[KevinTheOmnivore]

Originally Posted by GAsux

As for my niavety, I am not saying this makes me credible but I will add that I too live in California, and have for the past 28+ years.

And obviously it does give you more of an expertise on the wrongs of Gray Davis. But as I've probably said 10 times now, that's not my point entirely. We have procedures we use when it comes to appointing are elected officials, and we likewise have procedures as to how we discard them. Throughout our nation's existence, these methods have changed.

My point has been that this recall is bad policy, and it doesn't put California in a better position, it in fact puts them in a potentially worse one.

ack of support goes far deeper than the "5%" drop in popularity polls you've mentioned. It's been building for several years and I think you'll find that all polls aside, even in relatively heavily democratic areas of the state people aren't too happy with Davis. It's education spending, it's the power fiasco, it's the budget problems, etc. I honestly believe that Davis re-election this past go around has more to do with lack of a viable option than it does with any kind of validation of Davis's leadership. I think you might discover that a lot of folks picked Davis as the lesser of two evils.

Okay, but my question to you then is how should it be. Should the people of California accept the democratic process and wait to vote him out, or should a recall that will give them 3(?) years of another potentially rich yet incompetent governor go through...? Is this preferable, and more importantly, is it fair...? Several other states throughout the union are in the economic dumps, other governors have poor opinion polls. Is the recall process, as it's enacted in California, viable?

the "movement" forgive me if I used bad semantics. Perhaps some of the recall effort was in fact driven by stooges. I suppose there is only one way to test your theory. We'll find out when the people go to the polls again. I would imagine that will demonstrate whether or not this effort is merely political posturing or genuine discontent.

I'm not sure it'll matter either way. It looks now as if Arnold is leaning towards not running, which actually takes one of the few potentially known names off the ballot. Maybe Mr. Issa can cough up another million and be your governor. Do you know his stance on various state issues? Would you be happier with him, or someone like him, as your governor???

s of the stepping aside bit, all theorizing aside, I'm saying that the Dems in California faced a cross roads. Maintain their loyalty to the party and their candidate and point out fault in the system at the risk of losing their leadership, or cut their losses and at least maintain some semblance of control in the states affairs.

I think you're probably right, but keep in mind, a lot of these Dems backed this pony less than one year ago. To turn on him now could look like pure opportunism rather than civic responsibility. Furthermore, I think it's not fair to question whether or not this is a Republican fueled power play. It clearly IS just that, whether it's a righteous act or not, it's certainly an attempt to use discontent to grab the governor's seat. This kind of tactic tends to polarize people, not unite them. It's pretty tough to ask state Dems to understand this recall, especialy since it's the opposition party fueling the process. It's kind of like asking Congressional Republicans to support impeachment of W, simply b/c a minority in Congress have proposed it.

I'm not saying the voters in the fine state of California are ready to shift to the right and support conservatism (see Sen. Boxer and Fienstien, Repl Waters, etc) but I think you will see more and more bipartisan discontent with the leadership of Gov. Davis himself.

And I'm sure it's warranted. Al I'm saying is the process sucks. I'd stop complaining honestly if they were going to use an IRV system for the special election. This would make more sense for such a large ballot, IMO.