Can A Dem Pres Candidate REALISTICALLY Win Without California ???

[WillyT]

I sure as hell cannot see how. And I think that THAT is what this recall bullshit is all about!!!

OK you political wonks, any math say that the Dems can afford to lose CA???

:mad::shrug::mad:

[lcordero]

1. I'm not a political wonk but losing California is a DISASTER!!!!

Think forward to the 2004 Presidential Elections. With Diebold installed, the Repuke gets something like 360 to 220 electoral votes.
This is why I think Davis should have taken one for the ballteam whether right or wrong...on top of that, NOBODY is worth 25 million dollars to me.

[Dr_Strangelove]

3. Gray Davis Loses the Recall

If a Republican replaces Gray Davis in California, then the Republicans have no more ammunition to use against the Democratic candidates in the fifth largest economy in the world. Let Arnold win in California, is what I say. There is no way in hell that it'll help the Republicans in 2004.

If Gray Davis wins, however, it'll re-invigurate the grassroots campaigns that are going to put Howard Dean in office. Its a 'Heads I win, tails you lose' scenario for the Democrats.

That is excepting, of coures, the moderate Repulicans that would welcome someone with fiscal responsibility at the top of the list in office.

But the fact is, that there a lot of moderate Republicans out there.

[lcordero]

15. WHOA!!!

Hold on, you are making the assumption that the Republicans are going to let us have a recall after the signatures are taken.
The Republicans letting us recall them is NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!!!
Republicans have constantly underminded our rights and they WILL NOT GIVE US A RECALL.
After they get this recall, all they have to do is install the diebold machines and after that they are there PERMANENTLY!!!!

This is a LOSE-LOSE situation for the Democrats.

DAVIS WAS WRONG AND HE WAS BOUGHT AND PAID FOR BY THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.

[Trek234]

39. .

.

[tedoll78]

2. Nope.

We lose CA, and we're doomed.

I heard one prominent Dem in CA say that if Davis is replaced with a Repub, they'd begin an immediate recall movement. That would hype-up Dem turnout, for sure.

[Democat]

7. A recall of any Republican who steals the office is the only right thing

Democrats must try to undo the damage that the corrupt right politicians are trying to do by overturning a recent legal election.

The only right and smart thing for Democrats to do is to immediatly recall any Republicans who steals the office that Davis was elected to.

[lcordero]

16. You are assuming that we will get our day in court and that is NOT

GOING TO HAPPEN!!!

[Dr_Strangelove]

4. Lose Cali?

Yes we can lose California, Because Cali will reflect badly on whatever political group is trying for the office in 2004. The faci is that California is the single largest economy in the United States, and that it reflects as such on the campaign. Give people the chance to vote for the president in the Democratic Elections, and you have the person that will beat George Bush in 2004.

[Dr_Strangelove]

5. Lose Cali?

Yes we can lose California, Because Cali will reflect badly on whatever political group is trying for the office in 2004. The faci is that California is the single largest economy in the United States, and that it reflects as such on the campaign. Give people the chance to vote for the president in the Democratic Elections, and you have the person that will beat George Bush in 2004.

[Dr_Strangelove]

Lose Cali?

Yes we can lose California, Because Cali will reflect badly on whatever political group is trying for the office in 2004. The faci is that California is the single largest economy in the United States, and that it reflects as such on the campaign. Give people the chance to vote for the president in the Democratic Elections, and you have the person that will beat George Bush in 2004.

[Dr_Strangelove]

6. Lose Cali?

Yes we can lose California, Because Cali will reflect badly on whatever political group is trying for the office in 2004. The faci is that California is the single largest economy in the United States, and that it reflects as such on the campaign. Give people the chance to vote for the president in the Democratic Elections, and you have the person that will beat George Bush in 2004.

[Dr_Strangelove]

8. Lose Cali?

Yes we can lose California, Because Cali will reflect badly on whatever political group is trying for the office in 2004. The faci is that California is the single largest economy in the United States, and that it reflects as such on the campaign. Give people the chance to vote for the president in the Democratic Elections, and you have the person that will beat George Bush in 2004.

[Dr_Strangelove]

9. Lose Cali?

Yes we can lose California, Because Cali will reflect badly on whatever political group is trying for the office in 2004. The faci is that California is the single largest economy in the United States, and that it reflects as such on the campaign. Give people the chance to vote for the president in the Democratic Elections, and you have the person that will beat George Bush in 2004.

[Dr_Strangelove]

10. Lose Cali?

Yes we can lose California, Because Cali will reflect badly on whatever political group is trying for the office in 2004. The faci is that California is the single largest economy in the United States, and that it reflects as such on the campaign. Give people the chance to vote for the president in the Democratic Elections, and you have the person that will beat George Bush in 2004.

[Dr_Strangelove]

11. Lose Cali?

Yes we can lose California, Because Cali will reflect badly on whatever political group is trying for the office in 2004. The faci is that California is the single largest economy in the United States, and that it reflects as such on the campaign. Give people the chance to vote for the president in the Democratic Elections, and you have the person that will beat George Bush in 2004.

[Dr_Strangelove]

12. Lose Cali?

Yes we can lose California, Because Cali will reflect badly on whatever political group is trying for the office in 2004. The faci is that California is the single largest economy in the United States, and that it reflects as such on the campaign. Give people the chance to vote for the president in the Democratic Elections, and you have the person that will beat George Bush in 2004.

[Dr_Strangelove]

13. Lose Cali?

Yes we can lose California, Because Cali will reflect badly on whatever political group is trying for the office in 2004. The faci is that California is the single largest economy in the United States, and that it reflects as such on the campaign. Give people the chance to vote for the president in the Democratic Elections, and you have the person that will beat George Bush in 2004.

[Dr_Strangelove]

14. Lose Cali?

Yes we can lose California, Because Cali will reflect badly on whatever political group is trying for the office in 2004. The faci is that California is the single largest economy in the United States, and that it reflects as such on the campaign. Give people the chance to vote for the president in the Democratic Elections, and you have the person that will beat George Bush in 2004.

[Dr_Strangelove]

17. sorry

Sorry about the dupes... My ISP is flighty sometimes, especially with democratic (the party) websites.

[WillyT]

35. Not To Worry DS, Thanks For Padding My Thread Though, LOL !!!

:hi:

[On the Road]

18. Losing Governorship Does Not Mean Losing Presidential Election

Regardless of the outcome of the recall, California is a safe state for any competitive Democratic candidate 2004. Bush tried mightily in 2000 but couldn't come close.

[redeye]

20. Ditto...

...I mean, NYC has had Republican mayors for years and yet NY, Kings, Queens, and Bronx counties have never voted Republican AFAIK.

[StopThief]

19. Sure a dem can win without California. . . . .

when pigs fly.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

21. No

snowball in hell, etc.

[Freddie Stubbs]

22. Probably not

[OldSoldier]

23. Why are we arguing this?

California has gone Democratic in presidential elections with governors of either party for about as long as I can recall. Reagan and Deukmajean (not sure about his spelling) were both Repugs and California went D in the presidential election.

If there is a fair election in 2004, California will stay in our party.

[WillyT]

24. I Sure Hope You Are Correct !!! --- But...

If they can associate Cali's woes to not only Davis, but Dems in general, we may be witnessing a paradigm shift.

Also, by moving Cali from a 'safe bet' Dem state, to a state in play (or worse, a battleground state), Dem candidates will have to spend a lot more of their limited resources in Cali, and will have less to spend in other battleground states.

This would not be a good thing, ya know???

:shrug:

[Hell Hath No Fury]

30. Here's what I think...

the GOP is trying to do re: CA.

Get a GOPer in the governor's mansion and watch the WH start throwing more cash at the State then we have seen in years. Anything Arnie (or Bill or Dick) asks W for the State gets the expedited "approved" stamp (unlike the treatment Davis got from them). Money flows in, problems budget start getting solved, and the GOP Gov gets to take ALL the credit for the turnaround.

Then come 2004 race time W makes many, many campaign trips to our Golden State for nice pictures with the "successful" CA Gov -- it's a win/win for them both -- and if that GOP Gov were Arnie, you bet W would be creaming his sock-stuffed tighty whities at the thought of standing next to The Terminator in all those pictures. I can envision campaign stop after campaign stop with Bush being introdued by Arnie.

[WillyT]

38. Wow, Great Analysis Hell !!! --- You Are Absolutely Right On !!!

Bush wants California BAAAAAADDDDDDDDD!!!

He may not need to use his aircraft carrier stage props, he'll be hangin wid da Terminator instead!!! Photo-op heaven, man!!!

:hi:

You gonna meet up with us Saturday to hang with Will Pitt??? Hope so!

:loveya:

[oasis]

46. You're right. Like when Enron initiated that phony energy crisis

and the Chimp refused to put FERC into action.

[Eloriel]

49. Throw in

skewed polls showing the Bush favorability high and rigged election machines and you have a plausible landslide.

Eloriel

[GOPBasher]

25. No chance

In order to make up for such a loss, we'd have to win all the Blue states plus Florida, Ohio and then 8 more ev's, possibly from two out of Nevada, West Virginia and New Hampshire.

[WillyT]

26. Yeah, That Looks About Right To Me !!!

We'll know soon enough I guess.

:shrug:

[jiacinto]

27. No

Realisitcally no. Mathemtically it can be done, but I don't see it being done in reality.

[West Coast Democrat]

28. Has it ever happened?

Has anyone ever lost California and won the presidency in recent times? (And Bush doesn't count because he didn't actually "win")

I don't think Bush has any chance of winning CA, and therefore, won't be able to win, period.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

29. John Kennedy And Jimmy Carter

didn't carry California.

[WillyT]

34. So... Including JFK, We've Had Nine Presidents In The "Modern Era', And...

Four of them were Democrats, and only two of them did it without California!

Hmmmm.... Am I using fuzzy math here, LOL!!!

:hi:

BTW - I was born during Ike's Administration, but don't remember it. Therefore my definition of the 'modern era', LOL!!!

:eyes:

[jsw_81]

50. CA

"John Kennedy And Jimmy Carter didn't carry California."

Yes, but they did very well in the south. If I'm not mistaken, Carter won every southern state with the exception of Virginia. Today's Democrats, however, have virtually no chance of doing that well in the south. That is why we MUST win California. Without California in our column the game is pretty much over.

[BushHasGotToGo]

32. Carter

n/t

[ButterflyBlood]

42. the last Dem who did was Carter

but he also carried the south, which can't be done now.

[Yupster]

51. And California had lots

fewer electoral votes in the 60's and 70's than it does today. -- and the Democratic strongholds like NY and Mass had lots more electoral votes than they do today.

[IndianaGreen]

31. No!

But in 2004 it will be Bush's record that will be on the line, not who is in Sacramento.

[birdman]

33. No - Given the regional demographics of the US

A current Dem could not win without both CA
and NY. It's been done before (Kennedy lost CA
and Truman lost NY) but it would take a miracle
for a current Dem to win without CA.

[Jack Rabbit]

36. Jimmy Carter did

Also, your favorite Frat Boy and mine "won" without either California or New York.

[xequals]

37. No way, not in this era

California has too many electoral votes. The only way we could win without California is if it were a landslide and for some weird reason we couldn't get California. Dems cannot win without their big state strongholds CA and NY, and the GOP could never win without their big strongholds like Texas.

Electoral college politics is wacky and unfair, which is why we should go to the popular vote. Then politicians would care about campaigning in ALL of the states instead of just the swing states. Under the electoral college system every vote isn't equal, and I'm not talking about voting machines.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

41. The 76 Map Was So Weird

Carter carried every state of the Confederacy cept Virginia. He lost Illinois and CA and most of the west but won big industrial states like NY, OH , and MI.

[xequals]

44. I think the weirdness of that election

has more to do with Watergate. Also the whole conservative/liberal geographic divide wasn't as strong as it is now, there were still some elements of the old Democratic party with the northeast and solid south New Deal coalition.

[twilight]

40. Yes it can and it has before

Remember Pete Wilson? Remember Bill Clinton? Wilson on his way out the door as governor of California when Clinton was elected and serving as President. How short memories are indeed. *sigh*

:kick:

[ButterflyBlood]

43. no but who cares?

it's like asking if Bush can win without Texas. But he'll win Texas anyway, and we'll definately win California. Having a Republican governor won't cause any problems, there are Republican governors in New York, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Hawaii and Massachussetts, all states that we aren't worried at all about losing. We also won California twice with Pete Wilson in.

[WillyT]

45. You Know That As A Fact, Or Are You Just Whistlin Past The Graveyard ???

Seriously!!!

:shrug:

[ButterflyBlood]

48. As I pointed out above

There are plenty of states with Republican governors we aren't worrying about losing, and we've already won California twice with a Republican governor. Bush's approval rating (not reelection, approval) is already below 50 there. How's he going to win it?

[WillyT]

47. Damn, I Could Of Made It A Poll, Ya???

Thanks for your input!!

:hi: