CNN says ARNOLD!

[Zep]

Personally, I would be VERY interested in the voter turnout figures. Anyone???

BTW, in Australia, we have what is known as the Australian Electoral Commission, which administers electoral rolls, enrolment, and federal and state elections. They ensure that the same voting procedures, whatever they are, used right across the voting population. Makes for consistency anyway.

 

[reprise]

I accidentally edited your post. I hope I restored it fully. I apologize. I wanted to say that my state elected an outsider and I think he did an outstanding job.

Didn't notice the edit, so "no harm, no foul". It was probably improved by whatever edit you made anyway (you should see the invective I'm throwing around on Infidels ATM).

It is no mean feat to try to hold together a commonwealth (and that's what the USA is) of 50 separate states all of whom operate first and foremost under the auspices of their own constitutions. We laughed at the USSR for presuming that it was possible and we laugh at the EU for pretty much the same reasons.

There's not an Australian on this board who couldn't relate absolute horror stories about some of the tragic state governments which have gained power during our lifetimes. The difference - I guess - is their capacity to make a significant impact on national - much less INTERNATIONAL - affairs. The reality is that if the world's sixth largest economy goes down the toilet it affects all other Western nations - just as your accounting or insurance firms going broke affects the world's economy.

It's not so much that we're trying to be nasty, it's that we're asking why in the heck American politics is decided by those who can be bothered turning out at the polls on a Tuesday (first mistake - we vote on Saturdays and go to the pub before and after) when the consequences of whether or how you vote are so enormous in your own lives, never mind how they impact on the rest of the world.

We - too - are heading towards an election. For the second time in 12 months the opinion polls are showing that the voters emphatically do not want token tax cuts in the lead up to the next election, they want our budget surplus directed towards upgrading the health and education systems in that order. We're FURIOUS that our mandated government hasn't already directed the extra $4 billion they acquired this year towards one-off "catch-up", "fix-up" expenditure. We fully understand that this was a "bonus" year and that the money cannot be committed to recurring expenditure, but we sure as hell want them to spend this bonus on the national "wishlist" and spend it now rather than return it to each of us taxpayers as electoral inducement money at a rate which won't even buy every Australian a soft drink each week. The projected 3.5 billion dollar budget should - of course - be managed very carefully. The 4 billion dollar bonus, however, is "play money" from the viewpoint of the elctorate. The party with the best proposals on how to spend this windfall for the benefit of all Australians will win the next election. Any party whose best proposal for spending that money is meaningless tax cuts is not going to win any extra votes - they'll probably lose many votes they previously regarded as "safe".

Cultural divide - you bet. And it's election results like the one in California which make me determined to defend our own imperfect model of democracy rather than simply adopt the model which the spin doctors tell us works so well in the "land of the free and the home of the brave".

If it's all the same to you, we'll pass on your particular political system while still admiring the ideals for which it stands.

 

[Some Friggin Guy]

Actualy, I thought of running myself.

Of course, I don't live in California, have never lived in California and wouldn't even if I was elected (Just don't like earthquakes.)

Somehow I doubt they would let me Govern over the internet.

 

[Zep]

Thank you reprise - I'm in full agreement, and VERY eloquently put!



BTW, that $4bill? That's OUR money from OUR taxes, not a windfall from lotto or something. So the bastards had BETTER listen this time...

 

[reprise]

Thank you reprise - I'm in full agreement, and VERY eloquently put!



BTW, that $4bill? That's OUR money from OUR taxes, not a windfall from lotto or something. So the bastards had BETTER listen this time...

I know that it's "our" money, but it wasn't part of the budget calculations. Everything that was part of the budget we can afford -and then some - without dipping into that part of consolidated revenue. The projected 3.5 billion dollar surplus was pretty much already committed in the budget. This nation - with approximately two thirds of the population of California and a 7.5 billion dollar surplus this financial year (let's not even go down the government and private debt comparisons, that'll only depress the Americans even more) had better damned NOT spend that "bonus" four billion on pork-barrelling. We - the electorate - consistently keep saying to our government, spend it on something worthwhile for all of us rather than giving us all a meaningless taxation "benefit".

Are we the only electorate in the world which actually REJECTS tax cuts? Spooky. Must be something to do with being upside-down.

 

[Some Friggin Guy]

Reprise, I know exactly what you mean.

Speaking as an American, I find it depressing that much of this country is run on the wishes of the wealthy.

There are those who will argue, but it's true. Just look at the tax cuts, no-bid contracts in Iraq and Enron.

Now, having lived for a few years north of the border, let me tell you a few things:

1. Their system is not perfect but at least it is a pure democracy, not a democratic republic (meaning, their votes actually count, and things are not decided by an "electoral college")

2. Their helathcare system has some bugs, admittedly, but you will never get into a situation where a company suddenly decides it can't afford your insurance anymore.

3. Okay, the metric system for non-scientists is a bad idea.

4. They have better beer.

5. ...

Okay, maybe I need more coffee before I continue.

 

[reprise]

Reprise, I know exactly what you mean.

Speaking as an American, I find it depressing that much of this country is run on the wishes of the wealthy.

There are those who will argue, but it's true. Just look at the tax cuts, no-bid contracts in Iraq and Enron.

Now, having lived for a few years north of the border, let me tell you a few things:

1. Their system is not perfect but at least it is a pure democracy, not a democratic republic (meaning, their votes actually count, and things are not decided by an "electoral college")

2. Their helathcare system has some bugs, admittedly, but you will never get into a situation where a company suddenly decides it can't afford your insurance anymore.

3. Okay, the metric system for non-scientists is a bad idea.

4. They have better beer.

5. ...

Okay, maybe I need more coffee before I continue.

I don't so much mean to get into a pissing match with Americans about "which form of democracy is better" so much as I want to break through the cognitive dissonance about the promises made by their political masters. Australia has made some bad - and very costly - mistakes in joining the global economy and adopting economic rationalism, but at least we are not irrevocably commited to that course. It might take a decade of some pretty unpalatable political options to re-establish our economic sovereignty, and doing so might mean paying much higher prices for imported luxury goods, but it's still doable here.

Quite frankly, I can't see anything other than economic imperialism which is going to rescue the US from the fiscal hole into which it has already dug itself and keeps digging itself even deeper. What perplexes me is that the voters of America seem to either not perceive or be apathetic towards the inevitable "crunch" which is coming. I sometimes think that this is what it must have been like watching the fall of the Roman and the British Empires approaching and knowing that there's not a damned thing you could have done to stop them from believing in their own invulnerability.

 

[Some Friggin Guy]

Reprise,

You are very much correct, however...

Americans, by and large, tend to believe their own press. The problem is, that press comes from the ones in power who stand to gain from the misfortune of others. This has nothing to with partisanship, as both major parties have been guilty of this.

In the mean time, we get fed one of the following two lines with a consistancy that would make almost anyone believe it:

1. (from one party): We are the most powerful nation in this world. Our economy will rebound once people remember this.

2. (from the other party): We need to be loved by the rest of the world. Our economy will rebound when that happens because trade will increase.

Both of the above quoted are INCREDIBLY simplified versions of what we hear, but the message is fairly accurate. Granted, we need to add in the agrument over tax cuts vs tax increases, but it really all boils down to that.

No one ever brings up the idea of economic sovereignty. The basic idea Washington tries to push is economic superiority. Frankly, Americans are PROUD of the fact that our money is (or was till the Euro) the global standard. They are even proud of the fact that the international black market runs on the US dollar.

 

[rikzilla]

Well,

This is an unmitigated DISASTER for California, the United States and the world!!

A Nazi loving, mysogenistic, drug abusing sex-maniac has stolen the California election using punch card ballots (which have been proved to be biased against democratic candidates)!! Ahhhh the inhumanity!!! Why the great Jesse Jackson himself has already said that:

The Rev. Jesse Jackson said the election should be challenged in court because voters were disenfranchised when polling places were removed from many neighborhoods, especially in minority areas.

Link

-z

PS: Just thought I'd get the whiners started....c'mon Clancy, cry for us.

 

[Brown]

Let's say it all together now:

"Governor-elect Schwarzenegger."

Okay, let's try it again, but this time, let's all say it without laughing.

"Governor-elect Schwarzenegger."

 

[Clancie]

No whining from me. After all, it will be very entertaining to see all the rationalizations people come up with for this guy (who, for starters, is not even going to live in Sacramento, just commute from his estate in Brentwood). AS did well yesterday with all groups of Ca. voters, but I think that a year from now it will be hard to find anyone who admits voting for him.

Posted by rikzilla

PS: Just thought I'd get the whiners started....c'mon Clancy, cry for us.

Oh, okay, rikzilla. One little whine, just for you....

I thought it was very rude of AS to start his acceptance intro (Leno) and speech just when Cruz Bustamante was beginning his concession announcement. Surely Schwarzenegger could have waited five more minutes until he finished...instead, of course, the cameras just left Bustamante in mid-thank you....

 

[rikzilla]

Oh, okay, rikzilla. One little whine, just for you....

I thought it was very rude of AS to start his acceptance intro (Leno) and speech just when Cruz Bustamante was beginning his concession announcement. Surely Schwarzenegger could have waited five more minutes until he finished...instead, of course, the cameras just left Bustamante in mid-thank you....

 

[Sandy M]

I suppose the wording of the recall statute either does not address the issue, or even says otherwise, but I had always though that the "recall" option was for MALFEASANCE. Don't like the guy that was elected?..then don't vote for him next time, but recall.... inappropriate and hideously expensive at a time when the state is in horrible economic shape.

Of course, if the economic shape of the state is grounds for recall, why aren't we recalling the Shrub? The whole country is in equally bad shape - must be the Shrub's fault, right?

Well, I'm appalled, disgusted and sadly amused. Still, Ah-nuld sounds a bit too liberal for the Republican powers-that-be. What I want to know is this: If Ah-nuld doesn't fulfill his promise of hydrogen stations every 20 miles (for non-existent hydrogen-powered cars?) and "a good job for everyone" is there going to be a "Recall Ah-nuld" petition circulating 8 months from now?

I have to keep thinking that my idiot fellow-citizens thought they were voting for Ah-nuld to PLAY a governor in a movie. A very BAD movie.

 

[Chanileslie]

Jesse would make a good presidential runner.

I would have voted Larry Flynt, but then I saw Mary's platform and it was actually pretty good. And she's so cute and bubbly! And DAMN smart.
Ugh, I sure hope Ahnold doesn't turn Vegas into California East.

Um, Vegas is in Nevada, but I know a few Nevadans who would happily hand it over to California. BTW, Vegas is nothing like the rest of Nevada, and it already feels like an extension of LA with Gambling, IMO. And we here in Nevada haven't elected Arnold as our governor. We are notoriously independent here.

 

[nightwind]

Arnold

If Arnold doesn't straighten things out soon, could they recall him?

 

[davefoc]

Grammaton said:

They checked my ID and I actually saw one guy being turned away because he had no form of identification of any kind. I am sure he was a registered voter; he just flaked on that part.

There were signs all over the polling place that I went to that it is illegal by state law to request an ID before voting. It is amazing to me that anybody in CA would have had their ID checked before voting.

A number of laws lately have been passed that make voter fraud somewhat easier to get away with. I am not quite sure why, but it seems like something that is part of the Democratic agenda. I think, it is their view, that more Democratic voters don't vote because they just don't want to make the effort, so the Democrats are generally the ones pushing laws that make it easier to vote. A more cynical view is that they think that illegal aliens are more likely to vote for them so that if they make it easier to commit election fraud they are likely to pick up votes from illegal aliens.

A few people that seemed to really look bad during this election:
Jesse Jackson - I'm not sure this guy is playing with a full deck anymore. Rambling on about voting irregularities when there is no evidence of any. My reaction to him was that he was more pathetic than partisan.

Huffington - Wow, a full out assault on the contest for the Nobel prize of hypocrites. She gets in the race, presumably because she thinks it would be a good idea to remove Davis, does poorly and all of a sudden is a Davis supporter. I suspect her support cost Davis more votes than it got him. She was already a leading contender for the hypocrite prize for paying no taxes on her millions in income. She did have a funny web site though.

Best Joke of the Election:
The reason that Schwarzenegger won was that he groped so many women that people thought he was a Democrat. A little tacky, but I thought it was funny.

Best part of the election
Schwarzenegger's victory speech. I was really amzed at the skill in the delivery and the well chosen words providing just the right tone of conciliation to the Democrats in power, the people who had run against him and to Davis.

 

[MoeFaux]

Um, Vegas is in Nevada, but I know a few Nevadans who would happily hand it over to California. BTW, Vegas is nothing like the rest of Nevada, and it already feels like an extension of LA with Gambling, IMO. And we here in Nevada haven't elected Arnold as our governor. We are notoriously independent here.

Yup, I know. My apartment is smack dab in Las Vegas right accross the street from the Hard Rock.

 

[davefoc]

nightwind asked:

If Arnold doesn't straighten things out soon, could they recall him?

I think technically yes. One view of the recall process is that it is a disastrous idea that can lead to terrible instability in the government. Anybody with a few million dollars to toss out can get the requisite signatures and then we've got another recall underway.

The other thought is that about thirty times over the years people have tried to recall the governor, but that in all those cases the idea never got off the ground because there was insufficient support and most people are rational enough with their voting to know that it is a remedy that must be used sparingly.

Interestingly, it may have lead to the election of a person that is almost unelectible with the current state of politcs in California, a fiscal conservative, social liberal. People that fall into this camp can certainly win a majority of votes in a general election as this result indicated but they just might not be able to win a primary.

 

[CFLarsen]

I thought it was very rude of AS to start his acceptance intro (Leno) and speech just when Cruz Bustamante was beginning his concession announcement. Surely Schwarzenegger could have waited five more minutes until he finished...instead, of course, the cameras just left Bustamante in mid-thank you....

So, you think that these huge events are timed to fit, so one ends and another can start. Nothing random happens on TV, does it?

Just like JE in Crossing Over.

 

[renata]

Somebody pinch me. Democrats blew it. New Yorker referred to Bustamante as "an affable mediocrity who has drifted upward on a combination of term limits, opportunism, ethnic ticket-balancing and luck." Arnold was the only moderate on the ticket- Davis is a money making machine, sold out to special interests and the unions, who is a disaster, Bustamante is a liberal, less talented shadow of Davis, and so there was very little choice. People held their nose and voted. Really, since Davis was in such denial over this recall, and because of his me or nobody strategy, they refused to put a strong Democrat on the ticket- they gambled and lost. When I voted yesterday the choices were worse than the next. The women of course are a red herring- if Democrats tolerate Kennedy, someone who caused a drowning death of a young woman, an actor who groped some women should be no biggie. We argued that character should not be an issue with Clinton. I am more concerned that Arnold is a puppet, that he has no experience, that he has no platform, that he is in pocket of big business. He uses Texas and Bush as his examples of good leadership, and that is the scary part. Of course given the Democrats control the legislature, this will be a very rancorous few years.