OC Political

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

Posts Tagged ‘Charles Munger Jr.’

Charles Munger and California Dental IE PAC meddles in AD-55

Posted by Allen Wilson on May 22, 2014

Yesterday, my colleague Craig Alexander reported that Charles Munger was meddling in the AD-73 contest in support for Anna Bryson.

It is now reported that the California Dental Association (CDA) IE PAC decides to get involved in the AD-55 contest in support for Ling-Ling Chang with a $129,000 drop.

The CDA IE PAC spent $100,000 on TV/Cable Buy and $29,000 on polling.

The Spirit of Democracy PAC controlled by Charles Munger gave CDA IE PAC $29,000 to pay for the polling, which was more of an “in-kind” donation.

The polling was mysteriously conducted few weeks ago to households in the AD-55 contest including yours truly relatives living in Orange County.  The poll initially asked for the registered to vote female in the household, then asked for the registered to vote male, if the female wasn’t home.  The poll asked basic questions who the voter would vote for Governor, U.S. Representative, which they finally asked questions about Phillip Chen and Ling Ling Chang.

The interesting aspect of the poll was they provided bio statement for each candidate and asked the likeliness of voting for either candidate.  When the pollster mentioned Ling Ling Chang, the first thing they stated was that “She was BORN and RAISED in Southern California”.  The respondent to the poll stated that they were unlikely to vote for Ling Ling Chang, because they bluntly stated that the “raised and born” part was a lie based on an article from the Orange County Register by Martin Wiskol.  The second part mentioned Ling Ling Chang being in charge of an educational organization for 8 years.  The respondent again bluntly told the pollster that if someone wants to be part of education, then they need to be in the classroom.

Nevertheless, the CDA IE PAC is also meddling in AD-9 and AD-64 contests supporting Democrats Elk Grove Councilman Jim Cooper and Carson Councilman Mike Gipson, respectively.

This contributor was warned that Charles Munger would find a way to meddle in the AD-55 contest and surely he has one way or the other.

Though, for a IE PAC to coordinate efforts with Munger is very chilling as it should serve as a warning to voters in the 55th AD that Ling Ling Chang isn’t the true Conservative that she is portraying herself as, because a particular IE PAC has already backed Democrat candidates for Assembly.

image

 

Posted in 55th Assembly District, Campaign Finance, State Assembly | Tagged: , , , , | 5 Comments »

AD-74 Watch: Karina Onofre Announces That She Is Running

Posted by Former Blogger Chris Emami on November 26, 2013

74Yesterday, former Santa Ana City Council candidate Karina Onofre announced that she is running for the 74th Assembly District which is currently held by Allan Mansoor. Mansoor announced last week that he will not be seeking a third term, instead opting to battle Michelle Steel for the 2nd Supervisorial District, held by the termed out John Moorlach. This announcement by Onofre caught me completely off guard as I had not even heard any rumors about this.  When I told Chris Nguyen about this, his reaction was, “WHAT?!?!?!”  (On a related note, does anyone know how to replace a burst iPhone speaker?)

Running a race in AD-74 also presents totally different demographics and challenges than running a race for Santa Ana City Council. AD-74 consists of Costa Mesa, Huntington Beach, Irvine, Laguna Beach, Laguna Woods, and Newport Beach.  In Santa Ana, Republicans are at a distinct disadvantage in voter registration, thus making it less likely to draw a crowd of Republicans who will fight for a seat. Two Republicans who have been able to overpower the Democratic stranglehold on elected offices are Orange County Board of Education Trustee Robert Hammond and Santa Ana Unified School District Trustee Cecilia Iglesias. (In the interest of full disclosure, Custom Campaigns served as the sole campaign consultants to both of these candidates.  Custom Campaigns is also the firm that owns OC Political.)

In AD-74, Republicans have a 12.6% registration advantage, which will lead to a rather bloody primary fight if last election is any indicator. In the 2012 Primary Election, Leslie Daigle (and the PACs supporting her) spent gobs of cash to fight incumbent Allan Mansoor by bloodying him up with lots of negative mail and negative television ads. Mansoor not only made it to the run-off in November, but he easily came in first place, and Daigle finished a distant third place:

MEMBER OF THE STATE ASSEMBLY 74th District                                   
Completed Precincts: 392 of 392
                 Vote Count                 Percentage                
ALLAN R. MANSOOR 33,319 43.5%
ROBERT RUSH 25,120 32.8%
LESLIE DAIGLE 18,207 23.8%

These results would not be surprising if it weren’t for the fact that Charles Munger Jr. spent almost $500,000 on Daigle’s behalf to try to get her to the November run-off. Even Bob Rush, who was a Dem sacrificial lamb in this race, spent almost $100,000. These numbers are stunning in that this much was spent trying to beat an incumbent and not for an open seat. Generally, candidates will spend more money trying to win an open seat as opposed to trying to unseat an incumbent (since incumbency is so tough to overcome).

While we are still looking at 2012, Onofre had a rough time against Roman Reyna last election in the Santa Ana City Council Ward 5 race:

CITY OF SANTA ANA Member, City Council, Ward 5                                   
Completed Precincts: 108 of 108
                 Vote Count                 Percentage                
ROMAN A. REYNA 32,419 61.8%
KARINA ONOFRE 20,065 38.2%

I’m going to be very honest: Onofre only raised $3,250 in her race for Santa Ana City Council, and this was for an open seat! AD-74 already has a field of strong candidates with the ability to raise money. Onofre has no name identification in AD-74, has no fundraising base, and will face allegations of being a carpetbagger.

Huntington Beach Councilman Matt Harper, AD-72 staffer Emanuel Patrascu, and former CRP Treasurer Keith Carlson have already expressed an interest in this race. Harper is the early front-runner in this race since Huntington Beach is the second-most populated city in AD-74 (Irvine is the most populated, but no current candidate is based out of Irvine). Patrascu is not very well-known in AD-74 and hails from Laguna Beach (only about 6% of the population in AD-74), but he does work for Travis Allen and might get some decent help from his boss, who would want to get an ally elected to the Assembly. Carlson will likely have a ton of establishment support and will be able to raise quite a bit of money through his connections as former CRP Treasurer.

I’m going to go out on a limb and say that the real wildcard here is Orange County Supervisor John Moorlach. He is set to announce his candidacy for the 45th Congressional District at some point very soon. If for whatever reason, Moorlach decides that CD-45 is not the right fit (I actually think that he can win), he could easily destroy anyone in the field in AD-74 (assuming he doesn’t just clear the field outright) and walk into the Assembly.

Posted in 74th Assembly District | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 10 Comments »

Mansoor Jumps Into 2nd Supervisorial Race

Posted by Former Blogger Chris Emami on November 20, 2013

allanmansoorAssemblyman Allan Mansoor confirmed longstanding rumors last night by officially jumping into the 2nd Supervisorial District race to succeed the termed out John Moorlach.

First of all, I would argue that Mansoor is actually the front-runner in this race, having been on the ballot before when running for Assembly, as well as during his unusually high-profile tenure as Mayor of Costa Mesa. Michelle Steel, his chief opponent, may have more money but just recently moved into the district and will likely face numerous carpetbagger accusations.  Mansoor takes Steel head-on in his announcement email: “My decision-making process started a few months ago, when I was approached by many residents and local leaders who suggested I run to replace John [Moorlach]. One of their biggest concerns was that the only major candidate for this office recently moved to Orange County from LA for the sole purpose of running for Orange County Supervisor in hopes of furthering her ambition of running for Congress if/when Congressman Dana Rorhabacher retires.

Mansoor has also proven that he can defeat candidates with gobs of cash, after having defeated a challenge by Newport Beach Councilwoman Leslie Daigle in 2012 despite her campaign’s vast financial resources from many wealthy contributors, including Charles Munger Jr.

Steel will also likely face accusations of supporting Larry Agran ally and Democrat Sukhee Kang in a past election.

This is the first of what I expect to be a couple of big announcements in the coming weeks with John Moorlach set to officially announce his candidacy for Congress in the very near future. Mansoor sent out an e-mail announcing the following:

Friends:

As you probably know, I’ve been thinking about running for Orange County Supervisor for several months. I want you to be among the first to know that I’ve decided to run.

John Moorlach has been a great voice for the 2nd District. As a longtime Costa Mesa resident and the County Treasurer who helped Orange County recover from the bankruptcy, he has very strong ties to our community, and his thoughtful and reasoned approach has been an asset in the county. I’m sorry to see term limits force him from office.

My decision-making process started a few months ago, when I was approached by many residents and local leaders who suggested I run to replace John. One of their biggest concerns was that the only major candidate for this office recently moved to Orange County from LA for the sole purpose of running for Orange County Supervisor in hopes of furthering her ambition of running for Congress if/when Congressman Dana Rorhabacher retires.

I’ve always been the first to admit that fundraising isn’t my greatest strength, and even though I’ve always raised enough to be be competitive, I’ve been outspent in every election I’ve run. This campaign won’t be any different, especially against a candidate whose greatest strength is her ability to raise money from interests outside the district.

So this wasn’t an easy decision. It required careful deliberation and long talks with family, friends, and supporters.

Ironically, this campaign reminds me of my first campaign for city council. In 2002, I ran against entrenched establishment incumbents because a group of people from my neighborhood felt like city hall didn’t care about what was happening in our community. While everyone wanted to improve city hall, no one wanted to run. I, somewhat reluctantly, stepped up because someone had to. Ever since, I’ve been happy and grateful for the opportunity to make a difference in the community I grew up in.

Now, more than 10 years later, the community I love has chosen me to represent them not only for two terms on the City Council, but also for two terms in the State Assembly. The easiest path would be to cruise to reelection to a third term in the Assembly, but no one else is ready or willing to stand up and fight to make sure that our community has local representation on the Board of Supervisors.

It will be a lot of work. But I’m ready for it, and I hope to have your help and support. You can start by making a financial contribution by clicking here. Whatever you can contribute, whether it’s $10, $100, or $1000 will help. If you’d like to volunteer, or contact your neighbors, or host a coffee, let me know by replying to this email.

With gratitude,

Allan

P.S. If you would rather mail a check instead of making an online donation by clicking here, you can send a check to Mansoor for Supervisor 2014, 2973 Harbor Blvd #571, Costa Mesa, CA 92626.

Posted in 2nd Supervisorial District | Tagged: , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

The Munger Games: Bob Huff and Connie Conway – No Criticism of Munger For You!

Posted by OC Insider on February 28, 2013

This weekend, delegates to the California Republican Party Convention will travel to Sacramento will vote on a new Chairman, Vice Chairman and several other important CRP board positions. Since the current Chairman, Tom Del Beccaro, has announced he will not be running for re-election, former legislator Jim Brulte has stepped up to take the Chairman position in what can easily be described as the CRP’s lowest point in a generation. Senator Brulte has only drawn the token opposition of a very late entrant into that race and it appears Mr. Brulte has all but locked up the position. We wish him well in what will be a difficult job.

The real drama is surrounding the continued and expanding influence of Silicon Valley billionaire and Santa Clara County Republican Central Committee Chairman Charles Munger, Jr. As readers of this blog post know, Mr. Munger spent millions of dollars in last year’s election. Some of it was to support Proposition 32 and oppose Proposition 30. Unfortunately Prop. 32 failed and Prop. 30 passed.

Also unfortunately, Mr. Munger attempted to oust Assemblyman Allan Mansoor by spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in support of Allan’s June 2012 Republican opponent Leslie Daigle of Newport Beach. Thankfully that effort failed but Mr. Munger continued forward by spending more hundreds of thousands of dollars in the fall campaign in Republican v. Republican races. It is too bad he could not have spent even a little of that money to help Republicans in Republican v. Democrat races so that the State Senate and Assembly might not be in the complete control of Democrats for the next legislative session. The Chris Norby Assembly race comes to mind.

Recently, State Senate Republican leader Bob Huff and Assembly Republican leader Connie Conway sent out a letter / e-mail to CRP Delegates defending Charles Munger and criticizing those who criticize Mr. Munger. It is noted that during the run up to the race between Allan Mansoor and Mr. Daigle, Mr. Huff and Ms. Conway did little or nothing to help Allan beat off this obvious challenge to a sitting Assemblyman that could have resulted in a Democrat running in the fall runoff against a non-incumbent weaker Republican Daigle for that seat. A pause here to give mega kudos to Orange County OC GOP Chairman Scott Baugh (and hundreds of volunteers) who pulled out all stops in support of Assemblyman Mansoor!

A web site/blog called The Munger Games, which appears to be one of the objects of Mr. Huff’s and Ms. Conway’s wrath, responded to their letter by pointing out they’re defending a man who wasted resources attacking a sitting Assemblyman while being a sitting Chairman of another county’s Republican Central Committee. The blog also pointed out that debates and criticism are important to the political process and the voters of Allan Mansoor’s district certainly expressed their views by reelecting Allan by such a wide margin that Ms. Daigle did not even make it into the “top two” runoff – the new system brought to you by Proposition 14 – again courtesy of Charles Munger, a very big supporter financially of Prop. 14.

Bottom line: The Munger Games blog site asks some very, very important and legitimate questions Senate Republican leader Bob Huff and Assembly Republican leader Connie Conway should answer. Whether or not they agreed with Mr. Munger’s attempt to unseat a sitting Assemblyman at the risk of placing that safe Republican seat in play for the Democrats? If the resources Allan had to raise to fend off that challenge and the resources Mr. Munger used for that race and the R v. R races he spent money on in the fall could have been better spent holding onto Republican seats? Where were they during that June primary battle while Allan was fighting for his political life? Why are you attacking those who are asking these important questions? Why are you attacking those who engage in an honest debate by bringing up these issues?

This blog post writer would like to know the answers to those questions too. Senator Huff what is your response to those questions? Assemblywoman Conway?

Posted in 29th Senate District, 65th Assembly District, 74th Assembly District, California, State Assembly, State Senate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Molly Munger Files Suit Over Ballot Measure Placement; Judge Halts Numbering Until 7/9

Posted by Chris Nguyen on July 2, 2012

On June 27, the State Senate passed AB 1499 on a near-party-line 24-15 vote (Democrat Joe Simitian of Palo Alto joined the Republicans in voting against the bill, with Republican Sharon Runner of the Antelope Valley not voting), the State Assembly passed the bill on a party-line 50-24 vote (with three Republicans, two Democrats, and one Republican-turned-independent Nathan Fletcher not voting), and the Governor signed the bill into law.

So what exactly does AB 1499 do?  It changes the order that ballot measures appear on the ballot.  Because this bill was a budget trailer bill, it has already become law, rather than waiting until January 1, like the average bill.

Under the law as it existed on June 26, this was the order of how measures appeared on the ballot:

  1. Bond measures proposed by the Legislature
  2. Constitutional amendments proposed by the Legislature
  3. Other measures proposed by the Legislature
  4. Initiative measures
  5. Referenda

However, AB 1499, which is now the law of the land, changed the order thusly:

  1. Bond measures (regardless of whether they were put there by the Legislature or initiative)
  2. Constitutional amendments (regardless of whether they were put there by the Legislature or initiative)
  3. Measures proposed by the Legislature that aren’t bonds or constitutional amendments
  4. Initiative measures that aren’t bonds or constitutional amendments
  5. Referenda

Molly Munger (a Democrat and the sister of Republican Charles Munger, Jr.) has filed suit to stop AB 1499 from affecting the November 2012 election.

Why is she doing this?

Well, take a look at my previous post (which went online just hours before AB 1499 made its way through the Legislature) that noted the likely order of the ballot measures.  Then, take a look at what the order will be if AB 1499 is allowed to move forward unfettered:

Proposition 30 – Safe, Clean, and Reliable Drinking Water Supply Act of 2012 (This was the water bond deal of 2009 authored by then-Senate Republican Leader Dave Cogdill that the Legislature put on the 2010 ballot before moving it to the 2012 ballot.)

Proposition 31 – Temporary Taxes to Fund Education. Guaranteed Local Public Safety Funding. Initiative Constitutional Amendment. (This is Governor Jerry Brown’s tax measure.)

Proposition 32 – State Budget. State and Local Government. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute. (This is the two-year budget measure.)

Proposition 33 – Prohibits Political Contributions by Payroll Deduction. Prohibitions on Contributions to Candidates. Initiative Statute. (This is best known as Stop Special Interest Money Now.)

Proposition 34 – Changes Law to Allow Auto Insurance Companies to Set Prices Based on a Driver’s History of Insurance Coverage. Initiative Statute.

Proposition 35 – Death Penalty Repeal. Initiative Statute.

Proposition 36 – Human Trafficking. Penalties. Sex Offender Registration. Initiative Statute.

Proposition 37 – Three Strikes Law. Sentencing for Repeat Felony Offenders. Initiative Statute.

Proposition 38 – Genetically Engineered Foods. Mandatory Labeling. Initiative Statute.

Proposition 39 – Tax for Education and Early Childhood Programs. Initiative Statute. (This is Molly Munger’s tax measure.)

Proposition 40 – Tax Treatment for Multistate Businesses. Clean Energy and Energy Efficiency Funding. Initiative Statute.

Proposition 41 – Redistricting. State Senate Districts. Referendum.

(Any initiatives or referenda that qualify now are too late for the November 2012 ballot and will have to wait for another election.  However, the Legislature can still add measures to the ballot or remove the Safe, Clean, and Reliable Drinking Water Supply Act of 2012 from the ballot, which would alter the numbering of the propositions.)

See what happened in the ballot measure sequence because of AB 1499: Molly Munger’s tax measure is buried near the bottom of the ballot while Governor Jerry Brown’s tax measure will be either first or second on the ballot (depending on if the Legislature removes the water bond from the ballot).  Without AB 1499, the two measures would be neighbors on the ballot.

Munger obtained a temporary restraining order from Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Timothy Frawley preventing Secretary of State Debra Bowen from officially numbering the ballot measures.  But for Frawley’s order, she would have done so today.  However, Frawley blocked her from officially numbering the ballot measures until after Frawley holds a hearing on Munger’s suit on July 9.

Not only does Munger challenge the applicability of AB 1499 to the November 2012 ballot, but she also challenges the order of qualification, asserting that the Registrars of Los Angeles and Alamenda Counties improperly validated petitions for Brown’s ballot measure before they validated petitions for her ballot measure, as they are required by law to validate petitions in the order received (yes, Munger’s signatures were turned in before Brown’s).

Should Munger achieve a total victory on July 9 (a week from today), then this will be the ballot order for November:

Proposition 30 – Safe, Clean, and Reliable Drinking Water Supply Act of 2012 (This was the water bond deal of 2009 authored by then-Senate Republican Leader Dave Cogdill that the Legislature put on the 2010 ballot before moving it to the 2012 ballot.)

Proposition 31 – Prohibits Political Contributions by Payroll Deduction. Prohibitions on Contributions to Candidates. Initiative Statute. (This is best known as Stop Special Interest Money Now.)

Proposition 32 – Changes Law to Allow Auto Insurance Companies to Set Prices Based on a Driver’s History of Insurance Coverage. Initiative Statute.

Proposition 33 – Death Penalty Repeal. Initiative Statute.

Proposition 34 – Human Trafficking. Penalties. Sex Offender Registration. Initiative Statute.

Proposition 35 – Three Strikes Law. Sentencing for Repeat Felony Offenders. Initiative Statute.

Proposition 36 – Genetically Engineered Foods. Mandatory Labeling. Initiative Statute.

Proposition 37 – Tax for Education and Early Childhood Programs. Initiative Statute. (This is Molly Munger’s tax measure.)

Proposition 38 – Temporary Taxes to Fund Education. Guaranteed Local Public Safety Funding. Initiative Constitutional Amendment. (This is Governor Jerry Brown’s tax measure.)

Proposition 39 – Tax Treatment for Multistate Businesses. Clean Energy and Energy Efficiency Funding. Initiative Statute.

Proposition 40 – State Budget. State and Local Government. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute. (This is the two-year budget measure.)

Proposition 41 – Redistricting. State Senate Districts. Referendum.

Why does ballot order matter?

Sadly, location on the ballot actually affects odds of passage.  The earlier on the ballot a measure appears, the higher its chances of passing.  I don’t have the figures for ballot measures, but there are studies that have shown being the first person on the ballot in a long list of candidates can boost a person’s vote by as much as 5%.  (This is why candidates appear on the ballot in a random ballot lottery rather than alphabetically.)

To people who vote “yes” on ballot measures because they appear earlier and “no” because they appear later, please for the love of democracy, leave your vote on ballot measures blank!  Your ballot still counts even if you don’t fill out every slot.  If you just want to vote for Obama or Romney, your vote will still count even if you leave the rest of your ballot blank.  Let informed voters who have studied the issues cast their votes for the propositions on the ballot.  While I’m here, if you don’t know anything about candidates in down-ticket races, do not automatically vote for the candidate who appears first or has the longest name.  Let informed voters who have studied the candidates cast their votes for offices on the ballot.

Alas, there is no point to the admonition above since people who read political blogs (like you, dear reader) are not the people causing this problem, as you’re the ones actually seeking information on the issues.

(In the interest of full disclosure, Custom Campaigns has done some consulting work for Stop Special Interest Money Now, tentatively Proposition 33 under AB 1499, or Proposition 31 if AB 1499 is prevented from taking effect for the November 2012 ballot.  For the record, we do not accept payments for blogging and require disclosures when a blogger has a potential conflict of interest in a blog post, unless it’s something really obvious, like a blogger blogging about their own candidacy for office.)

Posted in California | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments »

AD-74’s Surprise Split: Mansoor Wins Three Cities, Rush Wins Other Three Cities, Daigle Second in Hometown But Third in All Other Cities

Posted by Chris Nguyen on June 22, 2012

Apologies for the blogcation this week.  We forgot to tell readers we would be taking time off for Day of the Independent Hungary on June 19 and Argentinian Flag Day on June 20.  We were going to celebrate Canadian National Aboriginal Day and Prince William’s 30th birthday on June 21, but then Thomas Gordon blogged about Barack Obama’s assertion of executive privilege à la Richard Nixon.  Now back to the show…

On Monday, I blogged the city-by-city breakdown in AD-72, which showed Mayor Troy Edgar (R-Los Alamitos) and Businessman Travis Allen (R-Huntington Beach) the top two in four cities, OC Board of Education Member Long Pham (R-Fountain Valley) and Planning Commissioner Joe Dovinh (D-Garden Grove) the top two in two cities, and Pham and Edgar the top two in Garden Grove.

Today, we look at the surprise result in AD-74.

First, let’s recall the districtwide numbers:

California State Assemblyman Allan Mansoor (R) 33,319 43.5%
Newport Beach Businessman Robert Rush (D) 25,120 32.8%
Newport Beach Councilwoman Leslie Daigle (R) 18,207 23.8%

So let’s take a look at how the voting broke down in the six cities of AD-74: Newport Beach, Huntington Beach, Irvine, Costa Mesa, Laguna Woods, and Laguna Beach.

74th Assembly District results in each city

(Thanks to Matt Rexroad and Chandra Sharma at Meridian Pacific for the map, which I’ve cropped here and to which I have added graphics.  Note that the population numbers on the map apply to each whole city, not just the portion of the city in AD-74.  Huntington Beach is divided nearly 50/50 between AD-72 and AD-74 while 2/3 of Irvine is in AD-74, with 1/3 of Irvine in AD-68.)

In each city, the candidate with the larger head came in first while the candidate with the smaller head came in second:

  • Rush came in first with Mansoor second in Irvine, Laguna Woods, and Laguna Beach.
  • Mansoor came in first with Rush second in Huntington Beach and Costa Mesa.
  • Mansoor came in first with Daigle second in Newport Beach.

These results were consistent in all six cities across both absentee and poll voters.

Here’s the percentage breakdown by city, with the winner’s percentage in bold and the runner-up in italics:

Mansoor Rush Daigle
Costa Mesa 49.7% 32.1% 18.1%
Huntington Beach 46.2% 29.8% 24.0%
Irvine 37.8% 39.1% 23.1%
Laguna Beach 32.0% 46.6% 21.4%
Laguna Woods 33.8% 45.4% 20.7%
Newport Beach 48.2% 22.1% 29.7%

Now here’s that list of cities by number of voters in AD-74:

  • Newport Beach: Mansoor
  • Huntington Beach: Mansoor
  • Irvine: Rush
  • Costa Mesa: Mansoor
  • Laguna Woods: Rush
  • Laguna Beach: Rush

For our visual learners:

The results show that despite enormous spending on behalf of Daigle by Berkshire Hathaway Heir and Santa Clara County Republican Party Chairman Charles Munger, Jr. (as we blogged about here, here, and here), which eventually totaled well over half a million dollars ($579,040 to be exact), plus another $89,687 in independent expenditures from labor unions, the power of incumbency and grassroots activists enabled Mansoor to overcome the hundreds of thousands of dollars in Bay Area/labor union money spent on behalf of Daigle.  Similarly, the power of party label enabled Rush to overcome the hundreds of thousands of dollars in Bay Area/labor union money spent on behalf of Daigle (much like the power of party label enabled Republican Jose “Joe” Moreno [not to be confused with Anaheim City School District Trustee Jose F. Moreno] to overcome the $246,761 in labor union money spent on behalf of Democrat Julio Perez).

And here’s a quick video courtesy of OC Political Reader and Lake Forest City Council Candidate Dwight Robinson that boils the AD-74 result into a nutshell:

Posted in 74th Assembly District | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments »

AD-74 Initial Reaction: Mansoor Dominates Daigle; Munger Jumped in Too Late for Daigle

Posted by Chris Nguyen on June 5, 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)

With a 20% lead for Assemblyman Allan Mansoor over Councilwoman Leslie Daigle in the absentee votes, this will likely prove insurmountable for Daigle to overcome in late absentees and poll votes.  Charles Munger’s largesse was simply too late in the game to save Daigle to overcome Mansoor’s massive absentee lead.

Latest numbers
Mansoor: 42.8%
Rush: 34.4%
Daigle: 22.9%

Posted in 74th Assembly District | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Bay Area’s Munger Spending on Behalf of Daigle in OC’s AD-74 Rises to Over $470,000

Posted by Chris Nguyen on May 23, 2012

Leslie Daigle, Charles Munger, Beth Gaines

Newport Beach Councilwoman Leslie Daigle, Santa Clara County Republican Party Chairman Charles Munger, Jr., and Assemblywoman Beth Gaines

We reported previously here and here about the vast sums of money that Santa Clara County Republican Party Chairman Charles Munger, Jr.’s Spirit of Democracy California PAC has spent on behalf of Newport Beach City Councilwoman Leslie Daigle, who is running against Assemblyman Allan Mansoor and businessman Bob Rush for the 74th Assembly District.  (Daigle and Mansoor are both registered Republicans, though it is widely known that Mansoor is the candidate of the conservatives, libertarians, Tea Party, etc. while Daigle is the candidate of the moderate and liberal-leaning factions.  Rush became a registered Democrat in February.)

The Spirit of Democracy California PAC formed by Munger, the son and namesake of Warren Buffett’s business partner, has now spent nearly half a million dollars on Daigle’s behalf in the last two weeks.  Specifically, it’s $470,671, which is broken down this way:

  • May 21: $145,000 for TV Commercials
  • May 21: $21,306 for Mailers
  • May 21: $20,190 for Mailers
  • May 21: $15,619 for Slate Mailers
  • May 15: $20,973 for Mailers
  • May 14: $180,000 for TV Commercials
  • May 14: $20,973 for Mailers
  • May 14: $7,500 for Consulting
  • May 14: $7,500 for Consulting
  • May 14: $25,111 for Mailers
  • May 14: $6,499 for Mailers

(Note that the $150,000 previously reported by Munger’s PAC was amended to $180,000 in a subsequent campaign finance report.)

This totals:

  • $325,000 for TV Commericals
  • $115,052 for Mailers
  • $15,619 for Slate Mailers
  • $15,000 for Consulting

The only other beneficiary of the largesse of the Spirit of Democracy California PAC is Assemblywoman Beth Gaines (R-Roseville), who has received $175,334 in independent expenditures from the PAC.

Munger has contributed $726,826 to the PAC.  Besides Munger, the only other contributor to the PAC is the California Dental Association, which has dropped $150,000.  That’s a total of $876,826 in the PAC.  They’ve spent a combined $646,005 for Daigle and Gaines, leaving $230,821 available for future spending.  Of course, Munger also has the deep pockets to drop far more into the PAC at a day’s notice.  After all, he and his sister, Molly Munger, have spent millions of dollars on California ballot measures.

Posted in 74th Assembly District | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 7 Comments »

Munger Drops Another $366,604 into Pro-Daigle PAC Bringing Total Contributions to $876,826

Posted by Chris Nguyen on May 18, 2012

Two days ago, I wrote about the $360,222 that Santa Clara County Republican Party Chairman Charles Munger, Jr. dumped into the Spirit of Democracy California, a committee that spent $217,583 on behalf of Newport Beach City Councilwoman Leslie Daigle and $83,171 on behalf of Assemblywoman Beth Gaines.  Daigle is challenging Assemblyman Allan Mansoor while Gaines is being challenged by attorney Andy Pugno.  (Daigle, Gaines, Mansoor, and Pugno are all registered Republicans.)

The California Dental Association had also dropped $150,000 into the committee.  The committee has now received $876,826 from Munger’s two contributions and the Dental Association’s single contribution.

The PAC has since spent $20,973 for a pro-Daigle mailer, on top of the $217,583 it previously spent for her, bringing its total pro-Daigle spending to $238,556.

The PAC has since spent $17,992 for a pro-Gaines mailer and $15,000 for pro-Gaines TV ads, on top of the $83,171 it previously spent for her, bringing its total pro-Gaines spending to $116,163.

The Spirit of Democracy California PAC still has more than half a million dollars cash on hand ($522,107, to be exact).  Munger has also demonstrated he can still dump in hundreds of thousands of dollars at a moment’s notice.

Posted in 74th Assembly District, Independent Expenditures | Tagged: , , , , , , | 4 Comments »

Dentists & Bay Area’s Munger Spend $218,000 in 4 Days to Support Leslie Daigle

Posted by Chris Nguyen on May 16, 2012

Leslie Daigle, Charles Munger, Beth Gaines

Newport Beach Councilwoman Leslie Daigle, Santa Clara County Republican Party Chairman Charles Munger, Jr., and Assemblywoman Beth Gaines

Santa Clara County Republican Party Chairman Charles Munger, Jr., who funded Proposition 11 of 2008 and Proposition 20 of 2010 (Prop 11 formed the redistricting commission while Prop 20 extended the commission’s jurisdiction to Congressional districts), and the California Dental Association together spent $218,000 between May 10-14 to support Republican Newport Beach Councilwoman Leslie Daigle in her bid to unseat incumbent Republican Assemblyman Allan Mansoor.

  • On April 13, Munger dropped $360,222 into the “Spirit of Democracy California” PAC.
  • On Thursday (May 10), the California Dental Association IE PAC dropped another $150,000 into the PAC.  That same day, the SDC spent $39,110 in for Daigle.
  • On Monday (May 14), SDC spent $83,171 to support Sacramento-area incumbent Republican Assemblywoman Beth Gaines in her bid to defend her seat against Republican Attorney Andy Pugno.  That same day, SDC also spent $178,473 to support Daigle.

That leaves $209,469 left in the SDC PAC.

For visual learners:

Munger
Contributions
Dental
Contributions
Pro-Gaines
Expenditures
Pro-Daigle
Expenditures
Cash on
Hand
Spirit of Democracy
California
 $360,222 $150,000 $83,171 $217,583 $209,469

Here’s a breakdown of the Spirit of Democracy California IEs for Daigle thus far: one $150,000 payment for TV ads, three mailer payments totaling $52,583, and two consultant payments, each $7,500.  For Gaines, there’s one $54,000 payment for radio ads, one $14,171 payment for a mailer, and two consultant payments each $7,500.

For visual learners:

TV Ads Radio Ads Mailers Consultants Total
Pro-Daigle IEs  $150,000 $0 $52,583 $15,000 $217,583
Pro-Gaines IEs  $0 $54,000 $14,171 $15,000 $83,171

For those of you reading carefully, you may have noticed the $150,000 figure for TV ads for Daigle is exactly the dollar amount that the California Dental Association dropped into the Spirit of Democracy California.

Munger’s spending a lot of money this month.  Just last week, he spent $750,000 to fund the California Reform Institute, run by Senator Sam Blakeslee.

With $209,469 left in the Spirit of Democracy California PAC (and Munger’s very deep pockets), this could be a long three weeks for Mansoor and Pugno.

Posted in 74th Assembly District, Independent Expenditures | Tagged: , , , , , , | 6 Comments »