Recall

Keep in mind that some people voted no on the recall for reasons other than wanting Davis in office.

Also, I should probably remind everyone that Arnold CANNOT become president, because he was born in another country.
 
haha they are already talking of the possibilities of changing the law that a pres has to be born in this country. So a naturalized arnie could end up as pres. if he changes things in cali.
 
:rolleyes:
Although his move drew scant attention at the time, U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah recently introduced a constitutional amendment opening the presidency to naturalized citizens of foreign birth.
Click to expand...

Source
 
flavio,

Your math and your logic make perfect sense, except for one assumption you've made that I think can't be overlooked. You assume that someone voting "no" means they really want Davis as their first choice. On the surface, that seems like a reasonable assumption... but is it really?

I can't help but wonder: how many Californians voted "no" for the recall simply because they think recalling a govenor in the middle of the term just isn't the right thing to do? I could see myself voting in such a manner - disagreeing with the recall on ethical or other grounds, regardless of whether I liked Davis, hated him, or was indifferent.

Therefore, it is entirely possible that some voters did want Arnie as their first choice, but thought the recall was in general not the right thing to do; thus, they could have voted "no" and still voted "arnie" in case the recall did happen.

Since there doesn't seem to be any way to really know how many of the voters actually wanted Davis as their first choice, or how many just disagreed with the recall in general even if they would have rather had another govenor, I don't see how we can take your assumption as any objective indication of how many voters preferred Davis or Arnie.

I simply can't see any clear way to get that information out of the results, due to the way the voting ballot was set up. Also, I have to really wonder why Davis didn't want his name among the recall candidates (wasn't that his choice?). Surely someone informed him of the mechanics of such a dual vote, and explained that not having his name among the recall candidates put him at a disadvantages. OTOH, if it wasn't his choice, if he wasn't "allowed" to have his name on that list, then that was a pretty botched up election.
 
Since he's the one being recalled, his name can't appear on the possible vote-in list because a vote of NO is a vote for him & what would be the purpose of recalling him just to be recast as governor.
 
Hmm... yeah, I suppose it doesn't really matter. I suppose there would be little difference if people had the option to vote for Davis as a candidate, since I doubt there would be that many people who would vote "yes" for a recall, and then turn around and vote for Davis as the "replacement."

That still doesn't remove the possibility that some people voted "no" who would still rather have a different govenor, and just didn't agree with the idea of a recall in general. So I still don't see how flavio's assumption can be taken to be the truth. It may be, but how are we to really know?
 
no way arnie says he wont have time to do movies while in office. guess ill have to play him..... goes to the gym now. :)
 
outside looking in said:
That still doesn't remove the possibility that some people voted "no" who would still rather have a different govenor, and just didn't agree with the idea of a recall in general. So I still don't see how flavio's assumption can be taken to be the truth. It may be, but how are we to really know?
Click to expand...

You have a point to some degree. I voted "No" and I would rather have a different governor, maybe even one of the lesser known's from that huge pool of candidates. As elections go though, you have to play the odds.

So basically though your point is does a No vote equal a vote for Davis? Possibly it's not a 100% correlation but I'm not sure what other conclusion you could draw. A "No" vote means "Davis should not be recalled" which means "out of all these candidates my first choice is to keep Davis" which equals a vote for Davis as far as I can tell.

Given that, it seems obvious that more people picked Davis as their "1st choice" than any other candidate which shows an obvious flaw in the way the whole system is set up. Maybe an instant-runoff set up would improve things. In fact maybe instant runoffs should just be widely used in a lot of elections.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top