When conversations with friends turn to the news, no one ever brings up California’s gubernatorial recall election, now a mere month away.
That’s bad for Governor Gavin Newsom. It means his base isn’t fired up, even though polls show him in trouble. I suspect that’s because he doesn’t inspire passion (you won’t find many Newsomsexuals, even though he’s way hotter than Andrew Cuomo) and because his supporters assume there are so many more Democrats than Republicans in California he’ll win even if millions of Democrats don’t vote.
My impression is the recall springs from Newsom’s alleged “mishandling” of the pandemic, i.e. his issuance of lockdowns and mask mandates. But why not read the proponents’ Statement of Reasons for the Recall in its entirety and get the word straight from them? Their sentences are in italics, my responses in regular font:
Governor Newsom has implemented laws which are detrimental to the citizens of this state and our way of life.
Laws he endorsed favor foreign nationals, in our country illegally, over that of our own citizens.
I repeat: such as??? And what does it mean he endorsed the laws? The governor runs the state’s executive branch and either signs or vetoes legislation. He may endorse political candidates and propositions, but I don’t understand how that verb goes with the noun laws. I’ve heard of upholding laws — but isn’t that what every governor is supposed to do?
P.S. the words “that of” are superfluous.
People in this state suffer the highest taxes in the nation, the highest homelessness rates, and the lowest quality of life as a result.
Lower quality of life than Mississippi? Really? These conditions existed long before Newsom came along; wasn’t it Ronald Reagan who gave us chronic homelessness?
He has imposed sanctuary state status and fails to enforce immigration laws.
He unilaterally over-ruled the will of the people regarding the death penalty.
Newsom did suspend the death penalty in California. But in the last poll I saw, 44% of Californians would vote to abolish the death penalty and only 35% would vote to keep it, with 21% undecided, so suspending the death penalty does not over-rule [sic] the will of the people.
He seeks to impose additional burdens on our state by the following; removing the protections of Proposition 13, rationing our water use, increasing taxes and restricting parental rights.
This isn’t stuff he’s done, this is stuff you think he might do, which puts us in Minority Report territory. Plus, as regards rationing, I certainly hope he does something before we run out of water entirely.
P.S you need a colon, not a semi-colon, after the opening clause.
P.P.S. restricting parental rights? WTF is that code for?
Having no other recourse, we the people have come together to take this action, remedy these misdeeds and prevent further injustices.
I like the “we the people” flourish. Kinda makes you feel this is a second U.S. Constitution — written by people who think the phrase comes from the Declaration of Independence.
And hmm, not a single reference to the pandemic. Two references to illegal immigration, though. Which do you think is the proponents’ real bugaboo?
There’s no arguing with folks who, given a free shot, miss by a mile and congratulate themselves on their marksmanship. All you can do is outvote them. That may not happen — I think Newsom really is in trouble. But I’m not too worried, even though nearly all 46 candidates vying to replace him are less capable of governing than the recall proponents are of crafting a sound argument. There’s a regular gubernatorial election in November 2022, which Newsom or another center-left politician should win, meaning the recall victor will be in office only a year and change — and will face an overwhelmingly Democratic legislature. So even if the crackpots carry the day, I don’t expect much lasting damage.
Perhaps most Californians have come to the same conclusion, and that’s why they’ve been so blasé.