WWTBAM Bored

At a time when transgender rights have become the new culture war in American politics, former Olympian and reality TV star Caitlyn Jenner announced a historic campaign Friday to replace Gov. Gavin Newsom in the recall election.

“As Californians, we face a now-or-never opportunity to fundamentally fix our state before its too late,” the 71-year-old Jenner, a Republican, wrote on Twitter. “Taking on entrenched Sacramento politicians and the special interests that fund them requires a fighter who isn’t afraid to do what is right. I am a proven winner and the only outsider who can put an end to Gavin Newsom’s disastrous time as governor.”

The move comes as vocal segments of her party are pushing dozens of bills to curtail rights for transgender people across the nation.

https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/ ... nor-recall

I'd vote for her.

So it's Newsom against no one other than Trump supporters?

Bob Juch wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 23, 2021 1:51 pm

So it's Newsom against no one other than Trump supporters?

Newsom is an idiot. How do you know I support Trump now?

Bob Juch wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 23, 2021 1:51 pm

So it's Newsom against no one other than Trump supporters?

The recall hasn't yet been certified. We won't know the list of candidates until sometime after that happens. Scheduling will be up to the Lieutenant Governor. --Bob

Glad I don't have to make that choice.

Beebs52 wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 23, 2021 2:43 pm

Bob Juch wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 23, 2021 1:51 pm

So it's Newsom against no one other than Trump supporters?

Newsom is an idiot. How do you know I support Trump now?

You're not going to run for Governor of California.

BackInTex wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 23, 2021 4:06 pm

Glad I don't have to make that choice.

I don't think most Californians will have a problem. Governor Newsom was elected with 62% of the vote. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 23, 2021 6:26 pm

BackInTex wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 23, 2021 4:06 pm

Glad I don't have to make that choice.

I don't think most Californians will have a problem. Governor Newsom was elected with 62% of the vote. --Bob

I'm a little confused about how these recalls work in California. What does it take to hold a recall election? Are there any requirements other than some percentage of voters thinking the incumbent isn't doing a good job? If that's the case, then they'd probably be able to recall every governor every year. Do they just vote on Newsom versus any challengers or does it work differently?

silverscreenselect wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 23, 2021 7:06 pm

Bob78164 wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 23, 2021 6:26 pm

BackInTex wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 23, 2021 4:06 pm

Glad I don't have to make that choice.

I don't think most Californians will have a problem. Governor Newsom was elected with 62% of the vote. --Bob

I'm a little confused about how these recalls work in California. What does it take to hold a recall election? Are there any requirements other than some percentage of voters thinking the incumbent isn't doing a good job? If that's the case, then they'd probably be able to recall every governor every year. Do they just vote on Newsom versus any challengers or does it work differently?

All it takes is enough signatures quickly enough. The recall effort got a lot more time than it ordinarily would have because a local judge ruled that the difficulties posed by the pandemic entitled them to a lot more time. If not for that ruling, I don't think the effort would have gotten off the ground.

Assuming the recall election is certified, voters will face two choices. First, a yes-no vote on whether to keep Governor Newsom in office. Second, a first-past-the-post free-for-all election to select the new governor in case Governor Newsom is recalled. Governor Newsom doesn't get to appear on that ballot.

But I think it's safe to predict that one way or another, he'll be on the ballot in 2022, so even if the Republicans manage to successfully recall him, it will prove a short-lived victory. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 23, 2021 7:58 pm

All it takes is enough signatures quickly enough. The recall effort got a lot more time than it ordinarily would have because a local judge ruled that the difficulties posed by the pandemic entitled them to a lot more time. If not for that ruling, I don't think the effort would have gotten off the ground.

From what I read, it takes 1.5 million signatures to trigger the recall election. In 2018, there were over 12 million votes cast for governor. So, less than 15% of the electorate can cause a recount. As a practical matter, doesn't that mean that the losing party in virtually every statewide election can cause a recount any time they want? In this polarized political atmosphere, I can see this happening every single election.

silverscreenselect wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 27, 2021 10:43 am

Bob78164 wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 23, 2021 7:58 pm

All it takes is enough signatures quickly enough. The recall effort got a lot more time than it ordinarily would have because a local judge ruled that the difficulties posed by the pandemic entitled them to a lot more time. If not for that ruling, I don't think the effort would have gotten off the ground.

From what I read, it takes 1.5 million signatures to trigger the recall election. In 2018, there were over 12 million votes cast for governor. So, less than 15% of the electorate can cause a recount. As a practical matter, doesn't that mean that the losing party in virtually every statewide election can cause a recount any time they want? In this polarized political atmosphere, I can see this happening every single election.

It takes 12%. That's the second-lowest requirement in the United States, after Virginia's 10%. And I think this was the fifth recall petition filed against Governor Newsom. It was filed in February 2020, before most people realized we were on the verge of a pandemic.

I think there's a fairly simple solution. We should change the State Constitution so that in the event of a recall, there's simply a vacancy in the position, to be filled in the same manner as any other vacancy. If the office subject to recall is in the Legislature, that means a later special election (in which the recalled candidate is free to run as a candidate). If the office is executive, that means the Governor appoints the replacement with the advice and consent of the Legislature. If the office is Governor, that means the Lieutenant Governor becomes Governor.

This recall would never have been funded if everyone knew that the result would simply be to elevate the Lieutenant Governor to Governor. Recalls shouldn't be attempts at do-overs with a smaller electorate. They should be reserved for serious misconduct that makes the officeholder's continued service intolerable, no matter who the replacement might be. --Bob

silverscreenselect wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 27, 2021 10:43 am

As a practical matter, doesn't that mean that the losing party in virtually every statewide election can cause a recount any time they want? In this polarized political atmosphere, I can see this happening every single election.

Yeah, sort of like what the House has done with impeachment.

BackInTex wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 27, 2021 11:31 am

silverscreenselect wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 27, 2021 10:43 am

As a practical matter, doesn't that mean that the losing party in virtually every statewide election can cause a recount any time they want? In this polarized political atmosphere, I can see this happening every single election.

Yeah, sort of like what the House has done with impeachment.

Both impeachment votes against Donny were bipartisan. Remind me, please how often the House impeached President Bush 43. How often it impeached President Bush 41. How often it impeached President Reagan. How often it impeached President Ford. And remember also that if Donny had been removed from office, the result would have been President Pence.

Now if your point is that the impeachment of President Clinton was badly misguided, then I agree with you. But I suspect that's not your point. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 27, 2021 11:43 am

BackInTex wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 27, 2021 11:31 am

silverscreenselect wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 27, 2021 10:43 am

As a practical matter, doesn't that mean that the losing party in virtually every statewide election can cause a recount any time they want? In this polarized political atmosphere, I can see this happening every single election.

Yeah, sort of like what the House has done with impeachment.

Both impeachment votes against Donny were bipartisan. Remind me, please how often the House impeached President Bush 43. How often it impeached President Bush 41. How often it impeached President Reagan. How often it impeached President Ford. And remember also that if Donny had been removed from office, the result would have been President Pence.

Now if your point is that the impeachment of President Clinton was badly misguided, then I agree with you. But I suspect that's not your point. --Bob

You're delusional if you think all 1.5 million votes are from Republicans. You're delusional if you think the decrease in California's population with respect to Texas' increase is all Republican. Your state is anti-taxpayer (Democrat and Republican), anti-business (Democrat and Republican) and more and more anti-law and order which hurts Democrats most (if you believe most minorities are Democrats).

As far as impeachments, twice in one term for Trump is 400% more times than for Clinton.

BackInTex wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 27, 2021 12:30 pm

You're delusional if you think the decrease in California's population with respect to Texas' increase is all Republican.

And you're delusional if you think that the new voters in Texas are all Republicans happy with the current state administration's policies. California's population grew 6% over the last decade, which was below the national average. Texas grew about 16% in that same time. The biggest reasons for California's slower growth were a declining birth rate and a decline in international immigration, particularly from Asia.

The problem for Texas Republicans is that the influx is largely ethnic minorities who are not exactly big fans of the Republican party.

silverscreenselect wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 27, 2021 1:02 pm

BackInTex wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 27, 2021 12:30 pm

You're delusional if you think the decrease in California's population with respect to Texas' increase is all Republican.

And you're delusional if you think that the new voters in Texas are all Republicans happy with the current state administration's policies. California's population grew 6% over the last decade, which was below the national average. Texas grew about 16% in that same time. The biggest reasons for California's slower growth were a declining birth rate and a decline in international immigration, particularly from Asia.

The problem for Texas Republicans is that the influx is largely ethnic minorities who are not exactly big fans of the Republican party.

Probably not, they're just big fans of the results of Republican policies. That's why they're there. But I will agree, them being Democrats, they don't understand cause and effect of public policy.

BackInTex wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 27, 2021 1:54 pm

Probably not, they're just big fans of the results of Republican policies. That's why they're there. But I will agree, them being Democrats, they don't understand cause and effect of public policy.

I doubt they are big fans of being without power for several days in the middle of the winter. That's the cause and effect of Republican policies.

BackInTex wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 27, 2021 12:30 pm

Bob78164 wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 27, 2021 11:43 am

BackInTex wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 27, 2021 11:31 am

Yeah, sort of like what the House has done with impeachment.

Both impeachment votes against Donny were bipartisan. Remind me, please how often the House impeached President Bush 43. How often it impeached President Bush 41. How often it impeached President Reagan. How often it impeached President Ford. And remember also that if Donny had been removed from office, the result would have been President Pence.

Now if your point is that the impeachment of President Clinton was badly misguided, then I agree with you. But I suspect that's not your point. --Bob

You're delusional if you think all 1.5 million votes are from Republicans. You're delusional if you think the decrease in California's population with respect to Texas' increase is all Republican. Your state is anti-taxpayer (Democrat and Republican), anti-business (Democrat and Republican) and more and more anti-law and order which hurts Democrats most (if you believe most minorities are Democrats).

As far as impeachments, twice in one term for Trump is 400% more times than for Clinton.

California's population increased. But Donny's actions to discourage immigration did take their toll.

If you think that Republicans can win a statewide election here for the first time in nearly 20 years, or can break Democratic supermajority control of the Legislature (and an independent commission drew the lines so it wasn't gerrymandered), feel free to give it your best shot.

It's not taxes that are driving people out of the state. It's housing costs, combined with income inequality leaving too many people who literally can't afford to live here. There's plenty of new-business creation and the wealthy aren't fleeing. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 27, 2021 2:44 pm

BackInTex wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 27, 2021 12:30 pm

Bob78164 wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 27, 2021 11:43 am

Both impeachment votes against Donny were bipartisan. Remind me, please how often the House impeached President Bush 43. How often it impeached President Bush 41. How often it impeached President Reagan. How often it impeached President Ford. And remember also that if Donny had been removed from office, the result would have been President Pence.

Now if your point is that the impeachment of President Clinton was badly misguided, then I agree with you. But I suspect that's not your point. --Bob

You're delusional if you think all 1.5 million votes are from Republicans. You're delusional if you think the decrease in California's population with respect to Texas' increase is all Republican. Your state is anti-taxpayer (Democrat and Republican), anti-business (Democrat and Republican) and more and more anti-law and order which hurts Democrats most (if you believe most minorities are Democrats).

As far as impeachments, twice in one term for Trump is 400% more times than for Clinton.

California's population increased. But Donny's actions to discourage immigration did take their toll.

If you think that Republicans can win a statewide election here for the first time in nearly 20 years, or can break Democratic supermajority control of the Legislature (and an independent commission drew the lines so it wasn't gerrymandered), feel free to give it your best shot.

It's not taxes that are driving people out of the state. It's housing costs, combined with income inequality leaving too many people who literally can't afford to live here. There's plenty of new-business creation and the wealthy aren't fleeing. --Bob

Elon Musk would beg to differ.

These companies all moved to Texas from California in the last year.
Oracle
CBRE
Charles Schwab
Hewlett Packard Enterprises
First Foundation Bank

Any you know of that moved from Texas to California?

BackInTex wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 27, 2021 3:48 pm

Bob78164 wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 27, 2021 2:44 pm

BackInTex wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 27, 2021 12:30 pm

You're delusional if you think all 1.5 million votes are from Republicans. You're delusional if you think the decrease in California's population with respect to Texas' increase is all Republican. Your state is anti-taxpayer (Democrat and Republican), anti-business (Democrat and Republican) and more and more anti-law and order which hurts Democrats most (if you believe most minorities are Democrats).

As far as impeachments, twice in one term for Trump is 400% more times than for Clinton.

California's population increased. But Donny's actions to discourage immigration did take their toll.

If you think that Republicans can win a statewide election here for the first time in nearly 20 years, or can break Democratic supermajority control of the Legislature (and an independent commission drew the lines so it wasn't gerrymandered), feel free to give it your best shot.

It's not taxes that are driving people out of the state. It's housing costs, combined with income inequality leaving too many people who literally can't afford to live here. There's plenty of new-business creation and the wealthy aren't fleeing. --Bob

Elon Musk would beg to differ.

These companies all moved to Texas from California in the last year.
Oracle
CBRE
Charles Schwab
Hewlett Packard Enterprises
First Foundation Bank

Any you know of that moved from Texas to California?

The plural of anecdote is not data. Our employment numbers here are just fine. As are our tax receipts and our small business creation. Probably has to do with the ready availability of a well educated workforce. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 27, 2021 3:57 pm

BackInTex wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 27, 2021 3:48 pm

Bob78164 wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 27, 2021 2:44 pm

California's population increased. But Donny's actions to discourage immigration did take their toll.

If you think that Republicans can win a statewide election here for the first time in nearly 20 years, or can break Democratic supermajority control of the Legislature (and an independent commission drew the lines so it wasn't gerrymandered), feel free to give it your best shot.

It's not taxes that are driving people out of the state. It's housing costs, combined with income inequality leaving too many people who literally can't afford to live here. There's plenty of new-business creation and the wealthy aren't fleeing. --Bob

Elon Musk would beg to differ.

These companies all moved to Texas from California in the last year.
Oracle
CBRE
Charles Schwab
Hewlett Packard Enterprises
First Foundation Bank

Any you know of that moved from Texas to California?

The plural of anecdote is not data. Our employment numbers here are just fine. As are our tax receipts and our small business creation. Probably has to do with the ready availability of a well educated workforce. --Bob

Which is dribbling southeastward.

Whether it's Caitlyn Jenner or Cynthia Nixon, I really am tired of celebrities without any executive experience thinking the governor of a major state (or minor one, for that matter) is an entry-level job.

This includes Al Lewis as Green Party candidate for NY Governor. Sorry, Grandpa.

Yes, Arnold was a success. And, by some accounts, so was Jesse Ventura. Still not a fan of the practice.

There are some very interesting Republicans who have declared to face Newsom - Kevin Faulconer, the former mayor of San Diego, off the top of my head.

I am sure there will be more.

Any number of them will be more qualified than Caitlyn Jenner (some will be less qualified - I realize that).

Congress, mayor, state government - that's another matter. Athletes and actors from both sides of the aisle have made effective members of Congress or state reps.

mellytu74 wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 28, 2021 9:21 am

Whether it's Caitlyn Jenner or Cynthia Nixon, I really am tired of celebrities without any executive experience thinking the governor of a major state (or minor one, for that matter) is an entry-level job.

This includes Al Lewis as Green Party candidate for NY Governor. Sorry, Grandpa.

Yes, Arnold was a success. And, by some accounts, so was Jesse Ventura. Still not a fan of the practice.

There are some very interesting Republicans who have declared to face Newsom - Kevin Faulconer, the former mayor of San Diego, off the top of my head.

I am sure there will be more.

Any number of them will be more qualified than Caitlyn Jenner (some will be less qualified - I realize that).

Congress, mayor, state government - that's another matter. Athletes and actors from both sides of the aisle have made effective members of Congress or state reps.

I don't think most Californians consider Arnold to have been a success. His approval ratings were pretty low by the time he left office. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 28, 2021 9:29 am

I don't think most Californians consider Arnold to have been a success. His approval ratings were pretty low by the time he left office. --Bob

I didn't realize they were that low. I wonder if it's a case of outside perception vs in-state.