From Debbie Sharnak at the Independent Voter Network:
U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer’s (D-Calif.) decision not to run for re-election in 2016 was kept under wraps until she decided to announce her intentions in early January in a YouTube message sent out to supporters. Even her good friend, U.S. Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), expressed her shock and emotion over the announcement when she found out during a press conference.
Almost immediately after Boxer’s announcement was made public, speculation spread like wildfire over who would enter the race for the open U.S. Senate seat. IVN contributor James Ryan catalogued the race of possible contenders that quickly expressed interest in replacing Boxer, who was first elected in 1992.
However, with so many names that have either entered the race already or have expressed interest in running, including California Attorney General Kamala Harris, billionaire environmentalist Tom Steyer, and former State Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa, is there an opening for an independent candidate to enter what is expected to be an “outrageously expensive” election?
Money will be the biggest obstacle for any candidate outside the major parties, but demographics in California are changing, and the makeup of the electorate is shifting.
…
Independents have a chance to really capitalize on the dissatisfaction with the political parties at a statewide level. While voter registration has increased in the past 5 years, those who register with a political party has declined. Democrats have decreased to 43 percent of the electorate while Republicans now only make up 28 percent.
At the same time, the number of independent voters (those registered under No Party Preference) has increased to approximately 23 percent of the registered electorate. As independent registration continues to climb at a steady pace, No Party Preference voters may end up outnumbering Republicans by 2024.
“However, with so many names that have either entered the race already or have expressed interest in running, including California Attorney General Kamala Harris, billionaire environmentalist Tom Steyer, and former State Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa, is there an opening for an independent candidate to enter what is expected to be an “outrageously expensive” election?”
No. They’ll get ignored in the crowded field for the primary, when few people pay attention, and which few people will vote in. Their media coverage will be neglible (even compared to what it would be in a non-two only state or CA before two only passed) and the number of people paying attention to it even more neglible. They won’t make it out of the primary.
“At the same time, the number of independent voters (those registered under No Party Preference) has increased to approximately 23 percent of the registered electorate. As independent registration continues to climb at a steady pace, No Party Preference voters may end up outnumbering Republicans by 2024.”
That’s irrelevant. Numbers of registered independents have been climbing as has expressed dissatisfaction with establishment parties in polls, yet people still feel they need to vote for the supposedly lesser evil between the two. The number of independent candidates and votes has not increased, and in two only states it has been wiped out in statewide races in the general election, which is the one more people vote in and pay attention to. A few independents make it to lopsided two only races where one of the establishment parties does not even field a candidate, but since those races are not close they receive little media coverage and in CA and WA none of them are statewide races.
This source (Independent Voter Network) really seems to believe Top-Two in CA is a good thing. I used to try to set them staight in the comment section, but it didn’t seem to be doing any good.
I have heard a few names of Republicans who might run, but none of them sound strong enough to me to win over the big-name Democrats interested in running.
I sure wish Barbara would take her good friend Nancy with her, though.