Michael Savage to run for California governor? - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

BoCo · 07-25-2003, 04:59 AM

<hr>
Michael Savage to run for California governor?
Radio talk-show host, best-selling author consideringindependent bid in October

Posted: July 25, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern

Michael Savage, the controversial, nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and best-selling author, is considering a run for California governor in the fall recall election of incumbent Gray Davis.

Gov. Michael Savage?

Savage made the announcement on his radio program last night and is soliciting comments on the idea from his fans on his website.

His "Savage Nation" program is heard on more than 300 affiliates from coast to coast, but the talker is based in San Francisco.

State officials set an Oct. 7 date for the election to recall Davis, giving him less than three months to fight for his political life.

Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante announced the date yesterday, one day after state officials certified that the drive to recall Davis had collected more than enough signatures to make it onto the ballot.

It will be the United States' first gubernatorial recall election in 82 years.

If Savage runs, his entry into the race would be the latest development in a wild political story. Other candidates reportedly considering a bid include actor Arnold Schwarzenegger and former Republican vice presidential candidate Jack Kemp.

Savage was fired as a television host by MSNBC earlier this month for referring to an unidentified caller to his cable show as a "sodomite" and saying he should "get AIDS and die." Savage later apologized for the remarks, which, he said, he believed were made off the air.

His latest book, "The Savage Nation," published by WND Books, became the New York Times No. 1 best seller earlier this year.

Savage said his platform would include the following:

Enforcing Proposition 187, a ballot initiative approved by the people of the state that would have ended taxpayer subsidization of medical and education services for illegal aliens. Savage contends enforcement of the initiative would save California taxpayers $8 billion to $10 billion.

The deportation of all criminal illegal aliens in the state. Savage says this action would save $3 billion to $5 billion.

Hospitalization of the mentally-ill homeless. Again, Savage claims this would save $3 billion to $5 billion dollars in welfare payments.

He would also enforce another state ballot initiative declaring English the official language. As he explains it: "If you can't speak English, then don't vote in our elections. If you're too lazy to learn how to speak, read or write English, then don't vote in our elections. English only on all ballots. English only in all business dealings in the state of California."
"I believe in the Golden State not the Welfare State," he said.

Candidates seeking to replace Davis must now scramble to start their campaigns and declare their candidacies by Aug. 9 – 59 days before the election. Bustamante, himself a Democrat, selected the latest possible date allowed by California law for the unprecedented recall election.

As of yesterday, just one Republican candidate – U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa, who bankrolled the recall signature-gathering effort with $1.7 million of his own money – was definitely in the running. Several others were said to be weighing a decision, including Schwarzenegger, Kemp, state Sen. Tom McClintock, R-Thousand Oaks, failed gubernatorial candidate Bill Simon and former L.A. Mayor Richard Riordan.

Davis has branded the drive to oust him "a hostile takeover by the right," and allies have said they expect to spend $15 million to $20 million to campaign against the recall.

Recall supporters say they are planning a "very aggressive campaign" with a $15 million budget.

Davis, who is less than a year into his second term, has seen his approval ratings drop amid a slump in the economy and a staggering deficit projected at more than $38 billion. He has been accused of spending recklessly during the 1990s and mishandling the state's electricity crisis two years ago.

"I'm not running against anyone else," he said. "The election is whether or not to retain Gov. Davis. It's a very risky business to change governors in one day."

The last gubernatorial recall election was in 1921, when North Dakota Gov. Lynn J. Frazier become the only governor in U.S. history to be removed from office.
<hr>
LINK

Too bad I don't live there so he could get my vote.

Darkblack · 07-25-2003, 06:29 AM

lol What is he thinking?

Superbelt · 07-25-2003, 07:04 AM

Another man to saturate the already glutted conservative side of this election. Though he is fringe he will siphon off votes from any other non-psycho conservative. All of the conservative's will make the eventual democratic nominee pass this in a cakewalk.

doctorphibes · 07-25-2003, 10:27 AM

Or, you know, there's the little thing of, oh, the recall might not pass, or something.

Just because 1 million signed the petition doesn't mean a majority will vote to remove the Governor. And I saw today that Issa had like 4% of the potential vote, waaaaay behind Riordan or (potentially) Arnold.

The_Dude · 07-25-2003, 11:10 AM

i dont get it, why would u wanna be governor of CA at this time??? the budget is in deep crisis and it'd be a pain in the ass to salvage it.

this is the wrong time 2 run for gov of CA.

sixate · 07-25-2003, 12:50 PM

I would seriously doubt that he'd win if he did it, but if I lived there I'd vote for him.

Phaenx · 07-25-2003, 12:52 PM

It's always a bad time to run for governer of California, the liberals have been screwed it all up, Arnold should run for governer in a real state =).

ctembreull · 07-25-2003, 06:46 PM

Actually, I find myself hoping he does run. Not because I think he's even remotely human, but because I'd get a thrill watching the news media tear that sorry little troll a number of new orifices.

Please run, Mr. Weiner (yes, his real name is Michael Weiner). Turn this entire ridiculous process into a farce, just to ensure that CA voters do the right thing and vote to retain Gov. Davis for the term to which he was actually elected by a majority of California voters.

BoCo · 07-25-2003, 06:50 PM

ctembreull brings up a good point I was already thinking about. How's California going to react to possibly having a Governor Weiner?

I hope he runs and wins, but that name is so embarrassing.

GunslingerCold · 07-25-2003, 11:39 PM

If I lived there Id vote for him over Davis.
But how could he possibly beat Arnold.

2wolves · 07-26-2003, 07:47 AM

I hope Weiner does run against Davis.

We'd have a daily portion of what the neo-con movement is all about (hate and a longing for the Way Back machine) and as Weiner is forced to modify his positions to try to get votes the concrete resolution of his anti-everything that isn't white & right would tighten like a noose around his neck.

If my ancestors had an immagration policy like Weiner's he'd be in europe working as a waiter.

2Wolves

Cimarron29414 · 07-26-2003, 11:41 AM

Only in California could a man be elected in November, "unelected" in August, and replaced by a man like Mike Savage. We are all so tired of politicians, but replacing them with entertainers is even worse. Has anyone looked at the mess Ventura caused in Minnesota?

ctembreull · 07-26-2003, 01:58 PM

I'm just wondering how anyone associated with this recall can ever claim to have any respect for the electoral process, and keep a straight face while doing it. Isn't that why we have elections? CA voters (I'm one of them) had a chance to send Davis packing last year. They kept him around.

Personally, I would very much like to see recall laws subjected to some pretty strenuous Constitutional judging. I get the feeling that the ability to pull governors out of office, without their ever having committed a crime and strictly for narrow partisan gain, was never, ever, ever part of the intent of the Framers.

The_Dude · 07-26-2003, 02:06 PM

this recall election is going to cost millions, already at a time when the state's running deficits.

the same's happening in texas with the special sessions to re-district.

it's costing the state millions at a time of red-ink.

Phaenx · 07-26-2003, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ctembreull
I'm just wondering how anyone associated with this recall can ever claim to have any respect for the electoral process, and keep a straight face while doing it. Isn't that why we have elections? CA voters (I'm one of them) had a chance to send Davis packing last year. They kept him around.

Personally, I would very much like to see recall laws subjected to some pretty strenuous Constitutional judging. I get the feeling that the ability to pull governors out of office, without their ever having committed a crime and strictly for narrow partisan gain, was never, ever, ever part of the intent of the Framers.

You don't want to be able to pull a governer if he's an incompetant oaf? I think people should have that power, how it is disrespectful towards the ability to put them into office in the first place is beyond me.

ctembreull · 07-26-2003, 04:23 PM

Phaenx:

For one thing, incompetence is in the eye of the beholder. I think that Gov. Davis has done a fine job, given what he's got to work with. But that's the point of elections in the first place: you elect a person to a specifically-defined term of service. The alternative is nothing better than anarchy.

You see, it took a majority of voters to elect Davis to a constitutionally-mandated four-year term. It took 900,000 signatures on a petition to bring him back down for recall. How is this the rule of the majority? The voters, if they thought Davis was incompetent, should have voted him down last October.

It's a bare fact that this recall makes a mockery of the democratic process. Davis won his election fairly and legally. Just because someone's bitter about it doesn't mean that they should be able to overturn it with the signatures of 1/35th of the state's population. Otherwise, what's the point of that election in the first place?

Phaenx · 07-26-2003, 04:41 PM

A large portion of the rest of the population hardly cares, that's why they go with 12 percent of the voter turnout in November (in this case, 897k).

Getting elected is all talk, once they have a chance to act, and they screw everything up like he's done then no doubt a lot of the people who actually voted for him is going to have their minds changed about this guy. In this case the fact that the majority approved of him when he was elected is irrelevent, and it's hardly a fact that it makes a mockery of the democratic process, whose being sore here?

He was elected fairly and legally sure, and now he'll be recalled, fairly, and legally.

ctembreull · 07-26-2003, 05:00 PM

How, precisely, is a majority election victory "irrelevant"? And how is a vast minority's ability to undo the effects of an election "fair"?

You also neglected to note that Davis had been governor for four years prior to his election win last year. So the idea about voters not knowing what they were getting goes right out the window.

So I take it you think we should be able to recall George W. Bush as well? After all, he's done no better than Davis. Tell me, do you think that would be fair?

Because I don't.

Phaenx · 07-26-2003, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ctembreull
How, precisely, is a majority election victory "irrelevant"? And how is a vast minority's ability to undo the effects of an election "fair"?

Considering he's getting recalled, it's irrelevant what people thought of him in November. The "vast" minority is "well over" 12% of the voting population, it's fair because it, however much -you- may not like having a liberal recalled, is well within the legal rules of California. If you want to bitch about the democratic process being made a mockery of, I would suggest changing/abolishing your recall laws, because they're a part of that democratic process.

You also neglected to note that Davis had been governor for four years prior to his election win last year. So the idea about voters not knowing what they were getting goes right out the window.

Wrong. I didn't say anything about the Californians not knowing what they were getting. This is about how much incompetence they can take before they decide to do something about it.

So I take it you think we should be able to recall George W. Bush as well? After all, he's done no better than Davis. Tell me, do you think that would be fair?

Because I don't.
It would be fair. What you should be asking me regarding Grey Davis and with your analogy concerning Dubya, is if it's feasible to recall a Governer or a President.

ctembreull · 07-26-2003, 07:30 PM

Quote:

Considering he's getting recalled, it's irrelevant what people thought of him in November. The "vast" minority is "well over" 12% of the voting population, it's fair because it, however much -you- may not like having a liberal recalled, is well within the legal rules of California. If you want to bitch about the democratic process being made a mockery of, I would suggest changing/abolishing your recall laws, because they're a part of that democratic process.

It is, in fact, highly relevant what people thought of him in November, when better than 50% thought he was good enough to be elected. Now, what you've got is the will of 12% of the population trumping the will of more than 50%. No matter how you slice it, that's manifestly undemocratic. I mentioned earlier that there is precious little chance of the recall withstanding Constitutional scrutiny, but there you are. Bad laws are on the books in every state - there's probably a few of them mentioned in the humor forum. This is just one of them.

One other point - I don't care if it's a Democrat, Republican, Green, Libertarian, or any other party politician. Once he or she has been elected, barring the commission of a crime, then he or she should remain in office for the duration of his or her term.

Quote:

This is about how much incompetence they can take before they decide to do something about it.

Apparently, the answer to that is "two months worth." That's how long Davis was in office for this term before the recall effort was launched. Don't even begin to try and tell me that two months is enough to determine a governor's incompetence, particularly not one who has thirty-plus years in state politics and who had, in fact, already served a four-year term immediately prior to his reelection.

This is partisan politics subverting the will of the voter, plain and simple.

Phaenx · 07-26-2003, 07:48 PM

I disagree to say the least. I'll leave it at that unless you want me to elaborate, but I think we've gone through the specifics more then enough already.

Zeld2.0 · 07-27-2003, 12:25 AM

REcall is just gonna be shit anyways

Dems still got the upperhand

Technically speaking if Davis saw that he really was going to lose then a few days before the election he can resign and mr. Lt. Gov. is going to be the next gov and dem's will still have office

I'll say this though - I am pretty ashamed at how the entire recall is going.

The budget crisis is like $37.5 billion - the recall election will cost another $35 billion.

So thank goodness all you recall folks because all you did was double the crisis and whoever you elect next is going to be in worse shit.

not to mention that supposedly Arnold is having second thoughts on the election (its smart for him though IMO because its better to start elsewhere and gain experience so you can move to even bigger fish w/ fewer issues)

Phaenx · 07-27-2003, 01:02 AM

Weren't the democrats talking about extending it to stick it to someone? Shame on you, Republicans.

Zeld2.0 · 07-27-2003, 01:13 AM

Whether or not they chose to wouldn't matter in the end anyways because whoever takes the job next (if anyone does) all that will happen is the same shit.

Republicans would be smarter by leaving the shit on the Dems if they weren't so wanting of a position that could only be made worse after this :P

smooth · 07-27-2003, 02:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Phaenx
Weren't the democrats talking about extending it to stick it to someone? Shame on you, Republicans.

Last I saw you and seretogis left that thread with your tails between your legs.

edit: inserted thread link

thedrake · 07-27-2003, 10:51 AM

This is going to back fire badly on to the Republicans, I love it.

Keep up the good work,
The Democrats

07-25-2003, 04:59 AM	#1 (permalink)
BoCo Fear the bunny Location: Hanging off the tip of the Right Wing	Michael Savage to run for California governor? <hr> Michael Savage to run for California governor? Radio talk-show host, best-selling author consideringindependent bid in October Posted: July 25, 2003 1:00 a.m. Eastern Michael Savage, the controversial, nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and best-selling author, is considering a run for California governor in the fall recall election of incumbent Gray Davis. Gov. Michael Savage? Savage made the announcement on his radio program last night and is soliciting comments on the idea from his fans on his website. His "Savage Nation" program is heard on more than 300 affiliates from coast to coast, but the talker is based in San Francisco. State officials set an Oct. 7 date for the election to recall Davis, giving him less than three months to fight for his political life. Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante announced the date yesterday, one day after state officials certified that the drive to recall Davis had collected more than enough signatures to make it onto the ballot. It will be the United States' first gubernatorial recall election in 82 years. If Savage runs, his entry into the race would be the latest development in a wild political story. Other candidates reportedly considering a bid include actor Arnold Schwarzenegger and former Republican vice presidential candidate Jack Kemp. Savage was fired as a television host by MSNBC earlier this month for referring to an unidentified caller to his cable show as a "sodomite" and saying he should "get AIDS and die." Savage later apologized for the remarks, which, he said, he believed were made off the air. His latest book, "The Savage Nation," published by WND Books, became the New York Times No. 1 best seller earlier this year. Savage said his platform would include the following: Enforcing Proposition 187, a ballot initiative approved by the people of the state that would have ended taxpayer subsidization of medical and education services for illegal aliens. Savage contends enforcement of the initiative would save California taxpayers $8 billion to $10 billion. The deportation of all criminal illegal aliens in the state. Savage says this action would save $3 billion to $5 billion. Hospitalization of the mentally-ill homeless. Again, Savage claims this would save $3 billion to $5 billion dollars in welfare payments. He would also enforce another state ballot initiative declaring English the official language. As he explains it: "If you can't speak English, then don't vote in our elections. If you're too lazy to learn how to speak, read or write English, then don't vote in our elections. English only on all ballots. English only in all business dealings in the state of California." "I believe in the Golden State not the Welfare State," he said. Candidates seeking to replace Davis must now scramble to start their campaigns and declare their candidacies by Aug. 9 – 59 days before the election. Bustamante, himself a Democrat, selected the latest possible date allowed by California law for the unprecedented recall election. As of yesterday, just one Republican candidate – U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa, who bankrolled the recall signature-gathering effort with $1.7 million of his own money – was definitely in the running. Several others were said to be weighing a decision, including Schwarzenegger, Kemp, state Sen. Tom McClintock, R-Thousand Oaks, failed gubernatorial candidate Bill Simon and former L.A. Mayor Richard Riordan. Davis has branded the drive to oust him "a hostile takeover by the right," and allies have said they expect to spend $15 million to $20 million to campaign against the recall. Recall supporters say they are planning a "very aggressive campaign" with a $15 million budget. Davis, who is less than a year into his second term, has seen his approval ratings drop amid a slump in the economy and a staggering deficit projected at more than $38 billion. He has been accused of spending recklessly during the 1990s and mishandling the state's electricity crisis two years ago. "I'm not running against anyone else," he said. "The election is whether or not to retain Gov. Davis. It's a very risky business to change governors in one day." The last gubernatorial recall election was in 1921, when North Dakota Gov. Lynn J. Frazier become the only governor in U.S. history to be removed from office. <hr> LINK Too bad I don't live there so he could get my vote. __________________ Activism is a way for useless people to feel important. Last edited by BoCo; 07-25-2003 at 05:19 AM..

07-25-2003, 11:10 AM	#5 (permalink)
The_Dude The GrandDaddy of them all! Location: Austin, TX	i dont get it, why would u wanna be governor of CA at this time??? the budget is in deep crisis and it'd be a pain in the ass to salvage it. this is the wrong time 2 run for gov of CA. __________________ "Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity." - Darrel K Royal

07-25-2003, 12:52 PM	#7 (permalink)
Phaenx The Northern Ward Location: Columbus, Ohio	It's always a bad time to run for governer of California, the liberals have been screwed it all up, Arnold should run for governer in a real state =). __________________ "I went shopping last night at like 1am. The place was empty and this old woman just making polite conversation said to me, 'where is everyone??' I replied, 'In bed, same place you and I should be!' Took me ten minutes to figure out why she gave me a dirty look." --Some guy

07-25-2003, 06:50 PM	#9 (permalink)
BoCo Fear the bunny Location: Hanging off the tip of the Right Wing	ctembreull brings up a good point I was already thinking about. How's California going to react to possibly having a Governor Weiner? I hope he runs and wins, but that name is so embarrassing. __________________ Activism is a way for useless people to feel important.

07-26-2003, 11:41 AM	#12 (permalink)
Cimarron29414 Still Free Location: comfortably perched at the top of the bell curve!	Only in California could a man be elected in November, "unelected" in August, and replaced by a man like Mike Savage. We are all so tired of politicians, but replacing them with entertainers is even worse. Has anyone looked at the mess Ventura caused in Minnesota? __________________ Gives a man a halo, does mead. "Here lies The_Jazz: Killed by an ambitious, sparkly, pink butterfly."

07-25-2003, 06:29 AM	#2 (permalink)
Darkblack Banned Location: Pennsytuckia	lol What is he thinking?

07-25-2003, 07:04 AM	#3 (permalink)
Superbelt This vexes me. I am terribly vexed. Location: Grantville, Pa	Another man to saturate the already glutted conservative side of this election. Though he is fringe he will siphon off votes from any other non-psycho conservative. All of the conservative's will make the eventual democratic nominee pass this in a cakewalk.

07-25-2003, 10:27 AM	#4 (permalink)
doctorphibes Crazy	Or, you know, there's the little thing of, oh, the recall might not pass, or something. Just because 1 million signed the petition doesn't mean a majority will vote to remove the Governor. And I saw today that Issa had like 4% of the potential vote, waaaaay behind Riordan or (potentially) Arnold.

07-25-2003, 12:50 PM	#6 (permalink)
sixate Registered User Location: Somewhere in Ohio	I would seriously doubt that he'd win if he did it, but if I lived there I'd vote for him.

07-25-2003, 06:46 PM	#8 (permalink)
ctembreull Crazy Location: Silicon Valley, CA, USA, Earth	Actually, I find myself hoping he does run. Not because I think he's even remotely human, but because I'd get a thrill watching the news media tear that sorry little troll a number of new orifices. Please run, Mr. Weiner (yes, his real name is Michael Weiner). Turn this entire ridiculous process into a farce, just to ensure that CA voters do the right thing and vote to retain Gov. Davis for the term to which he was actually elected by a majority of California voters.

07-25-2003, 11:39 PM	#10 (permalink)
GunslingerCold Banned Location: IL	If I lived there Id vote for him over Davis. But how could he possibly beat Arnold.

07-26-2003, 07:47 AM	#11 (permalink)
2wolves Psycho Location: Just outside the D.C. belt	I hope Weiner does run against Davis. We'd have a daily portion of what the neo-con movement is all about (hate and a longing for the Way Back machine) and as Weiner is forced to modify his positions to try to get votes the concrete resolution of his anti-everything that isn't white & right would tighten like a noose around his neck. If my ancestors had an immagration policy like Weiner's he'd be in europe working as a waiter. 2Wolves

07-26-2003, 01:58 PM	#13 (permalink)
ctembreull Crazy Location: Silicon Valley, CA, USA, Earth	I'm just wondering how anyone associated with this recall can ever claim to have any respect for the electoral process, and keep a straight face while doing it. Isn't that why we have elections? CA voters (I'm one of them) had a chance to send Davis packing last year. They kept him around. Personally, I would very much like to see recall laws subjected to some pretty strenuous Constitutional judging. I get the feeling that the ability to pull governors out of office, without their ever having committed a crime and strictly for narrow partisan gain, was never, ever, ever part of the intent of the Framers. __________________ Mac "If it's nae Scottish, it's crap!

07-26-2003, 02:06 PM	#14 (permalink)
The_Dude The GrandDaddy of them all! Location: Austin, TX	this recall election is going to cost millions, already at a time when the state's running deficits. the same's happening in texas with the special sessions to re-district. it's costing the state millions at a time of red-ink. __________________ "Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity." - Darrel K Royal

07-26-2003, 04:23 PM	#16 (permalink)
ctembreull Crazy Location: Silicon Valley, CA, USA, Earth	Phaenx: For one thing, incompetence is in the eye of the beholder. I think that Gov. Davis has done a fine job, given what he's got to work with. But that's the point of elections in the first place: you elect a person to a specifically-defined term of service. The alternative is nothing better than anarchy. You see, it took a majority of voters to elect Davis to a constitutionally-mandated four-year term. It took 900,000 signatures on a petition to bring him back down for recall. How is this the rule of the majority? The voters, if they thought Davis was incompetent, should have voted him down last October. It's a bare fact that this recall makes a mockery of the democratic process. Davis won his election fairly and legally. Just because someone's bitter about it doesn't mean that they should be able to overturn it with the signatures of 1/35th of the state's population. Otherwise, what's the point of that election in the first place? __________________ Mac "If it's nae Scottish, it's crap!

07-26-2003, 04:41 PM	#17 (permalink)
Phaenx The Northern Ward Location: Columbus, Ohio	A large portion of the rest of the population hardly cares, that's why they go with 12 percent of the voter turnout in November (in this case, 897k). Getting elected is all talk, once they have a chance to act, and they screw everything up like he's done then no doubt a lot of the people who actually voted for him is going to have their minds changed about this guy. In this case the fact that the majority approved of him when he was elected is irrelevent, and it's hardly a fact that it makes a mockery of the democratic process, whose being sore here? He was elected fairly and legally sure, and now he'll be recalled, fairly, and legally. __________________ "I went shopping last night at like 1am. The place was empty and this old woman just making polite conversation said to me, 'where is everyone??' I replied, 'In bed, same place you and I should be!' Took me ten minutes to figure out why she gave me a dirty look." --Some guy Last edited by Phaenx; 07-26-2003 at 04:45 PM..

07-26-2003, 05:00 PM	#18 (permalink)
ctembreull Crazy Location: Silicon Valley, CA, USA, Earth	How, precisely, is a majority election victory "irrelevant"? And how is a vast minority's ability to undo the effects of an election "fair"? You also neglected to note that Davis had been governor for four years prior to his election win last year. So the idea about voters not knowing what they were getting goes right out the window. So I take it you think we should be able to recall George W. Bush as well? After all, he's done no better than Davis. Tell me, do you think that would be fair? Because I don't. __________________ Mac "If it's nae Scottish, it's crap!

07-26-2003, 07:48 PM	#21 (permalink)
Phaenx The Northern Ward Location: Columbus, Ohio	I disagree to say the least. I'll leave it at that unless you want me to elaborate, but I think we've gone through the specifics more then enough already. __________________ "I went shopping last night at like 1am. The place was empty and this old woman just making polite conversation said to me, 'where is everyone??' I replied, 'In bed, same place you and I should be!' Took me ten minutes to figure out why she gave me a dirty look." --Some guy

07-27-2003, 12:25 AM	#22 (permalink)
Zeld2.0 Cherry-pickin' devil's advocate Location: Los Angeles	REcall is just gonna be shit anyways Dems still got the upperhand Technically speaking if Davis saw that he really was going to lose then a few days before the election he can resign and mr. Lt. Gov. is going to be the next gov and dem's will still have office I'll say this though - I am pretty ashamed at how the entire recall is going. The budget crisis is like $37.5 billion - the recall election will cost another $35 billion. So thank goodness all you recall folks because all you did was double the crisis and whoever you elect next is going to be in worse shit. not to mention that supposedly Arnold is having second thoughts on the election (its smart for him though IMO because its better to start elsewhere and gain experience so you can move to even bigger fish w/ fewer issues)

07-27-2003, 01:02 AM	#23 (permalink)
Phaenx The Northern Ward Location: Columbus, Ohio	Weren't the democrats talking about extending it to stick it to someone? Shame on you, Republicans. __________________ "I went shopping last night at like 1am. The place was empty and this old woman just making polite conversation said to me, 'where is everyone??' I replied, 'In bed, same place you and I should be!' Took me ten minutes to figure out why she gave me a dirty look." --Some guy

07-27-2003, 01:13 AM	#24 (permalink)
Zeld2.0 Cherry-pickin' devil's advocate Location: Los Angeles	Whether or not they chose to wouldn't matter in the end anyways because whoever takes the job next (if anyone does) all that will happen is the same shit. Republicans would be smarter by leaving the shit on the Dems if they weren't so wanting of a position that could only be made worse after this :P

07-27-2003, 10:51 AM	#26 (permalink)
thedrake Banned Location: Iowa	This is going to back fire badly on to the Republicans, I love it. Keep up the good work, The Democrats