[elSicomoro]

Originally posted by Tobiasly
Why do you keep saying this Syc?

I said this one other time--on August 8 in the "Schwarzenegger" thread.

What does that have to do with anything?

Californians had a chance to vote Gray Davis out last year. They could have made their voices/dissention known during the primaries or during the general election. Now granted, I don't live in California. But based on what I've seen, the problems out there have not drastically changed since he was re-elected last November. Therefore, I contend that there was no real reason to oust Davis.

So people changed their minds since then. Or Davis didn't live up to his promises. Or they just realized they don't like a guy.

Perhaps...but there was a fairly strong backlash against Davis leading up to the '02 election from what I remember. I remember the pundits noting that voter turnout for that election was rather low (just under 50%) and that the election was rather close, given that it was a Democrat incumbent facing re-election in California.

Did Californians have the right to change their mind? Absolutely, with the laws of the state behind them. But less than a year after re-electing him? To me, it sounds retarded...why did they even bothering re-electing him then? $60-someodd million more dollars were just wasted. And from what I understand of California's fiscal affairs, it seems to me that what Schwarzenegger can do is limited.

I do think it's kinda cool how accessible this election was. However, I wonder if that will be a good thing in the end...

So why do you keep drawing this arbitrary 11-month line?

Huh? See above...you must have me confused with someone else.