# California recall debate **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 25, 2003, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-recall-debate/203793 "2003-09-25T17:26:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2003, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-recall-debate/203793/21 "2003-09-27T15:22:10Z")
> [@](#): > > Stoid wrote: > I think a whole lot of people are going to fuck this up. I hope so! ---
**Author:** ![Nobody](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/94ad74/32.png) [@Nobody](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nobody)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2003, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-recall-debate/203793/22 "2003-09-27T15:54:00Z")
> [@](#): > > **Arnold Shwarzenegger - Too many jokes and one liners and not enough substance. He has some interesting ideas but doesn’t seem to have a comprehensive plan, just ideas. Also, his links to special interest groups leave me a little uneasy.** > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by smiling bandit \* > \*\*I don’t agree. I think he’s being jovial on purpose because it reassures voters they aren’t getting a blank-faced suit. He’s trying to make voters comfortable with him, rather than make them believe in his ideas. \*\* I don’t know if you saw this or not, but before the debates, he was the O’Reilly factor. During that interview he was rather stiff, and answered question by basically firing off memorized lines. In short, he almost seemed like a “blank-faced suit”. I think that his campaign manager or somebody must have convinced him that he needed to loosen up for the debate. ---
**Author:** ![musicguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ba0ec/32.png) [@musicguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/musicguy)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2003, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-recall-debate/203793/23 "2003-09-27T19:38:50Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Stoid \* > \*\*It is extremely important for people to understand that it is not an either/or vote. You vote for whether you want the recall or not, AND you vote for who you want to win IF the recall passes anyway. > > I think a whole lot of people are going to fuck this up. \*\* Uh, **Stoid** , perhaps you didn’t see where I said that I was voting no on the recall \*and \* yes for Arnold. ---
**Author:** ![SPOOFE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@SPOOFE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SPOOFE)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2003, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-recall-debate/203793/24 "2003-09-27T21:15:39Z")
> [@](#): > > Cruz Bustamonte - I thought he performed poorly at times, though I liked his presence in some instances. Oddly I think his answer on Illegal immigrants was the better part of his performance. Why? He didn’t answer the question. He was asked how much he thought we should spend on health care for illegal immigrants… he responded with a flowing rant about how “illegals are people too!”… but gave no number. Does that mean he thinks ZERO dollars should be spent, or an infinite number? Bustamante is vile, dishonest, and should be catapulted out of the country. ---
**Author:** ![squeegee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/squeegee/32/14537_2.png) [@squeegee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/squeegee)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2003, 6:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-recall-debate/203793/25 "2003-09-28T06:13:25Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SPOOFE \* > Bustamante is vile, dishonest, and should be catapulted out of the country. Hmmm, I’m not sure I’d put it quite as vehemently but the Indian Casino thing definitely has me leaning that direction. Jeezus, what a fuckup this election is turning into. Recall: a) keep the current fucked-up status, or b) roll the dice for some clown. Some clowns: Bustamonte: status quo. A nice fuck-you to the recallers if you want that. A career civil servant and someone who seems to know what he’s doing. And a suspicious aura of having the Davis handicap: an apparent willingness to sell out the office in exchange for donations. The indian donation thing pisses me off. Arnold: Amateur hour. Smart guy, but… jeezus. CA needs someone who knows where the bodies are buried and can beat up the legislature and get shit happening NOW, not some dickhead (no matter how intelligent or well intentioned or determined) who will use up a couple of years finding out who does what in Sacramento. McClintock: Surprisingly statesmanlike, but I can’t go further. His politics are not mine. A non-starter for me, but he’s come off pretty well in the debates etc. Comejo: Also amateur hour. I do like some of his politics; he has damned good points to make about the tax structure. Basically unwinnable, which I’m not sure is a good or bad thing. Huffington: pure entertainment, she’s often fun, or sometimes not. Unelectable. Plus the zillion dwarves. Whee. No good choices here. I’m gonna hold my nose and vote for… damnifiknow. 😕 ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2003, 6:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-recall-debate/203793/26 "2003-09-28T06:44:47Z")
Am I the only one who isn’t particularly bugged if Bustamante is beholden to Native Americans? What’s the worst-case scenario? They get legislation passed that allows them to operate casinos and make a lot of money. Considering that we stole their country and committed genocide against their race, it just doesn’t seem all that unfair to me.😕 ---
**Author:** ![squeegee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/squeegee/32/14537_2.png) [@squeegee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/squeegee)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2003, 6:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-recall-debate/203793/27 "2003-09-28T06:56:58Z")
Blowero: the issue (at least for me) is that Davis has had a bunch of fund-raising scandels, and now Bustamonte seems to be having his own. It looks sleazy. Which isn’t isn’t to say that any politician, even Arnold, is a virgin in this area.:dubious: ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2003, 7:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-recall-debate/203793/28 "2003-09-28T07:01:33Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by squeegee \* > Blowero: > > the issue (at least for me) is that Davis has had a bunch of fund-raising scandels, and now Bustamonte seems to be having his own. It looks sleazy. Yeah, I know Cruz was ordered to give back some money he wasn’t supposed to use, but I don’t get the objection to the _Indian_ donation thing. ---
**Author:** ![squeegee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/squeegee/32/14537_2.png) [@squeegee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/squeegee)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2003, 7:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-recall-debate/203793/29 "2003-09-28T07:14:51Z")
blowero - Point taken. I don’t get it either, although I haven’t seen more than a very little “indian money is eeevil” coverage. ---
**Author:** ![squeegee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/squeegee/32/14537_2.png) [@squeegee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/squeegee)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2003, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-recall-debate/203793/30 "2003-09-28T13:43:12Z")
I must confess I was actually relieved when the 9th circuit had delayed the election: a) We’d all get a few months to find out who all these clowns _really_ were before taking one home and waking up to something coyote-ugly the next day. I fear it’s gonna be one helluva hangover. b) The recall delay, at least in theory, had the potential to get most of the legal issues out of the way _before_ the election, so we could all vote and be done with it. Now the election is October 7th, and October 8th is the day the lawsuits will start. I fear it will be Florida all over again. (@#%@#%) ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2003, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-recall-debate/203793/31 "2003-09-28T14:18:14Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by squeegee \* > . I fear it will be Florida all over again. (@#%@#%) Only if Bustamante loses.🙂 ---
**Author:** ![squeegee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/squeegee/32/14537_2.png) [@squeegee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/squeegee)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2003, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-recall-debate/203793/32 "2003-09-28T14:40:50Z")
Perfect, John. Just perfect. That’s the sort of sentiment that we’re all going to hear on October 8th and forever after, no matter who wins, from whichever partisans had a losing dog in the race. The Dems _and_ Pubbies will bleat endlessly about how fucked up and dishonest everyone else is, while thier chosen hero is a paragon. I am so fucking sick of this recall. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2003, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-recall-debate/203793/33 "2003-09-28T22:13:48Z")
No matter who wins the recall election, I’ll bet someone else will start the ball rolling on another recall 91 days afterward. 😉 (And no, I had that gag before _Doonesbury_ did. 🙂 ) ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2003, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-recall-debate/203793/34 "2003-09-29T00:53:46Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by rjung \* > \*\*No matter who wins the recall election, I’ll bet someone else will start the ball rolling on another recall 91 days afterward. 😉 > > (And no, I had that gag before _Doonesbury_ did. 🙂 ) \*\* Well, there’s been a recall effort against every governor for the last 40 yrs. It shouldn’t surprise anyone if the next gov gets one after him. In fact, it would be unusual if there wasn’t one. Squeegee: Do you know what a smiley face means?☹ ---
**Author:** ![squeegee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/squeegee/32/14537_2.png) [@squeegee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/squeegee)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2003, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-recall-debate/203793/35 "2003-09-29T15:34:34Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by John Mace \* > Squeegee: Do you know what a smiley face means?☹ Sorry, John. My vitriol was directed at the partisans and sore losers that will be out there on Oct 8th, not at you. I didn’t express that very clearly. Apologies. > [@](#): > > Well, there’s been a recall effort against every governor for the last 40 yrs Really? I hadn’t heard that every governor had been targeted. I think I recall a failed recall effort against Wilson. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2003, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-recall-debate/203793/36 "2003-09-29T22:37:37Z")
> [@](#): > > Really? I hadn’t heard that every governor had been targeted. I don’t have a cite, but I’ve read it in many different news articles. Perhaps someone else might be able to supply a good cite. I did a bit of googling, but came up dry. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2003, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-recall-debate/203793/37 "2003-09-30T00:36:00Z")
> [@](#): > > I read this morning that Arnold lost points in the debate with women, in his attacks on Huffington. If true it’s not a good sign for him. I’m coming to this discussion late, but I just had to mention this: I watched the debate, and thought it was largely a train wreck and none of the candidates came off particularly well. But I thought that Bustamante had an absolutely _horrible_ moment when Huffington was criticizing him, and he was rolling his eyes and grinning at the audience going, “Yes, Arianna… Yes Arianna…Yes, Arianna…” It came off as obnoxiously smug and condescending, and if anyone lost points with women I would have expected Bustamante to lose them right there. Hell, I’m a man and -I- was offended by that behaviour. She’s a damned candidate for governor, not a hectoring wife. And of course, the news now is that Arnold catapulted WAY into the lead after the debates, and he’s now leading Bustamante 40% to 25%. Clearly, the audience thought that Arnold was the winner. Probably because all he had to do to ‘win’ was to show that he wasn’t just another hollywood flake. He benefitted big time from low expectations. As for why Arnold isn’t being specific, it’s fairly clear to me - he’s not being specifics because his plan for the state is not very palatable to California voters. He is basically an economic Libertarian. He actually sends copies of Milton Friedman’s “Free To Choose” to friends and acquaintances, and before he became a political animal he couldn’t utter three sentences about economics without quoting from Friedman or Hayek. If Arnold gets elected, it’s going to be interesting. I believe he’s going to try to cut the state budget dramatically, cut regulations, cut business taxes and regulation, and in general try to behave like an economic Libertarian. Then he’s going to run into a buzz-saw of special interests, mandated spending by initiative, vested interests within the government, and recalcitrant local governments. Then we’ll see what he’s made of. He’ll either use his charisma and popularity to champion real reforms and save California, or he’ll back down and become another ‘managerial’ governor like Davis, or maybe there’ll be another recall (!!). ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2003, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-recall-debate/203793/38 "2003-09-30T00:47:30Z")
> [@](#): > > Sam wrote: > I watched the debate, and thought it was largely a train wreck and none of the candidates came off particularly well. I thought McClintock did a good job of keeping his comments serious, staying on topic, and giving concrete answers to the questions. But, judged as a whole, it was pretty much a circus. If your analysis is correct, and I think it probably is, I wouldn’t put it past Arnold to go on TV night after night if necessary to badger the pols in Sacramento into action. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2003, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-recall-debate/203793/39 "2003-09-30T01:04:54Z")
Actually, you’re right. McClintock came across as the only grownup on the stage, I thought. But he’s not going to be elected. Why was Arianna there? Has anyone explained this? She’s polling something like 2%. How does a 2% candidate get into a major debate? The Libertarians have been trying to get their candidates into debates for decades with no luck, and they usually poll in the 3-4% range in pre-election polling, and sometimes as high as 7-8%. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2003, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-recall-debate/203793/40 "2003-09-30T01:19:59Z")
Someone said, of the first debate, that Arianna was planning to be there even before she was invited. There is no good reason for inviting her other than: She’s a woman She has name recognition She’s a pest and might make too much trouble if not invited She provides a certain amount of entertainment value (think Sharpton) And, yeah, McClintock isn’t going to win. But then, only Cruz and Arnold have any chance at all. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-recall-debate/203793.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-recall-debate/203793.md?page=3)