LA Times Poll: Davis Should Be Recalled

[Guest MrRant]

LOS ANGELES - A majority of voters believe Gov. Gray Davis (news - web sites) should be recalled in a special election, according to a poll published Friday, hours after recall leaders claimed they had enough support to put the question on the ballot.

 

The Los Angeles Times statewide poll of 1,412 adults, 1,127 of them registered voters, found 51 percent want Davis ousted, while 42 percent would reject a recall. The rest said they didn't know what to do.

 

Many pointed to the state's $38 billion fiscal crisis as the reason Davis should be removed. Others gave the Democrat poor ratings on education and energy.

 

"I find it incredible that when he took office we had a surplus in this state, and now we're in the hole," Teri Hoerntlein, a 37-year-old San Bernardino County independent, told the newspaper. "If this were a private business, we would have had to declare bankruptcy."

 

Despite the increasing support for removing Davis — a Times poll in March had found 39 percent of voters favored a recall_ many of those in Friday's poll lost their enthusiasm once they learned a special election would cost at least $25 million.

 

The latest Times poll was conducted from June 28 to July 2. Both polls had margins of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

 

Whether the recall goes to a special election or not will come down to the signatures on the petitions.

 

By law, backers need 897,158 validated signatures of registered voters by July 16 to put the question to voters this fall. Ted Costa, coordinator of the Republican-led signature drive, said Thursday that just over 1 million signatures had been turned over to counties for validation.

 

Opponents were skeptical and noted state officials had yet to validate the signatures.

 

"The rhetoric has yet to match the reality," said Carroll Wills, spokesman for Taxpayers Against the Governor's Recall. Opponents said they had 1.1 million signatures on petitions opposing the recall, though those petitions would have no legal effect.

 

As for a possible replacement for Davis, the poll found the most support for Sen. Dianne Feinstein (news, bio, voting record), D-Calif., followed by former Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan, who lost the Republican primary last year, when Davis was re-elected. Republican actor Arnold Schwarzenegger trailed, with more than half of those polled saying they wouldn't vote for him

[Guest Jobber of the Week]

Please run, Arnold. You're the only guy on the Republican side that could win against a Diane Feinstein.

 

Bill Simon proved himself un-electable in the last campaign. Riordan would be risky and would be snubbed up north because of his ties to L.A. (nothing more irritating than seeing a politician from SoCal move up here and start sending funds down south like crazy), and I'm not going to vote for Daryl Issa because he's donated a crapload of money to the recall and letting a guy buy the Governor's office is starting off on the wrong foot.

[Guest MarvinisaLunatic]

Recall him all you want but I don't think things are going to improve overnight..and then what are you going to do when things don't get better, recall the next Governor?

[Guest Jobber of the Week]

I do not expect the next governor to wave a magic wand over the land and make things better overnight.

 

I do expect him to not shill off his powers to the highest industry bidder ala "eBay" Davis.

 

I do not expect him to declare our landmarks a terrorist risk out of nowhere in spite of what the Feds are saying, and should we have Guardsmen watching over our bridges and important buildings, I would expect our governor to find them accomodations a little more modest than a five-star hotel.

 

I would expect a governor who listens to what those around him are saying and wouldn't slack off and wind us in such a huge hole as our energy crisis was.

 

Yes, California has been in budget deficits many times before, even under Republican governors such as Wilson and Reagan. None of those were as massive as our current debt though.

[Guest Vyce]

Please run, Arnold. You're the only guy on the Republican side that could win against a Diane Feinstein.

Are you being serious? Sarcastic?

[Guest Tyler McClelland]

Davis is in the unique position where absolutely NOBODY likes him. Not the republicans, not the democrats, and not his own citizens.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Davis is a horrible governor. That is indisputable. Nevertheless he should not be recalled. Jonah Goldberg recently summed up why.

 

Californians were silly enough to elect a Democrat; now let them suffer. They deserve it.

[Guest JMA]

Davis is a horrible governor. That is indisputable. Nevertheless he should not be recalled. Jonah Goldberg recently summed up why.

 

Californians were silly enough to elect a Democrat; now let them suffer. They deserve it.

I'm no Democrat, but isn't that a little harsh? It's insane to think ALL Democrats are bad. After all, the Democratic and Republican parties are just clubs. Nothing more. I feel we would be better off without the two party system.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Since I'm not a fucking two-year old, no, I don't think all Democrats are bad. Do me a goddamn favour and don't turn this into another wide-eyed "Omigosh you're condemning an entire GROUP of people! That's INSANE!" waste of a thread. I'm fucking sick of your pretended inability to comprehend basic generalisation as a rhetorical device. You just promised me you'd try to lighten up. Try harder.

 

Anyway, it was unbelievably stupid for California to re-elect Gray Davis. But the state should have to live with its choice - otherwise we all face the spread of Clintonian leadership-by-polls. Read the editorial for the full argument.

[Guest Jobber of the Week]

Davis is a horrible governor. That is indisputable. Nevertheless he should not be recalled. Jonah Goldberg recently summed up why.

 

Californians were silly enough to elect a Democrat; now let them suffer. They deserve it.

God forbid we exercise our political process! I'd like to remind you guys that you tried to oust Bill Clinton when you had a chance. I guess I could say he never put the country at risk, but you'd say "but this is our responsibility and our right!" Well, good. The people over here are mulling over their responsiblities now.

 

(reads the article)

 

Davis' problem is not that he pays no attention to polls. Let me stress to you that is furthest from our minds. Our state economy, which was formerly strong enough to support the state as a country by itself, is now in the shits. It would be reasonable to suspect such a downtrun as the whole nation's economy has kind of been staggering for the last two years now, but Davis has been cleanly driving things over the edge.

 

 

Now, let me tell you there are people in California that don't want the recall. There are people who believe the theoretical $40 million cost for the recall (a number theorized by Davis, mind you) aren't worth it. Many of them politicians, then there's men like Mr. Goldberg who wonder what's going on here anyway. If nothing else, people who want to keep Davis (god forbid) have the option to on the ballot.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

God forbid we exercise our political process!

You already did, on November 6th 2002. Now live with it. If you must make a complete mockery of the very concept of elections, could you at least stick to one method and just ask for a recount? The results are less than a year old and the margin was only 5%. Surely a few dozen Democrat lawyers could find a hanging chad or two somewhere.

 

I'd like to remind you guys that you tried to oust Bill Clinton when you had a chance.

OMG you're lumping me in with a group to which I don't belong!!!!!!111!11!!! BAN PLZ~! Why are you being so hurtful??? It's COMPLETELY INSANE to claim all Republicans supported Starr's campaign! How can you possibly justify these horrible generalisations?!!!!

 

I thought the whole Clinton thing was ridiculous, thank you very much. Ken Starr was a useful idiot and those who urged him to ever greater depths were shameless and disgusting. However, the fact remains that lying under oath is an impeachable offense. Being an incompetent is not. You want to impeach him for corruption or some other actionable offense, fine. But you should NOT invalidate your own election simply because you don't like the result. Take it seriously next time and vote responsibly.

[Guest Tyler McClelland]

OMG you're lumping me in with a group to which I don't belong!!!!!!111!11!!! BAN PLZ~!

 

You just lowered my IQ about five points.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

OMG you're lumping me in with a group to which I don't belong!!!!!!111!11!!! BAN PLZ~!

 

You just lowered my IQ about five points.

JMA started it.

[Guest Jobber of the Week]

You already did, on November 6th 2002. Now live with it. If you must make a complete mockery of the very concept of elections, could you at least stick to one method and just ask for a recount?

Wait a minute, our state gives us the right to do recalls. You don't seem to understand what I'm talking about here.

 

The results are less than a year old and the margin was only 5%. Surely a few dozen Democrat lawyers could find a hanging chad or two somewhere.

Simon nearly got Giulianni on the phone to whine about the possibility of such a thing before sucking it up and taking it as a loss.

 

OMG you're lumping me in with a group to which I don't belong!!!!!!111!11!!! BAN PLZ~! Why are you being so hurtful??? It's COMPLETELY INSANE to claim all Republicans supported Starr's campaign! How can you possibly justify these horrible generalisations?!!!!

 

<--- Check it, not Tyler or whoever the hell you're picking on. I don't like casting everyone on the other side of the fence as evil. I save that on the special hatemongers on the Right, and expect them to save it for the /real/ Socialists on the left. And I emphasize "real" because I once had a chat with a loon who tried to convince me that I was a Communist because I wasn't registered Republican.

 

I thought the whole Clinton thing was ridiculous, thank you very much. Ken Starr was a useful idiot and those who urged him to ever greater depths were shameless and disgusting.

 

...... *amazed*

 

But you should NOT invalidate your own election simply because you don't like the result. Take it seriously next time and vote responsibly.

 

Well, there's many who agree with you. I know because I read the whiny letters to the editor every day in the paper. And hey, if enough people think we should stick to our guns, there is a Yes/No question on whether the current governor should be removed that supercedes the "Who should take his place?" question.

[Guest Tyler McClelland]

She was referring to JMA, not me. Fuckin' communist.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

You already did, on November 6th 2002. Now live with it. If you must make a complete mockery of the very concept of elections, could you at least stick to one method and just ask for a recount?

Wait a minute, our state gives us the right to do recalls. You don't seem to understand what I'm talking about here.

I do, perfectly well. It doesn't matter if the state gives you the right or not. Texas gave itself the right to prosecute homosexuals. State-given rights are not holy, and California's recall-by-petition right is inane.

 

<--- Check it, not Tyler or whoever the hell you're picking on. I don't like casting everyone on the other side of the fence as evil.

Lighten. Up. You stated (or at least strongly implied) that I tried to oust President Clinton or supported those who tried to oust him. Since I didn't, I took the opportunity to mock the crybabies who scream bloody murder and bigotry and racism and God knows what else at any generalisation whatsoever, no matter how justified. I wasn't attacking you and I'm not going to start a thread in NHB about how unfair it is to call all Republicans Starr-supporters. You had no way of knowing my views on the Clinton/Starr fiasco because I've never really discussed them, so you made a perfectly reasonable assumption about them based on what you know of my politics and philosophy. You happened to be wrong, but there was a high probability of you being right - and in your position I would have made exactly the same assumption. Once again: I wasn't attacking you. Clear?

[Guest JMA]

JMA started it.

Yes I did.

 

Now, if I could be serious for a minute...

[Guest Hogan Made Wrestling]

As a resident of the Canadian province of British Columbia, where we have seen several failed recall compaigns over the last few years and one that was essentially successful (an MP was found writing letters to newspapers using a false name for some undesirable purpose; he resigned before the recall campaign against him finished), I can say without a shadow of a doubt that Marney is completely correct. Recall laws are stupid, there's simply no other way to describe it. Recall legislation has been abused repeatedly, particularly in the city in which I live, to attempt to recall MPs who have commited no crime other than to be part of an unpopular, inept government. They are typically funded or morally supported by opposition parties and their friends, and are almost always used to re-fight elections rather than for noble purposes such as removing corrupt or criminal politicians from office. As much as I think Governor Ah-nuld would be kind of cool (as an outsider upon whom it has no bearing), I hope this thing backfires completely.

 

If you are interested in why recall legislation is a horrible idea, I urge you to take a look into BC politics for the last decade or so, in particular the case surrounding an MLA named Paul Ramsey, and the aborted "Total Recall" campaign (an attempt to recall every MLA in the governing party).

[Guest Kahran Ramsus]

As someone who lived through Bob Rae's horrific socialist regime in Ontario that left the province bankrupt and record number of citizens out of work, I sympathise with you Californians. Even if I can't see you getting rid of Davis until his term runs out.

[Guest Crazy Dan]

Two things that I think suck about this whole recall effort.

 

1. California is about 30 billion in the hole. The last thing we need is another 40 million tab to pick up, which the recall effort will cost the tax payers. This recall is also hindering the budget being passed, IMO.

 

2. The Republicans instead of putting a viable candidate (Riordan or Bill Jones, both of whom would have been a good choice), instead decided to vote for Bill Simon in the primaries. Bill Simon did everything he possibly could to lose the race, which he did. So the Cal. Republicans have no right to bitch about Davis, when they did not send a strong candidate. Also, this is a scary thought, a govenor winning office with a much smaller percentage of the vote.

 

I think that Davis is not a very good govenor, he has many faults and stuff like that. But, this recall effort to me is an example of one political party being a sore loser. Next time you want to win an office, don't send a bigger putz than the incombant that you are running against.

[Guest evenflowDDT]

However, the fact remains that lying under oath is an impeachable offense. Being an incompetent is not. You want to impeach him for corruption or some other actionable offense, fine. But you should NOT invalidate your own election simply because you don't like the result. Take it seriously next time and vote responsibly.

I couldn't agree with you more (but then that's probably because I don't hate Davis as much as everyone else, despite him cutting money from the UC system and raising my tuition) on that one. The two main problems I have with the recall are...

 

1) Davis hasn't DONE anything. You can blame him for the energy crisis or the current deficit/inability to pass a budget (though I'd disagree on that) until you're blue in the face, but that's not an impeachable (since that's essentially what this recall is) offense.

2) The repercussions...if Davis gets recalled, that basically means any time anyone with money, liberal or conservative, doesn't like a governor or an elected official, they can sponsor a recall. As far as I know, this whole campaign and most of its funding can be traced to that one guy in SoCal, and the amazingly small amount of signatures required (it's only around 900,000 IIRC) is hardly representative of the State, or even the State's voting population. Way to marginalize an entire population because you're rich and don't like the man in charge.