Join 3,411 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


But I thought... But he said... But doesn't that mean... ???
September 24, 2003 10:02 AM   Subscribe

It's not democracy if Republicans don't win! After spending $1.6 million to save California, Darrell Issa tells Republicans to vote No on recall if it means a Democrat will win.
posted by badstone (25 comments total) 1 user marked this as a favorite

 
Even Debra Saunders, the SF Chronicle's primary conservative columnist, points out the supreme irony/idiocy of this.
posted by badstone at 10:08 AM on September 24, 2003


Is Issa using some kind of bizarre reverse psychology on us ("Fine, don't vote on recall! See if I care!"), or is he just the Sorest Loser Ever?
posted by monosyllabic at 10:10 AM on September 24, 2003


The Special Interest Brothel (flash, possibly nsfw.)

The spinning tassels are mesmerizing...
posted by homunculus at 10:10 AM on September 24, 2003


Issa is the Supreme Idiot. History will bear me out on this.
posted by Outlawyr at 10:18 AM on September 24, 2003


After hearing this, kept thinking why would the politicians not want Arnold in office.

or is he just the Sorest Loser Ever?
said he is adamant that either state Sen. Tom McClintock or Arnold Schwarzenegger drop out of the race
He is afraid if it comes down to the two leading Republican candidates right now; LT. Gov. Bustamante will win it because the republican vote would be split. So he would rather see Gov. Davis as Governor then.
posted by thomcatspike at 10:28 AM on September 24, 2003


I have zero respect for Issa, and I wonder why anyone in the Republican party would either. This guy started the entire recall, bankrolled the whole thing, then the moment it finally started, he dropped out immediately upon hearing Arnold was running. If you're going to plunge a couple million into something you believe in, I don't see why you'd quit the moment it starts. If he really believed in it, he'd follow it through until the end.

He folded faster than a french lawnchair*. The man is a coward, he's not a man of his words, and I don't see why anyone gives this guy an ounce of credit for anything he says.


* I kid, I kid!
posted by mathowie at 10:35 AM on September 24, 2003


So he would rather see Gov. Davis as Governor then.

So, he'd rather see Davis for Governor - why? The only reason for this is that if a Demo is in office, he wants the worst possible Demo (in his eyes - he has said that any alternate would be better than Davis) in office so that Republicans can win next time around. He wants Californians to suffer, so that Reps can prosper? So, as every paranoid lefty has been saying since Bush vs. Gore, the Reps are out to do anything they can, at any cost to the people, to get themselves in office.
posted by badstone at 10:36 AM on September 24, 2003


You mean there are republicans that would actually vote for Schwarzenegger? I see his ads on TV, and I'm always surprised they aren't a parody. This guy so obviously doesn't know what he's talking about, I find it hard to believe anybody could be persuaded to vote for him.

Of course anything that convinces even one more Californian to vote no on the recall is cool by me. The whole damn thing is a farce that needs to be cut off at the knees.
posted by willnot at 10:36 AM on September 24, 2003


BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

And they say irony is dead.
posted by Cerebus at 10:37 AM on September 24, 2003


... This guy so obviously doesn't know what he's talking about, I find it hard to believe anybody could be persuaded to vote for him.

Tssht. Where were you in November 2000?
posted by George_Spiggott at 10:55 AM on September 24, 2003


doesn't Issa totally look like Stanley Tucci with a bad rug?
posted by matteo at 11:06 AM on September 24, 2003


Tssht. Where were you in November 2000?

seriously. They are pretty much evenly split in the polls. Reps can't distinguish between a moron and a Rep politician with 20+ years of experience. [and i'll just leave that wide open for whoever wants it...]
posted by badstone at 11:07 AM on September 24, 2003


oops - "they" = Arnold & McClintock...
posted by badstone at 11:08 AM on September 24, 2003


THANK YOU, badstone. I read this story the other day and thought exactly the same thing: that Issa basically announced that his entire effort to recall Davis was solely an attempt not to replace him, but to replace him with a Republican.

In Issa's mind, subverting democracy isn't subverting democracy when you've found a legal loophole to do it. Tragically this means there's not a special place in jail for frauds like him; the more devout will just have to settle for a special place in Hell.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 11:19 AM on September 24, 2003


Be careful what you call up, Stanley Tucci, if you can't put it down...
posted by solistrato at 11:19 AM on September 24, 2003


So, he'd rather see Davis for Governor - why? The only reason for this is that if a Demo is in office, he wants the worst possible Demo (in his eyes - he has said that any alternate would be better than Davis) in office so that Republicans can win next time around. He wants Californians to suffer, so that Reps can prosper? So, as every paranoid lefty has been saying since Bush vs. Gore, the Reps are out to do anything they can, at any cost to the people, to get themselves in office.


Ummm... wasn't this the rationale for voting for Nader in 2000, except in reverse?
posted by gyc at 11:39 AM on September 24, 2003


Ummm... wasn't this the rationale for voting for Nader in 2000, except in reverse?

Good point. Except... well, I participated in an different subversion of Democracy by vote swapping. At least in that case, we didn't plan on sticking the country with a bad leader - those who did it still essentially wanted to keep Bush out office and get Gore in, but we wanted to eat our cake too and get 5% of the vote for the Greens.
posted by badstone at 11:56 AM on September 24, 2003


I've thought from the start that the recall was an attempt by the CA GOP to create a situation in which they could win a statewide office, i.e. a situation in which you win by getting less than 50% of the vote. This at least cinches the perception that this was Issa's motive. At the same time, I'm scratching my head. Even if Bustamante wins, isn't recalling a Democratic governor a major score for the state GOP? If I were a Californian Republican strategist, I would want the party to be seen as "the party that hates Gray Davis."
posted by ~rschram at 12:06 PM on September 24, 2003


You mean there are republicans that would actually vote for Schwarzenegger?

Yup. They voted for Duhbya in 2000 and for Saint Raygun too. (a worse actor that Ahnold!) They would vote for Mr. Ed so long as he was republican.
posted by nofundy at 12:29 PM on September 24, 2003


Issa is a cry baby. Plainly and shamelessly.

First he buys a "do over" election because he's miffed at how people voted in the first one. Then he drops out when it becomes obvious people aren't going to let him win the election he just bought. Then he cries and blubbers over it like a little baby. Literally. And now he's condemning the recall because it's not following the unlikely fantasy he had in his head. When heading to the polls in California next month, just remember it was this cry baby who got you there. Fucking cry baby.
posted by y6y6y6 at 12:45 PM on September 24, 2003


I thought Issa wanted Davis out because of gross mismanagement and stuff. You can't tell me he'd spend all that money to try to replace the Gov just so a Republican could hold that office. Don't shake me confidence in our elected officials that way.
posted by soren at 12:51 PM on September 24, 2003


I believe Issa identifies Cruz as the more liberal democrat than Davis. If the issue is to get a less liberal Gov then having Bustamante win is counter productive. Apparently the issue is not really getting Davis out of office like they said. Hhhhhhhhhmmmmmmm...
posted by filchyboy at 2:52 PM on September 24, 2003


Other people on the right and left have commented that the republicans are showing remarkable arrogance in abandoning traditional procedures intended to maintain bipartisan cooperation in political systems. The California Recall situation means that any governer who gets on the bad side of a well-organized constituent group might be facing a recall in the future. Likewise the Texas redistricting fight and change in quorum rules might turn around and burn a future Republican minority. This would not be the first time. The presidential term limit amendment was supposedly pushed by Republicans who then found themselves to be the only party in a position to take advantage of a third term.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 5:37 PM on September 24, 2003


Electoral dysfunction (flash.)
posted by homunculus at 6:09 PM on September 25, 2003


There is a possibility that the recall will be voted down. Think about what that means to the Republican party in California. They lose big in an election, buy another election against a very unpopular Democratic governor, get a lot of media attention, and then they lose the recall. It would probably make it pretty hard to rally the troops for the next real election.
posted by rdr at 12:30 AM on September 26, 2003


« Older Directory of Iranians who blog in English...  |  A Cautionary Tale: DNA Analy... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments