Pretty funny shit. Meg Whitman used an old debate between the two from 92..... [video=youtube;TufO2AnYO50]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TufO2AnYO50[/video] Brown takes the bait, goes apeshit. http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/20...ton-i-did-not-have-taxes-with-this-state.html what a mook! i mean he seems all cool and all flying Southwest Airlines, answering his own cell phones and all...but damn. he got sonned right here.
these things always get handled in the last month though depending on the hot issue of the moment though, so who knows.
Would it be possible, you know, just for fun, or for a change, or for a unique experience, to maybe, just, you know, maybe, discuss issues in this campaign? Not what someone said 18 years ago, or bad hair, or bad jokes? Like, for example, San Bruno is still smoldering and the state legislature is considering a bill that would require consumers to pay for catastrophic fires that exceed PG&E's insurance limit. So they can make record profits but we foot the bill for screw-ups. I'd like, you know, just for fun, just for a change, to hear where the candidates stand on that. Maybe, I mean just maybe, that is more important or interesting or something than what was said 18 years ago or Nancy Pelosi's hairdresser? I mean, maybe?
I always kinda liked Jerry Brown. His political views over his career are all over the map, so I agree with him some and don't agree with him some. Jerry's had some political success since he left the governor's office nearly 3 decades ago but only to a certain level. I think that, unfairly, the Linda Ronstadt/Mike Royko "Governor Moonbeam" title hit too close to home.
the ad was a response to Brown's ad where he purported his successes as governor. I think this campaign is going to boil down to basically unemployment and government corruptions/unions/salaries. Those are the "hot" buttons right now.
I'd be pretty surprised if that were a game-changer. The best Meg Whitman can do is "Hey, Bill Clinton got this guy pretty good a couple of decades ago! Vote Meg Whitman"? Doesn't seem like a very decisive, winning thrust. But you never know what will end up making the difference.
yeah, the "Jerry Brown is a loser ads are better" Whitman is pouring in millions on brown...we'll see how it goes. I don't trust either of them, Whitman looks shifty but she seems like a ball breaker wheras Brown will kind of keep the status quo.
I think the ad effectively shows Brown to be a career politician, which he is. That politicians lie isn't newsworthy, IMO.
As for "running on the issues", I'd love it if that happened more. Unfortunately, I think we can both agree that the majority of people voting in almost any election nowadays are doing it based on popularity, the (D) or (R) after the candidate's name on the ballot, or who the people they like are endorsing. I'm not as familiar with CA issues from my perch up here in Beautiful Western Washington (TM), but it seems as if she has a relatively clear agenda if asked about the issues (perusal of a few articles and wikipedia show things like "Whitman has emphasized three major areas: job creation, reduced state government spending, and reform of the state's K-12 educational system", and "she supports 'policies that will not allow undocumented immigrants admission to state-funded institutions of higher education, such as UC, CSU and community colleges.'"). As for the commercials and things, I imagine it's much the same as up here--Patty Murray has agreed to only 2 of the proposed 6 debates with Rossi, probably b/c she'll be crushed if she has to explain her record--where the candidates spend most of the commercial time talking about imagined successes and the failures of their opponents, rather than issues that people have a hard time understanding in the voter pamphlet (if they read it), much less digest in 30 or 60 seconds.
I guess Slick Willy will campaign for Brown. Holy shit, it'll be a huge blow if California goes republican in the governor and the senate.
