California RECALL Megathread! (fit in, car, area)

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by OC Native

The weirdness of California’s recall system...

For one, to get the recall on the ballot, activists needed to meet a relatively low signature threshold: 12 percent of the voters who turned out in the last governor’s election. Even in a deep-blue state like California, 38 percent of voters backed Newsom’s GOP opponent last time around, so with the proper shoe leather and funding, that wasn’t a very hard threshold to meet.

So true.

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by Elliott_CA

I can understand why Newsom would skip it, he doesn't want to elevate the other candidates to his level and sit there and take shots from 3 or 4 sides. But for Jenner or Elder to skip it makes no sense.

Jenner is busy speaking in that critical voting area of La Quinta. And if you were Elder, you'd probably hide, too.

https://www.desertsun.com/story/news...ta/8117076002/

[Mellowmike]

Originally Posted by joosoon

No, the majority of voters would be firing him, then a replacement would be picked. The truth is, the majority of voters aren't "voting against" the replacement candidate even if the number of votes rejecting the recall are less than his or her percentage in question two. It doesn't work that way. There are two distinct elements in a recall.


This legal theory being floated is going to get laughed straight out of court.


If it's such a big deal to make the second half of the recall equitable with regular election math, the easy solution would be to have a run-off between the top two candidates in the replacement category. Then you'd have your majority beating the target of the recall. Also, had Newsom not strong-armed the Democratic party into keeping all options off the table for 'no' voters like you, this wouldn't be an issue and you'd have your fallback candidate to represent your 'no' vote on the recall.


Blame him for the fact you don't.




Oh that's rich. So, you think the recall is unfair because, well, I don't really know why other than you're relying on a unsound legal theory, but you think it's unfair. And yet you endorse this idea of the state legislature initiating impeachment proceedings on a total whim??? Ok. Sure. What misconduct are they going to cite when they impeach the new guy?


Just suck it up and vote 'no' on the recall. The recall election is a real election too and it's going to happen. The 2022 election won't be disadvantaged by anything that happens on Sept. 14th.

Actually, if the recall is successful, the next governor could in fact win with less than 50% of the vote. In fact with 5 candidates alone he could win with 21%. Not very representative of the people, right. Isn't that minority rule? As I had stated earlier, this is nothing more than a power grab by the Republican Party as they can't win in a general election because their platform doesn't appeal the the majoirty of voters. Thus they choose to resort to the recall method. They even made an attempt to recall Governor Brown, but it didn't gain any traction.
As for impeachment. Why not and why should they even need a reason other than we don't like the guy. Admit it, that makes about as much sense as these recall fiascos.

[Mellowmike]

Originally Posted by Grumpy ol' Man

Hey Mel, even the democrats realize that Newsom is a total disaster and needs to be replaced by an honest, hard working Republican.
Larry Elder picks up endorsement from former Democratic leader in California recall election

https://www.theblaze.com/news/larry-...ifornia-recall
It's never too late for you to educate yourself and join the good guys. Impress your friends and get behind Larry, the next governor of California.

I read her opinion in the editorial, in which I didn't get a bunch of pop ups, and couldn't help but laugh. She's an idiot.

[joosoon]

Originally Posted by Mellowmike

Actually, if the recall is successful, the next governor could in fact win with less than 50% of the vote. In fact with 5 candidates alone he could win with 21%. Not very representative of the people, right. Isn't that minority rule?

No, the RECALL is a yes/no question and requires a simple majority. That's representative of the voters will as is normal in democratic process. I explained that a run-off election between the top two candidates on the REPLACEMENT question would take the legs out from under this silly theory of unconstitutionality being floated by angry recall opponents. But that would require a second election on top of the recall, hence the simpler system. And again, that's the law as it stands.

As I had stated earlier, this is nothing more than a power grab by the Republican Party as they can't win in a general election because their platform doesn't appeal the the majoirty of voters.

*yawn*
That's the narrative of the governor.

Thus they choose to resort to the recall method. They even made an attempt to recall Governor Brown, but it didn't gain any traction

Oh my goodness, really? Wow. Aaaaaaand every governor since Pat Brown (that's Jerry's dad) has faced an attempted recall too. Here's that list again. Were those all "republican power grabs"???

As for impeachment. Why not and why should they even need a reason other than we don't like the guy. Admit it, that makes about as much sense as these recall fiascos.

Admit what? You're wrong. Impeachment proceedings are spelled out in the state constitution in article II and require some sort of misconduct, not just a whim. Recalls aren't the same thing and there is no requisite reason necessary to recall any elected official. Apple, meet orange.

[mlb]

“Statewide Dems are overperforming in 52 counties, Republicans are overperforming in 28, and Independents are overperforming in two"

[Elliott_CA]

My impressions from last night's debate:

Paffrath -- Sharp, good command of facts and details. But needs to tone it down -- both in policy and his speaking manner. His machine-gun verbal style, too-strong delivery and overly ambitious policy ideas were off-putting at times. But he was "good enough" for Democrats who are looking for an emergency backup on the 2nd recall question.

Faulconer -- Completely evaded answering the question, "Will you support a prohibition on developers building in wildfire-prone areas?" He refused to answer it, even after a pointed follow-up by the moderator. The only thing he would do is offer tax credits to homeowners to harden their homes for fire resistance. Evaded another question and used his time to blast Elder.

Cox -- Seemed to be a lesser star compared to Faulconer, competent, but nothing about him stood out.

Kiley -- Probably a rising star for conservatives. Calm, well-collected, long on complaints about Newsom but very short on specifics on what he would do. Probably the most conservative person on stage but he's not brandishing it. Maybe a young version of Mike Pence?

The debate was mediocre and won't change much. Elder really should have been there, more people would have tuned in, Elder could have presented his case against Newsom, and the fireworks between him and Faulconer would have been entertaining.

[Grumpy ol' Man]

Originally Posted by OC Native

The weirdness of California’s recall system
Newsom’s handling of the pandemic generally, the state’s serious homelessness problem, and a high level of unemployment benefits fraud. The motivation for the timing of this push, though, is likely that they think they have a better shot at winning in the recall than in next year’s ordinary election.

Now, in theory, the recall process is all about giving more power to the people so they can boot out politicians they think need to go. Who could be against that? But the devil’s in the details about just who “the people” happen to be, and how that choice is structured.

For one, to get the recall on the ballot, activists needed to meet a relatively low signature threshold: 12 percent of the voters who turned out in the last governor’s election. Even in a deep-blue state like California, 38 percent of voters backed Newsom’s GOP opponent last time around, so with the proper shoe leather and funding, that wasn’t a very hard threshold to meet.

Turnout is another issue. The nature of a recall means it’s an election that happens at an odd time, and oddly-timed elections can have a different electorate, in which those who are more fired up are more likely to turn out. So in practice, what the recall can do is give an impassioned minority of voters a chance at scoring an unexpected victory, due to low turnout from the less-engaged majority. (Though it doesn’t always work that way — turnout ended up being higher in the 2003 recall than in the governor’s election the previous year.)

The handling of the replacement candidates is also unusual because, unlike in typical elections, there are no primaries beforehand in which the field is sorted. So this time around there are 24 Republican candidates, 9 Democrats, and 13 others from third parties or with no party preference. With only a plurality necessary to win if Newsom loses the recall question, and no runoff, this poses the possibility that someone with a small slice of the vote would end up governor. This thrills conservatives, since a conservative candidate would have little chance of winning a typical two-candidate California election.

Another feature of the system takes away one possible choice from voters: Newsom is prohibited from appearing as a replacement candidate. That creates the strange asymmetry where Newsom needs a majority on the recall question to stay in office, but his replacement does not need a majority to be elected.

Put another way: If Newsom loses the recall question 51-49, and his replacement wins with 30 percent of the vote in a split field, would that really be what “the people” wanted? In that scenario, more Californians would have wanted Newsom than any one other candidate. Of course, it’s inherently tougher for a replacement candidate to get a majority since they have so much competition, but that only drives home how odd it is that these two differently-designed election systems are juxtaposed. Elder doesn’t need to win over the majority of voters – just enough to beat out Newsom’s other opponents.

Lots of writing to no end, make it simple. Vote yes on the recall and vote for Larry Elder to replace the corrupt, incompetent Newsom. Lets make California great again..!!

[Mahayana]

Suppose there is or will be a Spanish version of this ad from Gloria Romero:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_Ppmxwf7iw

[Grumpy ol' Man]

Originally Posted by Mellowmike

I read her opinion in the editorial, in which I didn't get a bunch of pop ups, and couldn't help but laugh. She's an idiot.

So I guess everyone who is tired of an incompetent, corrupt, do nothing governor is an idiot in your mind?
I'm a thinking that there is a very real possibility that you might have that opinion exactly backwards. Just why is it that you support total incompetence?