One in 10 California voters pick Leland Yee for secretary of state

June 4, 2014
Leland Yee

Leland Yee

Approximately 10 percent of Californians who voted in the secretary of state primary election selected alleged crime boss Leland Yee as their choice to become the state’s next chief elections officer.

Yee, a suspended state senator, is currently out on bail following a March arrest for firearms trafficking and political corruption. Federal prosecutors accuse Yee of sidestepping campaign donation rules and engaging in a conspiracy to deal automatic guns and shoulder-launched missiles.

Following the arrest, Yee’s attorney said that Yee was withdrawing his candidacy for secretary of state.

Still, Yee received a total of 287,590 votes, or 9.8 percent of the votes cast in the secretary of state election. He finished third in an eight-person race for the office.

In San Luis Obispo County, Yee tallied 4,617 votes, or 10.87 percent. Yee was the third most popular secretary of state candidate in the county, as well.

Elections officials have not yet counted all of the vote by mail ballots, so Yee’s vote count will likely rise.


10% actually voted for this gun-running, gun-banning, friend-of-Shrimp-Boy criminal? Really?

This goes to show just how screwed-up the electorate is in CA. May God help CA!


I bet the same result would have occurred in most other large (population) states. There are just too many Americans who vote with no (or inaccurate) information about the candidates. It is still a sad state of affairs. Remember that Florida elected a governor (Scott) not too long ago who had previously been the CEO of a health care company that had record fines for medicare fraud while under his management. That wasn’t enough for criminal charges but ethically it compares to Yee.


Vote for D party Dat gives you D most stuff? “…………most voters cast their ballots primarily on the basis of partisan identification (which is often simply inherited from their parents)…..” “The American Voter” 1960.


He is a democrat, that says it all for him and the idiots that voted for him.


I bet that if were Republican, he would have received the same proportion of Republican votes as he did of the Democrat votes. There are ignorant people in both parties who vote based only on the candidates party — especially when the office involved is a low-profile one.


Washington D.C. re-elected democrat Mayor marion berry after he served a prison term for smoking crack with a prostitute.

Many ( most? ) leftists are just voting to continue the welfare checks. Sad but true.


So, “( most? )” leftists are on welfare? Really? Have you got, maybe, one shred of evidence to back that up? I’ll wait…


I don’t know if he is right or not. Most leftists I know aren’t on welfare but the leftists are much more likely to tell those on welfare what they want to hear.

However, I do think that he greatly underestimates the proportion of poor white folks also on welfare — especially in the area from the rust belt to the gulf coast swamps. A lot of them do vote “conservative.”


No, he is wrong. Most leftists are NOT on welfare. But most welfare recipients ARE leftists.


80% of the people that I know that vote democrat are on welfare or have a close relative on welfare.


almost all major brand corporations where I shop are on welfare


It confirms that name recognition counts more than why people recognize his name.


and your position on the ballot


. . . And your party affiliation.

Jorge Estrada

Do we need to know who voted for him too?


Sadly, Smiley, you just might be wright :(


Just goes to show the caliber or intelligence of at least 10% of the voters which is probably a low number. Then of course, their are the diehards that will stick to the party and chosen candidate of the party regardless of their moral compass. Says a lot about them!


I would be more inclined to say that it shows the laziness of at least 10% of the voters. I am betting that almost all those who voted for him were ignorant of the charges against him. They probably voted for him for him due to his party affiliation or possibly a few due to his ethnicity. I suppose that in a way, not going to the trouble of looking up at least a little information about a candidate for whom you would consider voting also shows a lack of intelligence but maybe not a total lack thereof.


At least we all know about his criminal record. The others are an unknown. He is might be the safe bet!