Log in

No account? Create an account
Ramblings Journals I Read Calendar The Dirt MegaZone's Waste of Time Older Older Newer Newer
Not surprised, but disappointed - MegaZone's Safety Valve — LiveJournal
The Ramblings of a Damaged Mind
Not surprised, but disappointed
"Schwarzenegger wins" - according to CNN. Based on exit polls, etc, so I suppose there is some hope that they're wrong.

I am: disappointed disappointed
Current Media: TiVo: The Daily Show

hyuri From: hyuri Date: October 7th, 2003 09:25 pm (UTC) (Direct Link)
Why? What result would you have preferred?
zonereyrie From: zonereyrie Date: October 8th, 2003 08:53 am (UTC) (Direct Link)
Davis to serve out his elected term and for the voters to not be such fucking sheep as to be bought off to do a recall.

Yes, I said bought off. The CA recall was pretty much openly rigged - funded by pretty much one man who had it in for Davis, and then Arnie was propped up to slam dunk it because people vote for names, not issues.

The whole thing is a brilliant example of how much our electorial system is nothing by a circus and the ringmaster is the person with the deepest pockets.

Not that I really expect Arnie to govern anything - he'll be playing 'follow the handler', of course, that's normal these days.

Personally I hope that he crashes and burns and CA is worse off, because that's the only thing I think will make people question the way the system works.
hyuri From: hyuri Date: October 8th, 2003 09:47 am (UTC) (Direct Link)
I asked those questions because I was honestly interested, not as a sarcastic response. I didn't expect, nor do I think I deserved, an insulting rant in response, so I was a bit upset writing this.

I'm going to post this without editing, because if I tried to do that I'd spend a month or so working on it and then give up, having lost the "feel" for a response.

So you think we should be "punished" for trying to work with the rules as they were written in our state? We're all sheep; we should just suck it up instead of trying to improve a situation we didn't like?

Jeez, and I thought I was cynical! Never mind the facts; it's all a big conspiracy by somebody with deep pockets!

Eh, what do I know? I only live with the results of Gray Davis's mis-government at near-poverty level; that couldn't possibly tell me more than you can learn from the news, right?

If you're going on information from people you trust more than some yahoo with an LJ; that's fine, I can understand that. But please, please don't act like you're personally affected by this. And don't be so quick to condemn us when you don't know our lives.
zonereyrie From: zonereyrie Date: October 8th, 2003 10:13 am (UTC) (Direct Link)
0. I don't know why you felt insulted.

1. I lived in Berkeley for a while myself. No, I no longer live there, I do live in Taxachusetts though.

2. No, I'm not going by 'some yahoo with an LJ' - did you really watch the recall process? 'Never mind the facts'? I'm *talking* abotu the facts - it *WAS* a big conspiracy by somebody with deep pockets. The man's name is Darrell Issa! It was not a grassroots effort by a long shot, it was funded almost entirely by one man who wanted to take over from Davis - Congressional Representative Darrell Issa. He had deep pockets, so he decided to throw a little recall party bash. He personally funded the petition drive, paying people to collect the signatures. He spent over $2 *million* of his own money (estimated wealth of over $300 million) to fund the petition drive and run pro-recall ads - and pro-Issa ads. He thought he could unseat Davis and take the throne for himself.

But the funny part came when Issa had the tables turned on him. He was so successful drumming up support for a recall that he started a feeding frenzy and people came out of the wood work looking to replace Davis, since everyone was sure he was a lame duck. Issa got shoved out of the way by Arnie - once Arnie entered the race is was pretty much a done deal. So Issa spent his money and then had the prize snatched.

The whole thing is a sick joke and I'm sorry the people of California swallowed it so readily. Davis is hardly responsible for the condition of the state, people act like he has sole control over the states spending. Where is the recall for all the state representitives who pushed for higher spending when the state had a lot of money, and then didn't allow spending to decline when the bubble burst? They're pretty much all still in there - does anyone really think changing the head honcho is going to save the state in one fell swoop?

The lesson here is, if you don't like someone in office and you're filthy rich you can pay to have them removed by playing the system and feeding the public what they want to hear.

Yep, I'm a cynical bastard and I think we need a major disaster to make people pay attention and give things more thought. And if that means Cali has to crash and burn, so be it. I'd say the same thing if I still lived there - in fact, I have said pretty much the same thing in the past about states I was living in. Or the US in general for that matter. On my really bitter days I say we need WWIII to press the reset button.
hyuri From: hyuri Date: October 8th, 2003 12:37 pm (UTC) (Direct Link)

Tired == coherent? O_o

0. "... for the voters to not be such fucking sheep ..." -- that's me. I'm a voter.

2. I didn't really pay any attention to the given reasons for the recall; I had other reasons to want Davis out. Okay, maybe it was all funded by one person. Okay, maybe he even ran everything. That doesn't make his reasons the only reasons people wanted Davis out.

One of my major reasons for wanting him out was his veto of AB 1851. Because of that, I and several of my acquaintances are likely to have, or continue to have, "administrative difficulties" in the future. Gray Davis also favors legislation for gun control; I feel that education would be a better control, just as with sex. Niggling things, perhaps, but very much out-of-line with my beliefs.

In short, I felt that Davis wasn't the sort of person we needed holding veto power, and I took the opportunity to try and get that changed. I don't know that Schwarzenegger will be better, but I hope he will. And when I have hope, I tend to grip it as firmly as I possibly can, because sometimes it's all I have.

I think elections are somewhere between an unguided rocket launch and a game of craps: you can study it all you want, find out as much as possible about the candidates, but in the end it's just a throw of the dice. So I throw the dice I'm given and hope for the best.

It would be interesting, though, to find out how many people voted Davis out for "your reasons" -- the pabulum manufactured for the recall, whether true or false -- and how many for "my reasons" -- things easily provable outside the recall pamphlets/web sites/etc.
that_xmas From: that_xmas Date: October 8th, 2003 01:21 pm (UTC) (Direct Link)
I'm not too upset that a single person funded the recall signature collection.

I mean, they still had to collect 1.6 million signatures in a fairly short amount of time to start the recall process. As person who worked for a signature collection group, I'm sure you know how hard it is to collect signatures. :)

BTW, here's the Sacramento Bee's take on some of the recall storylines...


tweedlekeys From: tweedlekeys Date: October 8th, 2003 03:41 pm (UTC) (Direct Link)
I guess it can come across a little harsh since you're not being explicit about the voters/people of California being the not-landslide-majority-of-voters/people of California.

Sadly, I don't have enough faith in that same vague "voters/people" anywhere to actually learn, pay more attention, give things more thought, move in a good direction or whatnot from a disaster anymore than a lesser bad thing or lesser good thing. :)
From: iwascaite Date: October 7th, 2003 10:23 pm (UTC) (Direct Link)
It is sort of unbelievable really. Sickening too. Undermining the election process because they did not get the result they wanted.

Local news is saying there were 10% more people voting in the recall election than who voted in the last real election. If the world were fair and just, no one who did not vote then should have their votes counted now.

The "No on recall" commercials were all talking about how Davis voted to protect choice and protect the rights of gays even when those rights were being systematically destroyed by the federal government. (I often feel like tax breaks come with a groping, because the money in my pocket comes from the government touching my personal life.) I was happy the pro-life guy got thrashed last November. What I want to know is how people could forget in under a year.
that_xmas From: that_xmas Date: October 8th, 2003 04:01 am (UTC) (Direct Link)

That's the system California created

Well, California put the recall option in their state constitution. I'm sure the liberals who put it in were hoping to use it against some corrupt, conservative governor.

Welcome to the world of unintended consequences...

BTW, I can see why people are angry with Gov. Grey Davis. He should have pushed harder to stop spending increases when the government was flush with money they knew wasn't going to last. Of course, the California legislature now needs to be on their toes. This uptick in interest in local government is bad news for all those guys who created the budget increases and that very, very, poor attempt at electric deregulation.

impykins From: impykins Date: October 8th, 2003 05:55 am (UTC) (Direct Link)
Unforunately no. The seventh largest economy in the world is going to be run by a man who has no political experience and whose previous claim to fame included bad action movies. I think its time to cut California off.
hyuri From: hyuri Date: October 8th, 2003 08:04 am (UTC) (Direct Link)
Should we then be governed by corrupt, or even inept, professional politicians? At least I can point to something Arnold Schwarzenegger has consistently done well, even if it's merely producing mindless entertainment.

And how exactly would you propose to "cut California off?" Expelling us from the Union? Restricting our Guaranteed Privileges™ as citizens of the United States? Interfering with the rights guaranteed us by our State Constitution? (Article 2, Sections 13-20)

The election and recall of state officials in California is an internal matter. The other states and the Federal government have as much authority in the matter as, say, Australia and the United Nations have in a (U.S.) Presidential election: they're free to applaud it, or to criticize it, but they have no legal right or privilege to do anything about it.

I'm cutting this off in mid-rant, because you've uncovered a very large pocket of vitriol that I really don't want to throw at you. Regardless, sanctioning us for exercising our rights just ain't kosher.
sinapus From: sinapus Date: October 8th, 2003 08:34 am (UTC) (Direct Link)
My own .02 is some musing that perhaps it isn't a problem with the voters. Perhaps it's a problem with the other candidates being less-than-acceptable to the point where electing Arnie looked like a good alternative.

From: iwascaite Date: October 8th, 2003 11:43 am (UTC) (Direct Link)
Californians should be governed by their duly elected representatives. There was no misconduct that justified the recall being held. Therefore the recall is a farce designed solely to undermine a legal election.

The voters were sheep who cast their ballots to sanctify a coup and Californians ought to be ashamed that this happened on their watch.
hyuri From: hyuri Date: October 8th, 2003 01:43 pm (UTC) (Direct Link)
Californians should be governed by their duly elected representatives.

Maybe in your state. Here in California we have an alternative to "just suck it up," and we used it. Wisely? Perhaps not. But if it's a mistake, we have to live with it. We also have new "duly elected representative," whom we are still governed by.

There was no misconduct that justified the recall being held.

I don't see anything in the California Constitution requiring any misconduct to justify a recall; in fact, it quite specifically says that the validity of the recall petition can not be based on the reasons for it (Article 2, Section 14(a): "Sufficiency of reason is not reviewable.").

Presumably, we could recall a Governor for going bald. Hopefully we don't have too many voters that stupid here.

Therefore the recall is a farce designed solely to undermine a legal election.

Except that the recall was a petition properly delivered; it didn't undermine a legal election, it caused one. It no more undermined a legal election than the next gubernatorial election would have.

True, it may have undermined support for the present Governor, but that's completely different from undermining the election itself.
that_xmas From: that_xmas Date: October 8th, 2003 09:42 am (UTC) (Direct Link)
Actually, Arnold is a successful businessman and property owner. I mean, he's pretty active outside of his movie career and beyond the Planet Hollywood franchise.

He's an enough of a business leader to be invited to a special ass-kissing session by Ken Lay when Enron was being trashed by the Californian government.
arconius From: arconius Date: October 8th, 2003 12:03 pm (UTC) (Direct Link)
Which brings up an interesting point. Will we ever get back any of that money we lost to the energy companies, or should we just admit we're screwed on that score because the new Governor has ties to the energy people?

And what about the environmental regs? Will the advocate of the Hummer help keep our air clean?

[leaving it at that because, like others on this thread, I'm getting pissed off again, and that's not the time to type]
qedrakmar From: qedrakmar Date: October 8th, 2003 07:07 am (UTC) (Direct Link)
Why? Aside from his economic reforms, Reagan didn't do too bad a job... And Schwarzenegger's a better actor.