Garvey would be a home run for California
Readers respond to Question of the Week: Schiff touts Garvey; Porter promos Early?
Schiff on Garvey
It is a terrible state of affairs when a political ad is not about the benefits of electing the the individual buying the ad but is instead touting the “deficiencies” of their opponent. The culture of getting elected on the platform of “I'm not ...“instead of making promises of the politician's plans to benefit the public is in my opinion a loathsome approach.
— Mike Roach, Moreno Valley
Californians need to wake up and vote accordingly
We're being played and deceived big time by the unscrupulous candidates Adam Schiff and Katie Porter. Perhaps
their political shenanigans will backfire on them, presenting a golden opportunity for the Golden State to rediscover itself and shed the shackles of dubious politicians like Schiff and Porter. Voters of all political stripes should do exactly what Schiff and Porter profess, and vote for Garvey or Early during this primary election.
— Dain Gingerelli, Temecula
Politics is a very dirty business where devious acts are employed in an attempt to sway voters. True, Garvey has a steep hill to climb, but honestly, I think having someone in the Senate that does not have serious political ties would be better for the state. Garvey is a quick learner and would be a fabulous senator for California. If voters put aside their political party fervor and recognize the problems in Congress are caused by lifetime politicians and vote with their mind, heart and soul, the choice for the California Senate seat is a home run.
— Steve Lucas, Van Nuys
Senate needs a Republican
Given California's increasing problems we can't afford to have lying Schiff in the Senate. We can expect considerably more truth with Early or Garvey. Neither Schiff, Lee nor Porter have the qualities which are sorely needed at this time. They have the liabilities. With the increasing numbers of migrants and rising crime, a Republican would create a rational balance that we desperately need. We can't afford the increasing massive monetary giveaways that would inevitably result from the existing party.
— William C. Bradshaw,
Apple Valley