This Tuesday is Election Day so those registered to vote should go out and do so. The ballot for this primary election doesn't look all too interesting but it sets the stage for the big November battles that'll be played out.

The Democrats were hurt when neither Rob Reiner nor Warren Beatty would run for governor to challenge the star power of Arnold Schwarzenegger. Instead, Treasurer Phil Angelides and Controller Steve Westly are vying for the nomination. If you look at the issues, these two have more in common than they do different. That's why after some background ads on themselves, they went directly to attack ads on each other's backgrounds (Angelides and his real estate background or Westly with his ties to business and Schwarzenegger) instead of criticizing the other on their stances on the issues. I can't vote in this race, but I'm leaning toward Westly, a former Silicon Valley exec at eBay who would be able to grow California and its economy. However, a vote for either will certainly embrace the values of the Democratic Party in its fight against Arnold, which will be tough.

The state only has two ballot propositions this time which is weird since that's an awfully low number. The first is a library bond which should be allowed to pass. The second is preschool education for all 4-year-olds. It's a nice idea, but its execution is bad. It taxes the rich, which is a very volatile source of revenue, especially in this state. Preschool programs already exist for most of the lower-income families this proposal is designed to reach. And it requires these pre-school teachers to get a Bachelor's degree, which is absurd and a waste of resources when regular schools are running out of qualified teachers.

Turning local toward the San Jose mayor's race...if the winner receives 50%+1 of the vote, he or she would be elected mayor. However, with 5 prominent front-runners and 5 others running, this race is more likely headed to a runoff with the top two facing off in November. The city has been rocked by scandal, back-room deals and some financial mismanagement in recent years, which is why all candidates are calling for open government and accountability. A vote for Cindy Chavez would be a vote of confidence for the Ron Gonzales' administration, which by all accounts has not been a stellar one. A smaller percentage of San Joseans approve of the job Gonzales is doing than Americans do of George W. Bush. With Chavez' fingerprints all over the council's actions in the last few years and her insistence to continue with these policies, this really can't continue. Chuck Reed has a lot of good ideas and is considering himself to be the only honest, open, and ethical candidate who will not be influenced by anyone. That's well-intentioned but on the issues, he's usually the one who goes against the council and if you can't work with the council, then nothing can get done. Michael Mulcahy certainly looks the part of a politician and he is an outsider, but a complete outsider would not be advisable. His previous experience in the city is limited and the Mercury News notes his lack of reaching out to different parts of the community. As a result, either of the Davids would be a wise choice to run in the runoff in November with me leaning toward Pandori due to his experience during the good (at least comparatively) years on the council and his clear plan to rebuild San Jose from within through a revitalization of the parks and fiscal responsibility. It doesn't hurt that he went to Cal. Cortese is currently a councilman who would be able to work with this council while calling for open practices in the city and focusing on neighborhoods.