Why would a kindergartner need an iPad?

(PNI) I believe all citizens overwhelmingly support education.

However, in Saturday's article, "Schools brace for end of temporary sales tax," it was astutely pointed out that one of the reasons overrides and Proposition 204 failed in this election cycle is that citizens believe that the money goes to "frills."

All you have to do is look at the article's photos to support this theory. Why on Earth does a kindergartner need his or her own iPad provided at taxpayers' expense?

Kindergartners!

I never would have dreamed this was happening in any school in any district.

Thank you for making my decision easier the next time an override appears on the ballot.

-- Carla Benkosky,

Scottsdale

Loughner sentence wise

Last week's sentencing of Jared Loughner and the Pima County attorney's subsequent decision not to pursue additional prosecution may bode well for the criminal-justice system in this state and in our nation.

It has been recognized that society is safe with Loughner locked up for life and that there is no need to seek capital punishment.

Perhaps this mind-set will prevail and Arizona will join the growing number of states abandoning the death sentence.

-- Dan Peitzmeyer, Phoenix

Sentence was an outrage

I am angry. What right does Jared Loughner have to a long life? How dare a plea agreement be made for him?

I am angry because I and the rest of the country will have to provide care, food, an exercise program, dental care and all the other "perks" he will receive while in prison.

This is not just a money issue but the incomprehensible reason to give him seven life sentences. He could possibly live for decades.

This is so wrong.

Yes, I am angry! And everyone else should be, too!

-- Rose Frantz, Mesa

Others bear weight now

I have for some years now carried a weight on my shoulders that the elected officials I have voted for over the years had spent my future money and my children's future money.

Now, with the young vote helping elect President Barack Obama, I don't feel the burden any longer. Your money will be spent here shortly, but now it is your fault.

-- Dominic Foanio, Gilbert

Glad I voted for Obama

Sometimes, I do something and then wonder if I did the right thing. Such was the case with the 2012 election.

During the campaign, I became convinced that there was more at stake than the economy and jobs, so even though I have been a Republican for more than 60 years, I voted for President Barack Obama.

Did I do the right thing?

I am indebted to Donald Critchlow for confirming the wisdom of my decision. In his My Turn column Saturday ("McGovern Commission changes led to gridlock"), the professor blamed the gridlock in Washington on six groups of Americans, which he calls left-wing activists, who finally found the path to having their voices heard through actions of the Democratic Party.

The Republicans keep talking about the American dream as though they have a lock on it. Isn't it part of the American dream that all Americans have a right to be heard and taken seriously?

Thanks, professor. I really feel much better about my vote now.

By the way, it really does take two to tango.

-- Tyler Soine, Scottsdale

Stop the political banter

I am a Canadian snowbird and therefore neutral to American politics. Upon seeing this election, it makes me wonder why you don't have six weeks of campaigning like we do or restraint on money spent.

Four years was so long and drawn out, with all the divisiveness, mudslinging, dirty politics and media frenzy.

The $2billion could have been put toward reducing the deficit or given to charities. Now that it's all over, let's all sigh a breath of relief.

Some of my American friends say the campaign was too long. Even the gurus now say they have to put their differences apart and work together for the good of America.

So, could somebody please tell Fox News and MSNBC to stop their divisive bantering. They should be done in for sedition.

-- Gulzar Hallman,

Scottsdale

Paper hounding Horne

The perseverance of The Arizona Republic's criticism of Attorney General Tom Horne reduces this paper to a tabloid level.

Horne's record has been exemplary in representing Arizona on consumer fraud, civil rights in housing and employment, and reclaiming $1.6billion in the mortgage settlement, among other achievements. He has represented the state before the U.S. Supreme Court on multiple occasions.

Rather than focusing on real issues, The Arizona Republic has fixated on unsubstantiated gossip and innuendo.

Horne should be recognized for his accomplishments.

It is time to get back to real news.

-- Mark Winograd,

Paradise Valley

Pssst! Come on over here

Hellooo! You over there, way to the right. C'mon over here, closer to the rest of us, or you're going to be completely out of the picture.

C'mon, get out of our bedrooms. You don't belong there anyway.

Get off the ledge before you hurt yourselves. Join us in the middle of the room.

Yes, most of us are in the middle, but you don't realize that because you're afraid to even look to your left.

Don't be afraid anymore. Stop watching Fox News, listening to Rush Limbaugh, Karl Rove, Ann Coulter, and just get a good night's sleep. If you do, you'll really feel so much better in the morning.

So, c'mon over here and join us.

Together, it'll be OK.

-- D. O'Connell, Tempe

Copyright 2012 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Re-election of Arpaio a vote for rule of law

(PNI) As a snowbird, I was happily surprised at the support for Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

It's good to know that most people believe in the rule of law.

I am very pro-immigration and very anti-illegal immigration.

We definitely need reform. Until we get it, the existing laws should be enforced.

-- Dean Dalrymple,

Sun City

An archaic ballot system

As a former poll worker and supervisor in the 2008 election, I'm dismayed but not surprised at the number of provisional ballots cast in the recent election. It is the reason I did not offer my time this year and one of the reasons I now vote by permanent mail ballot.

I believe Arizona's voting laws are archaic and detrimental to the tradition of in-person voting. Why? Because polling places constantly change and voters constantly move.

Our poll workers have many important duties. Verifying polling places for voters should not be one of them. Nor should they have to endure the anger of voters who wait in line only to be told they must go to another location or use a provisional ballot.

Why should it matter where a registered voter casts his ballot, any more than it matters what mailbox I use to cast mine?

Our voting laws must be updated, or we will continue to see more provisional ballots -- which take days to review, verify and be counted -- and there will be fewer people willing to work at the polls.

-- Mary Marshall, Mesa

Cut Congress' pay, perks

Why would someone sign off on a document from a no-name nobody like Grover Norquist unless that person feared losing his or her cushy job?

It seems obvious that the reason these politicians sign the document for no higher taxes is that they will lose campaign funding from Grover and his cronies. That may lead to having to get a real job and go to work for a living.

Solution: Reduce salaries and benefits in Congress to teacher-level wages so you get people to run for office who truly care about doing the right thing for the people of America and would never bow down to a Grover type.

-- Gary Graham, Anthem

God provided marijuana

Regarding the "Medical-pot prescriptions studied" article last week:

I'm endlessly amazed at the state government's audacity against the will of its citizens when it comes to marijuana. The last thing the government has is the right to look at its citizens' medical records. There are laws against it.

If we're going to update the law, let's remove the restriction where patients won't be allowed to continue growing their plant medicine when the courts finally allow a dispensary to open within 25 miles of their location.

It's a plant, folks. We have an endocannabinoid receptor system for the THC and CBD molecules. It means we have a symbiotic relationship with the plant. Look it up.

Wonder when we're going to realize it's a vitamin that God has provided for us. For free. The peaceful plant is coming home. Prepare.

-- Mike Templeton, Mesa

Mormonism's bright face

Now that the election is over and the candidate I voted for lost the election, I can now pick the real winner: the Mormon religion.

Mitt Romney demonstrated by his actions that he lived a faith devoted to service to mankind. (I am not a Mormon.)

Had he won, he would have been a superb example of what a true American looks and acts like.

It is unfortunate that the other side of the coin is Chicago-style politics (Need I say more?) and Hollywood fakes.

It was unfortunate that, when Romney said 47 percent would not vote for him because they are on the government dole, he was right.

The United States will never again be the same because 50 percent or more are getting freebies from the government, and that is growing every day and people feel it is owed to them. Now that we have passed that threshold, we can never turn back.

It is a very sad state of affairs, but the Democratic Party is now the Socialist Party of America, and we are headed in the same direction as Greece, Spain, France and all other socialist countries using a failed model.

-- Richard Ksenich,

Phoenix

We must back education

I wish to sound the alarm over our failure in Arizona to support education.

In California, voters approved a ballot measure to raise taxes by $6billion annually over seven years to help California's public schools. By contrast, to quote this newspaper, "Arizona voters … rejected a ballot proposal to retain a sales-tax increase dedicated to education."

I am retired, no longer have children, and as a retiree am not eager to pay more taxes. However, I am also a retired pediatrician and now work as a full-time elementary-school volunteer coordinating a science lab for children in grades K-6.

By starving Arizona's schools financially, we will surely deprive our children of an education as good or hopefully better than the one we received.

Wake up, Arizona!

-- Dr.Ted Hecht, Scottsdale

Ads should thank voters

Now that the election is over, will we see any political ads thanking us for our support? Will that 30-second spot declare that the winner promises to work with the other side to finally get something done in the statehouse or Congress? Just wondering.

--Judy Darling,

Apache Junction

Founding Fathers aghast

Big government, the concept of voting in your own entitlements, and the something-for-nothing mentality triumphed.

Hard work, self-sufficiency, checks and balances, and small government lost big time.

Our Founding Fathers are rolling over in the grave.

--Richard Allen, Phoenix

Final note to Republicans

Well, well, well. Thanks to all of the overly rabid, poison-spewing, toxic-ad Republicans out there: You blew the election!

--Art Cote, Peoria

Copyright 2012 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Dems fume over Flake robocalls

Republican U.S. Senate candidate Jeff Flake came under fire Monday from Arizona Democrats for a round of automated phone calls that provided some Democratic voters with incorrect information about their polling sites.

News that a handful of Democrats received the robocalls, which Flake subsequently said were intended only for Republicans and inadvertentantly went to only a small number of Democrats because of discrepancies in Maricopa County voter data, was broken Sunday night by 12 News.

Flake, a six-term congressman, is in a tough battle with Democrat Richard Carmona, a former U.S. surgeon general. Election Day is today.

The original 12 News report included an interview with Democrat Mary Crecco of Scottsdale who said she "just freaked out" when she got the Flake robocall. The recording encouraged her to vote for Flake but identified the wrong polling location. "It was totally wrong, totally wrong, and I feel like it was done purposely," she told the TV station.

Democratic Party officials told The Arizona Republic on Monday that they have confirmed that at least six Democrats got the Flake call and were given incorrect information. One other Democrat contacted The Republic with the same complaint.

The Arizona Democratic Party on Monday demanded that the Arizona Secretary of State's Office, the state Attorney General's Office, the FBI and the U.S. Department of Justice look into the Flake calls.

William Solomon, an assistant U.S. attorney in Phoenix, told The Republic that a request for an investigation had been received and referred to the proper investigative agency.

"No decision has yet been made as to whether or not an investigation will result from this referral," Solomon said. "The Department of Justice ordinarily does not confirm or deny the existence or status of an investigation once a request for investigation has been received."

FBI Special Agent Manuel Johnson, spokesman for the FBI's Phoenix office, told The Republic that the FBI was aware of the situation but could not confirm or deny that the matter would be investigated.

Luis Heredia, the state Democratic Party's executive director, said in a written statement that "it is clear the Flake campaign was targeting Democrats in a clumsy attempt to influence tomorrow's election."

In a written statement, Flake said the 120,000 robocalls were part of a get-out-the-vote effort targeting registered Republicans. Andrew Wilder, his campaign spokesman, said a small number of the calls went to Democrats who for whatever reason shared the same telephone number with Republicans listed on the voter rolls.

The Flake campaign identified a registered Republican whose voter information included the same number as Crecco.

Wilder also pointed to the fact that the calls were clearly identified as paid for by Flake's campaign as proof that there was no sinister motive.

"The call clearly stated that it was from my campaign because it was intended for Republicans," Flake said in his statement. "We received fewer than a dozen calls from voters with questions about the information provided, nearly all of which we were able to reconcile. Some adult children were registered under their parents' address. In other cases, voters had moved but not updated their registration."

Carmona said it was "troubling" that Flake campaign was trying to complicate the voting process.

"But, ultimately, Congressman Flake or any other group can't stop anyone from voting who is registered and shows up," Carmona said Monday in a statement.

A poll released Sunday by the Democratic firm Public Policy Polling had Flake leading Carmona 51 percent to 46 percent. The automated survey of 1,080 likely Arizona voters, conducted Friday and Saturday, had a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

To find your polling place, visit https://voter.azsos.gov/VoterView/PollingPlaceSearch.do.

Copyright 2012 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Brewer PAC adds cash to help Flake campaign

Gov. Jan Brewer's federal political-action committee has poured $100,000 into Republican Jeff Flake's U.S. Senate campaign, new federal filings show.

Federal Election Commission records show that Jan PAC spent the money on mailers on Flake's behalf.

Flake faces Democrat Richard Carmona in a race that has become one of the most closely watched in the nation and could help decide which party controls the Senate.

This is the governor's latest foray into Arizona's tightly contested partisan races -- she also has sunk money into the campaigns of GOP candidates seeking office in three of the state's congressional districts.

Carmona's campaign decried Brewer's intervention in the race.

"Jan Brewer was once begging Rich Carmona to run for governor," said Andy Barr, Carmona's spokesman. "This shows how broken and absurd our politics have become, that these career politicians only care if you have an 'R' or 'D' next to your name, not what you'd do for Arizona."

Andrew Wilder, Flake's campaign spokesman, said Flake's team doesn't comment on outside spending by supporters as a matter of policy.

The Flake mailers come a day after Jan PAC spent money in eastern Arizona's newly drawn Congressional District 1, one of the most competitive races in the nation.

Jan PAC, according to the state Democratic Party, "has launched a full-scale attack" on Democratic congressional candidate Ann Kirkpatrick, who is battling Republican Jonathan Paton, a former state senator.

Records show Jan PAC on Tuesday spent $35,567 on a mailer to attack Kirkpatrick.

The buy comes on the heels of Jan PAC's recent attack mailer on Congressional District 9 Democratic candidate Kyrsten Sinema, a former state senator.

Sinema is in a heated battle with Republican Vernon Parker for the right to represent the newly drawn congressional district.

"I think it's unprecedented for a sitting governor to double down on negative attacks," said Luis Heredia, executive director of the Arizona Democratic Party. "And it does not create an environment of trying to solve problems facing Arizona voters if you have a governor who is extremely partisan. I don't go out on a limb by labeling her as the most partisan governor we've had in our state."

Paul Senseman, spokesman for Jan PAC, said the governor believes Flake is the better fit for the Senate post.

"The governor is very fond of Congressman Flake, and she believes he has the right temperament and leadership capabilities to best represent Arizona and hopefully find some new success and attention by the federal government," Senseman said.

Senseman described the Flake mailer as a "very positive piece."

Meanwhile, the committee on Tuesday spent an additional $29,651 on a mailer to support Republican Martha McSally, who faces Democratic U.S. Rep. Ron Barber in Arizona's Congressional District 2 race.

The governor created the committee last year and has said it would be dedicated to "securing the border and restoring integrity to our immigration system, fighting 'Obamacare,' creating jobs (getting Americans back to work) and reducing the sea of government."

The PAC has raised about $587,000.

Brewer is tentatively scheduled to head to Colorado today, where she will be raising money for Jan PAC, The Arizona Republic has learned.

Staff writer Dan Nowicki contributed to this article.

Copyright 2012 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

McGovern Commission changes led to gridlock

The late George McGovern leaves behind a political legacy of a presidential candidate who suffered the worst defeat in American political history and a man who played an instrumental role in shifting his party decisively to the left. This leftward shift of the Democratic Party that began following the disastrous 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago set the course that has led to the current gridlock in Washington, D.C.

McGovern was a man of high principle, intelligence and great affability. I met the late senator in the mid-2000s when I was invited to give a keynote address at a conference held at the McGovern Center at Wesleyan University in South Dakota. Before my talk, we were asked by the conference organizers to have our photo taken together. As we posed, the senator put his arm around my shoulder and declared, "Does not anybody realize that this man is going to skewer me tomorrow?" I did not skewer McGovern in my talk, although I did discuss how the McGovern-Fraser Commission, established in 1969 by the Democratic National Committee, transformed the Democratic Party.

In 1968, anti?Vietnam War activists were outraged that Vice President Hubert Humphrey won the Democratic nomination despite earning a small percentage of primary votes. The Democratic Party responded by appointing a commission, headed by Sen. George McGovern, an outspoken opponent of the war, to revise the party's process for selecting delegates.

Reformers on the commission -- especially young staffers who came out of the anti-war movement -- quietly rewrote the rules to give much greater power to left-wing activists, including peace protesters, feminists, environmentalists, community organizers, gay-rights advocates and ethnic minority leaders.

These rule changes have had long-term consequences for the Democratic Party, enshrining identity politics and pushing the party much further to the left.

The first signs of polarized politics came early to Washington. Paying the price for the Watergate scandal, Republicans suffered in the 1974 midterm elections. Democrats gained 43 seats in the House of Representatives and three in the Senate. The new class of congressional Democrats in the House was more ideologically liberal than their own party leadership. In their victory, the new Democrats who entered Congress displayed antagonism and arrogance toward the Republican minority. Assuming committee chairs, liberal Democrats -- the so-called Watergate Babies -- pursued an agenda with little input from their GOP colleagues. Democrats restricted debate, changed House rules for their own benefit, and exacted penance from Republicans for the sins of Watergate and political defeat. These actions allowed liberals to exercise control over executive-branch agencies and departments.

Meanwhile, the rules established by the McGovern Commission gradually took full effect. Motivation to take the White House tempered the Left's takeover within the ranks of the party for a while.

But in 2008, the activist rank and file found their candidate. Barack Obama almost certainly could not have won the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination without the McGovern Commission's changes to the nomination system that favored progressive activists.

After two years of Democratic control, American voters reacted in electing a Republican House.

We now have the politics of gridlock at the moment when the nation confronts the worst economic crisis since World War II. I wonder how George McGovern viewed the changes he wrought.

After all, he told me that he voted for Gerald Ford in 1976.

Donald T. Critchlow holds the Barry M. Goldwater Chair of Politics and American Institutions at Arizona State University. He is the co-author, with W. J. Rorabaugh, of "Takeover: How the Left's Quest for Social Justice Corrupted Liberalism."

Copyright 2012 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Kielsky takes on Montgomery

In the race for Maricopa County attorney, a heavily favored Republican incumbent is being challenged by a Libertarian who has run twice before for the office.

County Attorney Bill Montgomery, who took office after winning a special election in 2010, is facing Libertarian opponent Michael Kielsky. The Democratic Party did not slate a candidate in the race.

One of the sharpest contrasts between Montgomery and Kielsky is views on enforcing laws. Montgomery presents himself as a law-and-order stalwart who, in his career as a prosecutor, has pursued tough sentences. Kielsky's main campaign promise is that he will not prosecute victimless crimes such as marijuana possession and prostitution, using the slogan, "No victim, no crime, no time, no fine!"

Montgomery, 45, has done no television campaigning and bought no print ads. He and Kielsky will participate in a lunch forum tentatively set for Monday at the Phoenix School of Law.

Kielsky, 48, says, "It will be my most successful run yet" because the voters of Maricopa County will express their dissatisfaction with Montgomery's first two years as county attorney.

The last general election for Maricopa County attorney, in 2008, was a horse race in which then-incumbent Andrew Thomas edged out Democrat Tim Nelson.

But less than two years later, the Maricopa County Attorney's Office was thrown into turmoil because of Thomas' skirmishes with judges and county officials. Thomas resigned to run for Arizona attorney general.

Former County Attorney Rick Romley battled against Montgomery to replace Thomas, but Montgomery, the party's preferred candidate in the Republican primary, won and then rolled over Kielsky in the November 2010 special election.

Montgomery's tenure has been relatively uneventful compared with Thomas'; he has presented himself as a conservative lawman in contrast to Thomas' anti-corruption crusader. Montgomery has gotten criticism from political pundits for not pressing criminal charges against politicians who allegedly took favors from the Fiesta Bowl or against Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne for possible campaign-finance violations. Horne defeated Thomas in the 2010 GOP primary for attorney general.

Montgomery said that there was insufficient evidence to warrant criminal charges and that seeking indictments "opens me up to criticism that there was a political reason to get an indictment."

Tempe-based polling expert Michael O'Neil said he thinks a Democratic opponent could have capitalized to some degree on the lack of prosecutions.

"You could say he's protecting his cronies and build a campaign on that," O'Neil said. But "nobody is willing to step up for a race that they would definitely lose."

Montgomery moved to improve relations with county managers and the county Board of Supervisors, and his press conferences often focus on community activities such as shred-a-thons to combat ID theft or anti-drug programs.

On broader political issues, Montgomery has hewed to Republican Party positions, such as supporting Senate Bill 1070, the embattled Arizona immigration law. In addition, he will defend the state's ban on abortions beyond 20 weeks of pregnancy before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals next month.

He has been outspoken against Proposition 121, which would create an open primary system instead of separate primaries for each political party. He also has opposed the successful citizens' initiative that allows for legal medical use of marijuana. Kielsky supports decriminalization of marijuana.

Kielsky, a former head of the Arizona Libertarian Party, ran for a seat on the board of the Central Arizona Water Conservation District in 1992. He then ran for justice of the peace in 2002, Congress in 2004 and county attorney in 2008 and 2010.

As in his past campaigns, Kielsky, who has been an attorney since 2006, does not take stands on major political issues, instead focusing on not wasting resources by prosecuting victimless crimes, saying this will save money, lower the prison population and provide greater freedom and justice. He said he would not devote resources to prosecuting minor drug-possession charges, prostitution or immigration offenses.

"The job of the county attorney is to help protect individual rights by prosecuting those who harm other people," he said. "Bill Montgomery, like his predecessor, is spending a lot of resources on prosecuting people who aren't hurting anyone."

"How about if we just focus on the core issues of that office?" he said.

Copyright 2012 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Historic first: Not one Dem elected to statewide office

(PNI) Sorting through the election debris:

The failure of Democrats Paul Newman and Sandra Kennedy to be re-elected to the Arizona Corporation Commission has been largely overlooked. In fact, it marks an extraordinary historic event.

As a result, in 2013, for the first time in Arizona history, there will not be a single Democrat holding a statewide elected office.

Since 1912, there has always been at least one Democrat elected to statewide office -- U.S. senator, governor, secretary of state, attorney general, superintendent of public instruction, mining inspector or corporation commissioner. As of January, after 100 years, there will be none.

This may come as a shock to some Democrats, who are being told that demographic trends in Arizona are improving their electoral fortunes. The principal demographic trend supposedly doing that is an increase in Latino voters.

According to the national exit poll, Latinos in Arizona were 18 percent of the electorate this year. They overwhelmingly voted for Barack Obama over Mitt Romney, 74 percent to 25 percent. Yet, as of this writing, Romney was winning the state by 11 percentage points.

This isn't new. In 2010, the Latino vote also went overwhelming to the Democratic candidate for governor, Terry Goddard, over the Republican incumbent, Jan Brewer, 71 percent to 28 percent. Yet Brewer carried the state by 12 percentage points.

We've been inundated by press releases and news accounts about impressive efforts to register and turn out the Latino vote in Arizona. Yet Republican Jeff Flake will be Arizona's next U.S. senator and Joe Arpaio, who has been as much of a stimulus for Latino political activism as one human being could possibly be, was comfortably re-elected as sheriff.

The national situation may be different, although I suspect not nearly as much as the current hand-wringing assumes. But in Arizona, there is very little evidence that a surge in Latino voting is making the Democratic Party a more potent force.

In fact, just the opposite. The Democratic Party is a rapidly shrinking presence in Arizona politics.

Republicans have generally held steady in their voter-registration figures in the face of the true rising force in Arizona politics, the independent voter. Democrats have been hemorrhaging registrants.

For this presidential election, there were 69,000 fewer registered Democrats than there were in 2008. In 1998, Democrats had a registration advantage over Republicans in 12 of Arizona's 15 counties. Today, they have an advantage in just seven.

What leaves me dumbfounded is that Democratic leaders in Arizona seem completely unconcerned about this. They don't even acknowledge that the party has a problem that needs to be addressed.

If not having a single statewide elected Democrat for the first time in 100 years doesn't shake them out of their lethargy, probably nothing will.

The drop in Republican numbers in the Legislature is being taken as a sign of weakened electoral support. That's a misanalysis. Instead, it highlights how much Republicans overachieved in 2010.

In 2010, Republicans achieved a veto-proof Legislature, with 21 of 30 seats in the Senate and 40 of 60 seats in the House.

This turned out not to mean anything. There were not even any attempts to override a veto. When the governor is of your own party, things are worked out in different ways.

Having a veto-proof majority is highly unusual. In fact, since one-man, one-vote in the 1960s, it had never been achieved by either party in the Senate. It had happened only three times before in the House.

Republicans have a registration advantage in 17 of the 30 state legislative districts. So, the natural distribution of power is 17-13 in favor of Republicans in the Senate and 34 to 26 in the House.

It looks like that is exactly what the split will be in the Senate. No Senate candidate for either party successfully bucked a registration disadvantage.

There are still a lot of votes left to be counted, but at this writing, Republicans were leading for four House seats in which they have the registration disadvantage and Democrats in only one. In the House, Republicans will probably have 36 to 38 seats. That's outperforming their registration advantage and more seats than they had in either 2006 or 2008.

Perhaps I'm just deluding myself to keep from becoming too disillusioned with our democracy. But it seems to me that voters generally look past the clutter, garbage and crap the campaigns toss at them and decide elections on broad, important things.

In the presidential race, I think they did so again, but

on something that's missing from the national postelection analysis gabfest.

The exit poll suggests that Romney didn't make his case that he would be materially better on the economy or fixing the finances of the federal government than Barack Obama.

So, people were left with a lot of financial distress and anxiety in a sluggish economy with uncertain prospects.

Obama clearly stood for the proposition that government should be willing to help. Romney clearly stood for paring back what government does, except for the military.

Given the lack of belief that Romney would really improve the economy, swing voters didn't want to give up government as a source of potential help.

That and a potent ground game, I think, decided the election.

Copyright 2012 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Polling-place issues are reported in Pa., Fla.

Sporadic problems were reported Tuesday at polling places around the country, many in Pennsylvania including a confrontation involving Republican inspectors over access to some polls and a voting machine that lit up for Republican Mitt Romney even when a voter pressed the button for President Barack Obama. One Florida elections office mistakenly told voters in robocalls the election was today.

Although the majority of complaints were about extremely long lines, the Election Protection coalition of civil-rights and voting-access groups said they had gotten some more serious calls among more than 69,000 received on a toll-free voter-protection hotline.

"The calls have been hot and heavy all day long," said Barbara Arnwine, president of the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.

In Philadelphia, the Republican Party said 75 legally credentialed voting inspectors were blocked from polling places in the heavily Democratic city, prompting the GOP to obtain a court order providing them access.

Local prosecutors were also looking into the reports. Democratic Party officials did not immediately return a message seeking comment.

Also in central Pennsylvania, officials said the voting machine that switched a person's vote from Obama to Romney had been recalibrated and was back in service.

Pennsylvania Department of State spokesman Ron Ruman said the Perry County voter notified elections officials of the problem after trying to cast his ballot on Tuesday. Video of what Ruman called a "momentary glitch" was widely viewed on YouTube.

Pennsylvania was also the scene of what a state Common Cause official called "widespread" confusion over voter-ID requirements.

The state this year enacted a new photo-ID requirement, but it was put on hold for Tuesday's election by a judge amid concerns that many voters would not be able to comply on time.

Barry Kauffman, executive director of Common Cause in Pennsylvania, said election workers in many places were demanding IDs even though they are not required. It was unclear, however, just how many voters may have been turned away or discouraged.

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

A multihued future

So much for voter suppression. So much for the enthusiasm gap. So much for the idea that smug, self-appointed arbiters of what is genuinely "American" were going to "take back" the country, as if it had somehow been stolen.

On Tuesday, millions of voters sent a resounding message to the take-it-back crowd: You won't. You can't. It's our country, too.

President Barack Obama and the Democratic Party scored what can only be seen as a comprehensive victory. Obama won the popular vote convincingly, and the electoral vote wasn't even close. In a year when it was hard to imagine how Democrats could avoid losing seats in the Senate, they won seats and increased their majority.

Republicans did keep control of the House, but to call this a "status quo" election is absurd. After the 2010 midterm election, Republicans had the initiative and Democrats were reeling. After Tuesday, the dynamics are utterly reversed.

Don't take my word for it. Listen to the conservative bloviators who were so convinced that Mitt Romney would defeat Obama, perhaps in a landslide, and proceed to undo everything the president has accomplished.

Radio host Rush Limbaugh was almost wistful: "I went to bed last night thinking we're outnumbered. … I went to bed last night thinking we've lost the country. I don't know how else you look at this." He then launched into a riff about Obama and Santa Claus that is too incoherent to quote. Apparently, we are all elves.

Sean Hannity, on his radio show, was angry: "Americans, you get the government you deserve. And it pains me to say this, but America now deserves Barack Obama. You deserve what you voted for. … We are a self-governing country, and the voice and the will of 'we the people' have now been heard. America wanted Barack Obama four more years. Now you've got him. Good luck with that."

As is often the case, Fox News host Bill O'Reilly was a bit more perceptive: "The White establishment is now the minority," he said Tuesday evening, before it was clear that Obama would win. "The demographics are changing. It's not a traditional America anymore."

No, Bill, it's not.

African-Americans made up a record 13 percent of the electorate in 2008. Many analysts attributed this spike in turnout to the novelty of being able to vote for a Black major-party presidential candidate. This year, some pollsters factored into their projections the assumption that the Black vote would decline to a more "normal" 11 percent.

But on Tuesday, African-Americans once again were 13 percent of all voters -- and probably played an even bigger role than this number would indicate in re-electing Obama.

Look at Ohio, arguably the most hotly contested swing state. African-Americans make up only 12 percent of the state population, but according to exit polls, they constituted a full 15 percent of the Ohio electorate on Tuesday. Blacks, in other words, were more motivated to vote than Whites.

Ohio also happens to be a state where Republican officials sharply curtailed early voting. If, as many suspect, this was a transparent attempt to depress minority turnout by making it harder for working-class Ohioans to vote, it didn't work. In fact, it backfired.

Look at Colorado. In 2008, Latinos were 13 percent of the electorate; just over 60 percent voted for Obama. On Tuesday, Latinos made up 14 percent of Colorado voters -- and, according to exit polls, three-fourths of them supported the president. Think this might have something to do with Mitt Romney's "self-deportation" immigration policy? I do.

Nationwide, roughly three of every 10 voters Tuesday were minorities. African-Americans chose Obama by 93 percent, Latinos by 71 percent, and Asian-Americans, the nation's fastest-growing minority, by 73 percent.

These are astounding margins, and I think they have less to do with specific policies than with broader issues of identity and privilege. I think that when Black Americans saw Republicans treat President Obama with open disrespect and try their best to undermine his legitimacy, they were offended. When Latinos heard Republicans insist there should be no compassion for undocumented immigrants, I believe they were angered. When Asian-Americans heard Republicans speak of China in almost "Yellow Peril" terms, I imagine they were insulted.

On Tuesday, the America of today asserted itself.

This time, it was about us -- who we are as a nation -- and a multihued, multicultural future.

Copyright 2012 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Dems fume over Flake robocalls

Republican U.S. Senate candidate Jeff Flake came under fire Monday from Arizona Democrats for a round of automated phone calls that provided some Democratic voters with incorrect information about their polling sites.

News that a handful of Democrats received the robocalls, which Flake subsequently said were intended only for Republicans and inadvertentantly went to only a small number of Democrats because of discrepancies in Maricopa County voter data, was broken Sunday night by 12 News.

Flake, a six-term congressman, is in a tough battle with Democrat Richard Carmona, a former U.S. surgeon general. Election Day is today.

The original 12 News report included an interview with Democrat Mary Crecco of Scottsdale who said she "just freaked out" when she got the Flake robocall. The recording encouraged her to vote for Flake but identified the wrong polling location. "It was totally wrong, totally wrong, and I feel like it was done purposely," she told the TV station.

Democratic Party officials told The Arizona Republic on Monday that they have confirmed that at least six Democrats got the Flake call and were given incorrect information. One other Democrat contacted The Republic with the same complaint.

The Arizona Democratic Party on Monday demanded that the Arizona Secretary of State's Office, the state Attorney General's Office, the FBI and the U.S. Department of Justice look into the Flake calls.

William Solomon, an assistant U.S. attorney in Phoenix, told The Republic that a request for an investigation had been received and referred to the proper investigative agency.

"No decision has yet been made as to whether or not an investigation will result from this referral," Solomon said. "The Department of Justice ordinarily does not confirm or deny the existence or status of an investigation once a request for investigation has been received."

FBI Special Agent Manuel Johnson, spokesman for the FBI's Phoenix office, told The Republic that the FBI was aware of the situation but could not confirm or deny that the matter would be investigated.

Luis Heredia, the state Democratic Party's executive director, said in a written statement that "it is clear the Flake campaign was targeting Democrats in a clumsy attempt to influence tomorrow's election."

In a written statement, Flake said the 120,000 robocalls were part of a get-out-the-vote effort targeting registered Republicans. Andrew Wilder, his campaign spokesman, said a small number of the calls went to Democrats who for whatever reason shared the same telephone number with Republicans listed on the voter rolls.

The Flake campaign identified a registered Republican whose voter information included the same number as Crecco.

Wilder also pointed to the fact that the calls were clearly identified as paid for by Flake's campaign as proof that there was no sinister motive.

"The call clearly stated that it was from my campaign because it was intended for Republicans," Flake said in his statement. "We received fewer than a dozen calls from voters with questions about the information provided, nearly all of which we were able to reconcile. Some adult children were registered under their parents' address. In other cases, voters had moved but not updated their registration."

Carmona said it was "troubling" that Flake campaign was trying to complicate the voting process.

"But, ultimately, Congressman Flake or any other group can't stop anyone from voting who is registered and shows up," Carmona said Monday in a statement.

A poll released Sunday by the Democratic firm Public Policy Polling had Flake leading Carmona 51 percent to 46 percent. The automated survey of 1,080 likely Arizona voters, conducted Friday and Saturday, had a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

To find your polling place, visit https://voter.azsos.gov/VoterView/PollingPlaceSearch.do.

Copyright 2012 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Polling-place issues are reported in Pa., Fla.

Sporadic problems were reported Tuesday at polling places around the country, many in Pennsylvania including a confrontation involving Republican inspectors over access to some polls and a voting machine that lit up for Republican Mitt Romney even when a voter pressed the button for President Barack Obama. One Florida elections office mistakenly told voters in robocalls the election was today.

Although the majority of complaints were about extremely long lines, the Election Protection coalition of civil-rights and voting-access groups said they had gotten some more serious calls among more than 69,000 received on a toll-free voter-protection hotline.

"The calls have been hot and heavy all day long," said Barbara Arnwine, president of the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.

In Philadelphia, the Republican Party said 75 legally credentialed voting inspectors were blocked from polling places in the heavily Democratic city, prompting the GOP to obtain a court order providing them access.

Local prosecutors were also looking into the reports. Democratic Party officials did not immediately return a message seeking comment.

Also in central Pennsylvania, officials said the voting machine that switched a person's vote from Obama to Romney had been recalibrated and was back in service.

Pennsylvania Department of State spokesman Ron Ruman said the Perry County voter notified elections officials of the problem after trying to cast his ballot on Tuesday. Video of what Ruman called a "momentary glitch" was widely viewed on YouTube.

Pennsylvania was also the scene of what a state Common Cause official called "widespread" confusion over voter-ID requirements.

The state this year enacted a new photo-ID requirement, but it was put on hold for Tuesday's election by a judge amid concerns that many voters would not be able to comply on time.

Barry Kauffman, executive director of Common Cause in Pennsylvania, said election workers in many places were demanding IDs even though they are not required. It was unclear, however, just how many voters may have been turned away or discouraged.

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

The men behind the money

WASHINGTON — WASHINGTON Shrek would be green with envy. Movie producer Jeffrey Katzenberg is animating the presidential race this election season, raising more money than any other Democratic donor.

The DreamWorks Animation CEO joins two other media moguls, a personal-injury lawyer and a philanthropist in giving millions of dollars to help President Barack Obama win a second term. They are helping fund a presidential election on track to cost nearly $2 billion, with money going toward the individual Republican and Democratic campaigns as well as independent, "super" political committees working on the campaigns' behalf.

Based on an examination of more than 2.3 million campaign contributions, The Associated Press has ranked the top five financial supporters of Obama's:

No. 1

Jeffrey Katzenberg, 61, Hollywood film producer and chief executive of DreamWorks Animation.

Total: $2.566 million

Katzenberg is President Barack Obama's top donor when tallying his contributions to a "super" political committee, money to Obama's campaign and the money he arranged for others to write for the president. The biggest contributions include $2 million to the Priorities USA Action super PAC. It was founded by former White House advisers and is the key pro-Obama PAC this election cycle. Katzenberg has helped "bundle" more than $500,000 for the president's second term. He has been invited to White House events, including a state dinner. Such high-profile soirées put him in proximity earlier this year to Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping, who signed off on an overseas deal benefiting Katzenberg's studio.

No. 2

Irwin Jacobs, 78, the founder and former chairman of Qualcomm.

Total: $2.122 million

Jacobs has given more than $2 million to pro-Obama super PACs and about $23,000 directly to Obama's campaign and the Democrats. But he's no newcomer to political giving: The La Jolla, Calif., billionaire has routinely backed San Diego-area politicians, including those in City Hall. Some of his local proposals have caused dust-ups in town, including one backed by San Diego's mayor that would have changed the name of Qualcomm Stadium for 10 days to reflect the cellphone-maker's new computer chip.

No. 3 (tie)

Fred Eychaner, founder of Chicago-based alternative-newspaper publisher Newsweb Corp.

Total: $2.066 million

Eychaner has given $1.5 million to the Priorities USA Action super PAC. He's also given more than $60,000 to the president's re-election committees, and he's listed as a major "bundler" for Obama, having raised at least $500,000 for the president. Eychaner, a gay-rights activist, also has donated millions to other nonprofit groups, including more than $1 million to the progressive EMILY's List organization. During the 2008 election cycle, Newsweb spent more than $1.7 million on Illinois elections and about $200,000 on the federal level, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

No. 3 (tie)

Jon Stryker, 54, a Michigan philanthropist.

Total: $2.066 million

Stryker has given $2 million to the Priorities USA Action super PAC and has given $66,000 in contributions to Obama and the Democratic Party. Stryker is the heir to namesake Stryker Corp., the major medical-device and equipment manufacturer. Stryker has been active in politics before the 2012 election; he contributed millions to help candidates statewide.

No. 5

Steve Mostyn, 41, a Houston-based personal injury attorney.

Total: $2.003 million

Mostyn has given more than $2 million to the Priorities USA Action super PAC that's helping Obama. Mostyn, the former head of the Texas Trial Lawyers Association, is a major backer of Democratic candidates in the state. He's also sank cash into a Texas political committee that tried unsuccessfully to unseat Gov. Rick Perry two years ago. Most famously, in 2009, Mostyn demanded tens of millions of dollars for property owners affected by Hurricane Ike in claims against the Texas Windstorm Insurance Association.

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Independents' vote crucial for Parker, Sinema in House battle

A tree-lined Phoenix street near the Arizona Biltmore offered a glimpse on a recent afternoon into the unpredictability of the 9th District congressional race.

Residents of three nearby houses were registered as Democrat, independent and Republican. Their varied affiliations reflect the nearly even split between the major parties in the district, as well as the prevalence of voters with "no party preference."

Republican Vernon Parker and Democrat Kyrsten Sinema will have to court the independent crowd more than candidates in any other U.S. House race in the state.

In Arizona, only the 9th District is dominated by independents, who outnumber Republicans by 15,000 and Democrats by 21,000. By definition, these so-called swing voters are not easy to pin down.

Arizona has two other competitive districts -- northern Arizona's 1st District and southern Arizona's 2nd District -- but neither has as many independent voters.

"I don't like to classify myself with one or another. It's like belonging to one religion," said 58-year-old interior designer Karen Rapp, the independent living on the Phoenix street. She said she often votes Democratic for state offices and Republican for federal offices because she likes the idea of parties splitting power and thinks their platforms work better in those positions.

This time around, though, she plans to deviate and vote for Sinema because a neighbor -- the nearby registered Democrat -- works for the former state lawmaker's campaign and has sung her praises.

To attract more independent voters like Rapp, Parker and Sinema are touting their crossover appeal and accusing each other of being "extreme."

The candidates tell stories of overcoming childhood poverty through education and hard work. They argue that their ideas about taxes and the economy will help middle-class families. And on some issues, such as immigration, they advocate positions closer to the middle than some in their parties.

For instance, Sinema voted in the Legislature for sending National Guard troops to the border and stiffening penalties for owners of drophouses. In Congress, she wants to require banks to freeze suspected drug-cartel accounts.

Parker, on the other hand, recently told The Arizona Republic he would support some version of the Dream Act or Florida Sen. Marco Rubio's alternative to provide a path to legal status for young immigrants brought to the United States illegally by their parents, though he did not specify what changes he would make to those plans.

Wes Gullett, a political strategist at the nonpartisan consulting firm FirstStrategic Communications and Public Affairs and a former Republican candidate for Phoenix mayor, said 9th District voters are among the most politically engaged in the state. Much of the district is expected to vote this fall.

An Arizona Republic analysis of voting data shows primary turnout, though small overall, was highest among independents in north and central Phoenix, suggesting the battle between Parker and Sinema may be fiercest there. The district also covers parts of Paradise Valley, Scottsdale, Tempe, Mesa, Chandler and Ahwatukee Foothills.

Gullett, who is not supporting either candidate, said north-central Phoenix neighborhoods like Arcadia and areas near Piestewa Peak are always highly contested in city, legislative and congressional races. Voters in those areas pay attention, he said.

"There's lots of opportunity there for both campaigns to do well," Gullett said. "It all comes back to those swing voters and figuring out who those swing voters are."

Campaign battlegrounds

The Republic's analysis of 9th District primary data shows:

Independent turnout was small, offering only limited clues to the general election. A variety of factors, including the challenge of requesting a primary ballot, deter independents from voting in the primary. But campaigns use the information as one indicator of where to spend resources for the general election, when many more independents and party voters will cast ballots.

North-central Phoenix, followed by parts of Tempe, Mesa and Ahwatukee, drew the strongest independent turnout during the primary. Those areas are likely to draw high participation in the general election and could become campaign battlegrounds.

Independents voted like their neighbors. In precincts where registered Republicans cast more primary votes, independents also swung Republican. The same was true for precincts that leaned Democratic. Parker and Sinema will likely garner the most support from independents in areas where their party bases are enthusiastic.

Though independent registration continues to grow in Arizona, independents who vote in primaries remain rare, as is the case with all voters. Only 8.8 percent of ballots cast in the 9th District primary came from independents, according to data provided to The Republic from the Maricopa County Elections Department through the state Democratic Party.

One reason independents turn out in low numbers is the extra step to receive early primary ballots, said Paul Johnson, a former Phoenix Democratic mayor. While party voters on the permanent early-voting list automatically receive primary ballots, independents must tell the county Elections Department which party ballot they want.

That keeps many independents from voting, said Johnson.

He is advocating for passage of Proposition 121, which would eliminate the party-ballot system and allow voters, regardless of party, to vote for any candidate during the primary. Independents then would receive early ballots as party voters do. Opponents say in practice the system is unlikely to boost independent turnout.

Rapp, the independent Phoenix voter, didn't vote in the primary because she didn't receive an early ballot.

"It wasn't convenient," Rapp said.

Other independents may sit out primaries because they don't feel strongly enough to vote or don't think it's right to participate in a partisan primary, said Michael O'Neil, president of Tempe polling firm O'Neil Associates Inc.

Since many more independents are expected to vote on Nov. 6, the primary patterns provide some insight but aren't enough to predict the general-election outcome, O'Neil said.

"It might be suggestive, but it's not necessarily predictive," he said.

Still, independents are key to the race, he said, because party registrations are so close. If party voters turn out in equal numbers, swing voters could determine whether Parker or Sinema win.

The closest correlation between the primary and the general is turnout, said Jim Haynes, president of the Phoenix-based polling company Behavior Research Center. Areas that drew heavy participation from independent voters in the primary are likely to stay that way in the general.

Precincts with the highest independent turnout were in north-central Phoenix, where both Parker and Sinema drew strong support from party voters because of their long ties there. Parker served near the area as Paradise Valley mayor and councilman. Sinema was a state legislator and social worker in the area. Both resigned this year to focus on their campaigns.

The north Phoenix Madison Heights precinct, which abuts Paradise Valley, had the highest independent participation, 15 percent. Precincts with independent turnout higher than 9 percent also occurred in west Mesa, south Tempe and Ahwatukee Foothills.

Residents in those neighborhoods typically have higher incomes, higher education and deeper roots in the community, Gullett said. Those factors are often linked to turnout.

One anomaly may be in the Tempe precincts around Arizona State University, according to Gullett, where primary participation was tiny. Those areas could become more active in the fall when students are settled in school, he said.

Many unknowns

Though it's harder to predict how independents will vote in the general election, Republic maps of primary returns show independents largely followed the party leanings in their neighborhoods.

Independents went red in Republican-leaning northeast Phoenix, west Mesa and west Chandler, while independents went blue in Democratic-leaning central Phoenix, Tempe and downtown Chandler.

Campaigns will use that information, coupled with voter profiles compiled by the state parties and past elections results, to determine voters and neighborhoods to target with direct mail, phone calls and door-knocking.

Haynes said he wasn't surprised to see independents leaning in the same direction as their party-registered neighbors. Some independents may be disaffected party members who still vote with the party they dropped.

But much remains unknown about many independents, he said, such as whether they are former Democrats, former Republicans or independents from the start. If he were a part of a campaign, Haynes said, his biggest effort would be to "find out who these people are and how to reach them."

Much work ahead

Though the Parker and Sinema campaigns see value in understanding the primary voting patterns, they promise to go after both independents and party voters and to compete across the district.

The candidates' work is cut out for them.

Jeanette Irwin was watering her garden while she talked politics. The 68-year-old retired teacher and registered Republican said she's open to voting for either candidate, though she likes what she's heard about Parker.

"I'm still deciding," Irwin said. "We have many times voted Democratic if the candidates are better. … I wouldn't vote party totally. I financially support the Republican Party, but hey, if somebody else is better ?"

Copyright 2012 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here