|
Post by Zynx on Aug 31, 2003 15:28:55 GMT -5
So your saying every election day is the end of the world? No. Having one after another in a short period of time is. This amounts to an overthrow of a government. This is not a normal election. Normal elections are fine although a dramatic government change can hurt a country financially like Brazil whose credit rating and bonds got hammered by the election of "Lula" down there. This California mess makes creditors very uneasy because the government might change every 6 months which is terrible for setting fiscal policy. Personally, I don't know how in the hell you said what you did. This California thing isn't normal.
|
|
|
Post by Dementia Summoner on Sept 1, 2003 17:53:07 GMT -5
Just because this happens once when the state is desperately in need of change doesnt mean it will be abused. I dont care if you dont know why i said what i did. So its a regime change. Big whoop. Not like each canidate has armies backing them up.
|
|
|
Post by Zynx on Sept 1, 2003 20:42:13 GMT -5
That isn't the issue. Argentina had a new president that was democratically chosen every few days during an economic and political crisis much like this one. No troops were involved and it tanked the country's credit rating. Political instability isn't always involving militaries you know. For instance, Italy in the 1960s and 1950s had government changes on average twice a year or something like that and it destroyed the country's economy because investors lost faith. The fact of the matter is that credit rating agencies don't like governments changing with different spending, tax, and regulatory policies on a frequent basis. This ridiculous recall hurts the state's image and results in the precedent for future recalls for unpopular governors. This underlines the ridiculous nature of the California proposition system as well by showing that government directly by the people is not a wise idea. That's the reason the founding fathers made this a democratic REPUBLIC and not a democracy. They knew things like this would happen.
|
|
|
Post by Dementia Summoner on Sept 1, 2003 23:42:15 GMT -5
If this happens in 6 months spank me.
Dude, do you live in California? Were not just booting Davis cause we feel like it, hes an ass, has fucked the system, and needs to go. Nixon went, did that start a recall chain? No. And if its a party change your fearing, theres a good chance bustamante will win.
|
|
|
Post by Zynx on Sept 2, 2003 5:45:41 GMT -5
Nixon went because of a scandal and he resigned. Besides, presidents can't be recalled except in impeachment which is a good thing. Davis is just being kicked out because Californians feel like kicking him out. You had your chance during the 2002 elections. Many incumbant governors with deficits and slow economies were booted out. A plurality decided to keep the governor and that is that. No scandal has erupted and if the budget problem is the sole reason, then Bush should be removed because the budget deficit he is running is even larger as a percent of the budget than California's.
Just tell me this in a coherent and intelligent argument, why should you remove Gray Davis and what makes you think his replacement will be any better? I'll admit he has been a bad governor, but that is not a basis for a recall.
|
|
|
Post by Dementia Summoner on Sept 2, 2003 14:35:05 GMT -5
Ok. So your saying the states should be run like the country and a trial should be neccesary for recall?
Davis won the last election due to a lack of better canidates.
Nixon resigned, but we all know why.
As i said, Davis isnt going cause we feel like it and we think itll be fun, ive stated the reasons why he should go and ill state them yet again: I think Davis should be recalled because he sold our energy for his own good, supports illegal dumping, supports his backers more than his state, has tanked the Californian credit rating, and is dishonest.
|
|
|
Post by Zynx on Sept 2, 2003 15:17:17 GMT -5
Ok. So your saying the states should be run like the country and a trial should be neccesary for recall? Davis won the last election due to a lack of better canidates. Nixon resigned, but we all know why. As i said, Davis isnt going cause we feel like it and we think itll be fun, ive stated the reasons why he should go and ill state them yet again: I think Davis should be recalled because he sold our energy for his own good, supports illegal dumping, supports his backers more than his state, has tanked the Californian credit rating, and is dishonest. 1. Yes. The reason this country was set up the way it was was to prevent mob rule like this. Poor job performence is not a reason to recall someone who just won re-election eight months before the recall started. When someone wins an election, give them time to fix the problems. 2. What is your point? You had your chance. 3. And? You missed my point. Nixon committed a crime. Davis hasn't done anything close to that. 4. This recall has been sighted as the reason why California's credit rating has been downgraded two notches by Moody's investor service. He did not sell your energy for his own good and I challenge you to prove that he did. Dishonesty is not a reason for a recall unless he purgered himself in front of a court, which he did not. And the rest of your comments can be applied to any politician. All incumbant governors have the same problems as Gray Davis except his is worse because nearly 90% of the budget in California is spoken for through government pensions and entitlement programs enacted through that ridiculous proposition system California has. You know what you guys should do to fix that state? Throw out the proposition system.
|
|
|
Post by Dementia Summoner on Sept 2, 2003 17:35:27 GMT -5
How is selling your states energy for the well being of yourself good?
How did we have our chance when there was a lack of competent canidates?
|
|
|
Post by Zynx on Sept 3, 2003 15:49:51 GMT -5
1. He did not sell energy for the well being of himself. Prove it. 2. You could have voted for Bill Simon if you thought Gray Davis was that bad or could have voted for Richard Riordan in the Republican primary.
|
|
|
Post by Dementia Summoner on Sept 4, 2003 21:56:42 GMT -5
Dude, now your being stupid. Dont give me this prove it shit, rolling black outs hit the state, the budget took a dive, and he came out with millions.
|
|
|
Post by Dragoon Tony on Sept 4, 2003 22:32:31 GMT -5
This makes me wish I was still in high school debate class. ;D
I would have to say that Zynx has been right on the money so far. The entire proposition system has screwed California over. Nearly all of the states funds are earmarked for entitlements. That's why the economy is in the shitter. Like Zynx said, most incumbant governors already have problems, except Gray Davis can't do anything to correct it because CA has no money.
As for Davis selling off the state's energy to profit, there is no way for you to qualify that Dementia. If you can prove it with facts, not the general misconceived opinion of the California populus, by all means do so. The energy crisis is nothing new to the state of California, so it's not logical to pin all the blame on Davis. Blackouts in California? Really? Like that's never happened before. I guess the power grid failure out east was the fault of some politician out to make money too. And as I said early, the budget was already floating in the toilet bowl.
The people of California are just looking for a scapegoat because they voted for a poor candidate and already put him in office. You can't say that there was no other choice but to elect Gray Davis. There were other candidates, were there not? So you can't say the other candidates were inferior, as obviously Gray Davis really didn't work out either. Regardless, CA had a choice, and they chose Davis.
This whole recall thing will only be bad for the government, locally and nationally, because of the precedent it would establish that might allow other politicians elsewhere to be oust simply becaused they are not liked. This type of mob rule will hinder progress in California, not help it. The problems will still exist, regardless of whether or not Davis is recalled. So the best course of action is to stick it out and vote for someone you think can do the job, come election time. And this time make sure that the person elected is not elected due to "lack of better candidates".
|
|
|
Post by Dementia Summoner on Sept 5, 2003 2:05:31 GMT -5
Dude black outs werent that common until about 2000. And gray davis was associated with the power companys.
|
|
|
Post by Zynx on Sept 5, 2003 6:01:57 GMT -5
Dude, now your being stupid. Dont give me this prove it shit, rolling black outs hit the state, the budget took a dive, and he came out with millions. Now this is just right-wing tripe. Prove it with facts and evidence. Also, regarding the blackouts, the infrastructure put in place that caused the rolling blackouts was not Gray Davis' fault. The things that caused the blackouts were started by Pete Wilson. Do you know who gets the largest donations from energy companies? It is a certain political party that begins with the letter "R".
|
|