CA-SurveyUSA: Gov. Brown's approval rating takes major hit

[hopper]

Democrats are pretty bad at managing states. California? Illinois? Disasters. New York is okay but still has a shortfall. Maryland, too, has a shortfall. While McDonnell's Virginia has a surplus.

Isn't Malloy pretty unpopular in CT too? Or am I just imagining that?

I think he has a 51% approval rating last time I looked. Malloy loves tax increases though. He did the same thing while he was Mayor of Stamford: increasing taxes like crazy I think. I don't know how this guy continues to win elections when he loves tax increases that much. Malloy somehow beat a incumbent Republican for Mayor of Stamford in 1995. Then Malloy was actually re-placed when he ran for Governor of Connecticut with a Republican Mayor in Michael Pavia. Pavia has still increased taxes but never like Malloy had in the past.

[Senator Sbane]

I thought Pete Wilson was popular during the 90's. No? Am I wrong?

The fact that Pete Wilson won re-election in 1994 is nothing short of a miracle. He was trailing by as much as 20% in 1993, and had some of the lowest approvals of any California governor, ever. The main reason why he won is (1) Wilson was a terrific campaigner who knew how to play hot-button issues like the death penalty, and (2) his opponent was inept at best.

Don't forget prop 187.

[So the Heroes Fall]

Democrats are pretty bad at managing states. California? Illinois? Disasters. New York is okay but still has a shortfall. Maryland, too, has a shortfall. While McDonnell's Virginia has a surplus.

Geez, are you serious about the blue avatar now? Do you think California and Illinois would be any better off with Whitman and Brady running things? Oh and how well off are the economies of Ohio and Florida and the popularity of the Republican governors there?

I thought Pete Wilson was popular during the 90's. No? Am I wrong?

The fact that Pete Wilson won re-election in 1994 is nothing short of a miracle. He was trailing by as much as 20% in 1993, and had some of the lowest approvals of any California governor, ever. The main reason why he won is (1) Wilson was a terrific campaigner who knew how to play hot-button issues like the death penalty, and (2) his opponent was inept at best.

and it was 1994.

[Pacific Councillor LiberalJunkie]

Weird...has his lowest numbers being with Women, 18-34 year old's and Hispanics.

[Χahar]

I thought Pete Wilson was popular during the 90's. No? Am I wrong?

The fact that Pete Wilson won re-election in 1994 is nothing short of a miracle. He was trailing by as much as 20% in 1993, and had some of the lowest approvals of any California governor, ever. The main reason why he won is (1) Wilson was a terrific campaigner who knew how to play hot-button issues like the death penalty, and (2) his opponent was inept at best.

Don't forget prop 187.

Yeah, 187 was what saved the Republicans in 1994. Unfortunately for them, the legacy of that has killed them at every election since.

[crypto-fascist superhero]

Running for governor of California, especially in 2010, is like asking to win the honor of being punched repeatedly in the face and charged five bucks each time for the pleasure.

I believe I called this back in 2010; I'll have to find my post.

Calling that doesn't make you prescient. Calling that means you have common sense. California hasn't had a popular governor since the 1980s.

Well yes, but people were getting angry and calling me a hack, as I recall.

[So the Heroes Fall]

I've always found it somewhat amusing that Gray Davis of all people won an election in 1994. But does the Lt. Gov. of California actually do anything?

[Torie]

I've always found it somewhat amusing that Gray Davis of all people won an election in 1994. But does the Lt. Gov. of California actually do anything?

To answer your question, the answer is no, the LG office is the null set. The LG theoretically runs the state however when the governor is out of state, which sometimes can lead to mischief.

[Kevin]

Democrats are pretty bad at managing states. California? Illinois? Disasters. New York is okay but still has a shortfall. Maryland, too, has a shortfall. While McDonnell's Virginia has a surplus.

Exactly one of the main reasons I'm a Republican,

The GOP may have some pretty kooky base supporters on paper but the Democrats can't govern anything whether on the county, state, or federal level to save their lives.

[I left.]

Democrats are pretty bad at managing states. California? Illinois? Disasters. New York is okay but still has a shortfall. Maryland, too, has a shortfall. While McDonnell's Virginia has a surplus.

Exactly one of the main reasons I'm a Republican,

The GOP may have some pretty kooky base supporters on paper but the Democrats can't govern anything whether on the county, state, or federal level to save their lives.

I could think of other reasons you're a Republican too.

[cope1989]

Democrats are pretty bad at managing states. California? Illinois? Disasters. New York is okay but still has a shortfall. Maryland, too, has a shortfall. While McDonnell's Virginia has a surplus.

Exactly one of the main reasons I'm a Republican,

The GOP may have some pretty kooky base supporters on paper but the Democrats can't govern anything whether on the county, state, or federal level to save their lives.

Agreed. It's also great how Republican led states are always at the top of public education, healthcare and income. Oh wait..

You can't just say that Republicans or Democrats will always be better or worse at managing states. It doesn't work like that. There's a lot of other factors at work. Georgia is led by Republicans and has faced a budget shortfall for years now while Dem led Massachusetts had a large surplus last year.

[Simfan34]

They're all bad, but the GOP is less bad. I'd like to hear more of Torie's doom and gloom, seriously, but CA, please don't cut the HSR!

[crypto-fascist superhero]

They're all bad, but the GOP is less bad. I'd like to hear more of Torie's doom and gloom, seriously, but CA, please don't cut the HSR!

Yeah, how about they spend a few more dozen billion over 20 years without a single millimeter of track being laid down for something that nobody even wants to use anyway.

[So rightwing that I broke the Political Compass!]

That poll is weird, it says that moderates are more supportive of Browns tax increase plans then Liberals are.

[Former Moderate]

They're all bad, but the GOP is less bad. I'd like to hear more of Torie's doom and gloom, seriously, but CA, please don't cut the HSR!

Yeah, how about they spend a few more dozen billion over 20 years without a single millimeter of track being laid down for something that nobody even wants to use anyway.

I would love to use it, actually. LA to SF in under 3 hours? Yes, please.

[Governor Maxwell]

Democrats are pretty bad at managing states. California? Illinois? Disasters. New York is okay but still has a shortfall. Maryland, too, has a shortfall. While McDonnell's Virginia has a surplus.

Exactly one of the main reasons I'm a Republican,

The GOP may have some pretty kooky base supporters on paper but the Democrats can't govern anything whether on the county, state, or federal level to save their lives.

I mean, yeah, Rick Scott, John Kasich, and Rick Snyder are great governors.

[Torie]

They're all bad, but the GOP is less bad. I'd like to hear more of Torie's doom and gloom, seriously, but CA, please don't cut the HSR!

Yeah, how about they spend a few more dozen billion over 20 years without a single millimeter of track being laid down for something that nobody even wants to use anyway.

I would love to use it, actually. LA to SF in under 3 hours? Yes, please.

The only train like this that would be remotely justified is a BoWash one, and that is primarily because that area is literally running out of air space. One storm in the area, and the air lanes get clogged, and chaos ensues. In any event, if one wants to experiment with super trains, that is the place where the first one should be built. Why have a train from SF to LA, when you can fly there for 80 bucks in an hour from a host of airports - LAX, John Wayne, Ontario, Burbank, Long Beach in the south, and San Jose, SF and Oakland in the north?  And the air lanes are not clogged over CA.

Anyway, CA is flat ass broke.  If it is built, the Feds will need to pay for this white elephant (training is going to cost more than flying in this instance).

[muon2]

Democrats are pretty bad at managing states. California? Illinois? Disasters. New York is okay but still has a shortfall. Maryland, too, has a shortfall. While McDonnell's Virginia has a surplus.

Maryland is doing alright.Colorado, Missouri, Arkansas, and Montana have Dem Governors and their balance sheets aren't complete disasters. Shweitzer in Montana is actually a Dem I could see myself voting for.  I agree CA along with Illinois are complete disasters. Maybe Illinois should have gone with Brady last election but he had like a nutty  view on something to do with animals or something. I remember Paul Begala talking about the animal thing on a couple occasions having to with Brady.

Yes, Quinn's approvals in IL have hovered in the 30s, and the perception is usually that he's well meaning but not up to governing. The Brady animal issue is covered here, and can be summed up as a politician running statewide but acting for local constituents regardless of the statewide impact. Once that got out the issue "dogged" him throughout the campaign. Most every observer will say that IL should have gone with Dillard who was 193 votes behind Brady in the primary, losing due a big field splitting his suburban base and attack ads from one of the other suburban contenders (who ignored Brady in those attacks). Watch for both again in the 2014 primary.

[muon2]

They're all bad, but the GOP is less bad. I'd like to hear more of Torie's doom and gloom, seriously, but CA, please don't cut the HSR!

Yeah, how about they spend a few more dozen billion over 20 years without a single millimeter of track being laid down for something that nobody even wants to use anyway.

I would love to use it, actually. LA to SF in under 3 hours? Yes, please.

The only train like this that would be remotely justified is a BoWash one, and that is primarily because that area is literally running out of air space. One storm in the area, and the air lanes get clogged, and chaos ensues. In any event, if one want to experiment with super trains, that is the place where the first one should be built. Why have a train from SF to LA, when you can fly there for 80 bucks in an hour from a host of airports - LAX, John Wayne, Ontario, Burbank, Long Beach in the south, and San Jose, SF and Oakland in the north?  And the air lanes are not clogged over CA.

Anyway, CA is flat ass broke.  If it is built, the Feds will need to pay for this white elephant (training is going to cost more than flying in this instance).

Medium-high speed trains (110-150 mph) may be able to succeed in parts of the Midwest. The airports are not close to the urban centers and a train at that speed over 300 miles is comparable in time when check-in and gate time is factored in. In 2007 IL increased the trains on the Chicago-St Louis run from 3 to 5 a day and saw a large increase in ridership and the increase has been sustained since then.

[Senator Ben]

While McDonnell's Virginia has a surplus.

And a lot of that is due to Kaine and Warner (who made the state the best managed in the country)

[timothyinMD]

Democrats are pretty bad at managing states. California? Illinois? Disasters. New York is okay but still has a shortfall. Maryland, too, has a shortfall. While McDonnell's Virginia has a surplus.

Exactly one of the main reasons I'm a Republican,

The GOP may have some pretty kooky base supporters on paper but the Democrats can't govern anything whether on the county, state, or federal level to save their lives.

Democrats have literally destroyed California and Illinois, and New York and New Jersey are a disaster.  Maryland is the land of massive, bloated big government

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I guess the problem is that various Propositions have made the state kind of ungovernable. I guess I would have answered I approve of Brown. Sure he sometimes does things I'm disappointed with, but compared to Obama it's nothing really.

As for wasted money in California, the Supreme Court recently blew $1 billion on a new IT system that never got finished. It was hilarious to see all of the commenters blame one party rule. Well, yes there is one party rule on the California Supreme court. Just not the party they were trying to blame.

[LINCOLN REPUBLICAN]

11% unemployment.

Californians, how do ya like Brown so far?

[Fmr. Emperor PiT]

     His approval rating is 31% too high.

[LINCOLN REPUBLICAN]

California -

11% unemployment.

California cities going bankrupt at a rapid pace.

How do ya like Brown so far?