When it favors the other side it’s bad. When it favors your side, it’s a good system.
1 Like
I have not done the math, but I’m pretty certain that this method favors the plurality party as scripta refers to them. In California, it is usually the Democrats. In my far left Silicon Valley District, I had the choice between two Democrats for most elected positions on the general election ballot.
The Democrats are usually quite disciplined about consolidating around two candidates.That still may happen in the governor’s race, but so far only one minor Dem has dropped out. The Republicans need one of the 2 leaders to drop out, but it also so far has not happened.
Democrats are going to airbrush Cesar Chavez from the picture like Stalin had his murdered opponents erased from pictures
California lawmakers say they’ll change name of Cesar Chavez Day to Farmworkers Day
There were calls to alter memorials honoring the man who in the 1960s helped secure better wages and working conditions for farmworkers and has been long revered by many Democratic leaders in the U.S. The California Museum said it will remove Chavez from the state’s Hall of Fame - something it’s never done before.
Some local and state leaders in both parties urged their communities not to celebrate Chavez’s birthday on March 31, and to rename buildings and streets named for him. Celebrations of Chavez in Texas and in his home state of Arizona have been canceled at the request of the Cesar Chavez Foundation.
1 Like
There’s nothing “good” about it, I don’t think it does the majority party any favors.
Maybe you should do the math then. I don’t think it favors either party. CA being majority Democrats would be more likely to elects Democrats even if each party had a separate primary and one candidate from each party advanced to the general.
ICE has been catching and investigating illegal aliens, including some examples where they have been voting regularly.
4 Likes
This bleeding heart liberal is A-OK with catching and punishing criminals, so long as the legal process is followed and their legal rights, including human rights, are respected.
But do not let this small number of alleged (not yet proven) illegal voters make you believe that the actual number is in the hundreds of thousands, as the article alluded multiple times about one state, unless and until those high numbers are proven to be true. The SAVE Act will most definitely disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of legal registered voters in this year’s elections, given that it takes immediate effect, does not clarify exactly what constitutes proof of citizenship or a “reasonable attempt” to obtain such proof if it can’t be obtained, and does not provide any funding for states to implement the requirements. Also I know onenote will say I’m presenting data without proof, my data is from Sen. Murkowski’s recent speech on the subject.
1 Like
A voter ID initiative has gathered enough signatures to qualify for the 2026 California ballot. I donated to gather the signatures and will vote for it.
https://www.reformcalifornia.org/cavoterid/home
What the CA Voter ID Initiative Does:
The California Voter ID Initiative is a state constitutional amendment being proposed to impose a Voter ID requirement for all future elections in California. Because the proposal is a constitutional amendment, once approved by the voters, state politicians will be compelled to comply with it for all future elections – no exceptions. Here’s what it requires:
Photo ID to Vote
Voters would provide a government issued ID for in-person voting or provide last four digits of a government ID for voting by mail.
Verification of Citizenship
Election officials would be required to verify that only eligible individuals are registered to vote and receive ballots. Citizenship must be verified.
2 Likes
SCOTUS may have states like my California scrambling to fix their vote counting in the November election. California is particularly outrageous. They give themselves 30 days for ballots to arrive and be counted. They encourage Ballot harvesting. They also have something called ballot curing where activists go out and contact the voters who screwed up their ballot to get them to change it so it will be counted,
Alito gives lawyers plain-English lesson on meaning of ‘day’ as Supreme Court weighs late-ballot fight
Alito says the phrase ‘Election Day’ implies ‘the day in which everything is going to take place’
The mailed ballots must be postmarked on or before Election Day, so whether they give themselves 1 day or 30 days doesn’t really matter, does it? Other than to people with the patience of a toddler?
Of course it does. Anyone with any sense would know that given enough time fraudsters will corrupt the system. For example, ballot curing, which is only possible with this extended time, is designed for fraud.
Voting has an important psychological aspect. Only if voters accept the integrity of an election will the losers accept the result. Having to wait 30 days immediately makes the results suspicious.
It will be interesting to see how SCOTUS rules.
2 Likes
Only if the results are very close. I don’t remember the last time we had to actually wait this long, because the number of not yet received or counted ballots is too small to make a difference. We often have the final results the same or next day (though they take a bit longer to certify).
This happens multiple times. For example, there were several California congressional districts with a margin of only a few hundred votes in 2024. Here is an example. Notice the date: November 27.
1 Like
This one is better than the SAVE Act, because it will give the state almost two years to prepare, assuming there isn’t another election sooner than that. It really should have some kind of a timeline, otherwise the state could end up breaking this law or not allowing any snap elections for a while.
But it still has problems. The text states “shall use best efforts to verify citizenship attestations using government data” without explaining what “best efforts” means. Not sure how I feel about using the last four digits of a government ID, which becomes “designated” for voting purposes. The text states: “Government-issued identification means documentation that allows conclusive verification of the voter’s identity”. What numbered documentation allows such conclusive verification besides a passport, whose number is only good until expiration? It then says: “Upon request by an eligible voter, the state shall provide, at no charge, a voter ID card for use in casting a ballot.” I’m guessing this will be a new document that the state needs to create just for voting.
I’m pretty sure most, if not all states offer non-driver ID cards. I’m not sure if “Real IDs” (or other state’s versions required for flights and allow certain boarder crossings) consider citizenship status or not, but they can add a flag and related documentation to that.
Real ID does not require citizenship. I guess they would have to add something to existing state-issued IDs. I don’t think any state IDs that are not Real IDs are valid for flights or border crossings anymore.
And all permanent mail voters would have to re-register to vote.
Thanks to tariffs, jobs are coming back to America, especially manufacturing jobs
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/04/03/job-growth-expectations-trump-iran-war-oil-00857260
Job growth shatters expectations in March, in boost to Trump
U.S. job growth surged past expectations in March and the unemployment rate dropped, giving President Donald Trump some breathing room as the economy comes under increasing pressure over the war in Iran and rising oil prices.
Companies added a net 178,000 jobs last month, the Labor Department reported Friday, a huge swing from February, when the economy actually shed jobs. But it was roughly in line with January — a sharp fluctuation that is making it hard to gauge the job market’s health. But the overall positive trend suggests that the economy remained resilient during the first quarter of the year.
Do we really care about those numbers? Arent they numbers that always end up being revised numerous times, since they always need ot be “adjusted” for various factors instead of just being a number?
Just saw this news today:
Any guesses on how this affects the California primary? Does somebody benefit from the scandal?
The general perception by the Democrats is that there are too many Democrats running. So this helps them by pruning the field, but it gets rid of one of their top candidates. He had been doing quite well,and had gotten the endorsement of the teachers union. The primary is not until June 2, so there’s enough time for things to shake out.
1 Like
He should run as a Republican now. Enough of them don’t care about allegations or even convictions of sexual assault or pedophilia.