Battle for 2nd Place Not Looking Good for Perez and Dovinh

Julio Perez (Photo: Chris Prevatt)

SANTA ANA — For those of us hoping for a successful come-from-behind victory (for 2nd place) in the 69th and 72nd Assembly district contests, Tuesday brought only disappointment. From where I sit, it looks like success will be a bit too high of a hurdle to clear.

In the 69th Assembly contest Julio Perez only advanced on Joe Moreno by 203 votes. He earned only 234 out of 691 ballots cast, 33.86%. That percentage was less than the 36% he had on Monday. In addition to Perez reducing his margin by 3%, Moreno increased his portion of the take by 5.5%. In short, the votes for Perez went in the wrong direction. 691 votes were added to the totals in the 69th, and an additional 106 ballots tabulated that either had no votes, or more than one vote, in the contest.

At the end of the day, 797 of the estimated 1,575 ballots remaining were counted on Tuesday. There are 778 ballots remaining to be tabulated. Based on the percentage of over and under-votes recorded Tuesday, we can surmise that about 103 of the remaining ballots will have no vote to be recorded, leaving 675 valid ballots. To surpass Moreno, Perez will need to gain a net of 404 votes. That’s a  long way to go, and to get there Perez would need to get seven votes to every one vote for Moreno. Not very likely.

Joseph Dovinh (Photo: Chris Prevatt)

The projections look even worse for Joe Dovinh in the 72nd Assembly race. Dovinh lost ground on Monday by 58 votes. He now sits at 279 votes behind Travis Allen. Long Pham also closed the distance between himself and Dovinh by nine votes. They are now separated by 71 votes. There are 1,327 ballots remaining to be counted, but after today’s numbers, it looks unlikely that Joe Dovinh will pull off a come-from-behind victory over Travis Allen. It is even possible that he will lose third place to Long Pham.

The counting continues this morning, but it’s looking like we can expect that the first and second place finishers on election night, will be facing off in the November general election.

  5 comments for “Battle for 2nd Place Not Looking Good for Perez and Dovinh

  1. Leading Candidate
    June 13, 2012 at 6:25 pm

    Its official, Julio will miss out on second place by about 260 votes. Hey Paco Barragan, since you love to comment here, how is taking your stand coming along? How was your campaign plan of not raising money, not precinct walking but hoping all the people you know would just simply vote for you coming along? Seriously, we never want to hear you complain about Tom Daly or any of his votes. You were told to stay the f_ck out and you decided to stay in because you disagreed with Julio on one f-cken issue. SO with no money, but knowing 500 people in the 69th AD you thought you could somehow win this campaign, when half of the 500 people you know were supporting Julio? Were you paid by Daly to run or are you just a f_cken idiot?

    • Repulsed
      June 13, 2012 at 7:46 pm

      Thank you Paco. Perez wouldn’t stand a chance even if he were #2. Is it because of his stance on drivers licenses for illegals, or possibly because those of us in the non-union real world are sick and tired of the union bully shenanigans

    • June 14, 2012 at 9:01 am

      “You were told to stay the f_ck out and you decided to stay in because you disagreed with Julio on one f-cken issue.”

      O señor mi so sorry mi no understand inglesh mucho, when yu ax mi tu stey out of raze.

      Mi so sorry tu, mi no know tu count.
      Me no understand disagree on many issues eyquals 1.

      Mi need tu ask yu only ONE por favor:

      1 . pleise next time yu tel me how tu vote too.

      2. Daly no pay me yet, kan yu help me get mucho money from him, lik he promiss?

      3. me promise to get idiota (big idea) out of me head, if u promise to get your head out of yor burro.

      • Leading Candidate
        June 14, 2012 at 6:48 pm

        Why don’t you try actually responding Paco? So Daly did not pay you, you just helped on your own. Thats like sucking d_ck for crack. I heard you personally tell Julio you only disagreed with him on pension reform. Guess what, so do I and I didnt go run for Assembly and I know more then 600 people in the 69th AD. SO thanks a lot pendejo. Just dont ever criticize Tom Daly, you have lost the right to do it. Punk dumb ass.

  2. June 14, 2012 at 11:36 pm

    @ LC:

    You must not have been listening . . . you must have been too busy listening to your own RAH RAH cheer-leading for Julio.

    And some of Julio’s supporters have had a very offensive attitude. You sound like AM (out of courtesy I will not mention the full name).

    I strongly disagree with Julio, on several areas, because I believe his views would be detrimental to the recovery of our state, and I am relieved that two people are not advancing:

    1) Michele Martinez because she has demonstrated to be ethically challenged.

    2) Julio – because of his stance on the issues and the fact that the majority of his state government employee unions supporters have been blocking necessary reforms to education and pensions. Even some local trade unions people expressed their strong concerns about Julio, and the dealings at Sacramento.

    My Disagreements.

    1) TAX Policy – Julio proposed to raise taxes no matter what.

    2) Pension Reform – none realistically proposed

    3) Job killing measures: Julio proposed to cut-off assistance (both technical & targeted financial incentives to small & medium sized businesses which create 90% of the jobs).

    4) Stance on Realignment – spending with no proposal for sound revenue generation other than to propose to raise taxes.

    5) No ideas on necessary educational reforms and how to improve access to education and to make it more affordable.

    6) High Speed Rail – He is all for it, without regard to scrutinizing or challenging the ever increasing costs.

    7) His personal debt mismanagement, and his lack of proper response to this.

    8) Lack of demonstrated experience creating jobs in the private sector.

    9) His “resume inflation” in claiming he was representing the Mexican community through the IME (Instituto de Mexicanos en el Exterior – Institute for Mexicans Abroad); and the other IME Mexican representatives challenging him openly and calling him a liar for NOT representing them. (What concerned me about this was that others had concerns about his integrity, and that he was claiming to have done something when he had not).

    This is sample – to know more see my comments & concerns at link below:
    http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2012/06/from-first-304-provisionals-julio-gains-79-of-606-needed-votes/

    WITH RESPECT TO THE OFFENSIVE ATTITUDE:
    Some community people asked me to consider running. I told them to give me some time to look at my experience, look at the issues and then decide if I could develop some real solutions. I discovered that I did. My stated concern was that the other candidates had the TIME and MONEY advantage and that we might be playing catch up, and might not be able to really catch. Although, I would follow some strategies to try to compensate for this.

    As I was exploring running I made inquiries of others, I asked AM & others specifically:

    ME: “What do you think JULIO or MICHELE bring to the Table, or what they will contribute?”

    Answer I got, “NOTHING. They bring zero to the table.”

    ME: “OK. So who are you endorsing or voting for?”
    (I was expecting to hear Tom Daly, since he was the other Democrat, and the people I was asking were Demos. Although, at the time we also had my Marine brother Robert Hammond-Republican in the race.)

    Answer: was either Julio or Michele, but primarily JULIO.

    ME: “Why would you vote Julio or Michele, if you said they contribute nothing?”

    Answer: “and what you want the ‘Pinche’ Gringos to win”

    This was the same OFFENSIVE sentiment that I heard, over and over again, from people that should know better . . .

    ME:
    “Do yourselves a favor and keep an open mind. You say that Julio (or Michele) contribute NOTHING, and yet you are going to go all out and endorse and vote for them…and you have been in the community as leaders for decades . . . and will continue there trying to correct the mismanagement or disfunctions that they bring.”

    ME: “Are you wondering why I am asking all this (I was making extensive inquiries)?”

    Answer: “Because someone asked you to endorse someone else.”

    ME: “No. Because I am considering running.”

    Answer: “Why would you do that and split the Latino vote, and ensure that the pinche gringos win”.

    This was the type of OFFENSIVE attitude I was encountering from “community leaders” . . . perhaps they have been jaded from their earlier “fights”, but they kept perpetuating the worst of the ethnic or partisan politics.

    ADD to this, the derogatory terms I would hear being used to describe the “women’s” vote that Michele was likely to gather, although not guaranteed.

    And ADD to this the OFFENSIVE sense or notion of ENTITLEMENT…how dare myself or anyone else consider running.

    My overall response:
    We would be pissed and up in arms, if we knew someone would engage in racial and ethnic discrimination, in elementary school, in high school, at work, at church, in the military…and yet some of those in community were engaging in this.

    @ LC, you are being disingenuous and with your comments you are reflecting the same “f___up” attitude that I encountered and that is a disservice to the community.

    So let me rephrase myself:
    I asked you to “promise to get your head out of yor burro”,
    on second thought, “get your burro out of your head!”

    Paco Barragan

Comments are closed.