Governor Schwarzenegger Thread - Edit 11-18-2003 Arnold goes to work immediately to rebuild California, Best Wishes Gov

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

digitalsm

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2003
5,253
0
0
Originally posted by: leborland
Could never figure Californians. They swing from Jerry Brown to Ronald Reagan. Now it's a contest between Davis and Schwarzenegger. They seem to have this love affair with Hollywood that overshadows reason. How can you even conceive of voting for someone who openly admires Hitler and has made inappropriate sexual advances toward at least 15 women? That's not to mention all the other bigoted statements he's made in his career. The man is downright disgusting and the tactics to get him elected frankly make my skin crawl. I mean the fact that they couldn't wait until the primary election in March, despite the fact that it would save California a bundle of money and allow time for the new improved voter machines in LA, all because they were afraid the primary would bring out too many Democrats and defeat their fair haired boy Arnold. I wonder if the fact that so many voter polls were closed, forcing people to wait in long lines, wasn't part of the same tactics.
1. His comments about Hitler were misqoutes by the newspaper that ran them. Hes given more to jewish charities than anyother single person IIRC.
2. He allegedly groped 15 women, one who turns out have major credibility issues, given time, Im sure each and everyone of them could be discredited. However it really doesnt matter, he could never be charged or sued for anything at this point.
3. Yes waiting until the democrat primary in march is the answer.

4. Near record voter turnout kinda kills your last point about long lines.
 

digitalsm

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2003
5,253
0
0
Originally posted by: flavio
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: flavio
You've got a good point. Seems pretty obvious that Davis is getting more votes than Arnie.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the liberal counties have already been counted and Arnold just retook the lead, the lead will only grow from this point on as OC's results come in.
If were to use Superant's scenario then you would have to take away the votes from Arnie by people who voted No on the recall (which means they pick Davis first). Makes you wonder if this thing is really setup correctly.
Uh, no. Thats not how it works, nor is it at all logical.

The most logical way of looking at it would be Davis got XXX,XXX,XXX votes, Arnold got XXX,XXX,XXX. A no vote = Davis vote, Arnold Vote = Arnold Vote, Bustamante Vote = Bustamante Vote, etc etc etc. Anyother way is illogical, and is shoulda, coulda, woulda.
 

flavio

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,823
1
76
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: flavio
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: flavio
You've got a good point. Seems pretty obvious that Davis is getting more votes than Arnie.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the liberal counties have already been counted and Arnold just retook the lead, the lead will only grow from this point on as OC's results come in.
If were to use Superant's scenario then you would have to take away the votes from Arnie by people who voted No on the recall (which means they pick Davis first). Makes you wonder if this thing is really setup correctly.
Uh, no. Thats not how it works, nor is it at all logical.

The most logical way of looking at it would be Davis got XXX,XXX,XXX votes, Arnold got XXX,XXX,XXX. A no vote = Davis vote, Arnold Vote = Arnold Vote, Bustamante Vote = Bustamante Vote, etc etc etc. Anyother way is illogical, and is shoulda, coulda, woulda.
Uh, yeah. We know how it works. This is theoretical if you hadn't noticed yet.

If someone voted No and then picked Arnie what is illogical about giving the vote to the first pick?

If you took all the candidates and put them on the ballot and said "Who do you want as Governor". Then Davis would get all the No votes. The rest of the candidates would get their votes from the people who voted Yes.

Who would have the most votes then?

 

digitalsm

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2003
5,253
0
0
Originally posted by: flavio
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: flavio
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: flavio
You've got a good point. Seems pretty obvious that Davis is getting more votes than Arnie.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the liberal counties have already been counted and Arnold just retook the lead, the lead will only grow from this point on as OC's results come in.
If were to use Superant's scenario then you would have to take away the votes from Arnie by people who voted No on the recall (which means they pick Davis first). Makes you wonder if this thing is really setup correctly.
Uh, no. Thats not how it works, nor is it at all logical.

The most logical way of looking at it would be Davis got XXX,XXX,XXX votes, Arnold got XXX,XXX,XXX. A no vote = Davis vote, Arnold Vote = Arnold Vote, Bustamante Vote = Bustamante Vote, etc etc etc. Anyother way is illogical, and is shoulda, coulda, woulda.
Uh, yeah. We know how it works. This is theoretical if you hadn't noticed yet.

If someone voted No and then picked Arnie what is illogical about giving the vote to the first pick?

If you took all the candidates and put them on the ballot and said "Who do you want as Governor". Then Davis would get all the No votes. The rest of the candidates would get their votes from the people who voted Yes.

Who would have the most votes then?
Wow talk about really illogical. Saying that Davis votes would equal the no votes, while all the other canidates would equal the yes votes its well um stupid to say the least. Really that is not even close to being logical, not even theoretically. To make that statement is moronic.

Saying No Votes = Davis Votes and the Yes votes are Arnold, Bustamante, etc votes, is just illogical, even theoretically. No Votes by a large % are Davis/Bustamante votes, and I can say right now, Davis wouldnt get 100% of the no votes, Bustamante would get a good chunck of the latino democrat vote.


 

flavio

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,823
1
76
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: flavio
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: flavio
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: flavio
You've got a good point. Seems pretty obvious that Davis is getting more votes than Arnie.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the liberal counties have already been counted and Arnold just retook the lead, the lead will only grow from this point on as OC's results come in.
If were to use Superant's scenario then you would have to take away the votes from Arnie by people who voted No on the recall (which means they pick Davis first). Makes you wonder if this thing is really setup correctly.
Uh, no. Thats not how it works, nor is it at all logical.

The most logical way of looking at it would be Davis got XXX,XXX,XXX votes, Arnold got XXX,XXX,XXX. A no vote = Davis vote, Arnold Vote = Arnold Vote, Bustamante Vote = Bustamante Vote, etc etc etc. Anyother way is illogical, and is shoulda, coulda, woulda.
Uh, yeah. We know how it works. This is theoretical if you hadn't noticed yet.

If someone voted No and then picked Arnie what is illogical about giving the vote to the first pick?

If you took all the candidates and put them on the ballot and said "Who do you want as Governor". Then Davis would get all the No votes. The rest of the candidates would get their votes from the people who voted Yes.

Who would have the most votes then?
Wow talk about really illogical. Saying that Davis votes would equal the no votes, while all the other canidates would equal the yes votes its well um stupid to say the least. Really that is not even close to being logical, not even theoretically. To make that statement is moronic.

Saying No Votes = Davis Votes and the Yes votes are Arnold, Bustamante, etc votes, is just illogical, even theoretically. No Votes by a large % are Davis/Bustamante votes, and I can say right now, Davis wouldnt get 100% of the no votes, Bustamante would get a good chunck of the latino democrat vote.
Ok, explain your "logic" if you really even know what the word means. What does "No" on the recall mean to you? It means "I do not want Davis to leave" => "Yes" for Davis. Get it?

"Yes" on the recall means "I don't want Davis, I want this other guy" in which case add 1 vote for whoever they picked.

If you're saying Davis wouldn't get 100% of the "No" votes then you're well um stupid to say the least. "No" is a vote to keep him as governor.

 

digitalsm

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2003
5,253
0
0
Originally posted by: flavio
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: flavio
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: flavio
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: flavio
You've got a good point. Seems pretty obvious that Davis is getting more votes than Arnie.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the liberal counties have already been counted and Arnold just retook the lead, the lead will only grow from this point on as OC's results come in.
If were to use Superant's scenario then you would have to take away the votes from Arnie by people who voted No on the recall (which means they pick Davis first). Makes you wonder if this thing is really setup correctly.
Uh, no. Thats not how it works, nor is it at all logical.

The most logical way of looking at it would be Davis got XXX,XXX,XXX votes, Arnold got XXX,XXX,XXX. A no vote = Davis vote, Arnold Vote = Arnold Vote, Bustamante Vote = Bustamante Vote, etc etc etc. Anyother way is illogical, and is shoulda, coulda, woulda.
Uh, yeah. We know how it works. This is theoretical if you hadn't noticed yet.

If someone voted No and then picked Arnie what is illogical about giving the vote to the first pick?

If you took all the candidates and put them on the ballot and said "Who do you want as Governor". Then Davis would get all the No votes. The rest of the candidates would get their votes from the people who voted Yes.

Who would have the most votes then?
Wow talk about really illogical. Saying that Davis votes would equal the no votes, while all the other canidates would equal the yes votes its well um stupid to say the least. Really that is not even close to being logical, not even theoretically. To make that statement is moronic.

Saying No Votes = Davis Votes and the Yes votes are Arnold, Bustamante, etc votes, is just illogical, even theoretically. No Votes by a large % are Davis/Bustamante votes, and I can say right now, Davis wouldnt get 100% of the no votes, Bustamante would get a good chunck of the latino democrat vote.
Ok, explain your "logic" if you really even know what the word means. What does "No" on the recall mean to you? It means "I do not want Davis to leave" => "Yes" for Davis. Get it?

"Yes" on the recall means "I don't want Davis, I want this other guy" in which case add 1 vote for whoever they picked.

If you're saying Davis wouldn't get 100% of the "No" votes then you're well um stupid to say the least. "No" is a vote to keep him as governor.
Well then you cant count any Bustamante votes, because they come from the no votes, if you dont see that, clearly you are umm stupid to say the least.
 

digitalsm

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2003
5,253
0
0
Originally posted by: flavio
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: flavio
You've got a good point. Seems pretty obvious that Davis is getting more votes than Arnie.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the liberal counties have already been counted and Arnold just retook the lead, the lead will only grow from this point on as OC's results come in.
If were to use Superant's scenario then you would have to take away the votes from Arnie by people who voted No on the recall (which means they pick Davis first). Makes you wonder if this thing is really setup correctly.
No you wouldnt. Thats not in any way logical, even theoretically.

You can just say "If were to use Superant's scenario then you would have to take away the votes from Arnie by people who voted No on the recall (which means they pick Davis first). Makes you wonder if this thing is really setup correctly"

Because then people WOULD NOT HAVE VOTED HOW THEY DID, you are questioning how they voted, even though you have NO CLUE what their reasons for voting for whomever. Your thinking is illogical and would not hold true if the election were actually set up that way. If people that voted no couldnt vote for someone, the numbers would be radically different, and I doubt the no numbers would be as high as they are, nor would Bustamantes be as high as they were.
 

flavio

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,823
1
76
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: flavio
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: flavio
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: flavio
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: flavio
You've got a good point. Seems pretty obvious that Davis is getting more votes than Arnie.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the liberal counties have already been counted and Arnold just retook the lead, the lead will only grow from this point on as OC's results come in.
If were to use Superant's scenario then you would have to take away the votes from Arnie by people who voted No on the recall (which means they pick Davis first). Makes you wonder if this thing is really setup correctly.
Uh, no. Thats not how it works, nor is it at all logical.

The most logical way of looking at it would be Davis got XXX,XXX,XXX votes, Arnold got XXX,XXX,XXX. A no vote = Davis vote, Arnold Vote = Arnold Vote, Bustamante Vote = Bustamante Vote, etc etc etc. Anyother way is illogical, and is shoulda, coulda, woulda.
Uh, yeah. We know how it works. This is theoretical if you hadn't noticed yet.

If someone voted No and then picked Arnie what is illogical about giving the vote to the first pick?

If you took all the candidates and put them on the ballot and said "Who do you want as Governor". Then Davis would get all the No votes. The rest of the candidates would get their votes from the people who voted Yes.

Who would have the most votes then?
Wow talk about really illogical. Saying that Davis votes would equal the no votes, while all the other canidates would equal the yes votes its well um stupid to say the least. Really that is not even close to being logical, not even theoretically. To make that statement is moronic.

Saying No Votes = Davis Votes and the Yes votes are Arnold, Bustamante, etc votes, is just illogical, even theoretically. No Votes by a large % are Davis/Bustamante votes, and I can say right now, Davis wouldnt get 100% of the no votes, Bustamante would get a good chunck of the latino democrat vote.
Ok, explain your "logic" if you really even know what the word means. What does "No" on the recall mean to you? It means "I do not want Davis to leave" => "Yes" for Davis. Get it?

"Yes" on the recall means "I don't want Davis, I want this other guy" in which case add 1 vote for whoever they picked.

If you're saying Davis wouldn't get 100% of the "No" votes then you're well um stupid to say the least. "No" is a vote to keep him as governor.
Well then you cant count any Bustamante votes, because they come from the no votes, if you dont see that, clearly you are umm stupid to say the least.
You would count Bustamente votes that came from the Yes votes. Catching on yet?

 

digitalsm

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2003
5,253
0
0
Originally posted by: flavio
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: flavio
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: flavio
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: flavio
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: flavio
You've got a good point. Seems pretty obvious that Davis is getting more votes than Arnie.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the liberal counties have already been counted and Arnold just retook the lead, the lead will only grow from this point on as OC's results come in.
If were to use Superant's scenario then you would have to take away the votes from Arnie by people who voted No on the recall (which means they pick Davis first). Makes you wonder if this thing is really setup correctly.
Uh, no. Thats not how it works, nor is it at all logical.

The most logical way of looking at it would be Davis got XXX,XXX,XXX votes, Arnold got XXX,XXX,XXX. A no vote = Davis vote, Arnold Vote = Arnold Vote, Bustamante Vote = Bustamante Vote, etc etc etc. Anyother way is illogical, and is shoulda, coulda, woulda.
Uh, yeah. We know how it works. This is theoretical if you hadn't noticed yet.

If someone voted No and then picked Arnie what is illogical about giving the vote to the first pick?

If you took all the candidates and put them on the ballot and said "Who do you want as Governor". Then Davis would get all the No votes. The rest of the candidates would get their votes from the people who voted Yes.

Who would have the most votes then?
Wow talk about really illogical. Saying that Davis votes would equal the no votes, while all the other canidates would equal the yes votes its well um stupid to say the least. Really that is not even close to being logical, not even theoretically. To make that statement is moronic.

Saying No Votes = Davis Votes and the Yes votes are Arnold, Bustamante, etc votes, is just illogical, even theoretically. No Votes by a large % are Davis/Bustamante votes, and I can say right now, Davis wouldnt get 100% of the no votes, Bustamante would get a good chunck of the latino democrat vote.
Ok, explain your "logic" if you really even know what the word means. What does "No" on the recall mean to you? It means "I do not want Davis to leave" => "Yes" for Davis. Get it?

"Yes" on the recall means "I don't want Davis, I want this other guy" in which case add 1 vote for whoever they picked.

If you're saying Davis wouldn't get 100% of the "No" votes then you're well um stupid to say the least. "No" is a vote to keep him as governor.
Well then you cant count any Bustamante votes, because they come from the no votes, if you dont see that, clearly you are umm stupid to say the least.
You would count Bustamente votes that came from the Yes votes. Catching on yet?

Dude you are a fvcking moron. The election isnt set up that way, and if it was, the numbers would be totally different. You can theorize all you want but its all illogical.

If the election was set up were no votes meant they were strictly Davis votes and the person couldnt vote on question #2 you would see a drop in no votes, and a huge drop in votes for Bustamante. Thats the only logical way to theorize with these numbers, as anyother way, you are trying to determine how a voter voted when you have NO FVCKING CLUE. The only other legit way to theorize these numbers is to compare Arnold votes to No Votes anyother way is trying to determine how a voter voted.

Get it yet or are you still a moron?
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,894
46
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
OK, stop with the name calling, sounds as bad as Davis calling Arnie all kinds of names which I'm sure contributed to his decisive loss.

A record 70% Voter turnout, closest amount of voters was 1982 and this exceeded that by at least 5%. The people have clearly spoken.

The really interesting thing about this is that the promise of Arnies new group of people in charge bringing jobs back to California is what the people in the rest off the Country are looking for at the Federal level and not getting from the current group in control and looking to a new group that can get the job done.
 

digitalsm

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2003
5,253
0
0
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
OK, stop with the name calling, sounds as bad as Davis calling Arnie all kinds of names which I'm sure contributed to his decisive loss.

A record 70% Voter turnout, closest amount of voters was 1982 and this exceeded that by at least 5%. The people have clearly spoken.

The really interesting thing about this is that the promise of Arnies new group of people in charge bringing jobs back to California is what the people in the rest off the Country are looking for at the Federal level and not getting from the current group in control and looking to a new group that can get the job done.
Eh, the turnout isnt anywhere near 70%. At 95% reporting, its 7,661,543 votes out of 15,380,536 registered voters, or almost 50%.
 

flavio

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,823
1
76
You should quit using the word "logical" until you look it up or have your mom expalin it to you. It doesn't mean what you think it does.

Think of it as an instant runoff election where 1st choice "No" would equal a vote for Davis. If your 1st choice counts then your 2nd choice wouldn't. Therefore votes for "no" wouldn't count towards Arnie or Cruz. Then take all the "yes" votes and distribute them to the other candidates.

Now once you figure out what Logical means then go ahead and tell me why a No vote wouldn't be a vote for Davis?
 

digitalsm

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2003
5,253
0
0
Originally posted by: flavio
You should quit using the word "logical" until you look it up or have your mom expalin it to you. It doesn't mean what you think it does.

Think of it as an instant runoff election where 1st choice "No" would equal a vote for Davis. If your 1st choice counts then your 2nd choice wouldn't. Therefore votes for "no" wouldn't count towards Arnie or Cruz. Then take all the "yes" votes and distribute them to the other candidates.

Now once you figure out what Logical means then go ahead and tell me why a No vote wouldn't be a vote for Davis?
Then take all the "yes" votes and distribute them to the other candidates.
Oh magic mind reader, tell me how you determine which of the yes votes go to whom in your theory. Duh, its illogical, obviously you are retarded.

If it was setup that way the numbers would be no where near the same. Get it yet?

You can not use your theory because, you can not determine how a person would have voted if it was like that.
 

digitalsm

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2003
5,253
0
0
If they did it how you did it, the numbers would come out totally different, you cant go back and say shoulda woulda coulda in theory, because its just illogical.

You are saying you know how people would have voted if it was set up like that, in which case you have no FVCKING CLUE. If it was setup that no votes = davis votes, and people that voted for davis couldnt vote for question #2 the numbers would be different. Thats why its illogical to use these numbers in your theory. Plain and simple.
 

flavio

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,823
1
76
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: flavio
You should quit using the word "logical" until you look it up or have your mom expalin it to you. It doesn't mean what you think it does.

Think of it as an instant runoff election where 1st choice "No" would equal a vote for Davis. If your 1st choice counts then your 2nd choice wouldn't. Therefore votes for "no" wouldn't count towards Arnie or Cruz. Then take all the "yes" votes and distribute them to the other candidates.

Now once you figure out what Logical means then go ahead and tell me why a No vote wouldn't be a vote for Davis?
Then take all the "yes" votes and distribute them to the other candidates.
Oh magic mind reader, tell me how you determine which of the yes votes go to whom in your theory. Duh, its illogical, obviously you are retarded.

If it was setup that way the numbers would be no where near the same. Get it yet?

You can not use your theory because, you can not determine how a person would have voted if it was like that.
Hey I have an idea! How about if they voted yes for the recall the votes go to THE CANDIDATE THAT THEY PICKED TO REPLACE HIM!

OMG! How about that? Without even any "mind reading" at all?!?!? Geezus.

Edit: "Duh!" ...LOL
 

digitalsm

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2003
5,253
0
0
Originally posted by: flavio
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: flavio
You should quit using the word "logical" until you look it up or have your mom expalin it to you. It doesn't mean what you think it does.

Think of it as an instant runoff election where 1st choice "No" would equal a vote for Davis. If your 1st choice counts then your 2nd choice wouldn't. Therefore votes for "no" wouldn't count towards Arnie or Cruz. Then take all the "yes" votes and distribute them to the other candidates.

Now once you figure out what Logical means then go ahead and tell me why a No vote wouldn't be a vote for Davis?
Then take all the "yes" votes and distribute them to the other candidates.
Oh magic mind reader, tell me how you determine which of the yes votes go to whom in your theory. Duh, its illogical, obviously you are retarded.

If it was setup that way the numbers would be no where near the same. Get it yet?

You can not use your theory because, you can not determine how a person would have voted if it was like that.
Hey I have an idea! How about if they voted yes for the recall the votes go to THE CANDIDATE THAT THEY PICKED TO REPLACE HIM!

OMG! How would about that? Without even any "mind reading" at all?!?!? Geezus.
Yes however, you do see, that if the election was setup DIFFERENTLY people would vote DIFFERENTLY. Even in theory its illogical, because you cant say a person would have voted no if they couldnt vote for someone.

 

flavio

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,823
1
76
1st choice "no" = keep Davis.

...and you need to ask for a dictionary, a logic book, and a thesaurus for christmas.
 

digitalsm

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2003
5,253
0
0
Originally posted by: flavio
1st choice "no" = keep Davis.

...and you need to ask for a dictionary, a logic book, and a thesaurus for christmas.
Yes and you are a fvcking moron that cant understand how elections work.

Yes I am fully aware a no vote = vote for Davis however using these numbers in your theory is ILLOGICAL.

These people voted the way they did because of how its SETUP. Changing the setup invalidates these numbers for your theory.

You have no idea what you are fvcking talking about.

Using these numbers in your theory is ILLOGICAL.

If people voted based on your theory you would have totally different numbers. Do you get the fvcking point yet? I doubt it since you seem to be a certified moron that can not comprehend if you change one variable, you change the whole thing.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,894
46
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
OK, stop with the name calling, sounds as bad as Davis calling Arnie all kinds of names which I'm sure contributed to his decisive loss.

A record 70% Voter turnout, closest amount of voters was 1982 and this exceeded that by at least 5%. The people have clearly spoken.

The really interesting thing about this is that the promise of Arnies new group of people in charge bringing jobs back to California is what the people in the rest off the Country are looking for at the Federal level and not getting from the current group in control and looking to a new group that can get the job done.
Eh, the turnout isnt anywhere near 70%. At 95% reporting, its 7,661,543 votes out of 15,380,536 registered voters, or almost 50%.
They weren't going by the number of registered Voters, going by the number that came out to vote compared to the other Elections.

Voter turnout has been as dismal as 12% so getting a 70% increase over that is quite a statement.

Tim Russert pegged it this morning, "The California Electorate is showing how angry not just Californians are at Partisan Politics but the entire Country, they are willing to punish Incumbents no matter what party". "This is a precursor to next year's General Election". Katie Couric also said the S word too, "It's the Economy, Stupid".

Bet your A$$ America is angry.


 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,894
46
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
I agree, dmc...which is why I question the we-hate-Bush attacks by the 7 dwarves trying to win his job.
I don't recall Dean saying he hates Bush or Clark doing that either so I guess you mean the rest of the Dem pack that are going nowhere?

I believe there is a "Kick Me" sign on just about every Career Federal Politician that has a piss poor track record and has clearly showed only an Agenda for him or herself and their respective party and not putting the interests and best interests of the American people first.


 

digitalsm

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2003
5,253
0
0
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
OK, stop with the name calling, sounds as bad as Davis calling Arnie all kinds of names which I'm sure contributed to his decisive loss.

A record 70% Voter turnout, closest amount of voters was 1982 and this exceeded that by at least 5%. The people have clearly spoken.

The really interesting thing about this is that the promise of Arnies new group of people in charge bringing jobs back to California is what the people in the rest off the Country are looking for at the Federal level and not getting from the current group in control and looking to a new group that can get the job done.
Eh, the turnout isnt anywhere near 70%. At 95% reporting, its 7,661,543 votes out of 15,380,536 registered voters, or almost 50%.
They weren't going by the number of registered Voters, going by the number that came out to vote compared to the other Elections.

Voter turnout has been as dismal as 12% so getting a 70% increase over that is quite a statement.

Tim Russert pegged it this morning, "The California Electorate is showing how angry not just Californians are at Partisan Politics but the entire Country, they are willing to punish Incumbents no matter what party". "This is a precursor to next year's General Election". Katie Couric also said the S word too, "It's the Economy, Stupid".

Bet your A$$ America is angry.
I dont agree that this is a precursor to next years election.

 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
OK, stop with the name calling, sounds as bad as Davis calling Arnie all kinds of names which I'm sure contributed to his decisive loss.

A record 70% Voter turnout, closest amount of voters was 1982 and this exceeded that by at least 5%. The people have clearly spoken.

The really interesting thing about this is that the promise of Arnies new group of people in charge bringing jobs back to California is what the people in the rest off the Country are looking for at the Federal level and not getting from the current group in control and looking to a new group that can get the job done.
Eh, the turnout isnt anywhere near 70%. At 95% reporting, its 7,661,543 votes out of 15,380,536 registered voters, or almost 50%.
They weren't going by the number of registered Voters, going by the number that came out to vote compared to the other Elections.

Voter turnout has been as dismal as 12% so getting a 70% increase over that is quite a statement.

Tim Russert pegged it this morning, "The California Electorate is showing how angry not just Californians are at Partisan Politics but the entire Country, they are willing to punish Incumbents no matter what party". "This is a precursor to next year's General Election". Katie Couric also said the S word too, "It's the Economy, Stupid".

Bet your A$$ America is angry.
I dont agree that this is a precursor to next years election.
It's the spin to try to lessen the impact this is having on the Democrats. It wasn't unexpected - I fully expected the press to eat up and spew forth such trash. People disliked DAVIS - and had a very popular choice for replacement. So the only way this is a precurser to next year is if the Democrats find an overly popular figure to run against Bush.

CkG
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,894
46
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
OK, stop with the name calling, sounds as bad as Davis calling Arnie all kinds of names which I'm sure contributed to his decisive loss.

A record 70% Voter turnout, closest amount of voters was 1982 and this exceeded that by at least 5%. The people have clearly spoken.

The really interesting thing about this is that the promise of Arnies new group of people in charge bringing jobs back to California is what the people in the rest off the Country are looking for at the Federal level and not getting from the current group in control and looking to a new group that can get the job done.
Eh, the turnout isnt anywhere near 70%. At 95% reporting, its 7,661,543 votes out of 15,380,536 registered voters, or almost 50%.
They weren't going by the number of registered Voters, going by the number that came out to vote compared to the other Elections.

Voter turnout has been as dismal as 12% so getting a 70% increase over that is quite a statement.

Tim Russert pegged it this morning, "The California Electorate is showing how angry not just Californians are at Partisan Politics but the entire Country, they are willing to punish Incumbents no matter what party". "This is a precursor to next year's General Election". Katie Couric also said the S word too, "It's the Economy, Stupid".

Bet your A$$ America is angry.
I dont agree that this is a precursor to next years election.
It's the spin to try to lessen the impact this is having on the Democrats. It wasn't unexpected - I fully expected the press to eat up and spew forth such trash. People disliked DAVIS - and had a very popular choice for replacement. So the only way this is a precurser to next year is if the Democrats find an overly popular figure to run against Bush.

CkG
My own personal Poll of asking people right now is 7 out of 10 people would not vote for Bush next year at this time.
I expect that figure to go even higher should the Economy get worse over the next 8 months or so.
If the Economy somehow does manage to turn around only then, maybe could the incumbent group get re-elected.

 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS