He'll be back.
On the 'phone with satanismyname tonight, he told me about a downstate state senator who is chairman of the Committee for Legislative Action. (This guy looks familiar from last election or the one before - I'll have to look into that and find out why.)
I tend to go along with the (usually) great folks at Snopes (that's [Ctrl+D] you're looking for now, I think), who explain very nicely why Iterent petitions are crap. They phrase it more politely, though:Paper-and-ink petitions are signed in a variety of handwriting styles, each unique to its signer. Consequently, signatures on a paper-and-ink petition cannot easily be faked else certain glaring similarities would show up in one entry after another.
E-petitions, however, come with no such assurance - the same person could have generated all of the signatures. Moreover, it takes little by way of programming skills to create a sequence of code that will randomly generate fake names, e-mail addresses, and cities (or whatever combination of same the e-petition calls for). Once written, such a program can be executed with a keystroke, resulting in the effortless generation of thousands upon thousands of "signatures."
Those in a position to influence anything know this and thus accord e-petitions only slightly more respect than they would a blank sheet of paper. Thus, even the best written, properly addressed, and lovingly delivered e-petitions whose every signature was scrupulously vetted by the petition's creator fall into the same vortex of disbelief at the receiving end that less carefully shepherded missives find themselves relegated to.
This thing, though, does not claim to be such a petition, at least. It says: CLA has accepted the charge to gauge public opinion and see if at least the number of registered voters necessary to put the question of recalling a Governor on the ballot, 418,559, would "register" their support for such action.
In other words, it's more like they are asking if people would support them if they did it properly.
Unfortunately, our current governor - the one raising this speculation - seems to have no fear of the possibility, because, as pissed off as people are, they are still generally opposed to change.
I tend to go along with the (usually) great folks at Snopes (that's [Ctrl+D] you're looking for now, I think), who explain very nicely why Iterent petitions are crap. They phrase it more politely, though:Paper-and-ink petitions are signed in a variety of handwriting styles, each unique to its signer. Consequently, signatures on a paper-and-ink petition cannot easily be faked else certain glaring similarities would show up in one entry after another.
E-petitions, however, come with no such assurance - the same person could have generated all of the signatures. Moreover, it takes little by way of programming skills to create a sequence of code that will randomly generate fake names, e-mail addresses, and cities (or whatever combination of same the e-petition calls for). Once written, such a program can be executed with a keystroke, resulting in the effortless generation of thousands upon thousands of "signatures."
Those in a position to influence anything know this and thus accord e-petitions only slightly more respect than they would a blank sheet of paper. Thus, even the best written, properly addressed, and lovingly delivered e-petitions whose every signature was scrupulously vetted by the petition's creator fall into the same vortex of disbelief at the receiving end that less carefully shepherded missives find themselves relegated to.
This thing, though, does not claim to be such a petition, at least. It says: CLA has accepted the charge to gauge public opinion and see if at least the number of registered voters necessary to put the question of recalling a Governor on the ballot, 418,559, would "register" their support for such action.
In other words, it's more like they are asking if people would support them if they did it properly.
Unfortunately, our current governor - the one raising this speculation - seems to have no fear of the possibility, because, as pissed off as people are, they are still generally opposed to change.