Judicial Races: Patterico: 3 . . . L.A. Times: 0
100% of the precincts have reported their results in the local races for judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court. In the three judicial races where I made recommendations yesterday, let’s see how my candidates fared against the candidates endorsed by the Los Angeles Times. (Those of you who read the headlines to the posts are already way ahead of me on this, but let’s just go through the process, shall we?)
Los Angeles Times candidate: Pamala Matsumoto
Patterico candidate: Amy Carter
Winner: Amy Carter
Los Angeles Times candidate: Songhai “Sunny” Armstead
Patterico candidate: Teresa Magno
Winner: Teresa Magno
Los Angeles Times candidate: Debra Losnick
Patterico candidate: Shannon Knight
Winner: Shannon Knight
Teresa Magno’s bid to defeat the race-obsessed Songhai “Sunny” Armstead was a squeaker: 52% to 47%, a difference of 22,000 votes. Thanks to all Patterico readers from Los Angeles County for making the right call in that race.
Here’s a fun fact: of the 12 candidates endorsed by the Los Angeles Times, nine failed to come in at the top of the ticket. In the three races where their preferred candidate came out on top, one faces a runoff. The other two were prosecutors. So the real message is, prosecutors won in almost all races, L.A. Times endorsement or no.
I am not completely happy with all of the results, and I was not against all of the L.A. Times‘s candidates — just the vast majority of them.
Putting specifics aside, I am especially pleased about this general trend: the L.A. Times can’t control who the public votes for. Given that they almost always get it wrong, this is a good thing.
Congratulations to Amy, Teresa, and Shannon! And congratulations to my old office mate Serena Murillo, who ran unopposed.
Ding.
Patterico (9c670f) — 6/4/2014 @ 7:24 amThat’s a relief!
The LA Times has become so absurdly leftwing over the past several years, it has become pretty much a parody of itself, a parody of irresponsible, unreliable, one-sided journalism.
From a purely symbolic standpoint, the paper’s lousy political cartoonist (whose illustrations tend to be surprisingly unsophisticated and ham-handed) — who also pens a column running in tandem with his artwork — shows just how lame the LA Times has become. He is to op-ed musings what Michael Hiltzik is to business reporting.
Mark (99b8fd) — 6/4/2014 @ 7:32 amApparently being a prosecutor is even better than being a sitting judge, as the only Superior Court judge on the ballot narrowly lost.
Scatterbrained Carol Rose won 2-1 over the former Mr Big, Calderon.
Kevin M (b357ee) — 6/4/2014 @ 8:04 amHooray for L.A.!
And for Patterico for pushing L.A. in the right direction.
Patricia (be0117) — 6/4/2014 @ 8:21 amGlad to hear the race baiter lost.
rochf (f3fbb0) — 6/4/2014 @ 9:19 amPutting specifics aside, I am especially pleased about this general trend: the L.A. Times can’t control who the public votes for.
See, this is why we need to overturn Citizens United. It’s just beastly that rabble like the Koch Bros and Patterico get to participate in the democratic process, rather than allowing their betters on the editorial board of major newspapers to make decisions for them.
JVW (feb406) — 6/4/2014 @ 9:43 amCongratulations. By my lights 1 of 3 woulda been good. 3 is outstanding.
gary gulrud (46ca75) — 6/4/2014 @ 10:49 amThere may be some hope for LA after all.
Bill M (906260) — 6/4/2014 @ 11:04 amWell, obviously liberal newsrags such as the LAT can’t control for whom people vote. Were the opposite the case no Republican at any point over the past six or seven decades ever would have won a statewide election in California, nor for that matter too many other places. That all said it is true, amazingly, that even the government employee demographic is not quite as loopy and detached as the liberal print media when it comes to handicapping races and picking the correct candidates. That’s a faint praise damnation, obviously, but accurate. Keep in mind however that racial minorities especially in low turnout Summer primary elections simply don’t vote for down ticket races. And since judicial races are non partisan there’s not the dreaded “R” on the ballot against which so many useful idiots reflexively vote. In other words don’t make mountains of of molehills. Otherwise you might be shocked by the extent of Moonbeam’s winning margin come November.
Lawrence Westlake (4fc30a) — 6/4/2014 @ 11:45 ampamala?
really?
happyfeet (8ce051) — 6/4/2014 @ 12:37 pmThanks to all Patterico readers from Los Angeles County
You’re Welcome.
askeptic (8ecc78) — 6/4/2014 @ 1:44 pmJVW (feb406) — 6/4/2014 @ 9:43 am
Snicker.
askeptic (8ecc78) — 6/4/2014 @ 1:45 pmI had a perceptible impact.
Awesome.
JWB (c1c08f) — 6/4/2014 @ 3:12 pmThanks for the update & input on cadidates. Grew up with the Times, too many years to count, and still subscribe but have to lick my conservative wounds when I read it. Sad transgression for what was once a fine paper. Luckily, have a Pulitzer Prize winning local paper, Antelope Valley Press, conservative in nature, excellent editorials, to console myself, along with Investors Business Daily.
Judy Eaton (9d1bb3) — 6/4/2014 @ 8:32 pmAfter watching Carol Rose in action during jury selection last year, I couldn’t vote for her. “Scatterbrained” is a good description for her.
Kirstin (1b48bc) — 6/5/2014 @ 6:04 am