it is simply reality that the two who have already spent to get their names out are the frontrunners right now, is it necessarily the case that that will remain the case from now until June?
Both of those two will be hit by the “carpetbagger” label, especially if Nelson ends up in the primary with one of them. Do you really see no other option for the party than accepting the inevitability of self-funded rich guys? That seems extremely depressing.
“Do you really see no other option for the party than accepting the inevitability of self-funded rich guys?”
One can make a case for Janowicz and his activist brigade, but they would be deep underdogs to any of the leading Republicans,. One can (barely) make a case for Tran. Jammal should get out because he shouldn’t want his fingerprints on the neck of this corpse, being the only one left for whom politics is a career. So, with Chen out of the race I DO find it hard to see a good option to letting the decibillionaires duke it out. (Well, giving up on the race is another option, but I dislike it.)
“That seems extremely depressing.”
Only “extremely”? That’s the best you can come up with?
Yep — too depressed to come up with anything better.
I can’t make a case for Tran (not compelling as a candidate despite her inspirational biography) or Janowicz (agree, little chance against the Republicans). I think Jammal would be a decent candidate but don’t see a path for him to get there. So assuming we end up with Cisneros or Thorburn, the attack ads write themselves and the district stays red.
Red … or Schatzle purple. Have you ever seen her speak? Don’t discount her. She’ll have plenty of support from women and good government types — and from Dems if she makes the runoff.
Thornburn built a very successful business, so I’m guessing that there’s going to be some basis for attack ads lying around. What attack ads do you see against Cisneros, though? That he didn’t work for his fortune? (Isn’t that the American Dream? It’s odd to pair that with attacks ads on Thorburn because he DID work for his.
(I prefer Thorburn to Cisneros — but I still think that Cisneros’s low-key style may be a better fit for the district. But as I look at the numbers, unless two of the top five Dems suspend their campaigns — and hopefully three, if not four — then it’s just not going to matter.)
The rich carpetbagger / dilettante label is looming for both. Regardless of the source of their respective fortunes, either/both can be accused of shooting to the top of the pack merely because they bought lots of ads, rather than through any innate support in the district. Even Chen seemed to me to have a potential weakness in being from the northern section rather than where the bulk of the voters live, so those who have moved in recently (or refused to move in) will have an even harder time arguing that they understand the district’s problems as well as any of those on the Republican side.
The lack of governmental experience plays into the same line of attack; although some places may be eager to elect neophytes, I don’t see the anti-establishment card playing that strongly in the 39th.
Thorburn does nothing for me. I can’t see a 60s-era throwback winning over independents. Cisneros does have some of the same attributes as Chen that might play well if we are really going to see the much-rumored blue wave in a traditionally red-leaning district: Navy vet, some time in the business world … and I think his philanthropic activities do show him in a good light. I guess of the two, he’s the one I’d root for. But I think he’ll have a hard fight against Nelson or Huff.
Fair enough. But right now the candidates shouldn’t be looking past June: the one-on-one runoff is a whole new ballgame — and the election may remain largely nationalized.
Or not!