05-08-2003 01:02									#1
	More legal maneuvering in California Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I thought this one was pretty good. As most of you know Govornor Grey Davis will have to face a recall election in the next two months and as many as 60 candidates have lined up to run for his office. Having so many candidates running for govornor means that it is very possible, even likely, that if Davis is recalled his replacement will have a very small percentage of the total vote.

Lately Davis's legal team has been feverishly trying to figure out how to save the Govornor's political career and keep him in the Govornor's seat. It appears they might have just found the loop hole which will allow them to do just that. You see the California Supreme Court has ruled that the recall and then the replacement vote are two seporate elections so it is possible for a person to vote no on the recall but still vote for who they'd like to be govornor incase the recall succeeds (a right wing republican group had argued that anyone who voted no on the recall didn't have a right to vote for the next govornor. Luckily, the court throw the Republican plot to disinfranchise half the state's voters out). So what does this mean to Davis? It means that legally Davis can officially run as a replacement for his own recall since the recall and the election are two seporate elections.

Polsters are saying that dispite Davis's low poll standings in the polls he might actually get the most votes because the other 50 candidates will split the other votes up in so many ways that Davis would win the election. What do you guys think? Will Davis be recalled and then win the election to replace himself?

This is to damn good!

	05-08-2003 01:06									#2
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Actually, the state recall law PRECLUDES the incumbent from being on the replacement ticket, THAT is what he is sueing to have changed.

	05-08-2003 01:10									#3
	Remove this text

I think the key word in the law is "replace"

	05-08-2003 01:19									#4
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Actually, your characterization of the "Republican plot to disenfranchise half the voters" is incorrect. The existing statute provided that if people do not vote on the recall question at all (i.e. they don't vote "no" nor do they vote "yes") then any vote for a replacement candidate would be invalid.

The Davis hacks sued to challenge that provision (part of what they're doing is looking for avenues to challenge the election result on appeal, part of what they are doing is looking to simply delay. None of what they are doing relates to voter enfranchisement.) so that anyone who failed to punch, or mispunched, the question on the recall still pick a candidate, even though they didn't vote on the recall question at all.

They are not two separate elections per se - they are two separate ballots on the same election, i.e. independent questions to be decided by the voters.

Davis can not run as a candidate - his campaign has already taken the position that as he is not a "candidate for elective office" that campaign finance and contribution limit rules don't apply to him, so he's been soliciting six-figure donations (in violation of the state cap of $21,000.00 for personal contributions for candidates for elective office).

Recall the greaseball!

	05-08-2003 01:19									#5
	Get a bigger avatar today!

"(a right wing republican group had argued that anyone who voted no on the recall didn't have a right to vote for the next govornor. Luckily, the court throw the Republican plot to disinfranchise half the state's voters out). So what does this mean to Davis? It means that legally Davis can officially run as a replacement for his own recall since the recall and the election are two seporate elections. "

This doesn't make sense.
If people voted on a recall, they are voting against Davis, why would he need to be on the replacement ballot?
Nobody would be "disenfranchised", but it is a blantent attempt by Davis to bamboozle the electorate.
I can't see how anyone could claim they are losing their vote, if you want Davis, you vote NO to the recall, or is this beyound the ability of California Democrats to comprehend?

	05-08-2003 01:24									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: if you want Davis, you vote NO to the recall, or is this beyound the ability of California Democrats to comprehend?

Half of them can't even read!

	05-08-2003 01:25									#7
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Hey, Yank.

The California Dem party knows that more than half the registered rank and file want the bastard out, so they're trying to make as much confusion as possible in the issue.

So much for the "moral high ground" *****ing about Florida.

	05-08-2003 01:28									#8
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Hey Reb, you left us hanging at the joint, need to pop in more.

The kruat syster has taken to putting me on ignore, I always beat that bum, now he can't even face the music anymore.

	05-08-2003 01:31									#9
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

My new office setup will have five comps in it, so I'll have one exclusively for running BS like 'poly and FFZ.

Right not, I've got too many windows going at once to keep track. I'll be over there a bit later though.

	05-08-2003 01:32									#10
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: None of what they are doing relates to voter enfranchisement

Attempting to set up a system where 50% of the legal voters will not be able to cast votes upon who will become govornor is the very definition of disenfranchisement. Parse words all you want but that fact will remain the same.

to the state Supreme Court for seeing through the bullshit.

	05-08-2003 01:34									#11
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

If you vote "no" on the reelection you have voted for Davis, so where is the disenfranchamacallit?

	05-08-2003 01:36									#12
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Chris 62 This doesn't make sense. If people voted on a recall, they are voting against Davis, why would he need to be on the replacement ballot? Nobody would be "disenfranchised", but it is a blantent attempt by Davis to bamboozle the electorate. I can't see how anyone could claim they are losing their vote, if you want Davis, you vote NO to the recall, or is this beyound the ability of California Democrats to comprehend?

Chris: I will break it down for you. The court has ruled there is going to be two different elections occuring on the same day. Legally, Davis can run for the second election even if he loses the first election. Will he win either election? Who knows but I thought this issue was interesting enough to warrent a thread hear at poly.

	05-08-2003 01:37									#13
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin Attempting to set up a system where 50% of the legal voters will not be able to cast votes upon who will become govornor is the very definition of disenfranchisement. Parse words all you want but that fact will remain the same.

This seems to have you confused, so let's try it again.
If you want Gray Davis, you vote "NO" to recall.
Nobody is removing anything.

Reb, no problem, I know how it is.

	05-08-2003 01:39									#14
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin Chris: I will break it down for you. The court has ruled there is going to be two different elections occuring on the same day. Legally, Davis can run for the second election even if he loses the first election. Will he win either election? Who knows but I thought this issue was interesting enough to warrent a thread hear at poly.

Can you show me this ruling?

I'd like to see yet another example of the 9th circuit court over-writing state law to suit partisan politics.

	05-08-2003 01:41									#15
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

This is what I see on the wire:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...gu/davis_recall

That is NOT what you are saying Oerdin, are you getting a different story?

	05-08-2003 01:43									#16
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Japher If you vote "no" on the reelection you have voted for Davis, so where is the disenfranchamacallit?

The disenfranchisement occures when you refuse to allow someone to vote in the second election just because of the way they voted in the first election. Since they are two entirely seporate elections you cannot tie one to the other. Thus refusing to let people vote for govornor simply because they voted no on the recall would mean voters were being disenfranchised.

You might disagree but the court says you are wrong.

	05-08-2003 01:43									#17
	Suffering from ads?

Oerdin, do you have a link to the court order itself? I have a hard time understanding just how Grey Davis could run as candidate in the recall election.

In the meantime, let's all sing along to Bye, Bye Mr. Gray Davis...

http://www.recallgraydavis.com/Song.asp

	05-08-2003 01:44									#18
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Chris 62 This is what I see on the wire: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...gu/davis_recall That is NOT what you are saying Oerdin, are you getting a different story?

I'm reading the front page of the Sacramento Bee. Upper left hand corner. I also don't like Davis but I like to read about the ins and outs of all the legal wrangling.

	05-08-2003 01:47									#19
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Our courts suk.

	05-08-2003 01:47									#20
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Here's a link to the Sac Bee's web site.

http://www.sacbee.com/content/polit...p-8108570c.html

	05-08-2003 01:48									#21
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin I'm reading the front page of the Sacramento Bee. Upper left hand corner. I also don't like Davis but I like to read about the ins and outs of all the legal wrangling.

It seems somebody seems to have something wrong here:

http://www.sacbee.com/

You sure that's what your seeing?

	05-08-2003 01:51									#22
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

It says he filed suit, not that there was a ruling, which makes this comment :
"The court has ruled there is going to be two different elections occuring on the same day. "
wishful thinking or horse manure.

	05-08-2003 01:55									#23
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin Attempting to set up a system where 50% of the legal voters will not be able to cast votes upon who will become govornor is the very definition of disenfranchisement. Parse words all you want but that fact will remain the same.

You working for Davis now? If you want to talk "facts" then where do you get the 50% number?

If you want to talk "facts" read the filings in the case - they're on Lexis and Westlaw, you should be able to find them from the state supreme court's website as well.

Since there is nothing else on the election, it's doubtful even five percent of the voters would bother to vote, then skip the recall question entirely, while picking a candidate.

The section of the California Election Code challenged did not apply to those who would "no" on the recall, it only applied to those who didn't vote on the recall question at all.

The only bullshit is that coming from the Davis camp, but at least he's showing the electorate exactly what a sleazy greaseball he is.

	05-08-2003 01:56									#24
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Ok, you're right. The motion was filed but the ruling hasn't occured yet. Still, I remember reading about people being able to vote no on the recall and still vote for a replacement due to there being officially two elections.

	05-08-2003 01:57									#25
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: If you vote "no" on the reelection you have voted for Davis, so where is the disenfranchamacallit?

BINGO!

It makes no sense to be able to say you don't want a recall, and then be able to vote on who you want instead. If you voted NO, you don't want anyone instead! DUH!

quote: The section of the California Election Code challenged did not apply to those who would "no" on the recall, it only applied to those who didn't vote on the recall question at all.

Well that settles that anyway . So we were arguing over something that won't even take place... nice confusion tactic, Oerdin.

Chris: Totally correct... he filed suit, the Cali SC hasn't ruled on jack yet. Another confusion tactic by Oerdin on this issue, not that that is suprising .

	05-08-2003 01:58									#26
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin The disenfranchisement occures when you refuse to allow someone to vote in the second election just because of the way they voted in the first election. Since they are two entirely seporate elections you cannot tie one to the other. Thus refusing to let people vote for govornor simply because they voted no on the recall would mean voters were being disenfranchised. You might disagree but the court says you are wrong.

That wan't the issue at all.

If they voted "no" in the recall, they got to vote for whoever they wanted in case the recall succeeded. The people "disenfranchised" are those who don't vote at all on the recall question.

	05-08-2003 01:59									#27
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Well, I may have been off for a bit Imran, but that doesn't mean I lost my touch.

	05-08-2003 01:59									#28
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Imran: If it's another confusing thread then can you please tell me what's confusing about the first thread?

	05-08-2003 02:16									#29
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

You deliberately intended to confuse and spread lies by claiming the Republicans were being sneaky and being 'undemocratic'. Both positions are highly hilarious to take.

	05-08-2003 02:24									#30
	Put an end to popups!

Well, since we need to put the recall to a vote lets do it, and for his "replacement" include Davis, I don't really care. Hopefully people won't be dumb enough to Vote yes on the recall and then vote for Davis. Though it would be rather funny.