California Math...I need help on this one

I'm a little bit like Isaac Asimov who once described math as a cruel mistress with whom he was madly in love but she always abandoned him just when he needed her most.

So it is with the California recall. I can see some real difficulties in counting the votes here. Let me lay out my understanding and ask for you to hlep me clarify the situation.

First, there is the subject of voting for or against the recall. The possibilities are:

Yes
No
no vote

Okay ...easy enough....but.....then regardless of the options you chose above you get to vote for any one of (X) number of candidates.

So how will you know if Davis got 51%? Because there are so many possibilites you don't know the total numbers of voters ....and, if you vote no on the recall AND vote for a replacement candidate won't that skew the total number of voters and change the 51% threshhold?

Among those running to replace Davis, it's pretty straightforward, I think. Just who got the most total votes.

I'm not a math guy and this may be much more simple than I am making it sound but I think there is great potential for confusion here. Does anyone have any ideas?

if davis gets more yes votes than no - he stays in.

If 'no' has more votes the the 2nd part of the ballot applies. Whomever gets the most votes on the 2nd ballot wins.. even if it is with 5% of the vote.. (boggles the mind)

That is incorrect.

To keep Davis in office, you must vote "NO" to the recall question.

Even if you vote "NO" to the recall, you can still vote for the possible replacement.

Yes it is confusing.

Isn't there a chance that a lot of Democrats might vote to keep Davis in power and then not vote on part two of the question?

Worst case scenario- Davis gets less than 50% on the first part of the vote, a lot of Dems don't vote on part 2, and a Rep. wins. :-(

Is it:

A: 50% + 1 "Yes" votes of the total Yes or No votes on the recall question results in removal, or

B: 50% + 1 "Yes" votes (on the recall question) of the total number of ballots cast results in removal?

There is a difference, and the law is NOT clear on how the count will be done. In one case an abstention on Question 1 would hurt Davis.

Let's say 20 people vote in the election.

Case "A":

- 10 people abstain on question 1.
- Everybody picks their favorite successor on question 2.

If 6 or more voted to recall Davis (question 1), he's out.

Case "B":

- 10 people abstain on question 1.
- Everybody picks their favorite successor on question 2.

If 6 (or even all 10) vote to recall Davis, he's NOT RECALLED.

If the result is ambiguous in the manner I've described you won't want to be anywhere near the state Supreme Court the day the counting is done. You might get trampled to death.

You have explained the complication far better than I.

lol..this could make Florida 2000 look like a picnic..........

Here're the key paragraphs (emphasis mine) in California Election Law:

11383. If one-half or more of the votes at a recall election are "No", the officer sought to be recalled shall continue in office.

11384. If a majority of the votes on a recall proposal are "Yes", the officer sought to be recalled shall be removed from office upon the qualification of his successor.

11385. If at a recall election an officer is recalled, the candidate receiving the highest number of votes for the office shall be declared elected for the unexpired term of the recalled officer.

11386. If the candidate who received the highest number of votes fails to qualify within 10 days after receiving his or her certificate of election, the office to which he or she was elected shall be vacant, and shall be filled according to law.

Interestingly, someone could receive the plurality of the replacement votes and still "fail to qualify." :eyes:

hey it was early in the AM for me!

thanks for setting it straight!

If Davis gets more than 50% then it's not necessary to go to stage two...i.e. - no recall and Davis remains.

However, if Davis does not get 50% then you go to the second process, and whoever gets the largest percentage there is the winner. Could be a really low % who the majority obviously don't want, but, hey, that's California.

Just another example of an electoral system that just doesn't work and should be changed, much like the electoral college.

... works to davis's advantage? with so many candidates, it's a crap shoot as to which one will get the plurality. even someone who dislikes davis might be queasy about the crap shoot on part 2 of the ballot. larry flynt or mary carey?

as for ahnold, he probably did davis a favor by keeping riordan out of
the race.

Unless people are too dumb to figure out that question #2 is irrelevant if question #1 goes Davis' way.

But there is an issue of how the recall votes will be counted. See my other post.

aren't they anticipating something like 200 names on the ballot? How the hell are they going to do that?

They may have to go to multiple cards (yes, most CA precincts use punch-card machines) if there are more than a few hundred candidates.

all these "joke" candidates are actually helping Issa/Ah-nuld.

The core voters will be going for Issa/Ah-nuld. God knows why Ah-nuld other than he's got an R behind his name, but Issa is the main thrust for this.

The opposition is splintered into "hey, let's get the other, non-Repuke celebrities into the office".

With the addition of Ah-nuld into the race, I have officially joined Rush's assertation that the California political scene is a nuthouse. But I am saying that California is a loony bin as an insult to the Repukes, especially if Ah-nuld wins.

that Issa knew he was opening the gates to HELL with the recall iniative?

Just like Huffington (Michael) was "enticed" to put up millions to run for the senate with the promise by Sen. Gramms (Phil) that the Republican Senatorial Committee would kick in an additional million (which they never did).

I think someone (rove or rove operative) sold Issa a bill of goods - fund the recall - and YOU will reap the spoils. Remember before Issa had any political experience he ran in the primary for Governor in 1998. He was such a weak candidate that he was (iirc) trounced by unpopular Dan Lungren. He then realizes he has to "build" experience and runs (buys) a congressional seat in San Diego.

So an operative whispers in his ear.... this is your chance... we will - from a distance - support you.

Instead they knew that they didn't want a twice convicted felon - they just needed his money to create a way to over turn democracy.

Heck, Issa is an idiot if he doesn't yet realize this. First big note to him should be that in all of this week's coverage about Arnold, Huffington (arianna), and others - he doesn't get mentioned, or barely gets mentioned. He isn't even on the radar screen anymore.

Sorry Issa, karma is a b*tch.

First there will be a vote as to whether Davis will be replaced. If he is recalled, then and only then will there be an election to choose a replacement. Simple as that.

Everything's on one ballot, right?
Can Davis be on the second part of the ballot? Or is he prevented from being a candidate if he is recalled?

Part one...yes (he's out)...or NO(he stays)

Part TWO..

300 and counting names to select from IF more people voted YES on part one..


so.................................


we need to vote NO on part one....(50% +1 NO means recall failed and it does not matter WHO got more on part TWO)

If YES prevails, whoever gets a MAJORITY on part TWO becomes gov.

"If YES prevails, whoever gets a MAJORITY on part TWO becomes gov."


Don't you mean a plurality? Nobody will get a majority with 300+ candidates.

You say "If YES prevails, whoever gets a MAJORITY on part TWO becomes gov."

Actually, whomever gets a plurality of the votes on the second question would become Governor. That could conceivably be as little as 10-15% of those voting.

If there are 200 candidates on Question #2 (and that is a real possibility), as little as .5% + 1 of the votes could determine who takes over as Governor.

First of all, there's a principle of law in elections that ballot measures are not interrelated for either counting votes or for allowing votes. Thus, a voter cannot be precluded from voting on any ballot measure due to their vote (or non-vote) on another ballot measure.

Thus, a "majority" (or plurality) is only calculated on the basis of votes for that ballot measure itself. This one's simple. Two choices. A majority must vote "yes" for the recall in order for it to pass. Thus, if 10 votes are "yes" and 10 votes are "no", it fails and there's no recall. (A majority is defined as greater than 50%.)

What's particularly pernicious in this undemocratic election is the fact that millions more voters may vote, in effect, for Davis (against his recall) than vote for any replacement candidate.

This ballot is contrived to create a greater requirement for Davis than for any other candidate. Thus, California voters who favor Davis have their votes valued less than voters favoring anyone but Davis.

IMHO, that's several orders of magnitude more of a violation of US Consitutional 'Equal Protection' than what the Supreme Court reasoned regarding the manual recount of votes in the 2000 Florida Presidential election.



FWIW, I agreed in principle with that part of the USSC's reasoning that argued that materially differing criteria for validating and determining the intent of the voter on a ballot is a violation of 'equal protection' ... even though they magnified and exaggerated the materiality. That's not, IMHO, what was overwhelmingly corrupt in their decision on Bush v. Gore. The corruption was in their elevation of the 'safe harbor' provision above and beyond the rights of voters and their overtly cynical and deceitful provision of merely a couple of hours to perform the ordered manual recount, which already should've been completed long before if the politicians in Florida weren't so corrupt. The proper USSC decision would've been to exclude Florida's electoral votes altogether. That's what the US Constitution actually mandates, IMHO.

I was basically gonna post the same thing you said until I saw you already said it. I think it is wholly undemocratic that if Davis doesn't get the 50% he isn't allowed to be tallied up against his opposition. It doesnt make sense if Davis gets 40% approval and his closest opponent on question 2 gets 30% or whatever.

This whole recall is a sham anyway. The Repugs are just trying to blame a governor, who coincidently is a Democrat (gee, i wonder why they want him so bad) for problems in his state that, for the most part, aren't his fault. You can't totally blame him for budget downfalls when Bush is at the helm and our economy goes into the shitters.

In no particular order, those deficits are a result of:

• The "Energy Crisis" that was set up by Pete Wilson and cronies, and perpetrated by the Enron consoriutm under the cover of a GOP FERC. Davis was between a rock and a hard spot. In order to keep the electricity flowing to the citizens (and businesses) of California, who have the lowest per capita energy consumption in the entire US(!), he had to have the state fund the purchase of overpriced megawatt hours from the Bushoilini Mafia.
• The Bushoilini Enronomy has hit California harder than any other state, leaving millions of Californians unemployed and underemployed and enormously reducing state tax revenues.
• The Bushoilini Cabal has taken a meataxe to Federal subsidies to the states, affecting California far more than any other state even though California's "balance of Federal payments" is higher than any other state. (Californians pay far more in Federal taxes than the state of California receives in Federal monies. Much of the rest of the country feeds at the California tax trough.)
• The California GOP (and 'conservative' Dems) has repeatedly obstructed virtually every budget proposal in Sacratomato, pushing constantly for tax cuts, particularly for the wealthy and corporations, and driving the state further into debt.

The GOP Fascist Reich is engaging in political vandalism throughout the US ... running amok and raping and pillaging without principle. We are no longer a nation. We are a rabble of complacent and soporific factions addicted to the boob-tube, fast food, and the scraps from the tables of the wealthy -- repeating the total insanity of looking for (complacent and ineffective) Quisling "leadership" and abdicating our ownership of a government purportedly "of the People, by the People, and for the People" ... surrendering to our "back to the womb" quest for a nice Daddy.

Challenging home invaders to a nice game of rock-paper-scissors is just plain nuts.

the principles are important too.

Question 1: Do you think Davis should be recalled? (Y/N)

If Y/N is greater than 1, he's outta there.

Question 2: If Davis is recalled who do you think should replace him? (pick one)

If Y/N is greater that 1, whoever has the most votes becomes the governor.

Only the total number of yes/no votes on part I (recall) are counted for that particular purpose. AND :Part two (rpelacement)only comes into play if recall = "yes"

So much for the math problem. The other issues raised in this thread still don't go away.

Davis is not afforded equal protection.

It is inherently unfair that there are no statuatory "grounds" for impeachment...that it can be done for selfish and purely political reasons.

The entire replacement process (part II) is an absolute joke. Davis can get 49% support for part I and still lose office to somebody with 5% or less of the vote.

The repubs get to create the California crisis on one hand and blame Davis for it on the other.

Thanks to you all........the issues (not to mention the math) have been very well articulated.

:toast:

We have had some doozies in CA in the past and this will be no different, but a bigger problem I have is that they aren't going to mail out absentee ballots in my county. If you don't go pick one up from the county offices, you will have to go vote in person. This is going to cut a lot of homebound people out of the election, disenfranchising this particular group.

For example, SF was already not going to be ready for November's mayoral election (instant runoff software not up to snuff yet).

All over the state, precincts that were really only going to ramp up for March primaries are now having to trot out the election hardware 2x before that (some, in LA County for example, are still testing new touchscreen systems)...and many of the precincts are just saying, no way, we can't hold two elections in two months (and really, who can blame them?)

So in addition to having to cast votes on ballots from hell, they will be consolidating precincts. This will hit the Dem precincts hardest, since most people just go to the usual polling location and when they find out that it's not open, they'll just give up and not vote. Guess which party this favors?