I knew the county Dems were in bad shape, just didn't realize it was THIS bad.

Not much chatter here today...everybody must be hung over from the parties last night, especially Nathan's margaritas!

how much did we spend on slates in that race?

Who is "we"? In what race, Dem Central Ccmmittee? The implicaton of the question is mind-numbingly ridiculous.

Ok Huh. Who raised 10k from the lodging association to put central committee candidates on multiple slates, of which 32 of the 40 candidates won? Somebody wanted specific people on the Central Committee.

The only name associated with the committee is April Boling, who is the treasurer for about 50 PAC's so that doesn't mean a thing. Somebody has tight control of the committee now, we just want to know who it is. I would assume that since Kvaric, Nehring and Buettner were on the slates, they would know something.

I hope nobody pulls the "we don't know who did that". That would be mind-numbingly ridiculous.

Oh my gosh! Shocker! Somebody wanted specific people on the city council, and someone started a PAC to raise money for them. Somebody wanted a specific person in Congress and donated to them. Somebody wanted a particular city attorney candidate to win and got others to donate to a specially-formed committee to conduct an IE for the candidate.

Lo and behold, that happens in politics. Welcome to the real world. Why would it be any different for Central Committee? It's called freedom of expression. From a LEGAL standpoint, a slate committee shows the treasurer and the financial contributors in the filings. From a LEGAL standpoint, those that donated to the effort are therefore the "Somebodies that wanted specific people on the Central Committee."

Are they hiding that fact? No, it's in the disclosures, they donated, so they must have wanted specific people on the Committee. A real conspiracy, that.

Does it matter who asked them to donate? It's up to them if they want to answer the question. The important thing is that they could have said no and NOT donated to the effort.

Wow, knowing that POLITICS was going on in a POLITICAL election for POLITICAL seats is just sickening to me. Who'd have thunk it? I think I'll crawl off into a corner and die.

In the meantime, if anyone in a leadership position in the GOP had the foresight to raise some dollars and select for slates those they thought were best qualified, darn good for them, they know POLITICS.

Complainers could have done the same thing, by the way.

As right as you are Vito, the fact that those slates existed in the first place means that someone has a specific interest in the CenCom. As a result, the Committee and the whole Republican movement in San Diego County are at a valuable loss for some of the people that didn't make it onto the slates. That someone has such an interest in the CenCom that they would be willing to spend this kind of money (18k donated in total), and that they were willing to sacrifice some valuable people in the process, should be cause for at least some concern for any Republican who is interested in the health of their party organization.

gee, I wonder why someone would want to stack the deck?

http://sdcitybeat.com/cms/story/detail/developer_vs_developer/6991/

It really is a shame about Jess, but I am more than certain that the Dems of San Diego will get by.

BTW, I can't wait to watch the battle play out between Mike Lumpkin and Duncan Jr. I have my money on Mike!

People who can't manage to get themselves elected to the local central committee probbably have their own questions to answer as to why they should be an authority on...elections.

The precent canvass returns in city council district 3 overlap will be telling.

I agree with you Vito, the slates are legal and its part of the political process.

But is this takeover for ideology or for financial gain? The people on the slate don't seem to have any pattern of ideology, so i assume it is for financial gain. Which worries me. Are these people going to do whats right for the party, or whats right for specific groups who will benefit from millions of dollars in member communication money? Republicans fight for transparent government. We're just asking for a little transparency in our own party.

I would be much more inclined to trust the intentions of this organization if the leaders and or members were more open about who they are and what are their intentions.

As one of the newbies elected on Tuesday, it is my impression that the Central Committee election was a good old-fashioned political power play between Tony K. and the people who have been outspoken against him (with maybe some Ron Paul-types thrown in for good measure). I'm not sure what the person who posted the developer story from the City Beat was implying but that piece didn't mention anything about partisan politics. If there's further clarification he/she would like to offer, I'd love to hear it.

central committee votes on propositions like the ones on the ballot this time (a,b,c), votes in support of people like when doug sain came a spoke on the south bay need support against using folks not unionized etc., votes on endorsing candidates that support a variety of issues.
there are a great deal of issues that the city is about to face and some may end up as ballot measures. if a person wanted to change a communities plan, they very well could place it before the voters, then the rep party decides to endorse it thus helping the measure pass.
having a stacked deck via central committee can help indeed.
by the way, congratulations to the Sudberries for their award this year at the Lincoln-Reagan dinner.

What do you know. Sundberrie was one of the contributors to the PAC that paid for the slate mailers. hmmm...

Durfee is a bonehead. He tells the VoiceofSD that he's not worried because he can get appointed as an alternate member then get re-elected as Chair. If he can't get elected by himself, he doesn;t deserve to be Chair. Take the hint buddy...pack your bags!!