OC Political

A right-of-center blog covering local, statewide, and national politics

AD-74: Mansoor Roars on Fundraising, Rush Loans Campaign $100K, Daigle Only Adds $17K

Posted by Chris Nguyen on March 26, 2012

Allan Mansoor, Leslie Daigle, Robert Rush

Assemblyman Allan Mansoor (R-Costa Mesa), Councilwoman Leslie Daigle (R-Newport Beach), and Businessman Robert Rush (D-Newport Beach)

Long accused of being a poor fundraiser, Republican Assemblyman Allan Mansoor‘s campaign finance reports show the donors are beginning to rally around Mansoor.

During the January 1-March 17 fundraising period, Mansoor raised $61,135 in contributions and dropped another $30,000 into his campaign warchest, growing it by $91,135.  During the same period, Republican Newport Beach City Councilwoman Leslie Daigle raised $17,577 in contributions.

Surprisingly, Democrat Robert Rush loaned his campaign $99,999.  He received three contributions during this time, all of which were at the maximum legal limit of $3,900.  The three were from The Bascom Group in Irvine and two of the principals from that same business.

Mansoor spent $32,477, Daigle spent $29,324, and Rush spent $7,661.

Mansoor now has $115,371 cash on hand, Daigle has $107,956 cash on hand, and Rush has $104,038 cash on hand.  The money race is too close for Daigle; she needs to have a dominating cash lead to even have hope of making it to November.

There’s no way to quantify this, as it’s more art than science, but ultimately, Mansoor does not even need to outspend Daigle.  The “California Assemblyman” ballot designation is worth probably $200,000 in a primary.  Daigle will need to outspend Mansoor roughly 2-to-1 to unseat him, and I just don’t see that happening.  Similarly, Rush does not need to outspend Daigle.  The word “Democrat” after Rush’s name is worth probably $200,000 in the AD-74 primary.  Having the word “Republican” is worth probably $300,000 in AD-74, but that’s split between Mansoor and Daigle.  Therefore, being a Republican California Assemblyman on the ballot is worth $350,000 for Mansoor, being identified on the ballot as a Republican is worth $150,000 for Daigle, and being identified on the ballot as a Democrat is worth $200,000 for Rush.  Furthermore, Mansoor has no problem on his right flank, and Rush has no problem on his left flank, so they can both come after Daigle’s voters in the center.

Daigle will need to spend a fortune to form a coalition of anti-incumbent Republicans, Democrats willing to vote for a Republican, and independents who are both anti-incumbent and anti-Democrat.  There’s a certain bloc of voters who will automatically vote for Mansoor because he has “California Assemblyman” as his ballot designation, and there’s a certain bloc of voters who will automatically vote for Rush because he has “Democrat” as his party affiliation, but Daigle has no natural bloc of automatic voters.  She will have to outspend both Mansoor and Rush to pull together enough votes to reach second place to get to November.

42% of AD-74 voters are registered Republicans, 29% are registered Democrats, 24% are registered as No Party Preference, and 5% are registed as members of third parties.  If Daigle grabs 30% of Republicans from Mansoor and 25% of Democrats from Rush (remember, she does have the word “Republican” after her name on the ballot even if she is to the left of Mansoor), that gives her 20% of the vote, Mansoor 29% of the vote, and Rush 22% of the vote.  That leaves the 29% of the vote from independent and minor party voters.  Say she gets 36% of those people and Mansoor and Rush each get 32%.  That brings Daigle up to 30%, Mansoor to 37%, and Rush 31%.  She would still fail to make it to November.

However, her problem is compounded because independent voters, moderate Republicans, and moderate Democrats are less likely to vote in primaries, so you get the hard core partisans in primaries.  That means loyal Mansoor Republicans and loyal Rush Democrats will be disproportionately high.   This is why to advance to November, Daigle must substantially outspend both Mansoor and Rush, who will only need to spend enough money to reinforce their bases.  I suspect Mansoor captures half the vote, Rush will end up in the high 20s, and Daigle in the low 20s.

Barring a six-figure infusion of cash over the next two months (along with a complete failure of her opponents to fundraise), Daigle is caught between a Rush rock and a Mansoor hard place.

3 Responses to “AD-74: Mansoor Roars on Fundraising, Rush Loans Campaign $100K, Daigle Only Adds $17K”

  1. Danny said

    “The “California Assemblyman” ballot designation is worth probably $200,000 in a primary.”

    Says who?

    There’s a reason elected officials throughout California are fleeing and hiding from their occupation. It is because this is shaping up to be maybe the worst anti-incumbent year in recent history. Quite the opposite of it being worth a couple hundred grand – Allan identifying himself as part of the problem might in fact cost him that seat.

    Amateur move… and why you let adults run your campaign.

    • Outside of a handful of Inland Empire officials, I just don’t see many legislators “fleeing and hiding from their occupation.” Indeed, every single member of Congress and the State Legislature whose district includes portions of Orange County included their elected office in their ballot designations:

      • CD-38: Linda Sanchez, United States Representative
      • CD-39: Ed Royce, U.S. Representative
      • CD-45: John Campbell, Businessman/U.S. Representative
      • CD-46: Loretta Sanchez, United States Representative – 47th District
      • CD-48: Dana Rohrabacher, U.S. Representative
      • CD-49: Darrell Issa, Member, United States House of Representatives
      • SD-29: Bob Huff, Lawmaker/Business Owner
      • SD-37: Mimi Walters, Businesswoman/Senator
      • AD-65: Chris Norby, State Assembly Member
      • AD-68: Don Wagner, Assembly Member
      • AD-73: Diane Harkey, Businesswoman/Assemblywoman

      (I attempted to look up Curt Hagman’s ballot designation in AD-55, but the San Bernardino County Registrar’s web site is so terrible that they haven’t released the ballot designations online yet.)

      There’s no incumbent in AD-69 or AD-72, but every candidate who holds elected office included their office in their ballot designation:

      • AD-69: Tom Daly, Orange County Clerk-Recorder
      • AD-69: Michele Martinez, Councilwoman, City of Santa Ana
      • AD-72: Troy Edgar, Businessman/Mayor
      • AD-72: Long Pham, Member, Orange County Board of Education

      Guess how many incumbent California Congressional representatives and state legislators were defeated for re-election in either the primary or general elections in 2010, the worst anti-incumbent year in recent memory. Zero, zip, zilch, nada. There is no way 2012 will be as anti-incumbent as 2010 was.

      For the sake of argument, even if your contention that “elected officials throughout California are fleeing and hiding from their occupation…because this is shaping up to be maybe the worst anti-incumbent year in recent history” were true, I would note that Mansoor’s opponent, Leslie Daigle, is using “Council Member/Businesswoman” as her ballot designation.

  2. […] AD-74: Mansoor Roars on Fundraising, Rush Loans Campaign $100K, Daigle Only Adds $17K […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: