(UPDATED) First Big Victory for Open Primary, Pete Stark Deafeted
By Chad Peace | 11/06/2012 | California, Congressional | 4 Comments
(California) – In a race that has put the new Top Two primary system to the test, Democrat Eric Swalwell, 31, challenged long-time incumbent Democrat Pete Stark, 81, for the 15th Congressional District. With 42% of the vote counted, Swallwell is leaded with over 55% of the vote. More than half the votes are still left for counting, but as of now, it appears Swalwell has won California’s new non-partisan primary battle against the incumbent.
[Eric Swallwell has officially defeated the incumbent with just over 53% of the vote]
Stark, 81, has held his seat since 1972 and was, perhaps for the first time in his career, required to seriously defend his post. The race was one of the most divisive and nasty races in California, as each candidate took personal jabs at one another in an effort to undercut their credibility.
Opponents of California’s top-two open primary system argue that a situation where two members of the same party on the general election ballot would leave voters without a choice. Perhaps, the 15th Congressional District is the first example of where Republican and Independent voters in a predominately Democratic district have had a choice for the first time. Under the old system, Swalwell would have been defeated in the primary and Stark would have coasted into another term. Not this year.
Swalwell and Stark may be from the same party, but they do differ on policy and practice. Swalwell insisted that the district needed “new energy and ideas.” Swalwell, 50 years the junior of his opponent, had great success in resonating with constituents and appealing to voters across party lines.
Stark is known to be one of the most partisan members of California’s congress and had a turbulent and bizarre campaign. In October, Swalwell said: “He’s not up for the job and it’s time to move on. You have to be connected and on the ground and he’s been absent and asleep at the wheel.”





Leave Your Comment →
4 Comments
Arthur Christopher Schaper
11.07.2012
At least there is one victory to rejoice in — no more Peter Stark!
Richard Winger
11.07.2012
@richardwinger
Congressman Stark is an expert on banking, and despite his gruff edges he has shown great skill in introducing bills on important subjects that actually pass, even in the Republican-majority U.S. House this last congress. What is so wonderful about defeating him? Is there some rule that says people in their 80′s are no good? What about Winston Churchill, Konrad Adenauer, Syngman Rhee, all who provided excellent leadership while they were in their 80′s? I think it’s called ageism.
Chad Peace
04.22.2013
@Chad_Peace
Just saw this comment about 6 months later. Richard, I think you missed the point of the article … and the non-partisan primary. The point is that Stark is a bitter partisan and long-time incumbent. He would have never lost under the old system, which institutionalizes party-line candidates.
richard winger
04.23.2013
I just re-read the article on Pete Stark on wiki. There is nothing there that suggests he ever was a bitter partisan. The wiki article mentions several courageous votes of his that contradicted his own party’s position, but nothing at all that says he was a bitter partisan. He certainly was a rude person during the 2012 campaign but that is not the same thing at all.