Comments on: total(ly wrong about the) recall

By: Antoin O Lachtnain

Antoin O Lachtnain — Wed, 15 Oct 2003 21:13:12 +0000

I think people voted for Arnold because he meant something to them, and because they had an opportunity to make a difference. Most politics is meaningless to people and most of the time it doesn't make any difference what way you vote. This was different. Who wouldn't want to have the Terminator for Governor?

The big problem now is how he can live up to the high standard he has set for himself through his movies. It's hard for aeven an wily old experienced politician to make a real difference. For the sake of politics and politicians everywhere, let's hope this guy can.

By: tas

tas — Sat, 11 Oct 2003 16:41:41 +0000

Wasn’t a conclusion he came to actually, the number of votes (not just percentages) were on the link to CNN that he gave… Schwarzenegger received 3,743,431 votes, whereas fewer people — 3,559,436 — voted for Davis (i.e. “No” for recall).

By: Tkil

Tkil — Sat, 11 Oct 2003 00:04:29 +0000

A clear majority voted to recall the governor. And more people than supported Davis voted to elect Arnold Schwarzenegger.

I’m curious how you came to this conclusion. 45% voted to keep Davis vs. 55% voting to recall; Schwarzenegger got 49% of the votes as the potential replacement. If the replacement votes were evenly distributed across all voters, then Schwarzenegger only received 49% of 55%, or about 22% of the votes; for him to have gotten more than the 45% that Davis received, he would have to be selected by more than 90% of “yes to recall” voters -- which strikes me as unlikely.

Oh well. Here’s to three years of the Governator.

By: Richard Bennett

Richard Bennett — Fri, 10 Oct 2003 20:20:35 +0000

Neil, it appears that you're struggling very hard to escape reality. While nobody knows what would have happened if there were a Davis-Schwarzenegger heads-up contest, there is plenty of reason to believe the outcome would have been the same and no reason to believe otherswise.

A year ago, Davis only polled 47.3% of a low-turnout election, running against a very lackluster Bill Simon, a man with less poltiical experience, charmisma, and intelligence than Mr. Schwarzenegger. If that was the best Davis could do against a null Republican with staunchly hard-right positions on abortion and immigration, you're really pressing the envelope to imagine he'd do better against a popular hero.

Owen, it may surprise you to know that California already has a term-limits law in effect, and it's managed to do two things: 1) make the machines stronger, because citizen-politicians don't have the name ID to raise money on their own; and 2) make the governor stronger, because the legislators aren't around long enough to understand the issues and organize meaningful programs.

The main problem with California politics is the lack of significant media coverage of Sacramento, and with a celebrity in town and national and international attention on the system, this very well could change, at least for a while.

Left-wingers bitter about the recall would do well to remember that democracy is often not the prettiest system, but on balance it remains the least of the evils.

By: Owen

Owen — Fri, 10 Oct 2003 14:19:35 +0000

The strongest argument for change in government is not the occasional anomaly like Arnold, it's the continual and virtually automatic reelection of entrenched, interest-bound legislators whose primary focus is on reelection, not governing. In my callow youth I opposed term limits as undemocratic. Now, with the perspective of having lived through too many unproductive administrations and legislative sessions, I think they may be the only hope for democracy.

But recall...nah! The California model allows for wealthy, disgruntled and media-savvy interest groups to hijack election results at will. Unless an incumbent is tried and found guilty of malfeasance, we should let them have the time to do what we elected them to do in the first place...not look for instant gratification. Next election...hold them accountable.

Arnold's not the problem -- the system is.

By: Neil S

Neil S — Fri, 10 Oct 2003 10:09:31 +0000

Just to clarify - It was just speculation that Schwarzenegger may have been most people's second choice. There must have been some overlap between Schwarzenegger voters and No recall voters. If the vote was calculated differently (e.g a single election that included Davis and Schwarzenegger), the result could have been different.

By: Mark Federman

Mark Federman — Thu, 09 Oct 2003 22:25:52 +0000

Schwarzenegger for President? Sigh... It seems an obvious path for a country that is completely hypnotized by the cult of celebrity. But then again, his qualifications are no better nor no worse than the current occupant of the White House.

However, I'm old enough to remember when Henry Kissinger was sufficiently popular - a celebrity for his prominence with regard to world diplomacy, if you can believe it - for the constitutional amendment suggestion to be raised to allow him to run for President.

God bless America... it needs all the blessings and help it can get during this very trying period of history.

By: Chris Adams

Chris Adams — Thu, 09 Oct 2003 22:14:28 +0000

Patrick – I quite agree about this not becoming the norm: Arnold could not have won against a less odious governor. He had few friends even among the Democrats – their main concern was losing control of the office, not keeping Gray in it.

By: Nick

Nick — Thu, 09 Oct 2003 20:43:54 +0000

*sigh* Take the leap. Orrin Hatch has already introduced a measure to amend the constitution to allow someone like Schwarzenegger to run for the Presidency. See this article for example.

By: Patrick Ryan

Patrick Ryan — Thu, 09 Oct 2003 20:21:54 +0000

In Europe governments at national level — and also at the EU level — can and are dissolved on occasion. The worst example is of course Italy. But I just don’t buy the slippery slope argument (not that that argument has been advanced in this thread, but I have seen it often). So for what it is worth I do not buy the argument that this recall situation is going to become a norm, either in California nor in other states. Indeed, the provision could be crafted better, but it was the people’s choice to put the provision in there, a state-level decision, and I think what we saw was a great example of federalism at work. Frankly I have no idea whether Schwarzenegger is the right candidate or not (I could not vote since I am a resident of Europe and anyhow registered in another state) so I had the benefit of not having to make a choice. One sort of side comment, however, which I have heard many times in the past day from a European –or perhaps better stated Austrian perspective– the Austrians are **totally** convinced that Schwarzenegger will make it to presidency. There is the Constitutional hurdle, of course. I tell my Austrian friends about the Constitutional hurdle, but they are all convinced that it is an archaic provision that is incompatible with our modern immigrant society, and that it is something that the US will ultimately overturn. They think it will be overturned for Arnold’s sake. I’m not willing to take that leap, but the idea is an interesting one.