New Senate Map Heads to Court

Make that two giant gaping holes: (5.00 / 1)

All of the oral testimony given to the Commission at every hearing is summarized online.  All of the written testimony given to the Commission is available online.  The statements made by commission members during their discussions is available online.

"Irrationally and without explanation?"  Neither charge is true.  You can, from any Internet-connected computer, look it up.

To paraphrase Dorothy Parker, this is not a lawsuit that should be tossed aside lightly -- it should be hurled aside with great force.

---

by: Seneca Doane @ Fri Sep 16, 2011 at 17:14:06 PM UTC

counting your checkens (0.00 / 0)

Let's not count our chickens before they hatch

I have no doubt that the Reapportionment is Fair
I have no doubt that it will stand

But, I'm getting increasingly fearful of the 2012 elections
It is possible that Obama will lose California
Remotely
But, if he does, our Legislatures could look pretty similar to what they look like now

I'm expecting the Republicans to nominate some Worthless Bozo
But, sometimes worthless Bozos win
(see: Bush, George)

Stay tuned

---

by: frisco @ Fri Sep 16, 2011 at 23:31:45 PM UTC

name the republican candidate who wins 51% of CA (0.00 / 0)

and the coalition of voters to make it past the threshold. my guess is that obama wins CA by well over 10%, and if it's perry, obama will beat his 2008 #s.

---

by: wu ming @ Sat Sep 17, 2011 at 02:31:13 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

my two cents (3.50 / 2)

i voted for obama twice in 2008, i will NOT vote for him again-ive never voted for a republican but if someone put a gun to my head and said vote for obama or perry/romney-id vote for the latter.  obama was the biggest (but not the only one)reason i become a DTS instead of a Democrat-which i had always been. hell, i passed lawn signs out for Gov Dukakis when i was 6 yrs old in my little hometown in western PA.  i dont have any use for this guy-infact id rather have a gop president & a Dem congress. inparticular im very afraid of more of his "bipartisan" bullshit deals on medicare, trade, social security, etc-ive already seen enough of his "bipartisan" bullshit.

---

by: John Estok @ Sat Sep 17, 2011 at 04:11:37 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Obama Has Also Lost My Vote (0.00 / 0)

But I wouldn't vote Perry/Romney.  I'll find a decent third party candidate who best represents a progressive agenda and vote for that candidate.  If there are none, I will leave the top of the ticket blank.

---

by: CaliforniaCondor @ Sat Sep 17, 2011 at 16:01:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I support Obama (4.50 / 2)

After the 2008 campaign the Republicans were scared to death.  They saw the best campaigner in modern history rip through them like a buzz saw.  They feared that if he achieved anything that he promised, Democrats would control the country for a generation.

They decided that they would use every single arrow in their quiver, fair or unfair, to defeat anything the President decided to do.

Would it mean a watered down and largely ineffective healthcare plan?  Not a problem.  Would it mean that the financial institutions that melted our economy would remain largely unregulated? Not a problem.  Would it mean no meaningful response to global warming? Not a problem.  Would it mean defaulting on US Treasury debt?  Not a huge problem...maybe give an inch there.

They have achieved what they set out to achieve: making Obama appear ineffective.  Does this mean that they are qualified to run the country?  Not in my book.  Our system of government gives enormous rights to the minority party and the GOP used every single tool it could to frustrate the President and gave only a moment's thought to the suffering their actions caused.

Voting for a Republican is unthinkable.  I don't believe that Republicans are always wrong and Democrats are always right, but in general, Republicans are like a disease--just look at how the GOP crowd responded during the debates to issues like the death penalty, CPV, immigration and the uninsured.  

I don't want any of those people even close to electoral power.  If you don't like Obama, get over it.  There is a real disaster coming if we don't keep him.

---

by: smoker1 @ Sat Sep 17, 2011 at 16:46:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Motion Seconded (5.00 / 1)

I'd rather keep the Devil We know, than have our throats cut by the Repugs in Washington, who do need to be thrown out enmass as Repugs in Congress are the problem, Not the Solution. President Obama is at least pliable, unlike the Repugs from the Tea Party, who really want to destroy the USA and could care less about lowering the defense budget even by $1, McKeon I've been told is in favor of raising It to at least $716 Bn.

---

by: SuperJoker @ Sat Sep 17, 2011 at 22:43:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

HUH? (4.00 / 1)

They decided that they would use every single arrow in their quiver, fair or unfair, to defeat anything the President decided to do.

HUH?
The problem was that Obama didn't decide to do anything
He left everything up to Congress
and he asked the Democratic leaders to 'play nice' with their Republican friends
OBAMA DIDN'T LEAD
Obama was (IS) weak and cowardly
that's why he didn't get anything done
On HCR, Obama Killed the public option

I won't vote for Obama, again
Ralph Nader will do just fine

PS
The Reason Democratic politicians feel free to sell out their supporters is because we blindly support them
NO MATTER WHAT
(see: Clinton, NAFTA)

---

by: frisco @ Mon Sep 19, 2011 at 15:08:09 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Then (0.00 / 0)

How do explain why bills were filibustered in the Senate by Republicans? Democrats did not have a filibuster proof majority of 60 votes and still doesn't to this day, So why should You blame President Obama? Presidents are not Monarchs with unlimited power, Presidents can propose legislation if they want, represent the USA before the UN or some other meeting of Heads of State, sign bills into law or veto bills or sign treatys before sending them off to the Senate. Yes President Obama did try to be bipartisan, It's not a bad thing, gridlock is bad, You're sounding like You want all of something and not merely half or 2/3rds or whatever and that's not how bills are crafted, cause no one gets all of what they want, that's called consensus by the majority and that has to be within the agreed upon rules of the body in question, otherwise nothing gets done, As Presidents are not Dictators. So You were saying about the President?

Hillary Clinton would I'd think make a good president, but then the Repugs would just go after Her and without a Majority in the house and a filibuster proof majority in the Senate, why bother?

Besides the old lady wants to retire after Her term is up. So do You have anyone else in mind to replace President Obama with?

And It had better not be any of the Repugs, Their all certifiable.

---

by: SuperJoker @ Mon Sep 19, 2011 at 22:02:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Another Democrat (5.00 / 1)

I recall another Democratic President who tried to get Health Care Reform passed and didn't come close.  The primary criticism with the Clinton plan was that it was created outside of the legislative process.  We do have a legislature that is supposed to make laws, so Obama learned the lesson from the Clinton Administration and handed the ball off to Democrats in Congress.  

If you think that the President didn't put political capital on the line for health care reform, you have not been paying attention.

---

by: smoker1 @ Tue Sep 20, 2011 at 05:23:04 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Shades of Grey (0.00 / 0)

That's the issue.  Clinton's healthcare approach may have been too far outside the legislative process, but Obama's approach was also too detached.  There would have been a better medium.

---

by: CaliforniaCondor @ Tue Sep 20, 2011 at 13:42:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Name one (0.00 / 0)

That was better and that would have worked...

The only way at the Federal Level is through Congress, other way like We're used to here in California will not work at the Federal level, so what's left???

Please enlighten us as to what would have been a better medium, I dare Ya too...

---

by: SuperJoker @ Tue Sep 20, 2011 at 16:39:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Who knows what would have worked? (4.00 / 1)

But he could have used more leverage in the senate to stop people like Joe Lieberman from his antics.  He could have encouraged a vote for single payer instead of dropping it  before the negotiations began.

---

by: CaliforniaCondor @ Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 01:15:26 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Right there with you. (0.00 / 0)

I'm praying that Bloomberg or somebody moderate can join the race as a 3rd party.

---

by: duder @ Mon Sep 19, 2011 at 22:18:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

bloomberg is a Corporatist (5.00 / 1)

...not a moderate.  that just means yeah hell be prochoice & generally not align w the Christian Right-but hes a corporatist economically.  ive just become aware of a new book called Confidence Men by ron suskind & it has alot of what ive long suspected had/is going on in this administration.  this is a VERY conservative administration & thats one of the reason this president is suffering.  like in the 30s with the new deal-people want decisive action from govt that benefits the country-not just the typical special/$$$interests.  obama has not done this so far & alot of people (including myself) dont trust him or expect him to do so.  hes got a BIG (political)problem.  he looks ALOT like Jimmy Carter in 1979/80.  

---

by: John Estok @ Tue Sep 20, 2011 at 00:40:28 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well (0.00 / 0)

Is there anyone else to be a potential replacement Democratic nominee for 2012?

---

by: SuperJoker @ Tue Sep 20, 2011 at 03:42:42 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Where are all those "Sore Loserman" signs (4.00 / 1)

that were so annoyingly visible during the 2000 Florida Recount?

People also need to be reminded the law gave the Republicans
EQUAL representation with Democrats on the Commission,
even though they are a minority party in the state.

They hold only 15 of 40 Senate seats, 28 of 80 Assembly seats,
only 3 of the mayor's offices of our 10 largest cities,
and only 1/3 of all registered voters... jeebus!

Oops... I forgot. They have more money than God,
so I guess they do deserve a few extra representatives in government.

---

by: jjohnjj @ Fri Sep 16, 2011 at 23:36:22 PM UTC

Less than 1/3 (0.00 / 0)

The Republicans only have 30% of registered voters.  They would need 33% to have 1/3.

---

by: annie @ Sat Sep 17, 2011 at 04:17:39 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

and.... (0.00 / 0)

Democrats have 44% of registered voters.

---

by: smoker1 @ Sat Sep 17, 2011 at 16:33:09 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

but regularly win a big majority of DTS voters (0.00 / 0)

in contrast to republicans in CA.

---

by: wu ming @ Sat Sep 17, 2011 at 18:57:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

A bit of wishful thinking, Professor?... (0.00 / 0)

I think it is more of a mixed bag, these DTS voters, than you suggest...

In our 2010 Statewide election Brown and Whitman appear to have split 50/50 the DTS vote.  In fact, only Sec of State, Controller and Treasurer won a majority of the DTS to the Democrat side.  Republicans drew a majority of the DTS voters in the Lt. Gov., Public Instruction, Atty Gen and US Senator elections.  Ins Commish (along with Gov) split the DTS vote.

In 2008, it was BHO all the way to a big victory.  The only statewide candidate election that year.

In 2006, Republican won a majority of the DTS voters in every contest (Gov., Lt, Gov., Sec of State, Controller, Ins. Commish) except 1- DiFi's Senate seat.

Here's why I think we need to push hard and take nothing for granted in California-

1) Brown won only 40% of our Counties (yes, Whitman outpolled Brown in 35 Counties).  Thank you LA (you won't hear this Giants fan say that very often).

2) Obama approval rating in California is under 50%

3) in 2010, with all the election noise, still less than 60% of registered voter actually voted

There are millions of votes and potential votes up in the air.  We should take nothing for granted.... unless we want to howl and complain (which many do love to do).  The People want Leadership, not vitriol. (But I suspect that some of the latter is headed my way...  :)

---

by: nomorewebvan @ Sun Sep 18, 2011 at 08:45:44 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

counties don't vote. that's been irrelevant for decades (0.00 / 0)

ever since the supreme court rightly decided that the CA state senate must be apportioned one person, one vote instead of by county. most of those counties that look so impressive on a map have tiny populations. hell, yolo county, a small one by most measures, but at 200,000 it's way bigger than most of those foothill and sac valley counties (only placer and butte county are bigger north of sac, and the bigger they get in the san joaquin valley, the better dems do in them).

dems have shut out the GOP statewide for over a decade, with the exception of people running against bustamante, and arnold schwarzneneggar. the margins are getting bigger with time. obama will crush whoever the GOP nominates, in CA at least. this concern is based upon a misplaced assumption about a center-right california electorate that has not been the case since prop 187 passed and pete wilson was governor.

---

by: wu ming @ Mon Sep 19, 2011 at 21:40:17 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Drive suspended (4.50 / 2)

The referendum campaign just suspended its paid drive, effective Monday.  I don't know if it's temporary or permanent.

---

by: Steve Bloom @ Sun Sep 18, 2011 at 03:38:39 AM UTC

Ah the fickle nature of politics (0.00 / 0)

Was it not this site that was against the redistricting committee at one point? The reasoning, I believe, was weak. Something like knee-jerk politics at its worst, along the lines of, if a Republican is behind it then it must be bad.

Now Republicans are deadset against it.

I'm so jaded now, that with both parties against it. I have to be passionately for it.

On another note. What do people here know about the Reason Foundation?

They had this quote on their site, and I can't believe it is correct:

California also squanders a massive amount of transportation money that never makes it onto roads, spending $93,464 in administrative costs for every mile of state road. New York ($89,194 per mile), Massachusetts ($71,982), and New Jersey ($62,748) also compare poorly to states like Texas ($6,529) and Virginia ($6,370) that spend dramatically less on administrative costs.

---

by: duder @ Mon Sep 19, 2011 at 22:17:42 PM UTC

Repugs can dish It out, but can't take It, nice. n/t (4.00 / 1)

---

by: SuperJoker @ Mon Sep 19, 2011 at 23:18:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]