(no subject)

[timepiececlock]

I'm no Davis fan, but I swear if Arnold Swartz-his-face gets elected governor of my state, I might as well never read a newspaper again for at least 4 years.

Have we no pride left, my fellow Californians?

Comments

Re:

[rashaka.livejournal.com]

I don't think he's annouced, but the Mercury News has him alongside every list of candidates and he's in the polls that they quote.

I dunno MH. what'd he do wrong?

[spikewriter]

Ah, Michael Huffington, ex-husband of the beautiful but evil Arianna Huffington. Very rich and ran for governor in the early '90s. Used his own money, so didn't fall under some of the spending limits.

He was a Republican. He was also an empty suit, mouthing what the party structure wanted him to -- and not doing that very well. My husband, who's a moderate Republican (one of the few left in captivity) refused to vote for him, saying he didn't vote for idiots just because they were in the same party.

He came out of the closet after he lost, btw.

Arnold's on everyone's list, but he seems to be very cagey about actually running this time. He's made comments that his calendar's cleared for 2006, but I think Republicans are desperately hoping he'll run now because he's one of the few choices they have that might actually appeal to a broad variety of people instead of the god-awful "it's more important they be true R*E*P*U*B*L*I*C*A*N*S than we get someone who might win and supports many of our goals" candidates they run.

Believe it or not, there are Republicans who wish someone would smack some sense into their party.

[rashaka.livejournal.com]

Hm. Well, in the early 90s I was in elementry school. No wonder I didn't know the name. Thanks for the update.

You know, I read an interesting graph in my political science text book (a 2002 book) that showed by percentages how the voting of delegates of certain topics differed from the opinions of their costituents of the same party, on the same subject. The graphshowed both parties, and it was enlightening to see how what you thought your guys were voting for differes from how they actually vote.

For instance... ::rummages through book until page found::

this says that in 2000 the percentage of republican voters who felt the government shoudl do more to regulate the environmental and safety practices of businesses was 37 %, where as the percentage of their elected delegates was 8%.

Also, for favoring child safety locks on guns it was 76% of rep. voters and only 48% delegates.