MVWRX

iTrader: (1)

All of the special election props in CA were defeated. Which means the election was useless. Which means the state of CA just speant more money on an election than ever before, just to see that we didn't need the election in the first place. Thanks Arnold, I guess you really know what the people of CA want...

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/....ap/index.html

psoper

I think we should make Aahnold pay for it from his own pocket.

That would make him think twice next time....

MVWRX

iTrader: (1)

...he actually did spend 9mill of his own, but the election still cost the state more than any election ever has...

HellaDumb

iTrader: (3)

So you didn't side with any of them? I honestly thing the voters of CA don't know wtf they want.... If the voters of CA were consistent then how did Arnie get elected?

MVWRX

iTrader: (1)

Arnold got elected because he had a famous face and a fat wallet at a time where the elected officials in CA were f***ing up. But it is perfectly clear, now, that his ideas about what californians want in terms of political reform are NOT correct. The 'special election' will go down as the worst waste of money a politician perpetrated in CA ever.


And no, there wasn't a single CA prop that I voted for...they were all pure crap.

MVWRX

iTrader: (1)

BTW, a lot of us here are from CA...how many of you that b**** all the time about our gov't actually voted yesterday?

riptide2

I voted... overall, I'm pretty pleased with the results. Although I think it's kind of silly that 78 didn't pass.

Although I wonder how many of the people who voted actually read the propositions (and were not just voting for or against Arnold.)

Salty

iTrader: (14)

I wholeheartedly agree with this based on the fact a lot of those propositions were actually reasonable in their proposal and did allow Arnold to do what he was elected to do.

Does anyone remember how and why the famous and politically intelligent candidate got voted in a predominately Democratic state? It was to replace the incompetent Gray Davis (D) and fix the spending issues. Who better to do this than an influencing figurehead? He presents a series of propositions to give him the leverage to fix the problem and the voters baulk! Wtf?!

I think the problem is a combination of voters not knowing what the hell they want and voters not willing to give the Governor a little more power to get the job done. And although I can understand that to an extent, I honestly feel Arnold was genuine with his efforts.

Every time he did a telephone interview with Armstrong and Getty (radio show here in Sacramento) you could just hear the passion in his voice regarding these issues. And yes, I know he's a politician but I was honestly convinced. He even got on the air this morning and expressed that he was still happy in knowing he truly gave it a worthwhile shot despite being rejected. I think that speaks volumes.

riptide2

Several reasons:

1) Arnold has effectively spent the last two years squandering the political capital he had when he was first elected. He has nobody to blame but himself. One can only keep blowing hot air for so long before the public catches up. I mean, Arnold's not a bad guy, but can anyone name ONE thing that he has actually accomplished in two years?

2) Only one of the propositions (prop. 76) had ANYTHING to do with solving CA's budget crisis (which is what Arnold was elected to do.) The rest of the propositions were just examples of Arnold trying to pick fights with someone he doesn't like.

3) Even if Arnold's intentions are good, I (and, I guess, other voters) feel that it sets a bad precedent to change the law "just to give the good guy a break" (prop. 76). If you're as good as you say you are, you've got to play by the rules.

MVWRX

iTrader: (1)

I heard a lot of passion in his voice in Kindergarten Cop too...he is an actor after all, it shouldn't be hard for him to sound passionate about something.


And about giving the governer more power...before the Davis ordeal our other governers did fine with our budget...we have a huge economy, the governer shouldn't need more power to fix the budget.


Arnold should NOT have called for a special election. If he wanted reform, he should have tried to get re-elected (in a real election) and THEN use another REAL election for his props. I can't believe all you conservatives don't want his neck for the absolutely clear waste of CA money that went into this election. Conservatives are supposed to reduce gov't spending aren't they...

Salty

iTrader: (14)

I realize all this but still feel somewhat bad for him. I think of it like the guy at an event that starts clapping but fails to get the entire audience in a standing ovation. Although his intentions were good, nobody followed his lead. Oh well!

SilverScoober02

The kindergarten cop reference is killing me......

MVWRX

iTrader: (1)

"You lack discipline" hahaha

VIBEELEVEN

iTrader: (2)

"I'm a cop you idiot!"

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/arnolds2.html

ipozestu

iTrader: (18)

CA is screwed!!! "Get out while you can" that's all I can say. You place a guy in office who promises reform, he creates a ballot for you knuckle heads to initiate reform, because your F'd up electorate couldn't find thier way out of a paper bag, then you shoot him down on every measure he proposes. "oh yea we want change, just not that kind" give me an F'n break!!!!. "We don't like guns, so lets make it a law in San Franfreako to outlaw pistols" Uh yea, criminals they really obey the law don't they. IDIOTS!!! The only thing you did was allow the courts to prosecute an innocent man from defending himself or his family from pigs, rapists, felons, junkies,. Disgusting, simply disgusting. Just wait, the NRA will fight this and win, and suck the hell out of San Franfreako's treasury. I sure that's ok with all of you because a proposition for a tax increase in San Francisco County is just what you need. Enjoy it jack azzes.