KCDem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-07-03 09:28 PM
Original message |
| so, say 47% vote "no" on recall... |
|
(or whatever # it is... I'm just putting it in the 40s 'cuz that seems reasonable to me).
Why would any of those people vote for the Terminator? Please correct my math, I'm drinking hot whisky toddies due to my oncoming Strep throat (kid has it). But, say, 47% vote "No", "Bustamante", and the true conservatives (say, 10%) vote McClintock, how would Sch. get more than Bustamante? Are there really people out there who would vote "no", "Schwarzenegger"?
|
Sephirstein
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-07-03 09:30 PM
Response to Original message |
|
There are other Dems and progressive-minded indies.
|
KCDem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-07-03 09:32 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
| 4. but why would a Dem/progressive vote for one? |
|
I mean, knowing what could/probably will happen to the state?
I just don't understand why anyone would shoot themselves in the foot this way.
(Obviously, I'm not a Naderite, lol).
|
Sephirstein
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-07-03 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
| 5. It's not your logic that matters here... |
|
It's theirs...
Trying to understand the mindset is like trying to use the Bible to argue against my position on same-sex marriage: You're speaking from a completely different frame of reference, making your arguments irrelevant to me.
|
slackmaster
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-07-03 09:30 PM
Response to Original message |
| 2. Drink three more toddies and you might be able to imagine the mindset |
|
I'm quite insane even with no alcohol, and it's not very hard for me to picture someone doing that. Maybe tens of thousands of people.
|
mitchtv
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-07-03 09:31 PM
Response to Original message |
| 3. that's what the Riverside paper recommended |
|
No- Arnold yes no a real RW rag too
|
Bozita
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-07-03 09:37 PM
Response to Original message |
| 6. The recall vote is different than the replacement vote. |
|
If 47% vote no on the recall, 53% voted yes.
So, Davis would be recalled.
The replacement vote is a different issue. Candidate with the most votes wins. Technically, a candidate in a field of 130+ could win with as little as 2% of the vote.
|
Sephirstein
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-07-03 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
|
In theory, less than 1% can be enough to win.
But this isn't Israel...lol
|
NaMeaHou
(802 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-07-03 09:39 PM
Response to Original message |
| 7. It's way too late for hypothetical questions |
|
we'll get the answers (not soon enough) and will have to fight from those. Wasting time on hypotheticals is not productive.
Just my .......................
|
HalfManHalfBiscuit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-07-03 09:42 PM
Response to Original message |
| 9. Both the SF Chronicle and SJ Merc News suggested the following: |
|
No on the recall.
And NO VOTE for the other candidates. They actually recommended to not vote on the second half. They could have recommended Bustamante.
These are liberal, influential papers in the most liberal part of the state. Pretty stupid, huh?
|
Sephirstein
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-07-03 09:44 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
| 10. We've been betrayed by our own... |
|
The RW must have launched a stealth campaign and infiltrated these papers.
Not even Nader voters are that fucking unpragmatic.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sun May 19th 2013, 09:16 PM
Response to Original message |