Slashdot Mirror
Georgy Tells Why She Should Be California Gov
1) Do you think the recall is fair? - by mjmalone
Do you think the california recall election is fair? I understand that a lot of Californians are unhappy with Gray Davis' performance, but he WAS elected by the people, if people dislike him then they can vote him out of office when his term is up. It seems unfair that Davis needs a majority of votes to remain in office, but a replacement candidate could be selected by a plurality. It is possible, and quite likely, that Davis will be voted out with 60% or fewer votes. That would mean 40% or more voters essentially voted for Davis, but he would not be the winner, one of the 400+ other candidates on the ballot would and in all liklihood that candidate will have received far fewer than 40% of the votes.
This whole situation seems like a gross abuse of a recall system that relies on honesty and virtuous politicians. Unfortunately California is no such utopia. By running in the election you have shown your support for it, how do you justify this support given the evident problems?
Georgy:
The aspect of this recall that I find most disgustingly unfair is the influence of money in politics. Californians should find it frightening that a wealthy Republican can buy himself another election. And if that isn't enough, we end up with an election where a series of other millionaires are taken seriously when they tell us they will govern for "the people." Perhaps worse than individuals being legitimized as candidates solely because of wealth, is a political system so heavily influenced by campaign contributions that lawmakers can no longer use their own judgment. This is at all levels of the Government, with the White House/Enron shenanigans being the perfect example. We also see it with Davis and Bustamante - who are owned by Prison Guard's Union and Indian Gaming. And if we look at less publicized issues, for example the high cost of Worker's Compensation, lobbying efforts and campaign contributions are to blame for the lack of response on behalf of the Legislature.
Requiring 50% to keep Davis seems unfair, when a replacement candidate could be elected with only 15%. However, the replacement candidate election could be fairer with instant runoff voting. Unfortunately people don't understand, and therefore don't trust, the instant runoff voting algorithm. If IRV were used, voters could be sure that the candidate *most* people wanted to win would win. It's a system where Ralph Nader could have maximized his vote without being a spoiler candidate in the 2000 election. (I encourage people to find out more about IRV at www.fairvote.org)
As for my candidacy, I am running in this election because Californians deserve a candidate who is willing to speak candidly to them about issues, such as the budget, the economy, and the death penalty, that other politicians only dance around. We need someone to show courage and take risks to promote change. This recall provides a unique opportunity for an "honest and virtuous" candidate to enter the race, and I challenge people to lend their support and make the first step in taking back the political process.
2) questions about the campaign - by garcia
I would like to know if you fear that two of your more controversial issues (legalization of marijuana and gay marriages) will be detrimental to your campaign? While I believe that as more and more "young" people run for and are elected to office, these items might come to pass, don't you think that it is a little early to be attempting to make these strides?
Georgy:
The controversial issues define this campaign. Realize that these issues are in large part controversial because they're avoided like the plague by mainstream politicians. Lacking the courage to convince people of their true beliefs, poll-abiding politicians choose the easy road. There is anecdotal evidence many politicians believe in gay marriage and ending death penalty, but are too cowardly to fight for those views. Bill Clinton came out after his presidency and so much as said he thought marijuana shouldn't be illegal! Good thing for us he found his spine a year after leaving office.
I don't see these as wacky issues. I've laid out my arguments for why death penalty is bad policy (it's costly, unfairly applied, and imperfect). I've explained why gay marriage is superior to civil union (marriage promotes fidelity and family values, and it removes unfair tax advantages for people willing to file a couple forms ). As for legalized marijuana, why is marijuana criminal when alcohol and cigarettes profit the government? I believe that when people are presented with intelligent and logical arguments, they will turn around. The problem is few politicians take the time to have intelligent discussions on these issues. Education on "controversial" issues is necessary to convince the electorate to make up or change its mind. I truly believe all of these issues will be passed someday. Politicians are wasting our time and money not passing them now.
3) Content vs. Tech - by stylee
California is considered the capitol of the content industry (RIAA, MPAA) and the technology industry (Silicon Valley). These two industries are at odds with each other over intellectual propery rights issues. They are probably also a large chunk of California's huge economy. Do you think you can balance the needs/wants of both lobbying groups in a manner that will be beneficial to both industries? If so how? I realize that this is mostly a federal matter as far as the law and politics go but there are many that believe that California kind of sets the standard for the rest of the nation to follow(at least economically and politically) so I am intersted in your ideas on this matter.
Georgy:
This is a federal issue; however I think that the RIAA in its aggressive pursuit of young mp3 down loaders demonstrates its lack of creativity. Can't they find a new way to make a buck? Besides which, concert prices are typically $40 or more! I haven't seen the numbers on this, but digitized music and video have certainly fueled sales of technology used in association with them. Additionally, kids and adults understand technology better as a result of digital music boom.
The RIAA, with the support of the government, should have approached the situation proactively long ago, and embraced digital music. They should still do this. If they can provide a reasonably priced, easily accessible digital music alternative, I think people will go for it. Right now however, it's cumbersome for the under 18 crowd especially, to buy stuff online, and they haven't worked out all the kinks surrounding the "rules" (e.g. burnable tracks, how long you can keep them, etc) of proprietary downloads.
I believe the role of the government should be to encourage technology companies and the RIAA to work together on the issue, as well as taking a look at it in terms of intellectual property rights of the artists. To me it seems that the RIAA is mostly concerned with their $$$ and not the rights (or $$$) of the musicians. Again, politics is hit with same problem - special/self interest ruling the legislature. And, with the looks of this ballot, anyone who wants to prevent prosecution of down loaders might want to think twice about voting for Arnie.
4) Hope to win or shake things up? - by Dark Paladin
With the names of such heavyweights as Arnold and lightweights like Gary Coleman (no pun intended - well, all right, it was), do you honestly hope to win, or are you making a Ralph Nader like point in forcing certain issues and ideas into the public's eye?
Georgy:
I hope to both win AND shake things up. Obviously the odds are long (Vegas has them at 100 to 1 - bodog.com/sports-betting ), but they are not out of reach. We've only reached a small percentage of voters and already received an impressive amount of support. Howard Dean was considered a long shot just a few months ago, now he's a front runner. To think a Georgy for Governor victory is impossible is to succumb to the jaded view that money is the only victor, and in effect solidify its reality.
5) Technology - by chrisgeleven
Why does your blog and web site, from what I can tell, not mention any uses of technology that you would like to see? Can you describe any protential plans to use technology to reduce costs or provide more benefits for the same price?
Georgy:
Check back soon. Technology is key to improving the efficiency of government, and though the government has come a long way (you can file electronically for some things on the Secretary of State's website) there is still more that can be done. As for problem solving, I like to speak in specifics rather than generalities, so it takes a while.
I am currently looking into the role of visas in technology companies and its effects on California's labor market, and investigating how we can encourage more wide spread use of open source software (both in education and businesses). I'm also trying to get some volunteers to develop apps that will aid in the voting process (check the website for updates or email if you're interested in helping).
6) the most important question - by Mothra the III
Boxers or briefs?
Georgy:
Boxer-briefs! But seriously, boxers, and Georgy for Gov boxers at that!
6A) Re:the most important question - by markhb
vi or emacs?
Georgy:
I'm so glad you asked!! Both. vi for quick editing, emacs (NOT xemacs) for coding projects. :q!:q!:q!
7) Do you think this election is Real? - by Voltas
With all the "Star Power" and the number of candidates that obviously are looking for media attention (I.E. Gary Colemen ), do you really thing that the candidates or the office really going to be taken serious when its all said and done?
Won't this whole election fiasco cripple anyone who actually wins?
Georgy:
This election does seem like it was dreamt up by Hollywood reality TV executives, but it is a real election, and it will go down as one of the most, if not the most, historical elections. After October 7, the fun will be over, and I'm sure the media will be bored by the daily details of Sacramento bureaucracy. The only thing that will cripple anyone who wins is his/her inability to lead. A candidate like Gary Coleman, who said he didn't want to be Governor, won't win (I hope). The interesting thing about Coleman, though, is that he was actually a president on Buck Rogers! Perhaps this is a case of the line between reality and fantasy blurring. "Hieronymous Fox, an 11-year-old child genius from the 20th Century is kidnapped for ransom by the sinister Roderick Zale. The boy is the President of the planet Genesia and his bodyguard fears that he will be killed because they cannot meet the ransom demand. Buck, Wilma, and the bodyguard then make separate attempts to rescue the boy." Maybe things will pick back up for the media in 2006, when Arnold Drummond can take another shot at it, and Willis can run as Lt. Governor.
8) Did you pay SCO? - by sharkey
Did you pay for your Linux licenses?
8A) Re: Did you pay SCO? - by El_Ge_Ex
If not, would you support strategic military action against Utah?
Georgy:
Despite the fact that SCO has launched an attack on many Californians, I don't think California will be declaring war on Utah, let alone the cowards at SCO. I'm not sure if my company plans to pay SCO, but I certainly hope they won't. SCO seems like they're running scared, using a lawsuit to boost revenue (kind of like the RIAA). Asking for $700 per license is extremely high, and should send a warning single to people that they are doing this to boost revenue and not simply out of fairness. If you check SCO's insider trading, people are selling like crazy. I think the open source community needs to educate people about the SCO case, and keep SCO's scare tactics from bullying weary individuals or corporations into paying them.
9) Who's in your staff? - by zoneball
A good leader must surround him or herself with the best advisors and experts within their respective fields. Who will you be bringing in to your campaign and administration, and what are their qualifications?
Georgy:
My "staff" is all volunteers. Their experience varies from none to work with local and state campaigns. I also have a professional photographer helping me, and a few people working on the technical side of things - website and video editing.
As for my administration, I plan to bring in people who have first hand experience with the problems on which they'll be working, and I would like to see diversity, in terms of both professional background and demographics (ethnicity, age, sex, etc.).
10) Do you understand... - by niko9
Do you understand Dselect? That program scares the poop out me. But I figure if you can handle dselect, you can handle being governor.
Georgy:
I have not used dselect. Hopefully you can find another litmus test for me!
Given the Terminator's capabilities it/he is clearly a derivative of Emacs, not Vi. Arnold would not give you a blank stay he'd simply delete your buffer with a quick C-x k you (that's Emacs-speak for "Hasta La Vista, Baby").
John.
Seriously, she's got my vote, for what it's worth.
Of course, I live in Chicago. . .
You are not the customer.
Not only is she smart, but she's damned cute too! She's got my vote! Oh, wait, I don't live in California. Damn. :)
My journal has hot
Those were the 10 questions?
Sheesh, how about "How would you cut California's $35 billion budget deficit?" (i.e. spending cuts or tax increases or both, and in which areas?)
--LP
P.S. For the curious, dselect is the Debian package manager, documented here.
I don't know about you all, but I don't hear a geek. I hear a politician telling geeks what they want to hear.
That's not a slam, just an opinion. On the other hand, Georgy would sure be a lot easier on the eyes than Arnold or Bustamante.
However, it's a moot point. Running as the "geek" candidate was silly anyway, like running as the "paraplejics" candidate, or the "millionaires" candidate. In a general election, any candidate aiming for a minority is going to lose.
As for legalized marijuana, why is marijuana criminal when alcohol and cigarettes profit the government? I believe that when people are presented with intelligent and logical arguments, they will turn around. The problem is few politicians take the time to have intelligent discussions on these issues. Education on "controversial" issues is necessary to convince the electorate to make up or change its mind. I truly believe all of these issues will be passed someday. Politicians are wasting our time and money not passing them now.
While I see where you are coming from, I highly doubt that the legalization of marijuana is a necessary topic when there are many other topics which should be discussed.
Marijuana, my opinion on the subject is irrelevant, is not a priority in this country. It's still considered a drug, its prohibition "worked" and didn't cause a massive revolt like alcohol's did, and it's not terribly important (medical use is another thread totally).
You haven't really answered my question though. Of course the mainstream politicians avoid them like the plague, they know that they are possibly detrimental to their campgains. Why don't you think that they will be detrimental to yours?
A very politically savey response, given the audience.
Everyone seems to forget the third option...
Comando!
Who are you? The new #2 Who is #1? You are #617565. I am not a number, I am a free man! Muhahaha.
You honestly think it's hard to find that many people in California, a state of 35+ million, who don't really have a clue, or are just bitter enough about Simon's defeat to take this shot at fscking their own state government? Get real.
If the early half of the 20th century should have taught us anything, it's that instability in goverment leads to chaos and populist leaders with dangerous agendas.
Too bad there's not a political IQ test people have to pass to vote.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
She's probably referring to large corporate campaign contributions, not private donations. The former is the problem with our elections today, where politicians loyalties can be bought for the average salary of an experienced engineer. It's a sad state of affairs.
This message brought to you by the Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People.
Because when you don't HAVE a lot of money, you complain about those who do. OTOH, when you DO have a lot of money, you generally don't complain about those who have less..
Just wait until she makes some real money, then election funds will disappear from her agenda.
"I can't give you a brain, so I'll give you a diploma" - The Great Oz (blatently stolen sig)
California may be famous for its cities, but it's the agribusiness which shapes much of the policy and possibilities. How much do you know about the seasonal migrant industry? How much do you know about toxic waste from dense livestock management? How much do you know about fair water rights and the unfair political agendas of the affected populations?
[
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
This calling people commie bullshit has to stop. It's the lamest, weakest, least creative attempt to marginalize liberal/progressive ideas ever. It's funny because the whole notion of a one-party system and with witch hunts, purges and calling people traitors, etc... is much more akin to what went wrong with marxism/leninism than single payer healthcare.
If the government gives every candidate the same amount of money, and at the same time forbid the acceptance of contributions or use of personal money. Than every person - poor or rich - has the same means to get elected.
Campaign contributions are NOT a natural part of democracy. They are rather a threat for democracy, and should be avoided at all costs.
I like her spunk, and her charge that politicians need a shake up. But I don't think she's correct on one particular statement...
Californians should find it frightening that a wealthy Republican can buy himself another election.
This has a few problems.
1) Who is buying themselves another election? I know of no money donations that came from a ex-gubenatorial candidate. Not Simon, or Riordan (who else would know who she might be talking about?). Most of the money was fronted by Darryl Issa, who not only didn't run previously, but is not running now (although he did fill out the papers to run).
2) How is this a purchased election? The money was not given to public officials as a bribe to make another election. It was not given to voters to sign petitions. It was given to only some of the people who watched people sign petitions. They were offered $1 a signature, and its noted that the counter petitions started by Davis put a bounty of $3-5 dollars a signature.
It just seems rather disenginious to call this election "purchased" in any way shape or form. Probably becuase it margionalises how much even Democrats hate Davis.
I am still in favour of the 'Prisoner Island', where you send lifers to compete in escape attempts off the island. You sell the rights to FOX, and no more prison overcrowding, sidestep the death penalty issue, and eliminate the defecit via royalties.
Beats the hell out of just gassing them.
Children can't vote. Felons can't vote. Illegal immigrants can't vote. Unregistered people can't vote. That's a lot of the population that isn't able to legitimately sign. If half of the state population can vote, that doubles your percentage to 6%, and figuring that the turnout hovers around 50% as it is, that makes for 12% equivalent. Not so bad in those terms.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
Californians should find it frightening that a wealthy Republican can buy himself another election.
As opposed to a wealthy Democrat who bought himself the last election?
"Teachers leave us kids alone
I think Arnold may make the best candidate because he's a businessman, has been extraordinarily successful compared to most people who go into business and he's got the appearance of a genuine and warm personality that makes him look much more like a straight shooter. He's closer to the center than most, and as Reason Online's writers have pointed out, he's got many good points going for him.
I am a Southerner, and for lack of a better political label I am closer to a libertarian socialist than a libertarian capitalist on most issues. These are what I think are wrong with Georgy's positions.
Just a little critique from an outsider.
Click here or a puppy gets stomped!
Would you have forgiven him if he hadn't signed those contracts and the blackouts had continued indefinitely? The fact is, deregulation allowed the energy companies to put a gun to California's collective head. By signing the contracts, Davis was able to at least make it so that energy prices were stable and predictable, not increasing exponentially every week with intentional rolling blackouts (arguably a form of domestic terrorism) driving the "point" home.
The fact is California was mugged, and Davis bought us our freedom back. Sure, it was and is expensive, and there might have been better solutions (if you know any, please let me know what he should have done instead). Otherwise, wouldn't it be more logical to save your rage for the Republicans who set up the mugging, rather than the people who had to deal with the results?
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
Another thing wrong with commies is that they've got no sense of perspective or humour.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
She'd lose my vote, if I were Californian. Not because of her naivete: I'd rather have a naive governor than one that's experienced in, and jaded by, the current political system. People who don't realize that what they're trying to do is impossible are far more likely to succeed than those who know it is.
But she'd lose my vote on one issue: I refuse to support anyone who supports IRV. Our current electoral system is bad enough: why oh why does every electoral-reformist have to support one of the few systems that's actually provably WORSE?
My personal preference for government elections is the Approval system, which eliminates the vast majority of the problems with Plurality without introducing worse ones, like a complicated ballot sheet (remember, a significant percentage of Floridians couldn't handle the ones we have now!) and violations of monotonicity.
I'm aware of the technical superiority of Concordet methods, and support them for elections in which all voters are highly educated, but the complexity of the ballot sheets should rule it out along with IRV for elections to public office, IMO.
The correct answer is not "Legalize Pot because Smoking is Legal."
You don't have to smoke pot, you can bake up some brownies and they achieve the same effect and are very healthy! The correct answer is "brownies are legal, therefore pot brownies should be legal too."
Zoot!
On access violations. I'd overflow her buffer any day.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Not only is she smart, but she's damned cute too! She's got my vote!
I'm glad to see that we the American people continue to be issue-driven in our selection of candidates.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
she doesn't adequately explain how she can not believe in the legitimacy of a recall and still run in that recall race. i presume if she says that california deserves a good governor, then she, in some part, believes that the recall is legitimate enough to elect a legitimate governor.
i don't think gay marriages and legalizing marijuana should define the campaign, as she said. i think the controversial issues, the reasons for the recall itself, are the economy of california, the inability of the state to get anything done, and gray davis' inability to work with the legislature. those are the reasons why a recall is needed; THOSE SHOULD DEFINE ALL THE RECALL CANDIDATES' CAMPAIGNS. the recall is about saving california, not a litmus test for social issues.
and if her staff is all volunteers, heaven help her (if she believes in such) because the big names in political maneuvering will go to the people who are willing to solidly define themselves on issues, and it doesn't seem like she'll get much help. (unless she drafts me? ah but the odds are against me; net interaction between women and me is negative) even then, i'm just a neophyte.
vi AND emacs? the question was meant for her to choose, not to explain good points of both! well she's learning as a politician how to keep both sides of the aisle happy i guess...=P
On a side note, I can't imagine why people feel so threatened by gay marriage. Nobody is gonna make you get married to a man if you don't want. It's not like theres a certain number of marriage points and the gay people will use them all up.
The 17 voters are split into 4 factions with the following preferences:In the first election, everyone votes for their favorite choice:
X gets 6 votes; Y gets 6 votes; Z gets 5 votes, and is eliminated.
In the second election, everyone votes for X or Y:
X gets 11 votes; Y gets 6 votes; X wins!
Now assume that the 2 voters (*) with preferences (Y,X,Z) had decided that "X" really was the best candidate and change their preferences to (X,Y,Z). All other preferences remain the same:In the first election, everyone votes for their favorite choice:
X gets 8 votes; Y gets 4 votes, and is eliminated; Z gets 5 votes.
In the second election, everyone votes for X or Z:
X gets 8 votes; Z gets 9 votes; Z wins!
The only change between the first and second cases was that X was more preferred by 2 voters. Because of the additional support, X lost.
-- Don't Tase me, bro!
To paint this as some sort of republican vendetta is absolutely idiotic, and if this guy doesn't understand that when he's actually running, then obviously he's too stupid to be governor.
And if you think this is a he, you're obviously too stupid to vote.
Typical politician... comes out on both sides of important and contraversial issues.
By reading this sig, you agree to the terms of my sig license.
You won't see Gary Coleman tolerate that kind of sloppy techno-scrawl...
So long, michael. Don't let the door hit you...
Yes everyone...Vote with your dick. She's young and cute after all. And she can use BOTH vi and emacs!
:q!:q!:q! at the end of a response from someone who could potentially be ruling over me. She's 26. We don't even know if she can balance her checkbook, let alone run an economy worth 100 billion a year. I don't give a crap if she's a geek, I want someone who is capable of running a large business and can make informed decisions across a wide range of topics. NOT someone who's biggest decision of the day is whether to write a program in Perl or Python.
Boxers or briefs? vi or emacs? What kind of questions are those? When I'm paying out of my ass for car registration and funding for higher education is being cut left and right I don't want to hear about these asinine topics. I don't want to see a
-R
First, consider the approach of one of her competitors, Mr. Schwarzenegger (who it should be pointed out, has an economics degree):
"...bring businesses back to California. We have the most unfriendly business environment right now in California of any state. Businesses are leaving every day. They're expanding outside of the state. That means that people are getting laid off. Jobs are lost."
Now look at Miss Russell's platform. It is filled with anti-corporate rhetoric like "We deserve better than rich businessmen and career politicians trading money for power and power for money", "end corporate welfare to Bush's energy buddies", and so on. Rather than even trying to get business back to the state, she proposes tax hikes that will further slow an already dismal state economy.
It's easy to blame all of society's problems on corporations and on the wealthy. I'm not rich either, and it's a natural reaction to be jealous of those better off than oneself. But, in the long run, it's counterproductive. After all, who hires people, makes investments, and gets the economy moving again?
In a sense, California's economic problems are a foreshadowing or microcosm of what is happening at the national level: because of high costs of living and more business-friendly atmosphere elsewhere, companies are leaving. Whether the jobs are going from California to Iowa or from the U.S. to India, the inability to retain or lure back business causes lost jobs and a weakened economy. Is someone whose economic policies revolve around anti-corporate rhetoric and tax hikes really in a good position to reverse this trend?
We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
This was a gabfest- a chatroom transcript.
Californians should find it frightening that a wealthy Republican can buy himself another election.
Well, some of us, while not Republicans, don't buy into the Big Evil Republican Bogeyman that the opposition trots out every 3 nanoseconds in lieu of actual thought or ideas.
And Issa dropped out, so what's your point? He could have spent $100 million and not gotten 2 million signatures if the sentiment for a recall did not exist. Some of us find it refreshing to see that voters can still flex a little muscle. See the Constitution Of California, Article II, Sections 13-20. The recall election process is built into the state Constitution as well as the state election codes.There were stringent numbers to be met for the recall effort. The recall has stood firm against several legal and media challenges.
As for Republicans, the recall is also endorsed by the Libertarians and the American Independents. In fact, many key Republicans have the stance that they should be focusing more on defeating Barbara Boxer or re-electing Bush in the next regular elections.
Ah, what's the point... She's just another ideologue without any real, workable solutions. Does humanity really have to suck this badly?
--- Ban humanity.
As a Californian who signed the recall petition I'd like to start by saying that we know why Davis is a bad governor.
So we know why he's a bad governor. What we want to know, what we need to know, is how do you propose to fix this mess? Don't tell me how other people have failed, don't give me some generic line about how "special interest is running this state". Give me specific points of your plan to fix our financial problems.
She didn't answer the question at all. I mean, come on folks. "Boxers or Briefs"?? Who the hell cares!? This is serious shit! How are you going to keep my vehicle fees, gas taxes, and property taxes from tripling? That's what's important.
Content of this interview == null
any californian slashdotter will vote for Mary Carey
Of course, you realize, that a bunch of us are going to come and beat you to a pulp and steal your land and your belongings, and the police will laugh since you're not paying for their services anymore.
I ce land.html
Not necessarily. There have been societies where police protection has been privately purchased:
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Academic/Iceland/
Or maybe we'll just set your house on fire, and the fire department will be on hand to protect the belongings of taxpayers.
And my (privately paid for) insurance company will be on hand to put out the fire in my house, which was the way it was done before socialized fire departments. You'd have a sticker in your window indicating who your provider was, similar to the way you put an ADT sticker in your window indicating who your security provider is.
Just because you'd like to use the government to freeload off of your neighbors doesn't mean it's a societal necessity. There's plenty of historical evidence demonstrating it's not.