Two Wealthy Top-Two Supporters Invest Heavily in Two California One-Party Races, but to No Avail

Charles T. Munger, Jr., through his PAC, spent more heavily in California’s November 2014 State Senate election than in any other general election contest this year. During the year he spent $663,000 to elect former Assemblymember Bonnie Garcia, a Republican, to the open State Senate seat, district 28, in Riverside County. She was running against another Republican, County Supervisor Jeff Stone.

Stone defeated Garcia, even though Stone was badly outspent and even though former Republican Governor Pete Wilson endorsed Garcia. Stone is clearly more conservative than Garcia, and during a debate, Stone said he admires Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s methods for dealing with inmates.

A PAC controlled mostly by John Arnold, a Texas billionaire, spent $800,000 to defeat California Congressman Mike Honda, a Democrat who was running against another Democrat, Ro Khanna. This Santa Clara County district, the 17th, nevertheless re-elected Honda, who is considered more liberal than Khanna.


Comments

Two Wealthy Top-Two Supporters Invest Heavily in Two California One-Party Races, but to No Avail — 4 Comments

  1. I also ran for Congress in District 17 in a special election in 1993 when Monterey fell within the districts boundaries so I am familiar with Congressional races.

    My only observation is that we who are interested in unity need to focus on the positives and not on the milk that was spilled (i.e. money spent on a losing campaign).

    With Ro Khanna being connected to the Unity Coalition we have potential to look forward into the future for pure American proportional representation (PR). It’s that simple.

  2. Don’t you think we in the USA need to set an example for the world?

    In places like Mexico, Libya, Israel, Hong Kong and other emerging democracies, there’s a need for advanced, competitive election systems.

    But we’re not going anywhere in the USA because of the arrogance and vile behavior of the team splitters who love to work against unity, against cooperation, and NOT for progress in election law.

    Some are so bent on conflict that they have no energy or imagination for constructive ideas for the whole. They’re main interest is in fighting, going backwards and for rocking the boat for the detriment of the whole.

    Maybe some people are spending money on losing elections. At least they’re not spreading vile conflict or hatred for any small incremental advances.

    In fact, it’s actually they who paid for Top Two, and so they should be commended for helping us go forward to a new level.

    These articles are a perfect illustration of what’s wrong with the anti-Top Two noise-makers.

  3. James Ogle:

    What do you find about elections in Israel which offend you? I can understand why reforms are needed badly in the other states you mention.

    Also, what is your definition of “team splitters?”

    What do you mean by “…helping us go forward to a new level?” What is this “level” you hope to obtain?

    And please use plain language that everyday people know what you are saying. Don’t speak in “code.”

  4. Well gosh, that decides it, then. The best strategy for moving forward any political agendum or campaign is clearly to spend no money at all.

    What gives with these idiotic rich people, anyway?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.