I personally didn't think race was mentioned as an issue on a personal level at all.It never even ocurred to me at all until I read about it in this thread.
Bustamante mentioned his upbringing and I saw nothing wrong with that. In fact I found it very interesting. "The Central California Kid Who Grew Up to Become Governor". Someone take that script to Ahhnold.
Several points that were mentioned during the debate that I felt were of great interest are the following.
It was said that no new universities have been built in California in 30 years. That is a serious problem I believe in a state such as California. If California is to lead in an economy where education is key to economic expansion the state must once again create a long term plan with the priority to expand the numnber of universities and colleges.
It was said in the debates that when Reagan was Governor of the state at that time 20% of the budget went to structure such as roads, water plants, and universities and now about 1% of the budget goes to such. That is a very clear indicator of priorities being mishandled by the CA government over the years since that time.
It was said in the debates that the state of Texas has now passed California as the number one exporting state in the union (I was unaware of that) this is not a good trend for the state of California to witness.
From the sound of the discussion regarding control at the state level in California it comes across to me the balance is far too centralized and local county governments are locked with a bleak reality of unfunded mandates from a power grabbing ever growing central California state government. This needs addressing from the tone of the dicsussions.
These were note-worthy points of interest from my perspective.
Oh, how I wish Riordan had run instead of Arnold. He was a great mayor.
That said, I agree with Eugene in that McClintock definitely has the right plan for fixing California's budget crisis. He showed great knowledge of the issue from both the state and local levels. Really, this overrides all other issues as far as I'm concerned. Whether he supports Proposition XYZ or not, doesn't really matter since the people have the ultimate say with propositions and the Democrat controlled State Legislature can override him on the more sensitive issues. I feel that his budgetary plans however are very reasonable and have a good chance of seeing the light of day. He's the only one saying we should cut spending. All the rest are talking about taxes, and many Californians will have none of that. Unfortunately, I'm afraid we're too easily lost in all the other bs.
We'll see.
As for the other candidates (from left to right on the table):
Arnold: He's has no clue what he's doing.
Camejo: He wasn't specific enough with the budget crisis. I'm a proponent of a flat tax (which seemed to be what he was proposing), but his overall gameplan seemed very vague. Perhaps it was because he was more concerned with promoting a multiple party system (and Greens in particular) than with worring about winning. I'm not sure.
Huffington: Either she had the worst debate game plan in history or she's an idiot. Her ideas were so unclear and ill stated that I'm tempted to think it's the latter.
Bustamante: Raise taxes. I didn't need to hear any more. As stated by both Arnold and McClintock, the problem isn't revenue. Our taxes are outrageous out here. The problem is huge waste. For instance, our roads are crumbling, and we're planting mature (read $$$) trees and doing landscaping next to freeway on/off ramps instead of paving the roads. Brilliant. Yeah Cruz, you know what's going on. I did however like his proposal for workers comp. My initial impression is that it makes damn good sense.
What if US coalition forces invaded CA, threw out Davis, and then employed large US corporations to rebuild CA infrastructure while preparations are made for a new democratic state government?
Actually I thought it was quite entertaining, much better than the Presidential Democratic primary where each and every one of them seemed to try to pander to any group they could think of. I didn't see any one of them as being leadership material except perhaps for Kerry.
I thought Arnold held his own quite well. McClintock actually performed the best but he's a tad too conservative for my tastes (I am pro-choice and pro-gun control). The others and their shameless pandering to the illegal immigrant lobby was truly ugly.
Arnold is the best of the lot.....................................
Please. Take Ahhnold's script away and he's like a deer in the headlights. He speaks in generalities. No substance at all. At least we know what McClintock is about. We don't know where Ahhnold stands on anything yet, so how can you say you like him better than McClintock right NOW?
I don't know what the "illegal immigrant lobby" is, so I can't comment on it. Does anyone know if Ahhnold was ever an illegal alien (overstaying his visa etc)?
Bustamante mentioned his upbringing and I saw nothing wrong with that. In fact I found it very interesting. "The Central California Kid Who Grew Up to Become Governor". Someone take that script to Ahhnold.
And at the same time, he runs an ad saying Schwarzenegger doesn't know what it's like to be a normal person with a dream. Either he's being hypocritical or trying to emphasize his ethnic background vs Schwarzie's. You may not think he was eliciting racially motivated votes, but the loudest claps of the debate where heard after Bustamante and Camejo rebutted McClintock statement on the subject. It's Bustamante's only real chip, but it's a big one.
And at the same time, he runs an ad saying Schwarzenegger doesn't know what it's like to be a normal person with a dream. Either he's being hypocritical or trying to emphasize his ethnic background vs Schwarzie's. You may not think he was eliciting racially motivated votes, but the loudest claps of the debate where heard after Bustamante and Camejo rebutted McClintock statement on the subject. It's Bustamante's only real chip, but it's a big one.
I haven't seen that ad so I can't comment on it. You're giving two choices for what the ad might mean, so you're not sure what it means either. I don't think Bustamante needs to "play the race card" . California hispanics vote democratic at a very high percentage(I believe around 80%)and I believe he can address them directly in Spanish. Sorry. The race card deal is a non-issue.
Arnold is clueless. If we really care about the "health" of the State we should vote for the best qualified candidate. Voting for a popular actor just because his popularity could propel him to partisan victory is just a fair reflection of what this Recall is about. 2004 politics.
I hope McClintock stays in the race and whoops Ahhnold's ass.
I love California, I wouldn't want to live anywhere else in the world(well maybe some tropical paradise when I'm older...so long as I have wi-fi internet )
This debate was an absolute joke.
Bustamante was pretty good, I liked the way he talked, he seemed the most "now let's think about this" rational there. Peter Conejo had some good points, and certainly addressed some things upfront about the whole republican agenda.
on the whole however, everyone was like a bunch of yapping dogs, the barely gave anyone else any room to breath. what I saw of Mclintock though he seemed pretty reserved, let people speak and all that.
Ahnuld was just the entertainer of the bunch, "your loopholes are so big I could drive my hummer through it" :lol
I think it would be REALLY funny if on the voting day everyone voted NO to having a recall in the first place
I love California, I wouldn't want to live anywhere else in the world(well maybe some tropical paradise when I'm older...so long as I have wi-fi internet )
This debate was an absolute joke.
Bustamante was pretty good, I liked the way he talked, he seemed the most "now let's think about this" rational there. Peter Conejo had some good points, and certainly addressed some things upfront about the whole republican agenda.
on the whole however, everyone was like a bunch of yapping dogs, the barely gave anyone else any room to breath. what I saw of Mclintock though he seemed pretty reserved, let people speak and all that.
Ahnuld was just the entertainer of the bunch, "your loopholes are so big I could drive my hummer through it" :lol
I think it would be REALLY funny if on the voting day everyone voted NO to having a recall in the first place
Yes, that's a fair assessment. McC has ideas though. He has a plan. Believe it or not I am leaning against the Recall. Davis may suck, but it's not like we've had a lot of great governors to begin with. This is all about having control of the state for the Pres. elections in 2004 and I don't like that. Hopefully the voters will realize that the candidates (except for maybe McC and maybe, just maybe Bustamante) are even worse clowns than Davis and that recalling a Gov. who won an election 9 or 10 months ago could be the opening of Pandora's box.
The Recall should've happened 9 months ago.
What the hell, let Ahhnold win and then let's just recall him for fun.
It was said that no new universities have been built in California in 30 years.
This is incorrect. There might be others, but California State University, San Marcos began operating in 1990 and the first buildings were opened in 1992. CSU Monterey Bay opened in 1995. CSU Channel Islands opened in 2002. The University of California, Merced campus was supposed to open this year, I think, but that is delayed due to budget problems.
Edit: That said, I didn't listen to the debate and don't know the context behind the original statement or who said it.
This is incorrect. There might be others, but California State University, San Marcos began operating in 1990 and the first buildings were opened in 1992. CSU Monterey Bay opened in 1995. CSU Channel Islands opened in 2002. The University of California, Merced campus was supposed to open this year, I think, but that is delayed due to budget problems.
Edit: That said, I didn't listen to the debate and don't know the context behind the original statement or who said it.
FCiB missed a modifier. It was more like "no top universities had been built" since whenever.
McClintock was the most knowledgable...but he's unelectable and those cross eyes really crack me up.
Ahhhnold was generally good...vague, but good. He shouldn't have engaged Huffington so much.
All in all, I'd say Arnold benefitted the most....Huffington the least, followed by McClintock (though again, he obviously knows what he's doing). Cruz was the big loser on this one.
Comments
Bustamante mentioned his upbringing and I saw nothing wrong with that. In fact I found it very interesting. "The Central California Kid Who Grew Up to Become Governor". Someone take that script to Ahhnold.
It was said that no new universities have been built in California in 30 years. That is a serious problem I believe in a state such as California. If California is to lead in an economy where education is key to economic expansion the state must once again create a long term plan with the priority to expand the numnber of universities and colleges.
It was said in the debates that when Reagan was Governor of the state at that time 20% of the budget went to structure such as roads, water plants, and universities and now about 1% of the budget goes to such. That is a very clear indicator of priorities being mishandled by the CA government over the years since that time.
It was said in the debates that the state of Texas has now passed California as the number one exporting state in the union (I was unaware of that) this is not a good trend for the state of California to witness.
From the sound of the discussion regarding control at the state level in California it comes across to me the balance is far too centralized and local county governments are locked with a bleak reality of unfunded mandates from a power grabbing ever growing central California state government. This needs addressing from the tone of the dicsussions.
These were note-worthy points of interest from my perspective.
Fellowship
That said, I agree with Eugene in that McClintock definitely has the right plan for fixing California's budget crisis. He showed great knowledge of the issue from both the state and local levels. Really, this overrides all other issues as far as I'm concerned. Whether he supports Proposition XYZ or not, doesn't really matter since the people have the ultimate say with propositions and the Democrat controlled State Legislature can override him on the more sensitive issues. I feel that his budgetary plans however are very reasonable and have a good chance of seeing the light of day. He's the only one saying we should cut spending. All the rest are talking about taxes, and many Californians will have none of that. Unfortunately, I'm afraid we're too easily lost in all the other bs.
We'll see.
As for the other candidates (from left to right on the table):
Arnold: He's has no clue what he's doing.
Camejo: He wasn't specific enough with the budget crisis. I'm a proponent of a flat tax (which seemed to be what he was proposing), but his overall gameplan seemed very vague. Perhaps it was because he was more concerned with promoting a multiple party system (and Greens in particular) than with worring about winning. I'm not sure.
Huffington: Either she had the worst debate game plan in history or she's an idiot. Her ideas were so unclear and ill stated that I'm tempted to think it's the latter.
Bustamante: Raise taxes. I didn't need to hear any more. As stated by both Arnold and McClintock, the problem isn't revenue. Our taxes are outrageous out here. The problem is huge waste. For instance, our roads are crumbling, and we're planting mature (read $$$) trees and doing landscaping next to freeway on/off ramps instead of paving the roads. Brilliant. Yeah Cruz, you know what's going on. I did however like his proposal for workers comp. My initial impression is that it makes damn good sense.
What if US coalition forces invaded CA, threw out Davis, and then employed large US corporations to rebuild CA infrastructure while preparations are made for a new democratic state government?
Originally posted by steve666
Actually I thought it was quite entertaining, much better than the Presidential Democratic primary where each and every one of them seemed to try to pander to any group they could think of. I didn't see any one of them as being leadership material except perhaps for Kerry.
I thought Arnold held his own quite well. McClintock actually performed the best but he's a tad too conservative for my tastes (I am pro-choice and pro-gun control). The others and their shameless pandering to the illegal immigrant lobby was truly ugly.
Arnold is the best of the lot.....................................
Please. Take Ahhnold's script away and he's like a deer in the headlights. He speaks in generalities. No substance at all. At least we know what McClintock is about. We don't know where Ahhnold stands on anything yet, so how can you say you like him better than McClintock right NOW?
I don't know what the "illegal immigrant lobby" is, so I can't comment on it. Does anyone know if Ahhnold was ever an illegal alien (overstaying his visa etc)?
Originally posted by Gilsch
Bustamante mentioned his upbringing and I saw nothing wrong with that. In fact I found it very interesting. "The Central California Kid Who Grew Up to Become Governor". Someone take that script to Ahhnold.
And at the same time, he runs an ad saying Schwarzenegger doesn't know what it's like to be a normal person with a dream. Either he's being hypocritical or trying to emphasize his ethnic background vs Schwarzie's. You may not think he was eliciting racially motivated votes, but the loudest claps of the debate where heard after Bustamante and Camejo rebutted McClintock statement on the subject. It's Bustamante's only real chip, but it's a big one.
Originally posted by Eugene
And at the same time, he runs an ad saying Schwarzenegger doesn't know what it's like to be a normal person with a dream. Either he's being hypocritical or trying to emphasize his ethnic background vs Schwarzie's. You may not think he was eliciting racially motivated votes, but the loudest claps of the debate where heard after Bustamante and Camejo rebutted McClintock statement on the subject. It's Bustamante's only real chip, but it's a big one.
I haven't seen that ad so I can't comment on it. You're giving two choices for what the ad might mean, so you're not sure what it means either. I don't think Bustamante needs to "play the race card" . California hispanics vote democratic at a very high percentage(I believe around 80%)and I believe he can address them directly in Spanish. Sorry. The race card deal is a non-issue.
Arnold is clueless. If we really care about the "health" of the State we should vote for the best qualified candidate. Voting for a popular actor just because his popularity could propel him to partisan victory is just a fair reflection of what this Recall is about. 2004 politics.
I hope McClintock stays in the race and whoops Ahhnold's ass.
This debate was an absolute joke.
Bustamante was pretty good, I liked the way he talked, he seemed the most "now let's think about this" rational there. Peter Conejo had some good points, and certainly addressed some things upfront about the whole republican agenda.
on the whole however, everyone was like a bunch of yapping dogs, the barely gave anyone else any room to breath. what I saw of Mclintock though he seemed pretty reserved, let people speak and all that.
Ahnuld was just the entertainer of the bunch, "your loopholes are so big I could drive my hummer through it"
I think it would be REALLY funny if on the voting day everyone voted NO to having a recall in the first place
Originally posted by Wrong Robust
I love California, I wouldn't want to live anywhere else in the world(well maybe some tropical paradise when I'm older...so long as I have wi-fi internet
This debate was an absolute joke.
Bustamante was pretty good, I liked the way he talked, he seemed the most "now let's think about this" rational there. Peter Conejo had some good points, and certainly addressed some things upfront about the whole republican agenda.
on the whole however, everyone was like a bunch of yapping dogs, the barely gave anyone else any room to breath. what I saw of Mclintock though he seemed pretty reserved, let people speak and all that.
Ahnuld was just the entertainer of the bunch, "your loopholes are so big I could drive my hummer through it"
I think it would be REALLY funny if on the voting day everyone voted NO to having a recall in the first place
Yes, that's a fair assessment. McC has ideas though. He has a plan. Believe it or not I am leaning against the Recall. Davis may suck, but it's not like we've had a lot of great governors to begin with. This is all about having control of the state for the Pres. elections in 2004 and I don't like that. Hopefully the voters will realize that the candidates (except for maybe McC and maybe, just maybe Bustamante) are even worse clowns than Davis and that recalling a Gov. who won an election 9 or 10 months ago could be the opening of Pandora's box.
The Recall should've happened 9 months ago.
What the hell, let Ahhnold win and then let's just recall him for fun.
Originally posted by Moogs
Couldn't happen to a more deserving state....
california...the nations whipping boy
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
It was said that no new universities have been built in California in 30 years.
This is incorrect. There might be others, but California State University, San Marcos began operating in 1990 and the first buildings were opened in 1992. CSU Monterey Bay opened in 1995. CSU Channel Islands opened in 2002. The University of California, Merced campus was supposed to open this year, I think, but that is delayed due to budget problems.
Edit: That said, I didn't listen to the debate and don't know the context behind the original statement or who said it.
Originally posted by Skipjack
This is incorrect. There might be others, but California State University, San Marcos began operating in 1990 and the first buildings were opened in 1992. CSU Monterey Bay opened in 1995. CSU Channel Islands opened in 2002. The University of California, Merced campus was supposed to open this year, I think, but that is delayed due to budget problems.
Edit: That said, I didn't listen to the debate and don't know the context behind the original statement or who said it.
FCiB missed a modifier. It was more like "no top universities had been built" since whenever.
Huffington was ridiculously bad..and obnoxious.
McClintock was the most knowledgable...but he's unelectable and those cross eyes really crack me up.
Ahhhnold was generally good...vague, but good. He shouldn't have engaged Huffington so much.
All in all, I'd say Arnold benefitted the most....Huffington the least, followed by McClintock (though again, he obviously knows what he's doing). Cruz was the big loser on this one.
Originally posted by Wrong Robust
california...the nations whipping boy
New Jersey would have something to say about that.
Originally posted by Randycat99
My favorite part- when Ahhhnold says, "Well I've got a real good part for you in Terminator 4 then."
Agreed. I loved that too.
Originally posted by chu_bakka
So does California.
in what ways?
especially to say its on the same sucking level as New jersey. that is just ignorance.... New Jersey is in a sucking field of its own.