well anything is better then the reps.
I think both sides have their share of defects. that’s why choosing between them almost always ends up being a choice of the lesser of two evils. I like the American Independent Party. they reflect more of my views. It stinks that getting a third party member has proved pretty much impossible. As for the illegals with driver’s licenses, he didn’t pass that, which may the latinos mad. i’m latina and i wasn’t offended in anyway. giving people who are here illegally some of the same rights as citizens is tantamount to shooting yourself in the foot.
well anything is better then the reps.
That was pretty weak… would you like Gray Davis is your governor? :o
if anyone wants Davis (i have a nickname for him but it might offend people) for governor they need to be sent to a shrink. that’s my opinion and it’s not gonna change, no matter how many people take offense.
@TG:
well anything is better then the reps.
That was pretty weak… would you like Gray Davis is your governor? :o
im in canada, I dont care how he treats you I care how he treats Canada
Lets talk about washington.
2nd highest unemployment.
NO charther schools
Massive budget defeciet.
LOw voter confidence in officials (rejected R-51 and supported I-776 in order to give the legislators/governor the finger)
And yet incumbents were almost always elected.
heh… how expected…
its a nation wide trend
wel herel in BC its all cuts
Heard today…
CA has a 35 billion $ deficit.
Davis plans on RAISING TAXES on cigarettes(POOR).
" " " " " " business(guess who’ll pay it).
" " " " " " a lot of other stuff (ANY HONEST CAian, please, feel free to add more taxes and cuts.)
Davis plans on CUTTING hospice care(POOR AND ELDERLY).
Davis plans on CUTTING 2000 CA GOV’T. jobs(YEAH! One thing right).
Let’s see…
According to 2001 economic data CA is the 7th largest economy in the world if separated from the US #s. If Gov. Davis can drag the economy enough then maybe the Democrats can win in 2004. Then Davis has a job in the Lieberman Administration as the Secretary of the Treasury.
…could be why the Democrats and Liberals in CA are not objecting…
You heard it here.
Well, Xi (Thats who the guest was), I wouldn’t accuse either party of playing the political business game any more than the other. Its just an ugly, inherent, part of American politics. For example, Dick Cheney would meet with American businessmen to talk about business, in the White House, in secret. When Congress asked what went on in one meeting with Enron executives, ole Dickey refused to answer. Can I find additional sources of Democrats doing the same thing? Of course. Its one of the reason we need people like Senator John Mccain, Jesse Ventura, and the late Paul Wellstone out there, good honest public servants.
Let’s see…
According to 2001 economic data CA is the 7th largest economy in the world if separated from the US #s. If Gov. Davis can drag the economy enough then maybe the Democrats can win in 2004. Then Davis has a job in the Lieberman Administration as the Secretary of the Treasury.
Errrr…. that’s 4th Largest Economy, Xi… :-?
Davis plans on RAISING TAXES on cigarettes(POOR).
" " " " " " business(guess who’ll pay it).
" " " " " " a lot of other stuff (ANY HONEST CAian, please, feel free to add more taxes and cuts.)
He doesn’t plan on raising taxes, he instead wants to raise FEES.
@TG:
Because he ran a 78 million dollar campaign while the Republicans were stupid enough to choose Bill Simon (with no money) instead of Ricahrad Riordan… How else? :-?
Just some of my usual provocation:
How can you call yourselves defenders of democracy when your winners of elections are not winners because of their program etc., but of how much money they have spent? That’s a “pecuniacracy” then….
How can you call yourselves defenders of democracy when your winners of elections are not winners because of their program etc., but of how much money they have spent?
Still a close raceeven though Simon didn’t win. It no way was Davis given a mandate. But even then, Davis was the incumbent and had name recognition, while Simon had several skeletons of how he ran his previous buisness. Had the Republicans chosen someone better (like Riordan), even with a smaller war chest, they would have won. Isn’t that sort of the same in Germany or any capitalist country? More money = more votes?
Simple enough F_alk, our election process is fatally flawed. Some people (Like Senator Mccain, and the late Senator Paul Wellstone) are trying to change this. Problem is, the majority of our politicians out there are products of the money-laden system.
Falk, plutocracy, not pecuniacracy.
Davis blew a lot of money to knock Riordian behind Simon, because Davis knew he couldn’t win against Riordian.
Seven out of the 11 richest senators are Democrats, including the top three richest. Democrat Senators are more likely to have married rather than earned their money, versus republican senators. THe average donation to the republican party is $50.
YB, then explain to me why the main opposition to the Camp. Finance reform bill was Republican? The only republicans who initially supported it were John Mccain and his close following.
Look at it this way. Republicans get their funding from the Oil lobby. Democrats get their funding from Unions.
Also, keep in mind, almost every single Senator, to the man(woman…) is a Millionaire.
It’s so interestingto watch these American political debates.
I didn’t say that the Republicans weren’t money whores. I just dispelling the myth that the Democrats are not plutocrats.
Its true that business funding is something like:
600 million Republicans
450 million Democrats.
The Democrats don’t actually get a lot of money or power from Unions. Unions don’t have much membership or money, the working class doesn’t vote much, even witht eh Democrats trying to buy their vote (setting up voter registration things at welfare places and telling the people if they vote Democrat they will get a welfare raise).
They do get a lot of money from Rich TRial lawyers whom have helped raise the cost of healthcare via Democrat loopholes.
I didn’t say that the Republicans weren’t money whores. I just dispelling the myth that the Democrats are not plutocrats.
Its true that business funding is something like:
600 million Republicans
450 million Democrats.
The Democrats don’t actually get a lot of money or power from Unions. Unions don’t have much membership or money, the working class doesn’t vote much, even witht eh Democrats trying to buy their vote (setting up voter registration things at welfare places and telling the people if they vote Democrat they will get a welfare raise).
They do get a lot of money from Rich TRial lawyers whom have helped raise the cost of healthcare via Democrat loopholes.
Why don’t we compromise? Both parties are garbage.
