Posted on 12/07/2005 9:55:06 AM PST by Clintonfatigued
In a race that drew national attention, Sen. John Campbell (R-Irvine) held a wide lead throughout the evening, ending the night with nearly 45% of the vote. But it was Minuteman Project co-founder and first-time candidate Jim Gilchrest of the American Independent Party who drew the spotlight with his one-issue campaign...
Gilchrest lost the election, but he found victory in his showing.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
This is good news, though it would have been better if Gilchrest had outpolled the Democrat. Hopefully, ths will send a message to Bush and Congress.
I was hoping the Jim would out poll the democrat.
Gilchrest was not able to win. One issue won't do it -- but he did get a message out, a very important one that hopefully has awaken the dysfunctional brains of so many California voters into seeing what the illegal immigration issue has done, and continues to do to our state and the rest of the nation.
No thanks to Washington, of course.
I think 25% is actually pretty good for a first-time shot at it.
To fully understand the results, you need to break down the votes according to the mailed-in ballots VS the show up at the poll on election day ballots.
Gilchrist, an amateur, totally dropped the ball here.
Most of the Campbell votes were mailed-in absentee ballots. Campbell, the pro, understood how hard it is to get folks to actually come to the polls for a special election. Every Republican in his district received mail-in ballots, with his spiel and so on. "Just check the box by my name, and drop it in the mailbox!"
Gilchrist probably would not have won even if he had matched Campbell in this crucial area, but he would have been close. Just look at the figures for the votes actually taken at the polling places on election day, VS the absentee ballots.
Tyranny of the purality - Clinton's 42% in 1992 gave us 8 years of garbage.
There's no prize for 2nd place in election-land.
25% is huge for a third party candidate. I can't think of any examples of a third party candidate polling higher. Were the Greens or some other Leftist party to get 25% of the vote in a Congressional race they would be hailed as The Next Big Thing.
There was that governor from Minnisota.
One needs to have worked a territory (sounds like sales!) for more than a few years to build a network of workers from scratch. Otherwise, you've got to have the local workers loyalty. Say by winning a primary election, perhaps downticket. Or coming in close often enough in a territory-wide election to get well known.
Good GOTV is about as hard as it gets.
This thread is spinning so fast I'm starting to get dizzy.
Gilchrist received 25% as one of three candidates. John Fremont received only 33% of the vote in the 1856 election, but this was a harbinger not of Republican rejection, but ascendancy.
--------------------- Votes - percent - Votes - percent - total - total
John Campbell (Rep) 30895 - 53.18% - 10555 30.47% - 41450 - 44.70%
Jim Gilchrist (Am.Ind) 10944 - 18.84% - 12293 35.49% - 23237 - 25.10%
My formatting sucks, but here are the figures. Among election day voters, Gilchrist beat Campbell 35 to 30. Among absentee ballots cast, Campbell won, 53-19.
Campbell, the political pro, blanketed his district with absentee ballots, (along with his campaign material). It worked.
Gilchrist, the amateur, put his money into radio ads.
Campbell put his money into direct mail with easy to complete absentee ballots. It worked. He had better consultants.
Yes, Campbell had better consultants. He addressed all the issues. He had the Republican GOTV team behind him. In other words he knew what he was doing.
It is very, very difficult for a 3rd party to win. That is why some of us KEEP saying that we have to change the Republican Party from within.
On election day, among those who got off their butts and went to a poll, Gilchrist WON.
Next time, the anti invasion candidate will hopefully run a more professional campaign, with better consultants.
And the Pubbies need to remember that when they consider about a third of their base voting pro-minute man.
I was hearing Gilchrist's radio ads on KFMB.
Problem is...KFMB's ratings in Orange County aren't that great--Orange County is really part of the LA market. (Idea for any San Diego radio stations looking to get market share in the OC--how about giving OC traffic?)
Spending money on radio ads that nobody in the district will hear is just stone-cold stupid.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.