"Total Recall" or "Homeland of the Living Dead"?

[omega minimo]

Could we harness the energy that will be expended in drumming up a recall of the Gubernator to focus on extreme and urgent national issues? And would we want to? :dilemma:

Why recall?
Will it work?
Is it worth the expense of time, money and energy?
Do we need to wake people up to the dangerous precipice that the nation is on?
Given the difficulty of waking people up to the dangerous precipice that the nation is on, are local/state efforts more doable?
Why recall?

[ronnykmarshall]

1. It won't work.

It's too late. Work on defeating him this November and then in November 2006.

[omega minimo]

3. Right. What about all that energy being generated put to better use?

[cascadiance]

4. The best use would be to get the vote out to defeat all of his props...

That is a measure of how disgusted California is with his rule that won't be ignored. Not to mention, the more Dems we get to turn out for this special election compared to the righties, the more we can have other candidates/measures win that are piggy-backing onto this election. For example, here in San Diego, we're electing a mayor and two more council people here. I'd like to focus on helping make San Diego blue, which would be a good side effect of getting many voters motivated to get out and vote down all of his props!

[omega minimo]

6. That's right. Okay. Good.

I see recall for recall's sake as short-sighted and ineffective-- didn't want to see all that civic enthusiasm get wasted....

[cascadiance]

2. This topic has been discussed further down already...

Even though many of us would LOVE to recall the Gropenator, now is not the time to do it:

1) A recall election before the 2006 elections would have to be either:
- the same election as the primary election in June to avoid spending extra money on it. This however could lead to some great confusion in how candidates can run both for a primary for governor in 2006 and as a final candidate for the recall at the same time... If you have different people winning the primary and the recall, that creates added problems as to who should run in 2006. Not to mention you only get 5 months of them being in office, and it might not be the person we'd ideally want in anyway with it being a plurality deciding the vote instead of a majority.
- a special election could be called earlier for the recall. But in addition to the expense of the signature gathering and many other parts of a recall, the added expense of yet another special election would completely deflate our criticism of this election he's called as being a wasteful expenditure of much needed state money, which will continue to sting him until next election, especially if none of his measures pass.
2) I think for the expense and added effort you go through, you might actually help get Arnold more sympathy from some in the middle rather than the anger if we do it the "normal" way of getting him out in 2006.

Leave the recall alone for now. If we need a recall, it would be to wait until after something suspicious somehow managed to get him elected in 2006. Then that would be the appropriate time for a recall.

[omega minimo]

5. Thank you. I spotted that too late. Looks like a good discussion

I will read.

What I am puzzling over-- after hearing talk radio and Mr. M talking about a grassroots upsurge in favor of a recall-- is:

What a shame. What a waste. Misguided energy. Maybe it makes people feel better. Like they felt better yanking Davis. As if "any change is good change."

What I'm suggesting is-- how to hook up with all that political activism of the grassroots, JQ Public, and link with the Big Picture issues?