News

McNerney back in Washington after election results give him 1% edge over opponent

Harmer wants all votes counted first before he responds to results

Congressman Jerry McNerney (D-Pleasanton) returned to Washington this morning for the final session of the 111th Congress and prepared to start his third term when the new 112th Congress is seated in January.

McNerney came out of a protracted election count with a full 1% lead over his Republican challenger David Harmer.

Almost all absentee and provisional votes have now been counted in the four counties the 11th Congressional District which McNerney represents

California Secretary of State Debra Bowen reported that with fewer than 2,000 votes yet to be counted, McNerney has received 113,969 votes, or 48% of the total number of votes cast, against Harmer's 111,494 votes, or 46.9%. American Independent Party candidate David Christensen has 12,345 votes, or 5.1%.

Bowen's latest tally came late Friday afternoon with her next report due today.

But while the last votes counted in San Joaquin County failed to overcome McNerney's lead in Alameda and Santa Clara County, Harmer said he won't concede at this time.

"San Joaquin County accounts for over half the population of the 11th Congressional District," Harmer said in a statement late Wednesday. "The numbers reported on Tuesday confirm that I carried San Joaquin County by a solid margin. At present, it appears unlikely that my margin of victory in San Joaquin and Contra Costa Counties will be large enough to overcome the deficits in Alameda and Santa Clara Counties. But we don't yet know for sure."

"Given the protracted delay in reporting the results of absentee and provisional ballots, and the fact that thousands of ballots still remain to be counted, pressure to concede is unseemly," Harmer added. "Every legitimate vote should be accurately counted. Having waited three weeks for partial results, we can wait one more week for final numbers."

"Likewise," he continued, "we can't decide whether to request a recount until we know the original district-wide count. As of now, no one does."

The 11th Congressional District race has been one of the closest in the country. Harmer's defeat appeared certain last Wednesday when the registrar of San Joaquin County, Harmer's stronghold, finished counting the last 7,000 absentee and provisional ballots. The San Ramon attorney's lead decreased from 4.3% earlier to 3.6%, far below what he needed to overcome McNerney's strong lead in Alameda and Santa Clara counties.

McNerney aide Sarah Hersh said the results made it clear that the congressman has been re-elected.

The Associated Press agreed, transmitting a story saying that McNerney has won the 11th Congressional District race.

This will be McNerney's third term in Congress. He defeated longtime Republican incumbent Richard Pombo on 2006 and carried the 11th District by a wide margin in 2008.

Both McNerney and Harmer were in Washington earlier this month with McNerney taking his seat in a pre-Thanksgiving session of Congress and Harmer attending a briefing for incoming, newly-elected Republicans.

All counties have until tomorrow to give a final count to the Secretary of State's office, which will certify the outcome by next Monday, Dec. 6.

Comments

Like this comment
Posted by Neutral
a resident of Ironwood
on Nov 29, 2010 at 7:09 am

Now that he has lost three consecutive races for congress in 3 different districts maybe he will give up. This marked Harmer's third congressional run in three separate congressional districts.n He previously lost congressional races in California's 10th district in 2009 and Utah's 2nd district in 1996.

Just pondering, wonder if his acknowledged LDS Mormon religion was a benefit or problem in his political career? Or perhaps his ties to WaMu and the federal bailout funds he received in his severence package did him in?


Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 29, 2010 at 8:20 am

"Just pondering, wonder if his acknowledged LDS Mormon religion was a benefit or problem in his political career? Or perhaps his ties to WaMu and the federal bailout funds he received in his severence package did him in?"

I was planning to vote for Harmer because I do not like the job McNerney is doing (especially his agreement with the national healthcare stuff) but once I learned more about Harmer, I decided to vote for McNerney.

Harmer's religion did not bother me, but his views on social issues did - he is too extreme (some call that conservative, I call it plain backwards thinking). I overlook the social issues if I am getting a true fiscally conservative person, but Harmer, as much as he criticized the bailout, happily enjoyed his bonus (yes, a taxpayer financed bonus)... fiscally conservative? no, he only talks the talk but in the end it is just that: talk. Actions speak louder than words, and the fact that he worked for a bank who was the recipient of bailout funds and happily accepted the bonus speaks more than all the speeches he made about how horrible tarp was!

How was he able to run for two separate districts? Did he move?


Like this comment
Posted by Jofus
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 29, 2010 at 9:06 am

Now we are stuck with another two years of dolt McNerney pimping for Cruella Pelosi.


Like this comment
Posted by Chet
a resident of San Ramon
on Nov 29, 2010 at 1:18 pm

Jerry has been doing a great job working hard for us all in Congress. We should all be very proud we have Jerry again going back to Washington D.C. where he will be hard a work for all of us in District 11.


Like this comment
Posted by Tea party bad?
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 29, 2010 at 3:59 pm

Maybe Harmer lost because the tea party endorsed him:

Web Link

An endorsement by the tea party is not a good thing, perhaps Harmer learned that a little too late. Even states like Delaware refused to vote for the tea party person, and even in Alaska (Palin land), Miller, the tea party favorite, lost to a write-in candidate! This should be a wake up call to republians: extreme candidates, tea party types that appeal to the base only will NOT be all that successful. Again, look at what happened in Alaska! The GOP retained that seat because a normal republican ran against the tea party backed MIller. I am almost positive that had Miller ran against only the democrat, the Alaska seat might just be democrat right now!


Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 29, 2010 at 4:14 pm

Here is some information about Harmer and his finances:

Web Link

The source is questionable? But it is defending Harmer, it is an interesting reading


Like this comment
Posted by mike marcuse
a resident of Dublin
on Nov 29, 2010 at 8:42 pm

So, from the web link, it appears Harmer made a living helping WaMu collect on credit card debts (interest-upon-interest-upon-interest), and made a pretty penny so doing. What a guy! Maybe there's a new position for him with another bank to sue foreclosed upon families? Hope the carpetbagger enjoyed his junket to DC; it's about as close as he'll ever come to holding legislative office It isn't a matter of his religion -- he lost in Utah, too. He's a one-trick ideologue who marches in lockstep with Republican talking points.


Like this comment
Posted by steve
a resident of Parkside
on Nov 30, 2010 at 9:07 am

Lib bandwagon jumpers and tea party haters: It appears the tea party did very well this election cycle, thank you. You Dems did such a bang up job that you lost the house to more conservative candidates, knocking your idol, Pelosi down a notch in the process.
Of course, it appears Calif. is a lost cause, bucking the trend of common sense found elsewhere across the U.S. Congrats on you state incumbent victories---I'm sure you're looking forward to a few more years of the status quo, or worse. The only thing that can spoil your victory dance is the state filing for bankruptcy, invalidating all those lucrative union contracts and undercutting funding for your favorite social engineering projects.
You all must be so proud of what you've accomplished.


Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 30, 2010 at 1:14 pm

This was not a republican victory at all. The Senate is still in democratic hands, and the tea party backed candidates who won did so because the democrat alternative was not good and the state was fairly conservative (Kentucky, for instance, where Ron Paul's son won).

Given how Obama is viewed negatively, the republicans should have been able to take over both the senate and the house like in 1994 but did not do so (then again, in 1994 we did not have the tea party extremes involved)

Ask yourself this: if the tea party movement is so strong:

1) why didn't O'Donnell win in Delaware? Could it be because she is just another Palin (unqualified but gets the base to follow her, for reasons difficult for the rest of us to understand)?

2) why didn't Miller win in Alaska? He was backed by the tea party and Palin but lost to the write-in candidate.

3) why did Sharron Angle fail to win against unpopular Harry Reid? (I think her extreme views and tea party affiliation had something to do with that)

California was not the only place where republicans lost (Delaware also did not get a GOP person on board), or where the tea party is viewed in not such a good way (Alaska, Palin land, elected a republican but NOT the tea party favorite Miller)

I am not a fan of Obama or Pelosi or McNerney but the alternatives the republicans came up with were simply awful. Now in 2012, I hear Palin will run? Does the tea party really want an Obama second term? I sure hope not, because as an independent and not loyal to one particular party, I am hoping I can vote for the republican presidential candidate, but if that candidate is Palin or some other extreme like Huckabee, forget it: I will have to vote for Obama, or better say: against the extreme right wing.

Please understand something: The "base" of the GOP will always vote republican no matter what, so there is no need to "get their vote" with clowns like Palin, Harmer, O'Donnell. However, independents like me will never vote for such candidates.

You need more than the votes of the "base" to win an election.


Like this comment
Posted by steve
a resident of Parkside
on Nov 30, 2010 at 8:29 pm

Resident-you effective discounted the entire Republican takeover for the same reason the Dems didn't win Kentucky. When there are hundreds of posts up for grabs, did you really expect victory to be defined by nothing less than a clean sweep?
You may be the only one with that expectation, but good for you for thinking the Dems were that vulnerable.
If you think the good folks that lost in Alaska, Delaware, etc. were clowns, I can only imagine that flattering labels you would attach to such fine upstanding politicians as Chuckie Rangel, Chuckie Schumer, Maxine Waters, Babs Boxer, etc. God help us if that's the kind of representation we deserve..............


Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 30, 2010 at 9:50 pm

Barbara Boxer is not a good representative, but she is definitely better than Fiorina. Did you know that Fiorina said that, given the opportunity, she would vote to undo Roe v. Wade? I am sure that as a guy, you don't care much about women's rights, but....

And what Fiorina did at HP says it all. I am glad we do not have Fiorina in Washington (didn't she defend Palin in 2008?) Come on, no matter how conservative you are, you have to admit that Palin is a joke! (and a quitter too, she can't even claim as qualification her governorship since she quit half way!)


Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 1, 2010 at 8:23 am

"When there are hundreds of posts up for grabs, did you really expect victory to be defined by nothing less than a clean sweep?"

Yes, I think that if the GOP had put good candidates out there, we would have seen something similar to what happened in 1994. The tea party, imo, hurt the republicans' chance to succeed in an election where democrats were very unpopular.

Enough about that, though. It is official: McNerney won, and I am happy we do not have Harmer in Washington.


Like this comment
Posted by Independent
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 1, 2010 at 11:21 am

I have to agree with Resident. I too am independent and would have voted Republican for governor, senator, and representative if GOP had better candidates. What Repbulicans need are middle of the road, middle class candidates that aren't rich business people or career politicians and radically right.


Like this comment
Posted by mepartypatriot
a resident of Downtown
on Dec 1, 2010 at 6:30 pm

mepartypatriot is a registered user.

The Grand Obstructionist Party rules!

Damn America, it's all about power, baby.


Like this comment
Posted by Chet
a resident of San Ramon
on Dec 1, 2010 at 10:51 pm

We are thrilled to have Jerry McNerney elected again to represent us in Washington D.C. We sure hope he can keep some of the GOP wingnuts in check for the next 2 years. Thank goodness we had such a nice clean sweep in this election in the Tri-valley and Walnut Creek area. Congratulations are in order for the smartness of the voters.


Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Battle over downtown Livermore plan heats up
By Tim Hunt | 5 comments | 1,454 views

Couples: Sex and Connection (Chicken or Egg?)
By Chandrama Anderson | 1 comment | 1,086 views