Yeticus, your post is hard to follow.
Are you saying that you acknowledge that those who wish to vote to recall the governor are probably a statistical minority and that if put to a true vote he might get voted back in?
So instead of keeping the “hearts and minds” of the california majority on the forefront, we’re going to oust a politician that would undoubtedly be voted back in in a fair election. Nice.
Please clarify for me.
Sam
While the Crocodile Hunter is by himself sufficient cause to add Australia to the Axis of Evil, the Aussies bear no blame for Outback Steakhouse. That particular restaurant chain was started in Tampa, Florida. As was Hooters, for that matter.
Coincidence? I think not.
The system is pretty confusing. I don’t see how he can be on the list, because if the first part is successful, essentially he’s fired. How can he then be on the list to be rehired? And if those who vote in the first part to keep him in, if he’s on the list of replacements, of COURSE they’re going to vote for him, thus they got to vote twice to save him. WTF? How is that just or fair?
But I could see him trying something like that…meanwhile, his plan of laying off 13,000 employees is still underway, my spouse being one of his victims, through no fault of her own except having less than 30 months experience of State Service. Me, I’m working on how we can trim our household budget if the layoffs go into effect. Thanks a lot Gray, you asshole.
No, I believe he’s saying that he doubts that Davis will get a Majority vote, but that Davis may well get a plurality if he faces the other candidates in a fair election, and he doesn’t want this to happen because then it would be a waste of time and money. Instead, I suppose, of it being a waste of time and money now.
Thumperdude, it’s just and fair because any former or current politician can run in practically any election for any elected office that they meet the requirements for. Grey Davis meets the requirements to be governer of California. A recall is not a lifetime ban. He has the right to run in any future election for governer of California. Why shouldn’t he be allowed to run in the recall election?
-lv
I can only imagine the chaos if every state had such a ridiculous recall process.
If you are going to recall a sitting governor, the only democratic recourse is to hold a new election. The idea of a giant field and the winner taking over in Sacramento with 15% of the vote? Absurd.
I hope Larry Flynt wins. Or Donald Duck.
It gets worse. By having 15 candidates, and only allowing voters to choose one, that’s a disenfranchisement right there. It’s a system that assumes black and white, rather than shades of gray (no pun intended).
Think of it this way… if you have 15 candidates, and your average voter thinks, “Well, fourteen of those guys are okay, but that ONE guy is a total creep!”, well, then the voters are shit out of luck, because their body of votes will be divided by 14, thus dampening the actual “will of the people”.
Better system? Let people “rate” the candidates, or have a series of elections, dividing the number of candidates in half each time, until you come down to two… THEN you’ll get an accurate view of who best fits the will of the people.
But that’s complicated. America can’t tolerate “complicated”. If it can’t be summed-up in a five-second sound bite, it’s not worth hearing…
Davis took office with a record budget surplus. This year, the state will run 8 billion in the red, at best. Many are still miffed about his mishandling of the energy crisis last summer. Standard and Poor is basically saying California’s bonds are 2 steps away from being worthless. Davis deserves the recall. I voted for him the 1st time. I wrote in Richard Riordan (R- former LA mayor) the 2nd time when I thought it was obvious Davis couldn’t do the job.
If Davis’ opponent hadn’t self-destructed out of the gate, I doubt anyone would have voted for him.
I found this online:
Eighteen other states, plus the District of Columbia, have recall provisions, but some argue that conditions in California are particularly stark. The state’s $38 billion budget deficit — which Gov. Davis understated in his 2002 re-election campaign — is about equal to those of the other 49 states combined.
Here’s the link:
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/Politics/calif_recall030804.html
Some other interesting stuff in there also…
Willie Brown is fooling himself if he thinks it’s only republicans signing the recall petitions.
Boy, that sounds familiar!
Seems my 8 billion figure is a bit off…
Florida, huh? What are the fucking odds?
No, I believe the voters FOR the recall are in the majority, but what would happen IF Gray did get on the ballot?
Scenario: If Gray’s posse convinces the court to allow adding Gray’s name to the list of candidates on the subsequent ballot, here is a likely scenario:
One million voter turnout, 600K voting to recall Gray, 400K voting against the recall - Gray gets the boot
Fifteen candidates on ballot including Gray…Let’s say Riordan is the best vote getter (of the 600K who gave Gray the boot) and gets 250K of the 600K and the rest of the pack (13 candidates which does not include Gray) splits the remaining 350K but do not have enough votes to pass Riordan.
Of the other 400K who voted against the recall, let’s say most of them voted for Gray anyways since they didn’t want him removed from office in the first place. Gray gets 350K of that 400K and the other 50K are splintered amongst the other candidates. Gray wins his seat back and California is millions of dollars poorer and we have the same schmuck in office.
Hey, was that really a recall? How much did we spend? Civics class never taught us that lesson!
Riots ensue…
[/scenario]
It would be more prudent and in the best interest of all Californians if Gray resigns and let Cruz take the helm for the remainder of the term. Although he is a democrat, (and I’m republican) I realize he still has better knowledge to run the state better than any of the other candidates this late in the term and I feel he’ll have the desire to do what’s right for CA (knowing the voters still have a red hot poker in their hands prodding him!)
Besides, I would hate to see any other candidate (DEM or REP) try to learn AND fix the state in half the time AND try to campaign to get re-elected (more wasted time).
Davis of course is digging in his heels and is costing us dearly in time and money with his obvious state of denial.
To say that he deserves to be on the replacement ballot is nonsense. The law is not outdated; it’s there to keep the back door shut.
BTW, If Boxer gets elected in some bizarre fashion, I’ll start that recall petition ASAP…
Sounds like democracy to me. If the schmuck receives more votes than any other candidate in a fair election, then the schmuck should be the governor. End of story.
I understand the point that he may well dead last on the ballots of those 600,000 voters who voted to recall him. But this is not a vote for the Most Valuable Player Award. In government elections, we generally do not pay attention to anything but the number of first-place votes. Those last-place votes aren’t recorded and don’t count.
Seems to me that if the recall is REALLY about the unpopularity of Mr. Schmuck, then no one has anything to fear from him being on the ballot. He won’t receive many votes, and anti-Schmuck support will soon coalesce around one or two candidates from among the 15, or 23, or 35 or whatever it is, and Davis will finish a distant…third, fourth, fifth, something like that. Maybe even fifteenth, who knows? That’s what a recall is designed for–when no one can stomach the idea of having him in office a second longer. And if that’s the case, the votes will show it even–or especially–if he’s on the ballot.
But if it’s not really about throwing the bum out, to be replaced by pret’ near anybody–if it’s a witch hunt by powerful political enemies, or a burning desire by certain factions to get a certain candidate into office earlier than the next general election–then that’s different. In that case, Davis might win. And having him on the ballot does represent a threat to the recall forces.
Note that in your example, he gets 35% of the vote; that’s not puny, and it doesn’t sound like someone who is roundly hated by everyone. People have won (regular) general elections with that, and less. I don’t live in CA, so I don’t know the details; but if 35% is legitimate, I’d have to say this sounds a lot more like my second scenario than like my first.