A question about California's political history (employment, public schools, living in)

[californio sur]

Lets be frank with one another. The only way a Republican can win statewide office in California is to mimic Schwarzenegger; a moderate Republican who views the GOP as essentially wingnuts [aka Palin] and attempts to distance him or herself from the typical Republican. Otherwise a governor has to be Democrat in order to win. Whitman has a tremendous uphill challenge just because she is a Republican; if she were running as a Democrat Whitman would probably win. But the very label of being a Republican in California is a major deficit. Republicans can not attract California voters unless they are super independent of the Bible-belt mentality.

[majoun]

Originally Posted by CAVA1990

I doubt there's any Republican out there who can win CA under any circumstances but that's not necessary if he/she puts together the right combo of Southern, Mid-Atlantic, Mountain, and Mid-Western states.

Gary Johnson could.

It'll be awhile before the dems can together all the pieces again that were needed to win in '08 so I anticipate the White House will revert back to the Republicans in the next couple of elections.

Depends how the Congressional elections in November go. The best thing for the GOP's presidential hopes in 2012 would be to merely reduce the Dem majority in both houses of Congress rather than to take Congress - that way everything could be blamed on the Dems. If the GOP takes Congress, they can be blamed for many of the country's problems and Obama gets re-elected in 2012.

[SOON2BNSURPRISE]

Originally Posted by californio sur

Lets be frank with one another. The only way a Republican can win statewide office in California is to mimic Schwarzenegger; a moderate Republican who views the GOP as essentially wingnuts [aka Palin] and attempts to distance him or herself from the typical Republican. Otherwise a governor has to be Democrat in order to win. Whitman has a tremendous uphill challenge just because she is a Republican; if she were running as a Democrat Whitman would probably win. But the very label of being a Republican in California is a major deficit. Republicans can not attract California voters unless they are super independent of the Bible-belt mentality.

The only way she can win is if she were facing someone like I don't know a Jerry Brown type. I mean after that guys record who would ever vote for him again. LOL

[SOON2BNSURPRISE]

Originally Posted by Gentoo

Links ?

Here are some links to the problem with socialism in Europe. After reading the French story it is age 60 as the retirment age and they want to increase that to 62 for some jobs and up to 67 for other jobs. Most people in france retire by age 57.5 by opting for lower benefits in exchange for government assitance.


In Greese you can retire at age 50 for many jobs. The burden of social security there has bankrupt the nation and is a drag on the Euopean Union


France: A new landscape for retirement plans

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/07/wo...AISER_BRF.html

France Firm On Raising Retirement Despite Protests - CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/09/02/ap/world/main6828750.shtml - broken link)

Greece raises retirement age, cuts pay ahead of strike (2nd Roundup) - Monsters and Critics

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/12/bu...12pension.html

[BluSpark]

Originally Posted by SOON2BNSURPRISE

Here are some links to the problem with socialism in Europe. After reading the French story it is age 60 as the retirment age and they want to increase that to 62 for some jobs and up to 67 for other jobs. Most people in france retire by age 57.5 by opting for lower benefits in exchange for government assitance.

In Greese you can retire at age 50 for many jobs. The burden of social security there has bankrupt the nation and is a drag on the Euopean Union

Well, in the United States Social Security isn't nearly the fiscal time bomb that health care costs are. That is why health care reform was important to address now, not later.

Besides the Greenspan Commission in 1983 RAISED the retirement age to 67 years come 2026, so we don't really have that problem with Social Security.

[BluSpark]

Back to the spirit of the thread, I would point out a few things about Reagan.

The way conservatives REMEBER Reagan is the way THEY WANT or CHOOSE to remember him. They conveniently forget that as GOVERNOR he RAISED taxes to balance the budget (and at the time it was the BIGGEST tax increase in the state's history). He balanced the budget with that tax increase.

They also forget that he RAISED taxes as PRESIDENT....the payroll tax was INCREASED based on the findings of the GREENSPAN COMMISSION on SOC. SECURITY Reform in 1983. The Republican party has been hijacked by fiscally irresponsible idealogues (or opportunists in Bush, Jr.'s case). Of course, these Reagan tax hikes were targeted tax hikes for Soc. Sec. reform. The broad based Reagan income tax cuts combined with increased domestic/defense spending left a large defecit for Bush, Sr. to deal with once he took on Reagan's third term.

To answer Majoun's very pertinent question, I think Dwight Eisenhower could get elected as the Republican Governor of California. Ike was the LAST REPUBLICAN President to submit a balanced budget!!

Ok, Eisenhower was a war hero...but I think someone with Ike's Eisenhower's moderation (both fiscally and socially) is a Republican with a shot in California. Of course, such a candidate would have great difficulty getting the Republican nomination for President today.

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by BluSpark

Ok, Eisenhower was a war hero...but I think someone with Ike's Eisenhower's moderation (both fiscally and socially) is a Republican with a shot in California. Of course, such a candidate would have great difficulty getting the Republican nomination for President today.

The current problem with the Republicans in California is the same problem they're having in many states. They don't appear to have a real, coherent, cohesive plan, just a policy and that's to oppose whatever plan the Democrats have. That does not inspire confidence or attract votes.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by SOON2BNSURPRISE

Here are some links to the problem with socialism in Europe. After reading the French story it is age 60 as the retirment age and they want to increase that to 62 for some jobs and up to 67 for other jobs. Most people in france retire by age 57.5 by opting for lower benefits in exchange for government assitance.


In Greese you can retire at age 50 for many jobs. The burden of social security there has bankrupt the nation and is a drag on the Euopean Union


France: A new landscape for retirement plans

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/07/wo...AISER_BRF.html

France Firm On Raising Retirement Despite Protests - CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/09/02/ap/world/main6828750.shtml - broken link)

Greece raises retirement age, cuts pay ahead of strike (2nd Roundup) - Monsters and Critics

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/12/bu...12pension.html

Ok, what I got out of that was not so much socialism as the problem but a lot seems to have to do with the current worldwide recession. Greece has always had issues even in the best of times. The retirement age issues are the same as they are here, aging populations living longer and steadily declining birth rates over the last few decades. There aren't enough new native born to pay into the systems there. Germany has been trying to combat this for a long time even by trying to recruit foreign born skilled workers. These are not issues with socialism as other countries that are socialist seem to have achieved a quality of life higher than ours.

[Highnlite]

I find it so humorous that people will work so hard to try to discredit Socialism, a system every modern country uses, and every country that beats the US in life expectancy, infant mortality, quality of healthcare, general prosperity, general happiness is socialist.

It does bring up a fundamental question, why aside from lack of critical thinking would anyone denigrate a system that is shown to work very well? Truly baffling.

Anyone remember when you had to pay firemen to put out your house fire? NO? Well, that is because fire services went socialist many many decades ago, and who complains about that?

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by Highnlite

I find it so humorous that people will work so hard to try to discredit Socialism, a system every modern country uses, and every country that beats the US in life expectancy, infant mortality, quality of healthcare, general prosperity, general happiness is socialist.

It does bring up a fundamental question, why aside from lack of critical thinking would anyone denigrate a system that is shown to work very well? Truly baffling.

Anyone remember when you had to pay firemen to put out your house fire? NO? Well, that is because fire services went socialist many many decades ago, and who complains about that?

Like I said, it has to do with what everyone has always had pounded into their heads and made to feel guilty or...God forbid...un-American for daring to think outside the box. People don't question things like they should.