California Gubernatorial Election
So I’m curious if there are any other Californians here looking at the ballot for the recall of Governor Newsom and scratching their heads like me. A group of Trump supporters got up enough votes to hold a recall of the governor, and we have to vote in the next few weeks. The ballots arrived this week and there are 2 votes we have to make: 1) Should we recall the governor? And 2) Which of these 46 (not joking!) people should replace him. Unfortunately, of the 46 possible replacements, I’ve heard of 2 of them: Caitlyn Jenner and Angelyne. Neither appear to have any relevant experience. (I’ll give Ms. Jenner the benefit of the doubt that she’d at least give a voice to an underserved portion of the population, though.)
This opinion piece from the LA Times makes the point that if the recall succeeds, there are no viable Democratic candidates despite the state leaning Democrat by a 2 to 1 margin. (Furthermore, I can’t find any place that even has statements from each of the candidates like our elections usually do. Found it!)
I don’t know how likely the recall is to succeed, so it may be a non-issue, but I’m a little concerned that there could be some dumb situation where not enough people take it seriously and only people who are pissed that they have to wear masks vote and we end up with some far right talk show host as our governor for the next year and a half or more. Anyone else have a strategy here?
Another “Not a Californian” disclaimer, but I’ll say that I wouldn’t give Caitlyn Jenner the benefit of the doubt. She is choosing a very deliberate path in her campaign that isn’t aimed at helping the underserved.
Ugh. Wow, I wouldn't have guessed that. I'm just starting to make my way through the candidate statements. That's quite disappointing.
I mean, during the 2016 election she said she thought Trump "would be very good for women’s issues.” along with shorter opinions on Clinton.
Some of the statements are pathetic, a sentence or less.
And as for the numerous candidate statements referring to god, faith, pro-religion, etc.. In my opinion, religion belongs in the church, and possibly in your home if you choose to have it there. Religion does not belong in government, since we were not founded as a christian nation, and freedom of religion also includes freedom from religion.
Problem comes when vast swaths of legislature espose the exact opposite of these things, despite there being clear evidence in both the formal documents and the other writings of the founders to support what you say.
They saw how religion competes with government for power, and how important it was to maintain a secular government to insure multiple faiths could live in relative harmony.
I will continue to oppose them at every chance I get. Unfortunately, I'm just your average bear with no political connections to run for office. Well, maybe a bit smarter than, pic-i-nic baskets and all.
Yep.
You are not alone in that.
As someone who has had extensive experience as a polling place supervisor for the last 10+ years, let me at least warn you of this.
While you may not be able to prevent a "Yes" vote on the recall, it is vitally important that you make a choice as to who should replace Newsom if the recall succeeds, even if you vote NO. My personal vote (so far) is going to Joel Ventresca, if I must pick someone.
If the recall succeeds and you have not registered a vote on his replacement, then your vote will essentially mean very little.
Warn your friends about this!
Also, if, like me, you are not happy with the crop of possible candidates, don't forget that there is a list of "Qualified Write-In Candidates" and that this list is not final until September 3rd. The California Secretary of State website has a list of candidates (PDF, so I will not link directly) available here.
Note that write-ins specifically refer to "qualified" candidates. For example, by law, Newsom cannot add himself as an option, and writing in his name would be ignored.
Lastly, Ballotopedia has more information and possible research links.
https://ballotpedia.org/Gavin_Newsom_recall,_Governor_of_California_(2019-2021)
This is an absolute scam. A "No" vote should count as "Newsom" on the second question.
But I'll vote for anyone that's not a Republican just in case. Even if they're a weak candidate I don't want to reward the exploitation of this system.
If you vote NO and do not pick a replacement on the second question, then your vote is effectively Newsom, that is true.
However, if the YES votes win, then you have a choice - Have no say in the replacement, because you didn't pick anyone, or have some say in the replacement.
I am encouraging people to hedge their bets in case the YES vote wins, so that they get the full weight of their vote.
Also, totally unrelated, but from your name, it reminded me of something as a Star Trek fan. Try "Alexa (or whatever wake word you have set) "Tea earl grey, hot".
I mean if the first question passes and we go to the second question then the minority that voted to keep Newsom should automatically count as voting for him in the second question. This should just be one question: Who do you want to be governor?
...
By state law, a governor subject to a recall election cannot add his name as a candidate to the recall, so option 1 in your example could never happen.
I don't expect to have my comment effect any change. I'm saying what I hoped would be the case with no expectation of it being legally sound.
But even under that law a raw plurality isn't a great system. With 46 candidates and no run-offs or primaries we could see a governor elected by 2% of the people that show up to this special election. And that's probably well below 1% of the population of the state.
People bitch whine and moan over how they don't have direct votes for some offices (such as President) and then they bitch and whine and moan some more that direct votes that they do have are bad.
No matter how you do it, people will always complain.
The only way to fix that is to VOTE! There's no excuse; all voters in California are getting vote by mail ballots that are postage paid, and they're getting them almost a month in advance. They can be mailed back, they can be exchanged at polling locations for in-person votes, etc.
And get your friends to vote too, because not exercising your right to vote just perpetuates the feeling of helplessness. If you vote, you at least have the knowledge that you tried, that you did one of your civic duties.
I vote in every election and I already harass my friends to make sure they do too.
I'm pleased. That makes my 16 hour day (6am arrival and set up, open at 7am, polls close at 8pm, final ballot pickup, pack up, and clean up by 10pm) on election days a bit more bearable.
To be fair to them, people always assume a direct vote for president will only have 2 main choices, where just setting up a "most votes win" practice is assumed to be one where the winner gets a 50% majority by default. Of course, this is ignorant of multiple choice elections like the one in CA, there are better ways like STV/RCV or approval voting for example.
I have worked with voters long enough that "to be fair" is no longer in my vocabulary.
We can stick a thing that says "Hey! This election uses Ranked Choice Voting! Here's how it works!" in their election information guide that every single registered voter gets mailed, plus in their vote by mail envelopes, plus in the voting booths.. and if that's still not enough, we have a dedicated phone number every single election manned by lots of pollworkers who will explain things, answer questions, etc. Hell, voters could just ask me or any other pollworker for help.
Do they read or do any of this? Guess.
Machine rejects ballot
"Sir/Ma'am, you can't vote for the same candidate more than once, or your vote in that contest will not count at all."
"Huh? What do you mean?"
sigh
Sadly, MoveOn.org is sending out information contrary to this. After replying that I was voting No, they replied back to me:
As a person who has served extensively as a polling place supervisor, I can tell you with certainty that I am correct on how the relation between questions 1 and 2 work, even if you vote NO on question 1.
Note that they explicitly do not address what happens if you vote NO but Newsom is recalled.
If you choose not to follow my advice, understand that you may lose some say over the future Governor, if Newsom is successfully recalled.
Just to be clear then, "No" plus a suggestion means you oppose the recall, but have a suggestion if it passes?
I guess I can't understand why the Democrats wouldn't want to also back a candidate just in case.
They did that in the last recall and it ended badly with the Democratic vote split between 2 candidates, and all the Republican votes on Schwarzenegger, who ended up winning.
That is correct.
Oh I'm 100% following your advice.
I can just see that the CA Dem party is not even going to communicate what you are saying out to people. Likely because they don't want to show as endorsing another candidate or muddying the water for people who don't understand how the recall works.
Another Californian checking in.
Here is my take on the Democrats listed on the Ballot:
Holly Baade
that's her... hang on, that's her in the hippie bikini, but it's a business website.
Her campaign website is here, where we learn she founded Joyful Warrior Yoga offering classes in Movement, Meditation & Meaning. Her platforms include:
In her first 90 days she will
So I clearly can't vote for her.
John Drake...
John says
Which is relevant, because for John, middle school was all of five years ago.
John is a member of the LGBTQIAP+ community.
Platforms include
Curiously, under environmental issues, John states
He doesn't elaborate on what he considers common sense, but for $50 you can buy this snazzy campaign t-shirt. The shirts tagline is: Submissive and breedable.
So I clearly can't vote for him.
Patrick Kilpatrick
Because California needs another failed movie star as governor?
No wait, that is his personal website. It's touting his book Dying for Living.
Hang on, this looks like the campaign website , except there isn't a lot there.
He ran as a Republican in 2018. I wonder if he was simply confused.
His platform includes
I realize Patrick has had a hard time getting parts in decent movies, but when did film production leave California?
I particularly like his announcement of his run for Governor
Details. Pesky, minor details. Who needs em when you have common-sense, I guess.
I am not comfortable voting for him.
Jacqueline McGowan
Her platform was originally
But then
I mean, some people say they are honest, others just show they are honest?
Key platforms include Housing, COVID, Cannabis, Justice, Fire and Water. Actually, for someone who openly admits they are winging it, she has a fairly decent platform.
OK, she is on my short list.
Kevin Paffrath
Because California wants another real estate mogul, social media genius as a political leader?
You can watch some of his videos on stopthebullship.com
StopTheBullship has some cool merch, coinstack shirts, to the moon shirts, diamond hands shirts and... oh yeah, vote paffrath shirts.
Platform includes
As a realtor, he clearly has no conflict of interests there.
Plus he has that narcissistic social media self promoting real estate mogul vibe about him...
I am definitely not comfortable voting for him.
Armando Perez-Serrato
OK, not entirely professional, but... wait, why is he saying the Mandalorian should be governor? Oh. That's his nick name?
Did he get confused when he checked the box for Democrat?
I don't see any reference to building a wall, and he is pro universal healthcare, so he is slightly different from Trump?
So I clearly can't vote for him.
Brandon Ross Wow... That is definitely... a photo. Of Brandon. I think it's the first photo of someone who looks like a generic politician. It's so big though.
Novel approach to showing you are honest.
Sounds good. Platforms include
Wait what?
I am not comfortable voting for him.
Joel Ventresca
Finally.
OK
Sounds good. Key platforms include
OK, it's a little light, lets see what else he has...
Ummmmm, OK?
What?
I particularly like "unemployment (failure to answer phones)"
Normally I wouldn't consider voting for a crazed homeless person for governor, but my short list is very short...
Daniel Watts
His platform includes
Wait. That's it????
Yup. That's it.
I think for me, its a tie between Jackie and Daniel. Single issue candidates are relatively harmless.
Wow, thank you. This is an awesome jumping off point. My ballot arrives in the next day or two and I've been dreading the waste of time researching these twits. You've definitely saved me some time as now I just need to very quickly confirm these quotes and move on!
I also reviewed all the other candidates.
The Republicans all seem to share a deep and abiding interest in lowering taxes and reducing regulations. Some of them have interesting thoughts on investing in water and road infrastructure. Their solutions to homeless varies from enforcement of existing laws to building more housing to solving the underlying mental illness challenges. One of them wanted to do all of the above (cut taxes and spend heavily on infrastructure.)
My two favorite independents are
Kevin Kaul whose platform seems be mainly based on the fact that he got photographed with Obama and also with Clinton, plus was part of the business delegation in Kazakhstan (VERY NICE!)
Angelyne whose platform is something to do with partying, dogs, pizza and chocolate. I'm not really sure. I definitely need to research her more.
The photos on Kevin's page under the "What the People Say" [translated] heading looked interesting, so I did a reverse image search and I see that Emma is quite accomplished. She's a doctor, package delivery driver, businesswoman, pharmacist, realtor, associated with Walden University
Thomas is also quite accomplished, he's a job seeker, but he must be just looking for yet another job as he's a florist, student of the danish language, and credit advisor.
Patrick is a cancer patient advocate, plumber, construction worker, handsome medical doctor, and smiling handsome man who holds teddy bears.
With supporters like that, I can't imagine not voting for Kevin!
The quotes are the best bits
What project? I thought Kevin was running for governor.
I do too!
He is a great fighter.... and creates both peace and work through his fighting?
I'm honestly concerned that Angelyne will win due to many people voting for her as a joke.
California's recall mechanism is fundamentally unfair and must be reformed (some have even gone so far as to call it unconstitutional [1]). Hypothetically Gavin Newsom could be supported by 49.9% of voters yet Caitlyn Jenner could prevail with just 2.2% (!!) of the vote.
Compounding that issue are the facts that:
Republicans could push hard for a recall election every cycle at the cost of a quarter billion dollars per attempt, and from a political strategy standpoint, that would be a perfectly rational thing to do.
But that would still be a stupendous waste of money.
This is the sixth recall attempt against Newsom alone.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_California_gubernatorial_recall_election
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gavin-newsom-recall-california-governor/
I'm sensing a theme here, with republicans and being bad stewards of the public money, nationally speaking.
Obligatory “Not a Californian” disclaimer.
Somewhat related, my understanding is the reason the Democrats did not put forward or encourage better candidates is memories of the 2003 Recall, where Democrats split the vote in the second half of the question, and Arnie ended up winning. Some suspect the objective this time around was to discourage Democratic fencesitters from voting yes in favor of recall (i.e., if Newsom gets recalled, you will get a Republican).
If I were in your shoes, I would vote for either the highest polling Dem (I think Kevin Paffrath is currently in that spot) or a stomachable Republican (I’d pick former SD mayor Kevin Faulconer).
Something that caught my eye in that:
Emphasis mine. What an breathtaking waste of money!
Oh absolutely. It was a waste of money the last time we did it, too. I'm all for giving voters the ability to express their needs and opinions, but we need to be mindful of the costs as well.
My ballot was just mailed yesterday, so I don't have it yet. I need to start seriously researching who to put in for the alternate if the stupid thing passes, but I sure hope that it does not. From what I've seen so far, the alternatives look like an absolute mess. Our recall system seems broken in that it allows a very small number of people to trigger a recall (worse, the deadline for this one was extended, making it easier) and then allows for a very small plurality to select the alternative. Newsom isn't perfect, far from it, but he's not doing a bad job given the circumstances. Yeah, he was an idiot who went out in public while pushing for lockdown mandates, but I think the real issue is a vocal minority who hate democrats no matter what who took advantage of the anger that a slightly larger minority had about being asked to practice a little bit of civic duty.
Oh, and Caitlyn is a horrible choice -- her political views disgust me. Supported Trump, spoke at the RNC and CPAC (and unsurprisingly wasn't accepted there either), has publicly supported Ted Cruz, etc. I strongly suspect that she's in it for the publicity as that appears to me to be her primary motivation for everything I've ever seen her do, though to be fair, I try my hardest to avoid celebrity news so my knowledge of her actions are limited to what I've heard of her political interactions -- but anybody who supports such vile people as Trump and Cruz has zero respect from me.
Speaking from someone who has only occasionally heard of the Newsom recall vote, can anyone remind me why a recall has been called for again?
A segment of the population feels that he handled the pandemic poorly. By which I mean, a bunch of conspiracy-driven Trump supporters are upset that he followed mask mandates (sort of), and didn't open everything up a few weeks after the original shelter-in-place orders in March, 2020.
Then how did this recall get 40 or so % support vote and growing to the point of the recall actually being competitive in such a Democratic state? I always assumed there was a better reason behind it and that it was like the people asking for Cuomo to be replaced?
I don’t think that’s what it needs. This appears to be the requirements (according to the secretary of State’s website):
So 12% (or 20%) of the number of votes in the last election for that office (if I’m reading it correctly). If 1/3rd of voters are Republican and there are some Democrats who also want to open things up because it’s hurting their business or whatever, it wouldn’t be that hard to reach either. Voter turn out for local elections is normally pretty small to begin with, so 12% (or 20%) of that is probably fairly easy. It looks like 12 million people voted in the 2019 gubernatorial election, so we’re talking about 1.4 million for 12% or 2.4 million for 20%. There are ~40million people in the state.
Is there even a remote possibility the recall succeeds?
Yes.
Out of curiosity why is it called "gubernatorial" rather than "governatorial"? Would the latter refer to something related to government rather than governorship?
According to Wiktionary, it’s from the Latin word “gubernātor” which means “governor”. It look like the word “governor” comes from the same word, but went through a few transformations via old French and Middle English. I’m not sure why one form of the word mutated more than the other. It seems like one of those quirks of language.
I'm an ex Californian and I'm just kind of baffled by the whole ordeal. I'm assuming it's a shady republican power grab but I haven't looked that much into it.
Precisely. Just like the last one.