Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The choices include Meg Whitman (R) versus Jerry Brown (D) for Governator, and Carly Fiorina (R) versus Barbara Boxer (D) for senate.
While I am tired of "career politicians", I'm not sure that I trust "career corporate CEOs" either. Which is the lesser of two evils? Fiorina has been dubbed the worst CEO in history. That's a pretty big jump from being the worst CEO, to going into PUBLIC OFFICE. Meg Whitman also seems to be telling a different story to different voter groups - saying one thing to Hispanics, while saying another thing to white Republicans. Brown seems like he would go for some much needed pension reform so I'm leaning towards him. But Boxer... I'm not sure I can rely on her.
Third party is always an option, but some of them seem absolutely nuts.
I'm not a Californian so my advice is moot. A few points of note though, Meg Whitman has spent more of her personal money on the campaign. More than any other political candidate in history. More than Bloomberg spent in New York. Upwards of 160 million. Hard to call yourself a fiscal conservative when you throw that kind of money around.
Boxer has served her constituents well as Senator for years. When you compare Fiorina and Boxer's track record, Boxer wins hands down in my opinion. Actually the only knock on Boxer is she tends to run straight democrat with her voting record. Overall, Californians seem pleased with the job she's done for the State over the years. JMHO.
Your guess is as good as mine. I was around when Jerry was governor of California from 1975 to 1983 and I remember him being a party guy that was more enthralled with the status of being governor than actually governing the state. He was extremely liberal. He reminded me of a wannabe hippie from the Haight Ashbury District. He was into the Dali Lama and if he had gotten his way, we would have all been living in a commune. While most Californians were in favor of the death penalty, he appointed Rose Bird to the Supreme Court and she all but dismantled capital punishment in the state. Voters finally had her removed from the Supreme Court. Recently, he admitted that he felt he would be a better governor now because he won't be at the bars like he was when he was governor in 1975. He has a wife now and said he would be home at night. Call me crazy but I think that's a pretty lame excuse. I'm more concerned about what he's been up to for the past 40 years. He had his records sealed until 2038 ... 50 years! Even the President's records are sealed for no more than 12 and some only seal them for five years. What is Jerry hiding? In 2007, there was an investigation into his work as mayor of Oakland. Investigators found documents in a dumpster that had been shredded but nothing of real importance or pointing to corruption was recovered. Still, it makes me wonder why an honest man would work so hard to hide his historical records.
I think he's slime, personally. I never really liked him but after his recent slip of one of his aides (or it could have been him) calling Whitman a wh**e pretty much speaks volumes of what he thinks of women. To me, he's just one of those men who gives you the heebie jeebies when you're around them or listening to them speak. I don't trust him and I don't think he gives one hoot about this state or its citizens. He's doing it because he needs the job. If he doesn't, he'll be unemployed for the first time in 40 years.
As for Meg Whitman. The woman isn't squeaky clean, either. She's a typical corporate mogul. There are skeletons in her closet just as any one of the multi-millionaires in this country. I also remember reading about her being ordered to repay money that she made by knowledge of insider trading while CEO of eBay. She made a boat load of money during that gig. She's just lucky she wasn't sitting in a prison cell next to Martha Stewart. Ironically, the last money she took from the company is pretty close to being what she has spent on her campaign. It would almost be karma if she didn't win and the money was just gone. Sort of like she never made it in the first place. As for her "illegal maid" scandal ... I believe she knew all along that Ms. Diaz was an illegal. If she didn't, then I'm not so sure I want her to be governor of California. I mean c'mon ... if she isn't aware of what's going on in her own home, how is she going to keep watch on such a large state as California?
The trouble with politics today is that it's money that wins elections. As you stated, there are a number of other candidates on the ballot but we don't know much about them because they don't have the mega bucks to fork out on advertising. We're stuck with the top two, who happen to be the richest. Money corrupts and I believe that in this case, if you vote for either one of these candidates, you will be voting for the lesser of two evils.
I think most Americans are tired of politics as usual which accounts for the rise in the tea party candidates winning these primaries. It isn't that they would necessarily do a better job, it's just a cry from Americans that we want something different than what we've been getting so far.
As for the race for senator, Boxer needs to go but I don't think Fiorina is the right person for the job, but like I said previously, it's only the people with money that are able to run for office these days. Smart people who have a deep desire to make this state a better place don't have the means to have their voice heard and they aren't willing to sell their soul to the devil (or the unions and lobbyists) to win. So, we're just stuck with what we get.
Probably didn't help you any more with your decision but it sure felt good to vent about the whole mess.
let's put it this way, I wouldn't want to be the one deciding who to vote for in Ca this year. ,Im both cases it is the lesser or evils.
Meg has spent her one money but that cetainly does not mean she isn't a fiscal conservative, it means she is filthy rich and isn't going to have a bunch of political favors to pay back. She also doesn't have experience in politics, this could be good or bad. Brown is a career politician connected heavily with the unions. This is something I personally, do not like and would not support him, if I lived there for that reason alone. Plus we all keep saying "we want new blood" and yet, many are going to support him even though he has been around, for 35 years.
Boxer, I won't even comment, I have never liked her. I also know she is almost unbeatable. She always finds a way to pull her victories out. Maybe she has been good for Ca, not living there since before she was elected, I don't know.
He's doing it because he needs the job. If he doesn't, he'll be unemployed for the first time in 40 years.
It would help if you knew what the heck you were talking about before writing idiocy like this. When he was governor last time IIRC he took a dollar a year (I could be wrong, but I don't think so) rented a cheap apartment instead of the governor's mansion and drove a beat up Plymouth himself instead of the limo with state cop at the wheel.
He's an attorney (JD) with 40 years of political connections. The guy can make $50,000 for a one hour consultation. If you think not read Richard Nixon's books. After his crime ridden vice-presidency and his defeat in the '60 presidential race he was still raking in big fees for little to no "advice".
Granted, Brown doesn't have "Ahnold" or Meg money, but he's not hurting.
It would help if you knew what the heck you were talking about before writing idiocy like this. When he was governor last time IIRC he took a dollar a year (I could be wrong, but I don't think so) rented a cheap apartment instead of the governor's mansion and drove a beat up Plymouth himself instead of the limo with state cop at the wheel.
He's an attorney (JD) with 40 years of political connections. The guy can make $50,000 for a one hour consultation. If you think not read Richard Nixon's books. After his crime ridden vice-presidency and his defeat in the '60 presidential race he was still raking in big fees for little to no "advice".
Granted, Brown doesn't have "Ahnold" or Meg money, but he's not hurting.
and Nixon told you this in his books or are you basing this on what someone else wrote about Nixon? Could you explain about his crime ridden vp days? I sure many would love to read about all this and where we can find the information.
To clarify something in my post that seemed to anger others. I never said Brown needed the money, I said he needed the job.
Anyone who has been employed their entire adult life will tell you that being out of a job isn't fun. In fact, if you're not prepared for it, you'll go stir crazy. Brown needs to work, he needs to be in charge of something or someone because that's his personality.
Sorry. I should have worded it better so it didn't lead the reader to believe it was about money. It wasn't.
As for the rest of my post, I stand my my statement.
If I had a vote in CA, I would not vote for Meg. Only because what is so exciting about being governor of CA that is so great to spend this amount of money. I doubt being governor of CA in its broken state now will be a smooth operation for whomever is elected.
It would help if you knew what the heck you were talking about before writing idiocy like this.
I welcome your point of view on this subject, golfgod. However, I am not an idiot and I don't like being called one or what I write as idiocy. I enjoy a healthy debate but I will not try to make my point by belittling another person's words. If you don't like what I write, then tell me why and state your view on the subject but don't try to convince me or others by saying my words are idiocy. Thank you.
If I had a vote in CA, I would not vote for Meg. Only because what is so exciting about being governor of CA that is so great to spend this amount of money. I doubt being governor of CA in its broken state now will be a smooth operation for whomever is elected.
I agree with you, Freemore.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
