Zupponn wrote:When a million people in a state of over 4 million want to get a guy fired, then to you, it doesn't matter what the other 3 million people have to say? That's my biggest beef with the recall. They didn't need even a quarter of the state's population to start one.
They actually didn't need 1 million signatures, but they got a million. I can't find a clear number on voter turnout, but it was between 55% and 65%... among eligible voters. A far cry from 4 million people.
The voter turnout was about 75-76% according to what I could find. About 2.5 million people voted. I guess it's not 4 million, but what I was trying to say was that they needed only about half a million signatures or so, which seems like a very low number to me. And the signatures part? None of them were even verified because they weren't given enough time. After talking to some people who had started working on the verification process before they cancelled it, I found out that they were throwing out a surprising number of signatures, although I never could get a hard number or estimate from them.
Blitzen wrote:Corporate money does make a difference. In California Proposition 29 would increase the tax on cigarettes by $1, to $1.90. In March it was polling at 67%. It was narrowly defeated, 50.8% to 49.2%. Why the sudden change? The tobacco industry spend $47 million on ads.
Sure, for that might, but for this particular election, it really didn't.
Blitzen wrote:On your union hogwash: you're stupid. I don't know how else to put it. You're stupid, and you don't understand how unions work beyond the garbage propaganda you've been fed. Do you think union-busting balanced the budget? You're stupid. It's political strategy. Where giant corporations are the top spenders for Repubs, unions are top spenders for Dems. This is part of the Repub plan for the next election, and that's who it helps. No one else. You're stupid.
This is normally why I don't like discussions about tough issues. It normally just boils down to one person or the other just flaming. And just to answer you, no, I don't think union-busting balanced the budget, I think that cutting government spending balanced the budget. I do also understand how unions work, and I never said that they were never important or effective at one time, I just feel that they have become too corrupt to be as useful to workers as they could be today. They are more interested in making money than helping workers. In fact, I see very little difference between a union and a big corporation. Even then, do I want to disband unions? No, because I don't feel that it would be a smart idea. I really don't like collective bargaining though. I feel that collective bargaining is similar to a monopoly, which are outlawed in most, if not every, modern country in the world. Why should they have the right to force workers to join a union? If the union was so good, then the worker should be running to join them. If the worker doesn't want to join the union for whatever reason, then they should have the right to say no. I'm really for the rights of the worker on this issue more than anything (could be that libertarianism in me