Louise Stewardson, a Democrat from Huntington Beach, has decided to jump into the State Senate race for SD-37 as a write-in candidate. With State Rep. Don Wagner amassing a huge war chest and former County Supervisor John Moorlach snatching most of the endorsements, Stewardson’s entry into the race removes the need for Democrats to cast ballots for Naz Namazi, an aide to Congressman Dana Roherbacher, as a protest vote.
Moorlach scored the GOP’s CRA endorsement and was endorsed by the OC Register’s page. Matt Cunningham at Anaheim blog reports Wagner has 10 times the money on hand that Moorlach does. Namazi is a political unknown hoping to snag votes from anyone who can’t stomach Wagner or Moorlach.
Stewardson is a Huntington Beach resident and she’s a member of the Democratic Party of Orange County. Why she didn’t file her papers on time is a bit of a mystery, but social media was active in Democratic circles on Sunday to get the word out about her candidacy. Now comes the hard work on telling voters how to write her name in.
The rules for running as a write-in candidate aren’t that tough. And, as the Alaska US senate race in 2012 shows, a write in candidate CAN win.
If you received a ballot my mail, simply write her name in like the photo below:
If you like going to the polls and voting in person, ask the poll worker for help in writing Louise’s name in for SD-37. I promise, they won’t be too busy to help. Just make sure you spell her name correctly.
The special election is March 17, St. Patrick’s Day. Go vote and then get a Green Beer, but do vote for Louise. Turn out is bound to be awful and with a concentrated effort, Louise has a real chance if registered Democrats turn out and vote.
Louise connected with me on Facebook Sunday; I don’t know a lot about her but know enough about Wagner and Moorlach for me to offer her our support. She doesn’t have a website up yet, but you can learn more at her candidate’s Facebook page here.
Good lady, old friend, real progressive… a founding member of my OC chapter of the single payer group Healthcare For All California. (She was the treasurer.)
And another failure on your part Vern as few wish to follow where you lead. I’ve offer her help with press releases
Dammit, Vern! If you and Louise hadn’t started “Healthcare for All Californians,” we would have had single-payer healthcare by now! (Or whatever it is that Chum is trying to say.)
I’m happy to see Louise in the race, although I’d have been much happier to see her on the ballot. But let’s get serious: for every Lisa Murkowski, there’s a large number of Mark Lopezes.
Louise has already put more effort in the race that you ever did as a candidate; why you’d spend so much just to get your name on the ballot when you’ve documented in court filings that you’re broke is beyond me. To piss money away when your step-daughter could use it for school only proves your priorities are whacked.
I can’t tell whether you have no idea what you are talking about or whether you simply lie with such ease by now that you just don’t care.
What effiet has Louise done as a candidate so far? What is your understanding of what effort I put in as a candidate — other than stepping in three times in three years to oppose people who would have otherwise run unopposed?
Without looking it up, tell me how much you think I raised when I ran against Huff. It doesn’t matter to you, because you’re a professional bullshit artist.
I’ve made lots of financial sacrifices to take on CATER’s cases with minimal compensation (something that, as you noted on “Liberal Anaheim’s” blog may yet change. But, uh, show me the court filing where I’ve said that “I’m broke.”
Or — perhaps you can admit that you just lied there too, in an apparent attempt to distract from your other lie. Whichever you find easier.
http://www.anaheimblog.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Application-to-Continue-Demurrer.pdf
in your own words: “Because of the demands of this case and another case of CATER against the City of Anaheim, described below, CATER’s General Counsel has been paid less than $5,000 by CATER for over 500 hours of work on this case over the past year.”
“His income for the past year aside from clients aside from CATER has thus been limited to under $20,000, requiring removing a substantial proportion of money from his retirement accounts as well as other financial hardships best addressed in a confidential sidebar.”
“he knew (or thought he knew) that this government watchdog business would put a dramatic strain on himself and his family – but to note that his doing such work leaves him close to a financial breaking point where he simply cannot continue it.”
So please refute your own words counselor…..
When you ran against Huff, I think you raised less than $5,000 and you were on record as paying a campaign consultant a 20% commission when the normal rate is 10-15%; you paid it because the consultant lives in your house, which makes you about as ethical as Dana Rohrabacher in that category. And yes you got 44% of the vote in a high Democratic turn out presidential year. You also ran one of the most inept campaigns ever.
I got a ton of contact and outreach done on Louise’s behalf Sunday; far more than I ever saw from you as a candidate. Your constant swipes at Party leadership are simply bad blood from having your leadership post taken away. One fundraiser for DA? Wow, knock em dead Tiger.
Where’d Greg go?
Anybody seen Greg? Anybody?……
I’m amused Greg calls me a liar when I can use his words against him. But then again, isn’t “financial breaking poin” just a prolix way to say “I’m broke?”
No, you babe in the woods — it’s a way of saying that I would have to seriously consider resigning from representing my client in the middle of a case — which I would never want to do absent client misconduct or personal tragedy — due to tactics that had been designed to make my work more time-consuming, exhausting, and expensive.
Yes, I have made some significant financial sacrifices to stand up against the corruption that is soaking Anaheim (and prospectively harming its poorer residents most) on behalf of wealthy (and mostly Republican) private interests. Until I collected some fees due from other cases of mine, I was in significant financial trouble.
Now things are a bit better. And that explains the difference between “close to the financial breaking point” and “broke,” which I don’t think that I’ve ever claimed to be. Would I claim to be “personally bearing a disproportionate share of the financial burden of political initiatives that a functioning local Democratic Party should be promoting”? Oh, yes, absolutely — but, alas, it seems that many leading OC Democrats are in cahoots with the Curt Pringles and Steve Sheldons among us, and that others in Democratic ranks either don’t care or are afraid to speak out for what they purport to believe in, perhaps for fear of consequences such as “Liberal”OC coming after them.
I raised over $13,000 to run against Huff — and he contributed less money (and did so later) to other Republicans than in previous years, which would not have happened had he run unopposed (as he would have without me.) My daughter did an enormous amount of work preparing my donor database from hundreds of loose business cards — work that a professional consultant would have expected to be done, by me, prior to accepting a contract for 15-18%. Having never run for office, you seem to have little idea how these things work.
I got 44.9% of the vote — third highest of any losing State Senate candidate in the state — where without me Huff would have gotten 100%. As I recall, people were predicting that Huff would get 65-70%, not barely 55%. You have no basis to say that “I ran one of the most inept campaigns ever” except for quotes from Arellano and Moxley over at the Weekly, who themselves (and like you) had no idea what I was actually doing and were just willing to fling wild and baseless accusations because Mox was pissed off at my support of Larry Agran.
Once again, the most important thing I did in that race (besides the mere fact of putting up my name at all) was to pay for an (expensive) candidate statement promoting a liberal Democratic platform in front of hundreds of thousands of voters — over 130,000 of whom supported me. You don’t grasp the importance of that because of your lack of knowledge about electoral politics.
I hope Louise does well — more despite you than due to you. But when you say this:
… you should bear in mind that (1) you weren’t looking for “contact and outreach” done by me during those elections, partially because (2) with the exception of the OCDA race, you’ve never been in my district, and (3) the “ton” (I presume that you were pressing your thumb on the scales) of work you did was probably, I’m guessing, contacting already politically active Democrats to let them know — with ballots arriving starting yesterday — to write in Louise’s name.
And even then, to what end? NOTHING that Louise and her supporters do now will even come close to counteracting the failure to put a Democrat on the bleeding ballot. This isn’t the first recent time this happened for a State Senate race, also: if they Republicans had been on the ball they would have put up their own straw candidate against Pat Bates in SD-37 last year just to close off any chance of a Democratic write-in campaign. Gary Kephart (whose limited success as a write-in for last year primary is instructive as to what can be expected for Louise) would have never made the runoff.
I’m glad that people are working for Louise — I’m telling people who I know, mostly outside normal party channels, to do so. However, too much DPOC work tends to be “face time,” done show other party committee members that one is working, prior to huddling together afterwards and blaming others (mostly Mexicans, in your case) for their failures to buy whatever crock of crap we’re selling that year. (Louise is an exception; someone worth electing.)
My primary purpose in running for DA — much like Louise’s in this election — was to give people the chance to vote for someone other than Rackauckas. Again, Mission Accomplished — over 77,000 people did so. (The other purpose was to raise important issues, which I did — although you don’t appreciate that because your views on criminal justice issues seem more in line with those of stereotypical “gated community” Republicans. Again — that worked.) I was doing all that WHILE IN THE MIDST OF fighting the court cases, for scant compensation, that you mention. And I’m supposed to be embarrassed?
As for this:
… I still haven’t written my story of what actually happened the night that I faced a kangaroo court there. Am I reading you correctly, that you seem to want me to do so? Maybe you should run that idea by your friends in party leadership.
so much to reply to:
Yes, I have made some significant financial sacrifices to stand up against the corruption that is soaking Anaheim (and prospectively harming its poorer residents most) on behalf of wealthy (and mostly Republican) private interests. Until I collected some fees due from other cases of mine, I was in significant financial trouble. That’s called being broke.
Now things are a bit better. Good And that explains the difference between “close to the financial breaking point” and “broke,” which I don’t think that I’ve ever claimed to be. Would I claim to be “personally bearing a disproportionate share of the financial burden of political initiatives that a functioning local Democratic Party should be promoting”? Oh, yes, absolutely — but, alas, it seems that many leading OC Democrats are in cahoots with the Curt Pringles and Steve Sheldons among us, and that others in Democratic ranks either don’t care or are afraid to speak out for what they purport to believe in, perhaps for fear of consequences such as “Liberal”OC coming after them.
Our county party is functional; but we have sore losers in it who place themselves over the interests of the party. And while you complain about party members being in cahoots with Curt Pringle, your support of Chris Pham and Tom Tait is perfectly OK. Try not to be such a hypocrite.
I raised over $13,000 to run against Huff (school board candidates in Irvine raise more)— and he contributed less money (and did so later) to other Republicans than in previous years, which would not have happened had he run unopposed (as he would have without me.) My daughter did an enormous amount of work preparing my donor database from hundreds of loose business cards — work that a professional consultant would have expected to be done, by me, prior to accepting a contract for 15-18%. Having never run for office, you seem to have little idea how these things work. Ah, I own a business card scanner that could have done the job in a few hours….really, this was a major accomplishment. A secretary could do this. I’ve also been involved in enough winning campaigns to know how things work.
I got 44.9% of the vote — third highest of any losing State Senate candidate in the state — where without me Huff would have gotten 100%. (and a Democratic president was on the ballot; imagine that) As I recall, people were predicting that Huff would get 65-70%, not barely 55%. You have no basis to say that “I ran one of the most inept campaigns ever” except for quotes from Arellano and Moxley over at the Weekly, who themselves (and like you) had no idea what I was actually doing and were just willing to fling wild and baseless accusations because Mox was pissed off at my support of Larry Agran. Stop throwing your support to Irvine Democrats; you do more harm than good.
Once again, the most important thing I did in that race (besides the mere fact of putting up my name at all) was to pay for an (expensive) candidate statement promoting a liberal Democratic platform in front of hundreds of thousands of voters — over 130,000 of whom supported me. You don’t grasp the importance of that because of your lack of knowledge about electoral politics. It was a presidential election year and Democrats came out and voted D.
I hope Louise does well — more despite you than due to you. But when you say this:
“I got a ton of contact and outreach done on Louise’s behalf Sunday; far more than I ever saw from you as a candidate.”
… you should bear in mind that (1) you weren’t looking for “contact and outreach” done by me during those elections, partially because (2) with the exception of the OCDA race, you’ve never been in my district, and (3) the “ton” (I presume that you were pressing your thumb on the scales) of work you did was probably, I’m guessing, contacting already politically active Democrats to let them know — with ballots arriving starting yesterday — to write in Louise’s name. No, you’re wrong. My email inbox and social media accounts filled up with news of her candidacy and folks were urging me to write about it. All I did was write a post and offer to help her with her press releases.
And even then, to what end? NOTHING that Louise and her supporters do now will even come close to counteracting the failure to put a Democrat on the bleeding ballot. This isn’t the first recent time this happened for a State Senate race, also: if they Republicans had been on the ball they would have put up their own straw candidate against Pat Bates in SD-37 last year just to close off any chance of a Democratic write-in campaign. Gary Kephart (whose limited success as a write-in for last year primary is instructive as to what can be expected for Louise) would have never made the runoff. I’d argue Gary has more class in his little finger than you do in your entire body. Candidate recruitment isn’t easy but I will do everything I can to help Louise do the best she can. I wish I could say the same about your efforts.
I’m glad that people are working for Louise — I’m telling people who I know, mostly outside normal party channels, to do so. However, too much DPOC work tends to be “face time,” done show other party committee members that one is working, prior to huddling together afterwards and blaming others (mostly Mexicans, in your case) for their failures to buy whatever crock of crap we’re selling that year. (Louise is an exception; someone worth electing.) It’s my fault for suggesting Mexican-American voters get out and vote?
My primary purpose in running for DA — much like Louise’s in this election — was to give people the chance to vote for someone other than Rackauckas. Again, Mission Accomplished — over 77,000 people did so. (The other purpose was to raise important issues, which I did — although you don’t appreciate that because your views on criminal justice issues seem more in line with those of stereotypical “gated community” Republicans. Again — that worked.) I was doing all that WHILE IN THE MIDST OF fighting the court cases, for scant compensation, that you mention. And I’m supposed to be embarrassed? You left out the part about the 5,000 word blog posts that seem to cut into your time. I am able to multi-task; can’t you?
As for this:
Your constant swipes at Party leadership are simply bad blood from having your leadership post taken away.
… I still haven’t written my story of what actually happened the night that I faced a kangaroo court there. Am I reading you correctly, that you seem to want me to do so? Maybe you should run that idea by your friends in party leadership.
As few people take you seriously, go right ahead and write your piece. No one will care. Many are happy you’re gone from that post. Others wish you were no longer on the central committee.
Greg is like a comic strip character. It is incredibly hard to take him seriously. No wonder our party is in such disarray.
And, so far as I can tell, no one associated with DPOC named “Wendy St. Clair” exists under that name. So, readers will have to decide whether to credit the opinion of someone who wants to give the appearance of being a real person without bearing any of the responsibility for “her” comments, or not.
You can’t tell…….Did you scour the voter rolls or what dude?
Note to Greg Diamond: Not everyone who votes is a freakin’ Zealot like you. Some of actually raise familes, work and pay our bills.
I am puzzled by your “walk”. Putting your family at risk financially and otherwise to place a ballot statement is both self serving and lacking responsibility. No wonder you never win. Just like my friends say: Greg is ALL ABOUT Greg. From what limited information I have that is true.
I’ve never heard anyone mention your name. You seem to profess knowledge of internal DPOC workings, so that’s unusual.
From the themes, tics, and typography of your additional writing, though, it seems that you are probably just another incarnation of “Robert Darley” — who, if I recall correctly, claimed to be the proud author of the attacks on our host here years back as the “Northwood Night Stalker.”
I too raise my family, work, and pay my bills. (Like the majority of Americans, including ones that actual Democrats try to appeal to, sometimes late.)
Your concern for my family is touching. My wife and daughters are doing well, thank you. While they like nice things as much as the next person, if the next person isn’t crazed, they also have managed to avoid the hollow-eyed hyper-consumerism that is all too common in our county. The love the stable neighborhood where my wife and I have lived for over 7-1/2 years. So whatever you’re concerned about, you can worry about someone else now.
Putting out a ballot statement, aside from being a useful (and cost-effective) political act, has not put my family at risk. Allowing the big banks to run rampant with lax regulation — in which too many OC Democrats, unfortunately, have been complicit — has done much more to do that. Not just my family, either, but yours as well — if, like you’re identity, they aren’t likely fictional.
If your goal/objective is to scare me off with threats and babble you will lose. I live in Irvine, was raised in Irvine, my husband is a twenty year law enforcement officer in OC. We vote Democratic.
What more would you like to know?
Where did ANYBODY say or even suggest I was somehow involved with your dirty dealings in politics. The only thing I know of you is what I read and hear. Most of it is not complimentery. I can have my husband reach out to you on my behalf if you wish. But I suspect you do not. I don’t wish to engage you in your hyperboyle I just believe you to be a loudmouth, self important clown.
Look in the mirror mister, read your words, have your children read them back to you. You come across EXACTLY AS I DECRIBED.
SYNTAX OR NOT.
Yes, Wendy (or “Wendy,” as the case may be): if you are in the habit of claiming baselessly to have faced “threats,” and your immediate response is to threaten to send your 20-year police veteran husband out to “reach out to [me] on [your] behalf,” then I absolutely do want you to have him do so.
You say that you base your opinion of me on what you’ve heard and read. I suggest that what you’ve “heard” has probably been defamatory and what you’ve read has lacked context. I’ll be happy to elaborate when I talk to your husband, your attorney, or whoever else you want to dispatch.
It’s reasonable to assume that Wendy St.Clair has formed an opinion based on Greg’s repeated anti- law enforcement rhetoric. Maybe Wendy’s husband served in the Anaheim PD against which GD promoted the anarchy and rioting following the shooting of gang members “lil Clumsy” and “Yogi Ascevedo”. Maybe her husband was one of those Law Enforcement professionals that had to make the hard chice about protecting society or letting criminal gang members hopped up on Meth shoot him instead. Maybe Greg Diamonds insistance that we “FTP” helped form Wendy’s opinion.
I am certain that her husbands career sacrafice out weigh this slugs. Whose greatest sacrafice appear to be: ” Ok were gonna lose, so if we quit now please don’t sue me for legal fee’s” Gee that’s really “walking the walk”……NOT.
Greg has made his bed. Joel Asceveda over police. “Lil Clumsy” over police. Encouraging riots and promoting “F%#k the police”.
GReg Diamond is no friend to Law Enforcement qnd their families!
Its not just Dem’s that think this guy is a poverty pimp and total asshat.
You may be right about write-in candidates, Dan….. in Alaska. When was the last time a write-in won here in Orange County? She might be an alternative to voting Republican but, given her chances for winning, it’s not likely (I refuse to use the term throwaway vote; no vote is a throwaway) given the district. I’d rather see votes cast for someone who at least has some sense of decency and a shadow of ethics that can do some good.
a case of again using Diamond’s words against him. from DailyKos:
“So this is what I spent money, ***money I didn’t have***, to have people read”
“I did a lot of work for causes that most of us here share — and I did so without the expectation of personal gain, but just to get a message out to people at a time that they would be most likely to read it.
I could not afford to do it by myself, so I think that it’s only fair to ask you to share the cost, only to the modest extent that you can do so personally. If I have to do this sort of thing by myself — letting people know that there are others out there who agree with their positions — then I can’t continue to do it. I hope that you’ll appreciate my efforts and help defray my $2000 campaign debt.
You can contribute through my website — Diamond for Clean Water Policy — here: http://DiamondForCleanWaterPolicy.com. Thanks for whatever you can do!
12:36 PM PT: For those who asked: Checks made out to “Diamond for Water Board” can be mailed to:
J. Barcelona
739 S. Walnut Ave.
Brea, CA 92821″
Oh, look — now Lib OC is attaching me for … fundraising.
I think that my readers on DKos understood that “didn’t have” meant “didn’t have to spare.” The consequences of my putting in a ballot statement was that I was late for a month paying my rent. The benefit of doing so was putting a ballot statement expressing important liberal Democratic principles in front of the noses of a very large numbers who would be inclined to read it.
That’s “walking the walk”; something that LibOC apparently doesn’t understand. I find what I wrote — and what I did in furtherance of my political convictions — to be entirely unembarrassing. Democrats in Orange County really should decide whether they will deem using one’s limited means for the public good to be embarrassing or not. If it isn’t, this very comment gives them a great opportunity to stand up for principle — although, of course, it then means risking being attacked by the “Liberal”OC.
Greg —
I can’t say this enough Greg. You ignore your family’s needs in exchange for your personal ego. The statement didn’t help you at the polls. If you are not a good steward of your own finances, how can you ever expect to be trusted with taxpayer dollars?
Perhaps you should have spent time fundraising before losing your second consecutive election of 2014 — third if you count your removal as a vice chair of the party.
And this wasn’t a personal attack; you asked for proof about your financial situation. All I did was offer it. Using your own words.
A friendly word of advice, Chum: you, of all people, should never, ever, lecture anyoneelse about “ego.”
You are confused about the term “family’s needs.” You mix it up with luxuries (which, by non-OC standards, my family does enjoy.)
You also apparently can’t get through your head what political activism really IS — and what it demands. Getting a 300-word statement into voters’ hands at $0.10 per impression at a time when they are most likely to read it is good an effective activism.
As for the “personal ego” thing — are you accusing Louise Stewardson of being egotistical in running for office right now? I’m not — I think that it’s great, albeit flawed due to OTHER PEOPLE’S errors. If you agree that she’s not being egotistical, where do you get off accusing me of having done it more often — and more effectively, given that I’ve never had to do a write-in?
I said: “But, uh, show me the court filing where I’ve said that ‘I’m broke.’” And you tried and failed, because “being forced to make unreasonable personal financial sacrifices due to my adversaries’ tactics to the point where I might be required to give up a case that I believe to be extremely important” is not the same as “I’m broke.” (And, in any event, things have improved.)
I hope that you approve all of the comments being held in moderation soon. Maybe it just takes a lot of time for you to compose a reply before you do so?
I think paying rent on time isn’t a luxury; I didn’t try and fail…I repeated your words of your financial strife. Unless of course you were lying to the judge when you filed your document.
Again, the .10 cent an impression is one thing; what is the over/under on likely readers of your document? Do you believe the majority read it? You lost by more than a 2-to-1 margin. Your message didn’t reasonate with voters. It’s not effective activism, but keep telling yourself that.
Nice try to place words in my mouth about Louise. I gather she is sincere about her write in candidacy, which is why I used part of my post to tell voters how to cast a ballot in her name. All you did with yours was tear her down.
Sorry I didn’t approve every comment right away; I was OOTO this afternoon.
Far from tearing her down, I do support Louise — it’s IN THE HEADLINE OF THE POST — on the presumption that she does complete her write-in paperwork (if she hasn’t), without which her votes would not be counted. That matters.
Because Democrats DO have an interest in this race going to a runoff, keeping the leading candidate under 50% is critical and if her votes WOULD NOT count then it would make sense to vote for Namazi instead — out of pure self-interest. The good feeling one gets from voting for a Democrat means little if your votes don’t count — and, as a result, the primary to replace Wagner (if he wins) would not be delayed and Dems would have a much worse chance to compete in AD-68.
I guess that maybe you skipped over that part of my post.
As I understand it, Louise is NOT the one to blame for our not having a Dem on the ballot. She’s being an incredibly good sport by doing this at all, especially given the difficulties of getting out write-in votes and the late start she’s getting. If she gets a very low number of votes as a write-in candidate, people will associate it with her, when it won’t actually be her fault.
It would conceivably have been possible to raise money for Louise to get a candidate statement had their been proper planning. If you don’t think that such a statement would be more valuable than that same amount of money spent on mailers or whatever, you simply do not understand enough about campaigning to argue with.
I’ll address your non-Louise-related idiocy when I get back from my Dem Club meeting. I’m fascinated with your understanding of what does and doesn’t entail “activism.” It’s a great example of what’s wrong with the current DPOC.
you continue to miss the point on your ballot statement issue; just because you posted your message and paid for it doesn’t make it effective. It’s one thing to create a message; quite another to have it reasonate with your audience. And by the thumping you took from someone who spent almost no money, your message didn’t reasonate with voters. There is no practical change as a result of your activism, much like there was no demonstrate change because of the local activism of OccupyOC. Activism without action. But keep spitting into the wind and tell everyone it’s raining.
And disagreeing with it means being attacked by you. You’re a very good bully; no one takes you seriously. And I see from the comments on Daily Kos that your cup runneth over with donations…. 😉
“You’re a very good bully; no one takes you seriously. ” What are you even trying to SAY there, beyond code red-level projection?
You seem not to care at all whether your allegations are true. Most of the people disagreeing with me are anonymous (which you used to hate but now you like; how can I attack them? I generally don’t attack people simply for disagreeing with me: they have to be dishonest or assholes.
Go ahead, make a list of the people you think that I’ve attacked. The only one you really care about, in my opinion, is yourself — but you’ve earned it.
You want a list? Pull out a DPOC directory and start there Dr. Oblivious… You complain about anonymous commenters here yet everyone has left a comment with a name. Get a grip or are you still distraught over the CATERing in court today?
And, again, you respond to a specific request for proof with a general unsupported allegation. No, I have not attacked most members of the DPOC in print. I’ve attacked certain members who have acted wrongfully — and even then, in most cases, without much force.
Yes, here everyone has left a comment with a name (although I’m not sure about one commenter, and another one you’re cooing with is a hard-care Wagner-supporting Republican.) That makes this particular post unusual. Let me know if you want to bother denying that.
No, you attack the organization with a broad brush. Every commenter here has left a name; sorry you’re not sure and there’s nothing I can do to fix that for you. And Mr. Gallagher is a libertarian not a Republican, but again, that’s never stopped you from talking about stuff you know nothing about.
Wait, all of this just because I offer some positive information about Louise?
What a grotesque sociopath this Chmielewski is.
Vern, I corrected stated most people won’t follow you towards any endeavor regardless of how noble it is…aren’t all the brush offs you get from leading Democrats in this county a clue?
Vern, apparently he is attacking Louise for having had the bad taste to work with you on the health care issue, or something like that. It’s not especially coherent.
Re-read the post you wrote on Wendy. You attacked her. To promote a Republican…again.
“Wendy”?
Explain what you’re talking about, with specifics, because it’s the specifics where you are usually provably wrong.
Who’s this Wendy?
I think that he may have meant “Louise.” But I just re-read the story I posted on Louise, and I don’t see any attacks on her, only compliments.
What Chum may take for attacks are the points where I tell the truth that Louise is likely not to do well because running a write-in candidacy is difficult even when you HAVE a well-functioning political operation behind you — which Louise won’t. I hope that she gets many votes and sends this into a runoff, but it’s as likely that she will fall far short of that, through no fault of her own. (If I get people to work harder to elect her by provoking them here: good!)
But let’s be real: what Louise’s candidacy actually accomplishes is to allow the relatively few people involved in DPOC’s echo chamber to convince each other that they are doing everything they can to help elect a Democrat — when, in fact, they haven’t even bothered to figure out what Democratic interests actually ARE here. (That is: this is — or should be — all about AD-68 and the timing of an election should Wagner win the State Senate seat.)
What the party regulars want to avoid acknowledging is that they already LOST the game when DPOC screwed up and didn’t get a candidate onto the ballot — something that would have almost ASSURED a runoff. THAT would require criticism of Henry Vandermier, which is forbidden.
It might also lead people to wonder why Nick Anas wasn’t on top of things — but of course Nick resigned (or was let go for lack of funds, it’s unclear), which allowed Henry to claim that he’d raised enough money to cover DPOC’s expenses for the year — without letting people know prior to his re-election that those expenses would not include DPOC’s continuing to have an Executive Director.
Nick and I have had our differences over his fealty to Henry — but he was quite good at his job. He’s smart, hardworking, and I don’t think that he’d have been caught napping here. But Chairman Henry is now his own Executive Director, and he has faced his first challenge, and now (with Louise’s kind help) is desperately trying to convert an “F” grade into a “D.”
So, that’s who I think “Wendy” is.
“It might also lead people to wonder why Nick Anas wasn’t on top of things — but of course Nick resigned (or was let go for lack of funds, it’s unclear), which allowed Henry to claim that he’d raised enough money to cover DPOC’s expenses for the year — without letting people know prior to his re-election that those expenses would not include DPOC’s continuing to have an Executive Director.”
Nick landed a wonderful job in the private sector which was all perfectly clear with those who know him well. But thanks for trying to spread misinformation and for proving you’re out to hurt the party more than help it if it won’t bend to your will. You’re a cancer. Please move to Ferguson MO; it will cost you less money to live there and I’m sure your “work” on behalf of the local Democratic Party will be appreciated.
You’re going to take credit for people working harder for Louise because you’re commenting and blogging about it. You compliment Wendy but say she has no chance and still urge support for a Republican candidate.
It seems to me Greg you won’t be happy unless you are named DPOC Chair and that’s never going to happen. Funding would dry up, you’d sit in meetings by yourself, and the county would be as Red as a STOP sign. You haven’t been the least bit helpful to Henry since he was elected.
This Louise-Wendy shit is getting weird. I hope you can remember what her name is if you’re writing press releases for her.
I addressed it early; I made a mistake. want me to point out every typo or should I only address serious untruths that Greg suggested Nick Anas had been let go by the party when he resigned to take a great private sector job that pays actual money…something you and Greg should aspire to.
Language Vern. Swear again, I’ll purge your comment
I still don’t understand who “Wendy” is.
No, Louise doesn’t stand a chance. But that’s OK; neither did Anne Cameron in AD-68, and neither did Gregg Fritchle in AD-55 or Joel Block in AD-72, but I’m glad that they ran. The only thing I’m unhappy about with Louise’s race is that she’s not on the ballot. If she were, it would virtually guarantee a runoff, which is the most important attainable thing for Democrats here.
But she’s not — and low-budget write-in candidates virtually never do well, especially in ruby-red districts like SD-37, which means that while her presence in the race is good for bringing out high-information Democrats it muddles the strategy for low-information voters, who could otherwise just be instructed to vote for Namazi as a spoiler.
Dan doesn’t get it. If either Moorlach or (far worse) Wagner get 50%+1, it will be first because the DPOC screwed up its recruiting, but second because it chose an ineffective strategy for blocking an outright win on March 17.
That seems not to matter to a lot of party insiders, who will probably figure it out when (if there’s no runoff and Wagner wins) a replacement for Wagner is elected in the middle of July or something, when no students are around and the vast majority of the ballots are Republican absentees. Then — as belatedly as Louise’s campaign announcement — they will realize that we REALLY wanted the AD-68 race to be in September. It’s all too subtle for Dan’s brain, I guess — despite that it’s not particularly subtle at all.
How many things did you get wrong in the last election? Calling the Costa Mesa race early? Pham’s performance in the supes election was overly optimistic on your part. Try getting some sleep instead of posting comments at 2AM.
I never wanted to run for DPOC Chair, Dan. I ran because Mike Kinslow died and I had promised him that I wouldn’t let Henry run unopposed.
I’ll be kind and not address the state of the party or the hue of the county.
so how many elections have you run for the purpose of making sure someone wasn’t unopposed? You’re an expert at losing. Calling you a loser is entirely accurate.
Mr. Diamond’s claim ” The consequences of my putting in a ballot statement was that I was late for a month paying my rent” is very instructive to his uber liberal thought process.
Once more Greg is “passing the buck”. For it was really his landlord who paid for the ballot statement, as it is assumed the apartment owner still needed to pay the bank, even though his tenant CHOSE to shirk his responsibility. In a sense you could say it cost the Diamonds nothing at all, at least for a time.
This goes hand in hand with his quest for things like a “gate tax” or his friend Dr. Joe Moreno’s assertion that the overburdened Anahiem schools should somehow be offering “social services” to the students there. I would like Diamond to STOP gassing about and perhaps pay for admission for “the walk” he pretends to take.
The DPOC should send his landlord a thank you note for paying for those “important democratic ideals” Greg whipped up.
To truly understand Greg Diamond and his motives would require one to look back at his return to OC. How that took place and WHO owns his apartment building at what kind of arrangements were made for Diamond. Which public elected or appoint official provides his house??? Is Greg something of a Manchurian canidate in waiting or is he simply trying to destroy the Democratic party in OC? There is so much speculation on everything Greg see’s, maybe that’s deflection.
I DID pay my rent. It was late. Businesses take advantage of “constructive breach” of their contracts all of the time, and it is usually worked out amicably, as has been the case here. My lease provides for a penalty for late payment of rent; so long as I’m willing to pay it and my landlord is willing to accept it, that’s fine — unless you hate capitalism, I guess. My landlord would surely prefer that it always be on time, but apparently he thinks that a good, quiet, responsible, and stable tenant is worth making some accommodations.
If you think that my landlord “paid for my ballot statement,” you can file an FPPC complaint. It such a stupid argument that it will not last long.
I’m glad that you brought up Disney. I’m perfectly happy to have my record in getting freebies, paying penalties, etc. be compared to that of Disney — or the Angels, for that matter — any time. You’re damn right that I want a gate tax in Anaheim — where the entry price has gone from $41 to $99 in 15 years! — because Anaheim is being cut out of the benefits of Disney’s presence, while still facing the burdens (such as financing the “Mickey and Friends” parking structure. Want to talk about this some more?
Please do talk about Tom Tait’s approval of the deal the city cut with Disney over the Mickey & Friends Parking structure.
Paying your personal bills is something anyone who runs for office should ALWAYS do. You can’t be trusted with taxpayer dollars if you’re not a good steward of your own checkbook.
Spoken like a consummate Republican, Dan.
I know plenty of people who don’t try to maximize their gains, and struggle to make ends meet, because they put their energies into building a better world. I would far sooner trust the public purse to these non-greedheads than to the wealthy people in both parties (but mostly the GOP) that dominate OC politics.
Your outreach to these good and honest people of modest means — who are overwhelmingly Democrats or otherwise lean left — is (apparently by design) atrocious. You wonder why so many people who ought to be voting Democratic stay home in OC? It’s largely because they find selfish, nasty, and disdainful people like you — who measure others by their wealth — to be disgusting and a betrayal of the liberal Democratic tradition. Then again, that tradition isn’t yours.
well, you spend so much time around Republicans like Tait and Pham these days; I’m not measuring you by wealth at all. I measure you by your priorities which your family seems to take a back seat to your activism. And decent, middle-class, left leaning people are generally horrified to discover you’ll spend thousands to run for office without campaign at the expense of basic support for your family. I’m always amused by the actions you want to take to fight corruption while being obvious that if often takes money, and the will of the people, to do it. If you still want the DPOC to spend $5000 on Ferguson, MO, well you’re good at spending other people’s money. I’d rather the DPOC spend it here.
and I know plenty of people who live within their means and pay their bills. But please tell me who appointed you the judge and jury and king protector of Democratic values? Because you place your own needs ahead of your family’s, I think you’re simply projecting selfish, nasty and distainful behavior you exhibit daily.