Not that I’m inviting flaming, but I am struck that my two most heart-felt posts on men and growing up have been largely ignored by my MRA critics. Not that I need you fellas to comment on everything I write, but the silence is nearly deafening.
One last special election note: listening to right-wing talk radio, I hear over and over again that the outcome of Tuesday’s balloting can be explained by low voter turn-out by Republicans and conservatives. I hear this especially about the failure of Proposition 73, the parental notification measure. As is so often the case in defeat, the losing side continues to insist that a silent, non-voting majority really supports their side of things. But the numbers don’t back that view.
Here are the voter turn-out percentages in five "liberal counties" that voted down 73:
Los Angeles: 41%
Monterey: 37.5%
Alameda: 44.6%
San Francisco: 41.1%
Santa Barbara: 42.5%
And five conservative counties that easily passed 73:
Placer: 52.7%
Orange: 41.5%
Fresno: 45%
Amador: 65% (highest in the state)
Kern: 41%
Looks about the same to me; the statewide average was a relatively high (for a special election) 43.1%; thus the liberal heartlands of Los Angeles and San Francisco were below the average, not well-above it! The only place conservatives had a poor showing was in the Inland Empire Southern California counties of Riverside and San Bernardino, but even those counties were heavily influenced by a growing Latino electorate, which was willing to support abortion restrictions but far more leery of the rest of the governor’s props.
Sorry, my GOP friends. This wasn’t about turn-out — this election, even the vote on 73, seems to me to be a fairly accurate reflection of the center-left impulses of most Californians.
UPDATE: One last last election note. One newcomer who won election to the Pasadena City College Board of Trustees (the folks for whom, in some sense, I work) is Hilary Bradbury-Huang. I knew she was backed by our union, and I was pleased she beat her Republican opponent, who had been on the PCC board since (believe it or not) 1977. But what I didn’t know is that she’s a registered Green. That makes me very, very happy. When I first started teaching here, Republicans held all but one of the seats on the Board of Trustees; now they are in the minority. Sweet.
More good news, excellent. Now, do the CA Dems have someone slightly more appealing than Grey Davis to run for Governor? That’s probably the threshold at this point.
Hugo, you’re probably not going to get a lot of arguing with you on personal reflection – when you say “I did this … I needed to change” or “My wife and I arrange our marriage…” there’s no real debate. It’s your business. If painting your ears green is what you do to please your wife, MRA’s one and all are jiggy wid’ it.
Honest, mate. We only argue when we disagree.
Now you start saying things like “Men need to change and paint their ears green…” then you’ll get some responses.
No, we don’t — that’s the problem. We’ve got two Democratic men lined up, Phil Angelides (currently state treasurer) and Steve Westly (the controller). Most party folks I know favore Angelides, and he’s got a bit of a personality and reasonably good progressive credentials. But our biggest potential stars aren’t running, at least not yet: mayors Gavin Newsom of San Francisco and Antonio Villaraigosa of Los Angeles. One of those two men will be governor some day, deo volente. Just not in 2006.
The last post was a reply to DJW; Gonz, I suspected that was the reason. I’ll see if I can come up with something suitably inflammatory, but probably not until next week!
And I agree with djw – while the People’s Republik of Kalifornia is pretty reliably left wing, Arnie got elected on Comrade Davis’ incompetance; apparantly he was a couple steps below the proverbial yellow dog.
As a Libertairan, I suppose I’m used to the year in and year out endorsements of Republicrats by the proletariat as a resounding “Yea, Rah!” for the status quo, but I really see no major political shifts this year.
(I’m trying to help you out and be inflammatory Hugo. You sound so lonely…)
“I’m trying to help you out and be inflammatory Hugo. You sound so lonely…”
Not lonely; just waiting for the air conditioner repair person, and thus I have lots of extra time on the computer. I ought to be out on my bike…
I guess that serves me right for citing turnout the other day, when the same web page showed O.C. at about 2 1/2 points below L.A. I don’t buy the theory that the overall voted reflected “center-left impulses,” however. Voting down everything left, right or center is not a left or right impulse; it’s a temper tantrum.
X, I’d buy that reasoning (knee-jerk hostility to the whole process) on the other props — but do you really think that applies to 73, a prop on the hottest of hot-button issues? Especially given that the governor was not closely identified with it?
Like Gonz said, on all counts re. “men and growing up” and Left Coast political issues, e.g., the proletariat endorsing the typical republicrats. I too am Libertarian.
The only thing I’d add is that I considered the two posts you referred to as being more of the same old same old, i.e., ‘men to change, grow up, etc., and women are just fine the way they are’ routine. And since I’ve already beaten that horse dead and beyond, I decided to pass. Been there, done that.
Give me something new to get riled-up about and I think you know how I’ll respond.
Actually, Hugo, it’s nice to have a break from MRA misogyny flooding your comments for once.
As a Libertairan, I suppose I’m used to the year in and year out endorsements of Republicrats by the proletariat as a resounding “Yea, Rah!” for the status quo, but I really see no major political shifts this year.
Hah! I’ve got you beat! I’m progressive and see republicrats *and* liberatarians as trying to maintain the status quo.
You got me, Hugo. My tendency is to pop in only when I see something to dispute. Of course, life intervenes at times, and I am unable to participate for a while, but that was not the case here. I believe that, in the past, I have expressed my admiration for your ability to introspect, and willingness to to admit error and improve yourself where you can. These recent posts reaffirm this. And you did not generalize by assuming this to be true of all men. Good stuff.
It’s great to be non-controversial for a bit. Gives a chance to catch the breath and see one another as human beings doing the best we can, and not as evil adversaries. (So do you think Serena will ever get back to #1?)
Stanton, I’m kicking myself that my wife and I didn’t get tickets to the WTA championships at the Staples Center… I caught quite a bit of the Davenport-Sharapova match last night, and though I was sorry Lindsey lost, it was well worth watching. No, I don’t think Serena will get back to #1, but I do think she’s got one or two more Grand Slam wins left in her. I just don’t see enough consistency — and good health.
I believe that Serena will be back at #1 if she REALLY wants to. I don’t believe she has the drive she once had, though the ability is still there.
Maybe Davenport can get even on the weekend.
Actually, Hugo, it’s nice to have a break from MRA misogyny flooding your comments for once.
Well, apparently we’re not short of WRA misandry.
I figured I’d just stay out of that little fight.