No No No,

I don't care whether you'd be for or against the recall; or if it happened, who you'd vote for be it Swartzeneggar ("I'm champion for de vimmen"), Bustamante (cool name for a possible back-stabber), Flynt, Coleman, etc.

Naw.

I propose that every ballot has 3 things:

(1) list of candidates you'd choose--or in some cases write-in
(2) whether you support traditional or supplimentary elections
(3) in the later, whether it would be run-off or affirmation

In (1), tabulation will be typical.
In (2), if people support "Traditional," then candidate who wins plurality is elected. Hence, if Arnie gets 30% of the vote, but it's higher than anyone elses, he becomes guv'nor.

If people choose for "Supplimentary" elections, then Arnie must win a majority to become guv'nor. If he wins only a plurality, there will be a supplimentary election.

(3) If the choice for a supplimentary election was for run-off, then in 1 to 4 weeks after the election, another election will be held for the top two winners (eg Swartzeneggar and Bustamante). Whoever wins this election--and if it's only two facing each other, a plurality will be by definition a majority--will become guv'nor.

If the choice is for affirmation, then in 1 to 4 weeks of the election, the winner of the plurality will stand for affirmation/negation. If the vote is for affirmation, he/she becomes guv'nor.

If not, then another election will be held, with the 3 choices. If this fails to produce a guv'nor, then it will be held again, this time plurality winning.



The purpose of this poll would be to determine how you would vote.

The poll in part 1 of 2 would be whether you'd support a traditional tabulation--plurality wins, no matter how short of a majority, or would you choose the supplimentary election in the event of a non-majority plurality.

The poll in part 2 of 2 would be whether you support a run-off, or affirmation.

You may choose to vote in any of these three selections of the ballot--i.e. not voting in one will not invalidate your vote in the other.

I'm just glad I don't live in California anymore.

__________________
~~ ><>><> ~~ ><,,> ><,,> ...`;=;p d;=;' /\/\^/\ ^^ ^/\/\_
Democracy Now! - The lost art of investigative news reporting.

I'd say "Don't Vote, It's the American Way"

__________________
People who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.

It brings back the memory of the "Go West Instinct" theory:

Ever since modern man developed, he had an instinct to travel west. First north out of Africa, then west across Europe, then across the western ocean, and then it was "Go west young man" in NA.
When the west coast was reached, we couldn't go further because we would reach the ancient east.
Once on the west coast, our sanity is suspect because we can't follow the instinct anymore.
I think the theory had something to do with trying to follow the sun.
Anyone else ever heard the theory?

__________________
'Sir........, I don't like these numbers.'
'Then hire somebody that can change them!'
("`-/")_.-'"``-.,,
\. . `; -._( );, `)
(v_,)' _ )`-. \ ``'`
_.- _..-/ /((.'
((,.-' ((,/

I don't know about the mechanics of the election. I just know that if you want to watch reality t.v., the California recall fiasco is as good as it gets. Action heroes, porn stars, porn peddlers, big bucks and bigger egos. Some days I can hardly wait to turn on the tube and see what's happened out there since yesterday. Of course, I don't have to live there.

I'd say that theory was probably developed by a Californian. :P

What's surprising to me is that the recall crowd wants to turn Davis out of office because he's incompetent. And their choice to replace him? One of the most [cough] obviously qualified leaders [cough] you can think of... :roll:

My theory is that California got cheezed off when Minnesota elected a pro wrestler as Governor, thereby stealing their crown as the flakiest state... #-o

This feels like the first time the US is trying a parliamentary style of election-the recall is a kind of vote of no confidence.

__________________
If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about the answers.

Good one Mike! =D>
The US of A may be in for a taste of 'twisted Canadian politics'? :wink:

__________________
'Sir........, I don't like these numbers.'
'Then hire somebody that can change them!'
("`-/")_.-'"``-.,,
\. . `; -._( );, `)
(v_,)' _ )`-. \ ``'`
_.- _..-/ /((.'
((,.-' ((,/

At least Jesse was articulate, made his views clear, and could debate and discuss issues with the rest of the state government. I didn't agree with all of his viewpoints but he came across as competent.

Schwartzy is going to, "give everybody a good job", "take back California", whatever that means, and he's "mad as hell" and isn't "going to take it anymore", whatever that means.

Reminds me of a skit on public radio's Rewind. "Elect me and everyone will get a pony."

Oh dear, slipping into politics there. sorry.

__________________
~~ ><>><> ~~ ><,,> ><,,> ...`;=;p d;=;' /\/\^/\ ^^ ^/\/\_
Democracy Now! - The lost art of investigative news reporting.

I think those last two quotes are direct from the movie Broadcast News. Althugh I would guess he'd want to have a new script written for his term in the gubernatorial (love that word) mansion.
Jesse Ventura. Yes, they elected him because he was straightforward, said what he thought. After they elected him he was straightforward and said what he thought, and they didn't like it. And apparently the bigwigs at ESPN didn't learn from Minnesota's experience.
Pardon my political sidetrip. But hey, this thread is kind of political anyway, isn't it?

That'd be Network, line delivered by Peter Finch.

__________________
SeanF

"Ask to understand, but don't challenge unless you have the knowledge."--NEOWatcher

The contents of this post are ©2009 by SeanF and may not be copied or retransmitted in any form without the express written consent of SeanF

I stand corrected. The old memory box ain't what it used to be.

And now "we're not going to take it" is the new theme song for Arnold. :roll: I still don't know what that means????????

__________________
~~ ><>><> ~~ ><,,> ><,,> ...`;=;p d;=;' /\/\^/\ ^^ ^/\/\_
Democracy Now! - The lost art of investigative news reporting.

It is the title of a song by a rock group called Cysted Blister, (Twisted Sister?). I could find the lyrics and PM them if you wish?

__________________
'Sir........, I don't like these numbers.'
'Then hire somebody that can change them!'
("`-/")_.-'"``-.,,
\. . `; -._( );, `)
(v_,)' _ )`-. \ ``'`
_.- _..-/ /((.'
((,.-' ((,/

I think she is talking about the actualy meaning behind the song. :-)


Otherwise i do have feelings on this, but it would better to leave my opinions to PM or another board. :-)

California's economy may be compared to that of the sixth largest of the countries of the world. Comparable to even Great Britain.
The message may be that they want representation on that fact.
Worldwide.

__________________
'Sir........, I don't like these numbers.'
'Then hire somebody that can change them!'
("`-/")_.-'"``-.,,
\. . `; -._( );, `)
(v_,)' _ )`-. \ ``'`
_.- _..-/ /((.'
((,.-' ((,/

California has the fifth largest economy in the world. The "we're not going to take it," probably refrences Gray Davis' abysmal handling of his term in office. In addition to handing out benfits to illegal aliens, he has run the economy into the ground, and generally ignored the people of California. When the recall first started, he called anyone who was for the recall 'idiots,' but when it looked like he may actually get recalled, he begged for another chance and claimed that he would start listening to the people. He is a real great guy.

__________________
Hwæt! We Gardena in geardagum,
þeodcyninga, þrym gefrunon,
hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon.

The most interesting question is whether direct democracy can scale to extremely large groups. As the size of social organizations grows it seems inevitable that an organizational pattern likewise grows. This seems to be a function of size itself and not the organization per se. In the US, for example, there is an organizational chart in politics (precinct, city, county, state, country) with limited penetration between layers. The initiative/referendum process cuts across this.

In the past, the sheer inertia of time and size ensured a certain stability in the organization. With modern communications/propaganda, events can short-circuit this inertia. Another way of looking at it is that the traditional system has lots of negative feedback built in, tending to damp out the oscillations. The more instantaneous system can produce positive feedback loops.

While the US constitutional system has drawbacks vs., say the parliamentary system, the concept of fixed election cycles tends toward institutional stability. Wonder if we are seeing the beginning of the end of this historical pattern.

__________________
If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about the answers.

Of course it is--but, as Humphrey sorta reminded us, the BA has said that this forum should "try to stay away from big time argument topics (like, say, politics and religion)"

Mike, like many, I see IRR (initiative, referendum, and recall) as a bit perilous to those raised on representative democracy--or other less democratic forms, but I see a new equilibrium re-asserting itself.

It will be interesting how Swartzeneggar fares (I being somewhat neutral on whether he will be better or worse than Davis). Will his supporters have their hurrah and there will be "a return to normalcy"? Will the Democrats stop fighting IRR and use it themselves? Will the system be repeatedly abused and make Californians think?

This was the purpose of my proposal. It would have effectively told Californians, "Okay folks. You gave Swartzeneggar a plurality (48% I believe), but do you really, really, want him as guv'nor?"


kilopi, I know I'm walking on thin ice here, but I feel the topic is light enough in stirring passion. Granted, I tend to regard many contentious political issues with a dispassion that borders on apathy. For instance, unlike many political types, and perhaps like most (thinking) people, I can (1) give praise to Republicans that are indirect criticisms of the Democrats, and (2) give praise to Democrats that are indirect criticisms of the Republicans.

As for Swartzenegger, he wouldn't have been my first choice and the criticisms are somewhat legitamate, but neither do I detest him. I'm also a big fan of Terminator 1 and 2 (I've yet to see the 3rd one--perhaps on video in several months). I enjoyed Total Recall, though I understand it was a serious aberation of the book. His Conan wasn't a total waste of time, and "Pumping Iron" and "Hercules Goes Bananas" was fun in a campy way.

His other movies, however, sucked, though this could be as much the fault of Ivan Reitman as Arnie's.

I started this thread on the basis that it will not inspire terrible debates, unlike what you might see on shows like Crossfire. I hope and trust that I haven't.

On the main page of this board, I ask that you avoid politics in the discussion. As this thread is about politics, it's inappropriate. Locked.

__________________
Phil Plait
The Bad Astronomer
http://www.badastronomy.com
badastro@badastronomy.com