The outcome of this race is difficult for me to write about, as I was very enthusiastic about Mary's campaign: her progressive stances on issues from Iraq to healthcare to accountability for the Bush Administration are all very attractive, and of the three candidates, she is by far the most charismatic and hard-nosed.  She also knows exactly what it takes to run a good campaign, and it was something of an open secret in the local political scene that Elton Gallegly was very nervous about having to face her in November.  I was so impressed with Mary (and still am) that I signed on to be her volunteer Netroots Outreach Coordinator.  But in a low-turnout election, the strangest things can happen.

The three candidates were contrasts in styles.  Of the three, Mary had by far the best campaign organization, ground game, and persuasion--the sorts of nuts-and-bolts messaging and GOTV politics that anyone who has been to DFA training courses like I have (or Camp Wellstone training, as Mary has) knows are supposed to win you elections if done right.  Mary raised tens of thousands of dollars, and spent them in the most effective way that could have been advised: on robocalling and direct mail.  Her team of volunteers spent countless hours phonebanking, securing thousands of "definitely yes" voters, and we had a decent earned media campaign of local appearances, fundraisers, and letters to the editor.  Mary also secured the endorsements of many progrsesive figures and organizations, including Sheila Kuehl, the Progressive Democrats of America and the California Nurses Assocation.

Jill Martinez, by contrast, ran what could best be described as the "Hillary Clinton" campaign: as the previous Democratic nominee, she ran as a the candidate of inevitability and the establishment: the nose-to-the-grindstone Democrat who had always worked hard in the district, and would continue to work hard for it.  Unfortunately for Martinez, she was still over $80,000 in debt from her 2006 campaign (nor was she exactly forthcoming about that fact, to put it mildly), and thus did not put in place any serious kind of ground game in terms of phonebanking, mailers or other nuts-and-bolts politics--preferring instead to appear at as many events as possible to get earned media, and boost name recognition through yard signs.

Marta Jorgensen, meanwhile, is from the northernmost part of the district (traditionally underserved by the more centrally-focused representation of Gallegly), and essentially entered the race late as a spoiler looking to highlight the issues of that portion of the district.  She had no campaign apparatus to speak of, attended few events, and had no significant endorsements to speak of.  On April 24th, Marta Jorgensen quit the race and endorsed Martinez.  Then, on May 19th, she re-entered the race--again due to a perceived slight to her part of the district:

"I was just getting used to the idea of not being in the race but I had some people contact me this week who were really getting upset that they lived in the central valley up here, the Lompoc valley, Orcutt, andparts of Santa Maria," Jorgensen said. "They felt like the candidates were never coming up here to campaign. I'd never seen them so I really helped what they were doing."

After re-entering, Jorgensen did not do any significant campaigning--and yet, come election day Jorgensen cruised to an easy victory with 46.1% of the vote in a 3-way race.  Martinez, meanwhile, carried 31.6% to Pallant's 22.3%.  How was this possible?

Apparently, the ballot designations overrode any other political concerns: Democrats far preferred to vote for an "educator" over a "businesswoman (Martinez).  And they sure as hell weren't going to vote for an "insurance agent" (Pallant), no matter how progressive her positions or effective her ground game and GOTV.  The results were shocking to everyone--not least of all to Jorgensen, who wasn't even apparently tracking the results on election night.  As the Ventura County Star reports:

Apparently powered by the appeal of the word "educator," a teacher and former nurse from Solvang appeared headed to an unexpected win in the three-way race for the Democratic nomination in the 24th Congressional District.

Marta Jorgensen, reached by phone Tuesday evening and informed of the early returns, was incredulous. "You're kidding! That's a pretty amazing thing."

For three weeks during the campaign, Jorgensen had suspended campaigning and announced she was supporting Jill Martinez, a developer of affordable housing and the Democratic nominee from two years ago.

But, saying she thought Martinez and Oak Park insurance agent Mary Pallant were not paying enough attention to Santa Barbara County voters, Jorgensen jumped back in.

"I was certain I had shot myself in the foot on that," she said. "I thought maybe I'd get 8 or 10 percent."

As the article goes on to point out, the ballot designations were the key:

The key to Jorgensen's apparent victory was likely her ballot designation: "Educator."

In a race in which none of the candidates spent much money to introduce themselves to voters, many Democrats apparently preferred that designation to those listed on the ballot below Martinez ("Businesswoman/Housing Developer") and Pallant ("Insurance Agent").

Jorgensen teaches computer classes in her home, and last year taught technology and journalism to third-, fourth- and fifth-graders at a private school in the Santa Ynez Valley.

And evidently, "businesswoman/housing developer" was significantly more attractive than "insurance agent."

Unfortunately, Jorgensen's victory means that this race is effectively off the map for Democrats, since it's unlikely that Jorgensen will be able to command the sort of fundraising, institutional support and visibility necessary to make a serious run at Gallegly.  While I commend her on her victory over both Jill and Mary and hope she puts together an effective race, either of the latter two candidates would have made a serious run at Gallegly forcing him to sweat, and even in defeat would have helped build the local Democratic Party and leverage significant volunteer efforts.  Now it appears that we will have to wait for another two years for a higher-turnout election and an even bluer district demographic for a serious challenge to Gallegly's awful representation here.

Nevertheless, let this be a lesson for many Democrats currently considering elected office: among the many other considerations in an election season, don't overlook the power of a progressive-sounding ballot designation that shies away from anything having to do with business, housing development, insurance or the like.  Democrats are fed up with anything related to Republican-sounding industries and are looking for a change--even if they do sometimes look for it in the most shallow ways.

And that, it must be admitted, is actually a good thing.