Newsletter Subject

California’s recall election is a terrible mess

From

bloombergview.com

Email Address

noreply@mail.bloombergview.com

Sent On

Tue, Aug 24, 2021 11:44 AM

Email Preheader Text

Follow Us Get Jonathan Bernstein’s newsletter every morning in your inbox. Oy, recalls. Califor

[Bloomberg]( Follow Us [Get the newsletter]( Get Jonathan Bernstein’s newsletter every morning in your inbox. [Click here to subscribe.]( Oy, recalls. Californians are beginning to vote in an election to recall their governor, Gavin Newsom. Despite the state’s large Democratic majority, it’s [very possible]( that Newsom will be removed, just as Gray Davis was in 2003. I haven’t lived in California for years, and I have no particular view on whether Newsom has done a good job in office. I do have a strong view, however, on the process: It’s garbage. To begin with, the election is structured badly. Californians are first asked whether to retain or remove Newsom, and then are given a plurality ballot of candidates to replace him, which only matters if the incumbent is in fact removed. Single-shot plurality elections with no party nominations are just a mess, and tend toward large candidate fields and almost random results; name recognition and factional candidacies are rewarded at the expense of almost everything else. Whatever the merits of recalls, this is simply a terrible way to replace a removed governor, as political scientist David Karol [points out](: Three improvements to the recall system in order of increasing simplicity and merit: 1. Lt Governor serves pending a special gubernatorial election. 2. Ranked-choice voting for replacement candidates 3. Lt. Governor serves out the term, as she would for any other vacancy. The best option, however, would be to get rid of the recall altogether, along with its Progressive Era cousins, the initiative and the referendum. All of them are purported to be methods for getting around organized interests and political parties and thereby returning power to voters. That’s bunk. For one thing, voters are only strong in groups. Tear them away from organized groups, and they retain only the illusion of influence. More important, the truth is that, like it or not, direct democracy isn’t a very strong form of democracy at all, at least in large polities. It offers only the illusion of control, as opposed to a representative system in which those who do the governing are responsible to the electorate. Direct democracy leaves voters hostage to what’s on the ballot, which means that the groups that choose what’s on the ballot — when recall elections are held, who’s being recalled, which initiatives are sponsored, how they’re drafted and so on — gain influence. Politicians have plenty of incentives to listen to their constituents. The groups that control the ballot, by contrast, need only listen to themselves. They might be permeable political parties that allow citizen participation, or they might be closed parties or narrower groups whose only concern is to advance their own interests. Of course, interest groups are an important part of any democratic system, but legislatures and other representative institutions force them to form coalitions, and, ultimately, to think beyond themselves. Direct democracy efforts such as recalls and initiatives encourage narrow groups to stay narrow and to try to manipulate enough voters to get their way. And that’s not the only problem. Recalls, initiatives and referendums all ask a lot of voters. They’re additional items on the ballot, or — as with the California recall — require additional visits to the polls. What’s more, they tend to remove useful short-cuts such as party identification. The result is that voters are asked to do more and given less useful information to do it. 1. Dan Drezner on [who is talking to President Joe Biden about Afghanistan](. 2. Paul Waldman and Greg Sargent talk to Sarah Binder about [the Democrats’ options on the infrastructure bills](. 3. Alex Samuels on [young Republicans](. 4. Ariel Edwards-Levy on [public opinion about Afghanistan](. 5. Barbara Rodriguez on [women and governorships](. 6. And my Bloomberg Opinion colleague Michael R. Strain on [Republicans and vaccine mandates](. Get Early Returns every morning in your inbox. [Click here to subscribe](. Also subscribe to [Bloomberg All Access]( and get much, much more. You’ll receive our unmatched global news coverage and two in-depth daily newsletters, the Bloomberg Open and the Bloomberg Close. Before it’s here, it’s on the Bloomberg Terminal. Find out more about how the Terminal delivers information and analysis that financial professionals can’t find anywhere else. [Learn more](. You received this message because you are subscribed to Bloomberg's Early Returns newsletter. [Unsubscribe]( | [Bloomberg.com]( | [Contact Us]( Bloomberg L.P. 731 Lexington, New York, NY, 10022

Marketing emails from bloombergview.com

View More
Sent On

05/07/2024

Sent On

03/07/2024

Sent On

02/07/2024

Sent On

01/07/2024

Sent On

30/06/2024

Sent On

29/06/2024

Email Content Statistics

Subscribe Now

Subject Line Length

Data shows that subject lines with 6 to 10 words generated 21 percent higher open rate.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Number of Words

The more words in the content, the more time the user will need to spend reading. Get straight to the point with catchy short phrases and interesting photos and graphics.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Number of Images

More images or large images might cause the email to load slower. Aim for a balance of words and images.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Time to Read

Longer reading time requires more attention and patience from users. Aim for short phrases and catchy keywords.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Predicted open rate

Subscribe Now

Spam Score

Spam score is determined by a large number of checks performed on the content of the email. For the best delivery results, it is advised to lower your spam score as much as possible.

Subscribe Now

Flesch reading score

Flesch reading score measures how complex a text is. The lower the score, the more difficult the text is to read. The Flesch readability score uses the average length of your sentences (measured by the number of words) and the average number of syllables per word in an equation to calculate the reading ease. Text with a very high Flesch reading ease score (about 100) is straightforward and easy to read, with short sentences and no words of more than two syllables. Usually, a reading ease score of 60-70 is considered acceptable/normal for web copy.

Subscribe Now

Technologies

What powers this email? Every email we receive is parsed to determine the sending ESP and any additional email technologies used.

Subscribe Now

Email Size (not include images)

Font Used

No. Font Name
Subscribe Now

Copyright © 2019–2024 SimilarMail.