Only in Cali

[VoodooAce]

Well, Californians now know the choices we'll have in the race for Governor.

Let me tell you, it's been a fairly bizarre race thus far. We had an incumbent Democrat attacking a Republican who was battling with two other Republicans for the GOP nomination.

Thing is, Gray Davis, the incumbent was blasting Richard Riordan, a Republican, for being against the death penalty, among other things.

In fact, I'm quite sure that Gray Davis spent more than any of the three Republicans trying to nab the nomination. As Davis is the incumbent, he didn't have any competition himself.

So he attacked the guy that he and everybody's uncle knows is the only candidate that would have a chance in heck against him....Richard Riordan. Riordan had huge leads over the other two candidates as recently as 3 weeks ago. So Davis thoroughly bashed him and Riordan, making a huge mistake, fought back against Davis rather than concentrating on his current competition, Bill Simon.

My thoughts? Davis is a sleaz ball. I voted for him 4 years ago against Lundgren, but I would have voted for Riordan this time.
While his strategy worked, he'll not get my vote as I just won't vote out of protest. I'm sure he'll be all broken up over this, but oh well.

I just hate the idea of him running adds against a candidate he's not actually running against. Comparable to the GOP running adds in California for Ralph Nader in 2000.

What sucks is his strategy worked, he's facing Simon, who he will trounce soundly.

Republicans fell on their sword and voted for a guy that is much, much more conservative and has no chance at all of winning in Cali.

 

[amadeus]

I'd say that Simon actually has a pretty good chance of winning...from what I've seen, everyone wants the head of Gray-out Davis.

 

[VoodooAce]

Originally posted by rmsharpe
I'd say that Simon actually has a pretty good chance of winning...from what I've seen, everyone wants the head of Gray-out Davis.

If you consider 40% all, then sure, I'll concede that one to you.

It is California, after all. No longer the state of Nixon and Reagan. We're as liberal as they get. Don't forget, there, RM, UCLA and Berkley are in California. In fact, California's on that 'Left Coast' your so fond of bashing.

Don't go and bet your lunch money on Simon.....unless its in a bet w/me.

Crazier things have happened, I guess.....lookat the Simon-Riordan race where Simon was being by some 25 points just a month ago......but I wouldn't count on it.

 

[amadeus]

I'm just figuring that people aren't going to vote for someone that's going to cut off your power every time he can't pay his gas bill.

 

[Pellaken]

its a many-way political war. in canada, we have 5 major parties. divied like so:
BC-NDP,LIB,CA
ALB-CA,PC,LIB
SAS-NDP,LIB,CA
MAN-NCP,LIB,PC,CA
ONT-PC,LIB,NDP
QUE-BQ,LIB
NB-LIB,PC
PEI-LIB,PC
NFLD-LIB,PC
NS-LIB,PC,NDP

they are orders -so- on the political left-right list:
NDP-LIB-PC-CA {BQ is a seperatist party}

so, its only logical, that:
in quebec, the PC,CA,and NDP should work with the BQ against LIB
amongst other things... currentley the Liberals have a majority of the seats, but the other parties just dont get it, and wont work togethor. in the US, atleast people can compromise... sometimes.

 

[VoodooAce]

Originally posted by rmsharpe
I'm just figuring that people aren't going to vote for someone that's going to cut off your power every time he can't pay his gas bill.

The majority of Californians understand that, rather than being the fault of Gray Davis, it was the fault of those that insisted on de-regulation and allowing the power companies to run.....I love this term....willy-nilly over our state.

Democrats SWORE up and down that this would happen. They SWORE it. They lost the argument, de-reg happens, what Dems warned about happened, and now the GOP refuses to admit they were wrong.

Worse yet, they want to blame Davis, who wasn't even Governor when the bad decision was made. Go figure.

When the US's economy is all screwed up in 10-12 years, as Democrats fear is likely, what with us spending all this money we don't have right now, what will happen? The GOP will deny it was their f*ck up that caused it (as they did 10 years ago) and will try and find some Democratic issue to blame for it.

 

[Greadius]

I don't see why Gray Davis is taking so much flak for the energy crunch. Every 'expert' said his gamble was going to fail, cost taxpayers a lot of money, and that brown outs would continue. They didn't... I don't know if he solved it, and it probably will cost taxpayers a crap of a lot of money, but he stuck his face all over TV while 'solving' it and it ended up being shorter than predicted.

Of course, I'm obviously not Californian. And I'm in kinda the same boat you are... my apparent choices for Governer are Janet Reno and Jeb Bush. Protest vote time... I'd write in Al Gore but they'd probably throw out the whole ballet

 

[knowltok2]

Being as that I don't live in California, I'm no expert on its energy problems, or the ins and outs of the deregulation. However, I have heard that part of the problem was that the deregulation wasn't done right, that there were limits placed on the free competition and the construction of new powerplants, and that that is what caused, at least in part, the problems. I have no idea which party backed what, or got which piece of a bill included or excluded in California, but what thoughts do you have on this?

What about deregulation in general? Is it unappropriate for power companies, or was it just done wrong in California?

PS, if you think this belongs in a seperate thread about deregulation, just put your response there and we can continue the discussion there.

 

[King of England]

simon can still win! it's just going to be real hard.

 

[VoodooAce]

Originally posted by knowltok2
However, I have heard that part of the problem was that the deregulation wasn't done right....

My problem with this, Knowltok, is that this is exactly what you would expect someone that backed the plan in the first place to say.

What else is he going to say? I was wrong? Doubt it.

Politicians of all shapes and sizes are NEVER wrong. If the plan they propose backfires, then it was the fault of the people onthe other side of the aisle....for whatever reasons.

Now, I don't claim at all to be an expert on this subject. ALL I know is that around 1996, when Pete Wilson was Governor, we had this great political debate about deregulation. As I said, I'm no expert on this subject and didn't really even follow it too closely. I do remember the warnings that it had the potential to blow up in our faces.

And, it blowed.....

 

[knowltok2]

Originally posted by VoodooAce


My problem with this, Knowltok, is that this is exactly what you would expect someone that backed the plan in the first place to say.

What else is he going to say? I was wrong? Doubt it.

Politicians of all shapes and sizes are NEVER wrong. If the plan they propose backfires, then it was the fault of the people onthe other side of the aisle....for whatever reasons.

I won't argue with that at all. I think you and I have the same general opinion about most run of the mill politicians, even if we differ quite a bit in many of our philosophies.

The question I would ask now though is, even though we can expect politicians to say those things, it doesn't prove the case one way or the other. I guess in twenty years or so some economists can come to a conclusion about the decisions of dead politicians and figure out if it was a good idea done wrong, or a bad idea from the start. For now we will have to see if other states can pull it off.

Ohio deregulated gas several years ago, and so far I am still warm in the winter. Time will, however, tell.