Paul Hogarth, Beyond Chron

Political candidates work hard to campaign for office – sacrificing time, money, family and their sanity – but sometimes the final result is beyond their control. They simply were not the right candidate at the right time, and it’s often not because of anything they did wrong – or that they didn’t run a good campaign. It’s unfair, but life is not fair. In 2008, candidates who embody change, have a theme about change, and can credibly convince voters that they are genuine agents of change are going to prevail. Those who embody the status quo – or come off as insincere agents of change – will lose.

After Assemblyman Mark Leno took the unorthodox move of challenging a sitting State Senator, Carole Migden did not react very well. Her supporters have accused Leno of making this a grudge match, and some have even called him sexist for challenging the only lesbian Senator from Northern California (Sheila Kuehl and Christine Kehoe are both from Southern California.) But Migden may have her own set of problems, because her campaign is premised on the fact that she has a good record – and an incumbent should normally not go challenged. In other words, she’s running on experience.

At the first State Senate debate – sponsored by the San Francisco Young Democrats – Leno made his opening statement that he was running to “challenge the status quo and fight for change.” Migden started her opening statement with “I’m Carole Migden and I am the status quo” – and she then rattled off her accomplishments in the legislature. If 2008 was a year where experience mattered more than change, it might be effective. But voters are craving for change – and it won’t work.