response 126 of 264:

Aug 17 00:26 UTC 2003

We don't think there is a danger of being sued unless we have realized a 
commercial gain.  So, please send us a check for $1,000.  (On second 
thought, from you we'd prefer cash.)

response 128 of 264:

Aug 17 02:44 UTC 2003

I agree with richard, resp:115, that a runoff would be sensible with 
so many on the ballot.

I disagree with richard, resp:114, that the random order on the 
ballots is senseless.  There's enough of an advantage for being at the 
top of the ballot that I'd expect the alphabetically first name to be 
a shoo in.  However, I'll admit it didn't occur to me just how 
inconvenient it will be for the voters to have the names appear 
randomly with so many on the ballot.

response 130 of 264:

Aug 17 20:54 UTC 2003

also, there is some fear about well known names drawing votes away from
lesser known candidates.

Robert Dole is running as a republican

Micheal Jackson is running as an independent

Of course it isn't the mfamous people we all know.  just local businessmen.

response 132 of 264:

Aug 17 22:04 UTC 2003

s/stick/pick/

response 134 of 264:

Aug 18 03:16 UTC 2003

I heard on the news that the Lt. Gov. essentially made a
plea for voters to oust Davis and elect him.  This marks
the onset of "every man for himself" among the Democrats.

"Et tu, Cruz?" -- Gray Davis

response 136 of 264:

Aug 18 15:01 UTC 2003

Not really. I mean he might want all the folks who vote no to the 
recall to vote for him just in case the recall passes. What is he 
supposed to say "vote no but vote for Arnold?"

response 138 of 264:

Aug 18 22:59 UTC 2003

#135..the lt. governor is a democrat and is pushing the democrats 
current strategy.  He is encouraging everyone to vote no on the recall, 
but on the recall ballot to vote for him JUST IN CASE.  He's in a no 
lose situation because he'll either end up governor or will 
dramatically increase his name recognition/exposure in advance of the 
next regular election for governor, when he'd presumably be the leading 
candidate or one of them.

There are now polls showing this vote no/vote yes strategy might work, 
schwarzenegger's numbers are slipping and I guess the lt. governor is 
well known enough that he's seen as a safe alternative in the event the 
recall goes through.  

I predict here and now that the recall will fail, because voters will 
realize that the only way to discourage the possibility of another 
recall vote next year and the year after and every year going forward, 
is to nip this one in the bud.  This recall petition effort was 
succesful because one candidate, Issa, is a multi millionaire and 
pumped several million of his own money into heavy advertising.  Which 
was more than enough to get most of the people who voted AGAINST Davis 
last time to sign petitions.  I mean they'd have to figure why not, 
they didn't vote for him in the first place.  So now that the formula 
for a succesful petition drive is in place, it'll happen again and 
again.  Unless voters express their solid preferance at the polls for 
having elections every four years.

This special recall election will cost this state, in an economic 
crisis, $60-75 million to put on.  Surely voters will realize that no 
matter how much they dislike Davis now, it isn't worth setting the 
precedent and spending the money, not just this year but in years to 
come.  And make no mistake, if Davis is recalled, and replaced by a 
Republican, there will be Democrats more than willing to spend millions 
of dollars on another massive recall petition next year.  Because 
turnabout is fair play.  The only sensible move is to stop this now. 

response 140 of 264:

Aug 19 13:17 UTC 2003

Yeah, the hard right is starting to back away from Ahnold in California.

response 142 of 264:

Aug 19 18:49 UTC 2003

The current federal govt. seems to have no philosophical problem with
give-aways.

Oh, you mean give-aways to non-rich people!  How silly of me.

response 144 of 264:

Aug 19 20:31 UTC 2003

I think it's amusing to see the same people endorsing Arnold who
complain when other celebrities involve themselves in politics.

response 146 of 264:

Aug 19 20:42 UTC 2003

re: #141..klg, this idea that ANY republican is preferable to any 
democrat is contrary to the complexity of american politics.  Here in 
New York City, our current mayor Mike Bloomberg, and former Mayor Rudy 
Guiliani were both lifelong Democrats who only switched parties when 
they ran for Mayor because it allowed them to sidestep the Democratic 
party machine. They are flaming moderates.  Pro choice, 
environmentalists.  Bloomberg is actually pretty liberal, he supports 
legalizing gay marriages among other things. Pataki, our governor, is a 
pro choice moderate.   There are also Democrats in office who are more 
conservative than them (New Jersey Governor McGreevey for instance)  In 
fact both parties are  populated with
people who are centerists,  and when that happens the differences 
aren't that great.  The party IDs become just labels.  When Nixon ran 
against JFK in 1960, a lot of people complained that there really 
wasn't much of a choice because they AGREED on most things.  Nixon was 
a moderate, and so was JFK.

Arnold appears to be, as Nixon was, the kind of politician that the 
right wing of the GOP hates even more than Democrats-- A Rockefeller 
Republican. Arnold doesn't appear to be a Republican because of deeply 
held religious beliefs or political ideology, but because he supports 
big business and is fiscally conservative.  But he is also socially 
liberal or appears to be.  That means he could easily have run as a 
Democrat.  But then, even if he was the same man with the same views, 
you wouldn't find him acceptable?

Remember too that if Arnold gets elected, he has a wife who is an 
outspoken liberal Democrat from a family of political junkies, Maria 
Shriver, and she says she'll be a hands on first lady.   You know that 
Arnold's wife and his cousin, the senior Senator from Massachusetts, 
will have his ear if he gets elected.  They'll keep Arnold in line  :)

response 148 of 264:

Aug 20 04:41 UTC 2003

In Richard's last paragraph, is he saying that Ted Kennedy is Arnold's cousin,
or that Arnold's wife is a he?  (anyhow, Ted Kennedy is Maria Shriver's uncle,
not cousin).

Isn't Richard also the same person who has repeatedly lectured us in the past
about the importance of voting for Democrats, since you're electing not just
a person but a party?  Given the amount of appointments the governor gets to
make, that's probably pretty accurate in this case.

When Al Gore ran against George W. Bush in 2000, a lot of people complained
that there wasn't much of a choice because they agreed on most things.  Wow,
did that turn out to be wrong.