Could Republican hopes be dashed in California?

[Dinner]

As most of you have heard California will be holding a recall election to decide whither or not to recall Governor Grey Davis (Democrat). The recall election has been pushed by a group of right wing Republicans who've dug up a s century old state law dealing with the removal of corrupt politician from office. So far no one, not even the Republicans, has alleged any corruption has taken place yet the recall election is now set to go ahead any way and Republicans across the state are now rejoicing at the prospects that they could take over the Governor’s Mansion just one year after losing a general election.

The Democrats are down but they aren't out yet. In fact the Governor’s office has launched a complex legal challenge claiming that even if the governor was recalled the standing Lt. Governor would assume the office of Governor (as detailed in the state's law dealing with who takes over if the Governor can no longer lead the state) instead of who ever wins the Republican backed replacement election. Davis's lawyers point to a provision of the recall law in which it says a new election for governor will be held "if appropriate". Davis is arguing that a new election would not be appropriate since there is a duly elected legal successor pre the state's successor law.

It sounds complex but legal scholars give the governor’s suite a more then 50-50 chance of success; not that it would insure Davis's political survival but it just might block Republican hopes of stealing the election they lost last year.

[DinoDoc]

Re: Could Republican hopes be dashed in California?

Originally posted by Oerdin
... not that it would insure Davis's political survival ...

I believe that it would take an act of God to do that at this point. What's his approval rating now?

[DanS]

It sounds complex but legal scholars give the governor’s suite a more then 50-50 chance of success; not that it would insure Davis's political survival but it just might block Republican hopes of stealing the election they lost last year.

Actually, Republicans should not want to win. The next couple of years are going to be tough budget years and it would be better to say that all of this is the Dems fault.

[Q Classic]

well, yes, if the republicans are sufficiently split.

i don't think it's likely they'll lose, though.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Davis sucks. 37% of democrats approve of his job, which is one percentage point more then those who support Bush. His ass is on the way out. Our deficit is the largest of any state, we are paying out of our yin yang for electricity, the legislature cant even get a budget approved on the budget deadline. I hate the republicans as much as the next californian. but davis has screwed the pooch.

[Dinner]

Another issue is the budget deficit and why the budget is ALWAYS late. I mean year after year after year the Republicans and Dems fight over the budget and both refuse to compromise one inch. Do you ever wonder why?

I was listening to Capital Public Radio (the NPR affiliate here in Sacramento) and one of the speakers claimed Term Limits which were passed in the 1980's was the roote cause of this disfunctionality. The argument went like before term limits the various high party officials had leverage over the rank in file because you knew the high official would always be around and if the rank and file stepped out of line then he could be black listed and his political career was over. He'd lose all support of the state party and all of the money generated by the state party. Since term limits it people are capped at 8 years in office and it takes 6 years to get to a position of authority. Often times the rank and file can now ignore the party leadership and refuse to do what they tell them (like cut spending in certain areas or raise taxes) because they know the leadership will be out of office by the time the next election rolls around.

I thought that was an interesting point. Effectively the state parties are both lead by lame ducks who can't force compromise so the individuals are refusing to ever compromise.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Term limits suck. The people can decide how long they want to keep their representative.

[Sava]

The people can decide how long they want to keep their representative.

So we can have Strom Thurmond's in office until they are 100?

[Lawrence of Arabia]

o we can have Strom Thurmond's in office until they are 100?

Thats right.

[Japher]

I don't care who gets the job so long as Davis doesn't have it... Sue away dildo

[Victor Galis]

The recall election is a sick, sick joke. I hope the court puts a stop to the madness. (Note: I won't be more than a bit annoyed if Davis gets recalled, but the qualifications required to have your name placed on the ballot as a replacement are ridiculous.)

[Imran Siddiqui]

Silly Dems.... it's now 'stealing' an election when complying with a legal recall election . Of course when the Dems say 'stealing' an election you can't ever trust 'em.

[Victor Galis]

Paying large sums of money to collect signiatures is not exactly a precedent that one should want to set. 13% of the voters are going to be deeply unhappy regardless of who's in office, and with regulations being what they are, I'm pretty sure that if I really, really wanted, I could get my name onto that recall election ballot (this would be really, really sad).

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Silly Dems.... it's now 'stealing' an election when complying with a legal recall election . Of course when the Dems say 'stealing' an election you can't ever trust 'em.

It's a loop hole and you know it Imran. Even if you can't bring yourself to admite it.

[Japher]

Gotta love the ungreased wheels of Democracy whinning in all it's glory... huh, Victor?