Replacing Gavin Newsom voter experience (me!) ~tops
My answer: Yes.
My personal, three primary (but not exclusive) reasons:
1. San Francisco went dramatically downhill during his leadership (increase in homelessness, trash, litter, graffiti, open drug use, higher crime.. less family-friendly environments, etc.) but somehow he still got promoted...
When he brought his poor leadership to the state of California as Governor, we experienced the same decline, in the same areas, happen and spread across our entire state; no longer restricted to just a formerly beautiful and iconic city
2. During covid, we saw, under his poor leadership, convicted criminals released, higher crime rates, while otherwise law abiding, tax paying, small business owning citizens became suddenly criminalized... the most backward, non-sense, counter-productive to a healthy culture decisions I have ever experienced as a California native of 55+ years.
3. His executive decision/signature -and reasoning! on the moratorium to the death penalty -which allows evil, wicked kidnapping, raping, murdering criminals to continue receiving free meals, free shelter, free laundry service, free medical care, free dental, recreation, air conditioning, cable movies.. and after the Californians voted twice for it....
not to mention a long list of other reasons.. but,
YES. Gavin Newson should be immediately removed from office.
***
second part,
If the governor is recalled, the candidate who receives the most votes will be elected as the new governor.
WOW! to this list of candidates... 46 of them?
and the very, very first thing that came to mind is this:
HOW on God's good green earth, are people who have full time jobs, plus their commutes, plus children, grocery shopping, cooking, homework help, appointments for doctors, dentists, car maintenance, family visits, yards to care for, on and on...
with what time and energy is the typical full time working adult suppose to sit down and investigate each candidate to make the most educated, well informed, decision?
unrealistic!
-which is why so many people just default to name familiarity, or party loyalty, or some quick stereotype, or hopeful guess based on common life experience ='s common values (?),
like,
(since we are both retired, i had time to read, and he had time to listen....so, )
i read, "Chuancey "Slim" Killens" republican. retired correctional officer."
and since my sexy is a republican, and retired deputy... he was immediately interested.
-and we briefly looked him up, and watched, and listened to him on a rebel radio show...
in my mind, i am like.. oh my God, they all say the exact same things, year after year, -can anyone break the script?
and what ive learned, is that the republicans all have the same set of criticisms against the democrats as the democrats do against the republicans. every citizen should watch one hour of political comedy hosted by each political party. enlightening!
anyway,
then my sexy, he started explaining about how 'not to waste your vote' -and what that means, is:
if the most popular candidate wins.. you want to guess and vote according to who will most likely win for your party... if you vote for someone who doesnt have a chance to begin with... that's a waste.
and i understand the math on that; i do.
but i just have to vote for the person i most believe will do the best job whether i believe they will win or not.
but.. the time and energy to look up and research each and every potential candidate...
"short cuts please!"
turns out, some have much better websites than others..
turns out, some are much better writers than others...
but i have also learned over the years, -just because you can write/speak well.. or make a pretty website..
doesn't mean you can lead a city or state or country.
-and i am suspicious some of these candidates arent genuine at all, but really just want to see their name on the ballot, and benefit from the name exposure..
there is a great deal of weeding to do on the part of the voting citizen...
i spent a little minute on sarah stephens website..
a pastor, mother of 5, and married to a former police officer...
i share her values/visions on most, but not all issues. i have already written extensively, about how and why i am PRO-CHOICE.. so, when i read about her way of thinking, 'instead of spending millions of dollars killing people, innocent babies...'
i disagree without evening finishing the rest of the reading. I realize over and over, that those people who are against pro-choice, they all believe that changing the law will result in no more abortions. -it is my opinion, life experience, observation and education, that changing the law will not result in the end of all abortions, but rather will create a black-market, will unintentionally create a higher number of self-inflicted abortions, which can result in the loss of not just the baby, but the mother...
i remain believing -no one wants 'babies killed'. no one. we all have that in common. and pro-choice people understand that humans in crisis and desperate and hormonal and confused and pressured... backed in a corner.. they will seek abortions one way or another
i am always delighted and hopeful when i read, that EDUCATION ALONE can reduce the number of abortions in a given society. we share the same goal. all of us.. less need, and less numbers when it comes to abortions. i will always vote pro-choice and pro-education...
-but it comes up as a hot topic every election. over and over, the GIANT THREAT THAT ROE V WADE will be overturned...
i used to get much more upset, and feel much more threatened.. but at 55,
i dont buy into the hype.. and think, if roe v. wade does get overturned..
the results are highly predictable. self-inflicted and black market abortions will show up on the rise.. unfortunate and preventable deaths of baby/child will happen..
back to court.. and back to pro-choice. if i am wrong.. and the law itself results in some dramatic reduction of abortions.. i would only be grateful to stand corrected.
***
i also do not line up with sarah on her stance about "churches being allowed to stay open" while there are mandates to close small businesses, large businesses, sport stadiums, schools, and any place of close contact gatherings.
i do not believe churches should some how be exempt from the social distancing mandates the rest of society is mandated to follow.
when the mall and schools can open.. so can the churches...
how can it be okay for the church goers, but not.. the tail-gate party people? i can't think of an argument that makes it okay for church goers to ignore the distancing rules everyone else has to follow...
anyway.. i haven't calculated how much time, thought, energy it has taken me to learn just a little bit more about only a handful of the potential 46+ candidates..
i only know for certain, the process to make an educated decision, when you factor in how much time it does take... very unrealistic for the majority of the voting age population.
and! i would like to suggest
that there be ONE website template, common to each candidate, which shares the same information, in the same format, in the same order, for every politician.
i.e.,
name, picture (brief bio)
party, education
hot topic issue stance. (hyperlink for how/why they landed on this value/decision)
homelessness -problem/solution
taxes -problem/solution
abortion -problem/solution
crime & punishment -problem/solution
vaccinations -problem/solution
immigration -problem/solution
climate -problem/solution
etc.,
this would at least streamline the reading/research process for the voters. sarah's website is lovely..
and i was equally impressed with our musician candidate, nickolas wildstar.. (problem/solution)
i do not agree across the board on the problems/solutions with any candidate, but i can see who has done some thinking...
In Jesus's gets my vote every time name, amen.
posted by SANDRA HARRISON KAY @ 4:43 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home