Recalls Have Unintended Consequences!

In the latest video by Scottsdale Studios and We the People AZ Alliance, activists in the group announced more Republicans are now their recall targets. (I predicted this. Where does it stop?)

Maricopa County Supervisor Steve Chucri and State Senator Paul Boyer are the latest elected officials who they have filed recall applications against.

In addition, the Trump-obsessed group announced they were pulling recall applications against Republican Governor Doug Ducey, Democrat Secretary of State Katie Hobbs and Democrat Superintendent of Public Instruction, Kathy Hoffmann.

(It’s only a matter of time before they file recalls against Attorney General Mark Brnovich, State Treasurer Kimberly Yee, The Corporation Commission and State Mine Inspector Joe Hart! And anyone else that doesn’t pass their purity test!)

In the video, Verl Farnsworth, who once ran for US President and other local offices, whips up the crowd promising even more recalls sometime in the next week. Farnsworth indicates they will recall one more member of the House of Representatives, another State Senator, one mayor of a city in Maricopa County and several members of city councils.

What does this mean?

First, recall efforts are extremely difficult campaigns to pull off. The last successful effort occurred in 2011 when former State Senator Russell Pearce was targeted and removed from office. Recall signature campaigns are extremely difficult because they require the collection of tens of thousands of valid signatures within a 120-day period. There’s a reason why they were set up to be difficult!

Second, even if a signature collection effort is successful in obtaining the minimum number of signatures, they must be validated AND are always challenged in court. On top of that, there is an appeals process that takes time and costs money.

Third, Democrats always take advantage of Republican on Republican violence. Vote splitting will occur.

Recall campaigns run a challenger Republican candidate against the elected Republican who doesn’t pass their “purity test.” Democrats plot and wait for this to happen and take advantage of a vote split even in the most Republican of districts. The challenger won’t win. The elected official won’t survive the recall. The Democrat will win. Democrat elected!

Recalls are a bad idea. Normal election cycles work. Primary Elections work. They allow the parties to purify their candidates.

These recalls are based on ignorance and revenge.

If these recalls succeed, the unintended consequence will be that Democrats will take control of almost all authority in Arizona and the recallers will have put themselves and all Republicans into a state of tyranny.

Don’t sign the petitions and pray the recall effort fails.

Recall Virus!

Arizona Republican elected officials appear to be suffering an outbreak of Recall Virus-20 with Maricopa County now declared a hotspot.

The source of the virus seems to have originated in a West Valley Glendale lab run by We the People AZ Alliance with potential links to Republican members in the Arizona State Senate.

Recall Virus-20

Most recently, infections of Recall Virus-20 were confirmed among county government elected Supervisors Jack Sellars, Bill Gates, Clint Hickman and Steve Gallardo.

Currently all Supervisors are showing little or no harm.

Although one Democrat Supervisors has been infected, it seems Republicans are the most susceptible victims.

It is also unconfirmed that one State Senator from LD20 may have also been exposed to this vicious political virus.

Recall Virus-20 appears to spread quickly through highly emotional superspreaders that demonstrate disoriented, irrational and even rabid symptoms.

Republican elected officials are most at risk with voter signatures identified as the main agent attacking the elected official.

Sonoran Alliance has calculated risk levels and political survival rates for Republicans who may be attacked by the virus. Here are those numbers:

Karen Fann – 36,444 signatures
Sonny Borrelli – 22,077 signatures
Wendy Rogers – 30,803 signatures
TJ Shope – 21,651 signatures
Vince Leach – 33,346 signatures
Warren Petersen – 39,001 signatures
Sine Kerr – 23,397 signatures
David Gowan – 26,515 signatures
Nancy Barto – 23,148 signatures
Kelly Townsend – 24,510 signatures
JD Mesnard – 32,313 signatures
Paul Boyer – 25,199 signatures
Rick Gray – 18,966 signatures
David Livingston – 38,260 signatures
Michelle Ugenti-Rita – 37,952 signatures
Tyler Pace – 28,623 signatures

Arizona Senate Republicans should exercise extreme caution and avoid all contact with recall superspreaders in order to avoid being infected by the virus or becoming superspreaders themselves.

Democrat elected officials appear to be at very low risk to the Recall Virus-20.

Recall Reality

To those who want to recall Governor Doug Ducey, here’s what you’re up against:

You will need to collect a minimum of 594,111 valid signatures in 120 days.

That’s 4,951 signatures per day. 594,11 signatures. 4,951/day. (ARS 19-201.A.).

That is A LOT of signatures which will require A LOT of people to be in the field collecting signatures.

There will be A LOT of people who want to get paid for this work which means it will require A LOT of money.

To make matters even more daunting, by the time a recall would get to the ballot, it will be 2021. That’s right, any recall effort against Governor Ducey wouldn’t take place until next year.

By 2021, this pandemic will either be over and business will be back to normal OR, we will all be sick and dying and no one will see the point of conducting a recall.

My advice:

  1. Don’t waste your time and money
  2. Be patient and adapt
  3. Start using your critical thinking skills again.

Recall Maricopa County Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox!

RecallWilcox

Senator Steve Smith on Future Recall Elections

By Senator Steve Smith

The following opinion piece appeared in the Arizona Republic on December 19th:

The Republican state senator talks about his plan to make it tougher to recall Arizona legislators.

Why do you want to make it more difficult to recall a state lawmaker? 

We just witnessed how the radical left has used the recall system to defeat an opponent they could not and would not have been able to defeat in a standard election. I believe this is a gross misuse of our recall system. I believe one should be recalled because of an egregious act committed or a proven inability to be effective in one’s job.

Do you expect the successful Pearce recall to open the floodgates of more recalls? 

Based on what has been said recently, this is clearly what the radical left wing is trying to do. They went after Russell Pearce and now they stated they are going after Governor Brewer, Sheriff Arpaio, and have threatened to do the same to other Republicans.

Do you think state government was harmed by losing Russell Pearce from the Legislature? 

Absolutely. Russell Pearce is an honest and fair man, and quite frankly, one of the best legislators this state has ever had. Under his leadership last session alone, we now have a jobs bill that will put more Arizonans back to work, a legitimately balanced budget for the first time in years, pension reform and much more.

You want to require signatures from a majority of voters in the district before a recall can be triggered. Why this approach? 

I believe the majority of the people (50 percent plus 1) should decide if an elected official should be recalled or not. Currently, 25 percent of the electorate is needed to initiate a recall, which means typically any political demographic can initiate the recall. The recall process should be a nonpartisan movement in which the majority of the people unify in response to an egregious act by the elected official.

Democrat attorney Paul Eckstein says lawmakers proposing this simply want to protect themselves from recall. Is this your motivation? 

I believe that if the right wing started using the recall system as the left wing has done and continues to do, Democrats like Paul Eckstein would soon agree with my position. Again, although a recall can be initiated for any reason, it should only be used when the majority of the people want it to occur.

Do you think the Pearce recall will soften the Legislature’s approach to immigration? 

No and nor should it. Remember, the people of Arizona have spoken time and again at the ballot box about this issue. Each time there has been a proposition relating to cracking down on illegal aliens, Arizonans by very wide margins (over 70 percent in most instances) have voted in favor of doing so.

Do you think your caucus will be able to work with recall winner Jerry Lewis? 

The Republican caucus is a strong and mighty force with many moral, constitutionally sound, and patriotic leaders. Although Russell Pearce will be greatly missed, I believe the Republican caucus will continue to effectively lead Arizona.

What do you think will be the important consequences of the Pearce recall? 

The biggest consequence of course is the loss of Russell Pearce for this upcoming session. Beyond that, other consequences would be that maybe others will decide to play dirty like the Democrats did and will initiate recalls.

Guest Opinion: Ellsworth to Pearce: ‘Move On’

By Brent Ellsworth

In an article ominously, but I’m sure inaccurately, titled, “Senator Russell Pearce: Final Remarks,” posted November 10 on a local political blog, Senator Pearce provided his explanation of why he was soundly defeated two days earlier by his Republican challenger, Jerry Lewis.

Among other things, the Senator confidently stated: “Pretty much all political observers acknowledge that I would have not lost the race in a normal election. . . In a recall election, there is no primary. . . In a normal election, he [Lewis] would have had no chance [against me] in the primary . . .”

Senator Pearce is still trying to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the recent special election because he is annoyed that every registered voter was eligible to vote. In a closed Republican primary, where all prior Pearce victories have been determined, only Republican voters are allowed to vote.

This is a classic example of “Denial,” the first of several predictable steps grief counselors tell us are common in the grieving process after a severe personal loss.

There are a couple of ways you can tell Russell Pearce is stuck in the Denial phase.

Pearce’s claim regarding a hypothetical primary election is contrary to the hard data. A recent independent poll and the double-digit margin of victory by Jerry Lewis raise doubts that a victory by Senator Pearce in a primary election would be a slam dunk. An ABC15 / Arizona Capitol Times poll taken just prior to the election showed that among Republican voters in LD 18, Jerry Lewis had a slight advantage over Senator Pearce. Combine that with the embarrassingly small amount of money raised by Pearce from within his own district, and it doesn’t take a Carville or a Rove to conclude that Senator Pearce may overestimate his current level of support among Republican voters in LD 18.

The conduct of Senator Pearce since the election has been disappointingly unpatriotic and boorish. Our society rightfully expects a minimum standard of decorum and respect for the political process from those who lose elections. Granted, this is unfamiliar territory for Pearce, who is not experienced in the awkward etiquette of political defeat, including the obligatory phone call to congratulate the victor and the graceful but painful concession speech.

We all watched Senator Pearce give his defiant “non-concession” concession speech on election night after the outcome was certain. The press was so confused by the speech they had to ask Pearce’s media spokesman, former TV meteorologist, Ed Phillips, if Pearce’s remarks were, in fact, a concession. Having placed his wet finger to the wind, the dutiful Phillips covered for his boss, and explained that no matter how the speech sounded, it was intended to be a concession speech, and they should take it as such. In other words, “This is as much of a concession as you’re going to get from the Senator, who is not real happy right now.”

Compare the concession speech of Senator Pearce with that of Al Gore in 2000, who arguably had much more reason to be bitter in defeat than does Senator Pearce.

Here are a few quotes from Mr. Gore, whose comments transcend political party and ideology: “Just moments ago, I spoke with George W. Bush and congratulated him on becoming the 43rd president of the United States. . . Tonight, for the sake of our unity of the people and the strength of our democracy, I offer my concession. . . History gives us many examples of contests as hotly debated, as fiercely fought . . . Each time, both the victor and the vanquished have accepted the result peacefully and in the spirit of reconciliation. So let it be with us. I know that many of my supporters are disappointed. I am too. But our disappointment must be overcome by our love of country. . . While we yet hold and do not yield our opposing beliefs, there is a higher duty than the one we owe to political party. This is America and we put country before party. We will stand together behind our new president.”

Somewhere along his political path, Senator Pearce lost his vision of the “higher duty” described by Mr. Gore. Pearce wasted a golden opportunity on November 8th to recapture that vision and behave like a true statesman by gracefully congratulating Senator Lewis, accepting the clear voice of the voters of his district, and calling on his “Patriots for Pearce” to join him in moving forward in a spirit of reconciliation and healing, rather than one of continuing rancor and division.

Once Senator Pearce gets through this first step of Denial, perhaps he will allow others to help him navigate the remaining four stages of grief, which are: Anger, Bargaining, Depression, and, finally, Acceptance.

Brent Ellsworth, a Mesa attorney, resides in Legislative District 18.

More Election Analysis from Stan Barnes & Jay Thorne on KAET’s Horizon

Missed this from last Thursday but that’s why we have YouTube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Es1JzCJ2Zow

The bottom line on the Pearce recall was that the election was a very high profile abnormal gaming of the electoral process.

Two for One: Recall of Two Democrats in Legislature Being Considered

Sonoran Alliance has learned that a group of conservative activists are considering launching recalls on two Democrat members of the Arizona Legislature.

The conservative group is citing egregious and “conduct unbecoming” activities of the two Democrats who they believe are too extreme to represent the image of Arizona.

A recall election could pose a serious problem for Democrats when the next legislative session convenes in January as they attempt to build for the 2012 election cycle.

Republicans would certainly gain the upper hand in the legislative session with Democrats scrambling to address recall challenges brought on by scandals.

The group, who has asked to remain anonymous until filing any committee organization papers, is also preparing to take on liberal activists who were behind the Pearce recall effort. They believe the recall electoral process can be used just as effectively by conservatives as it was by the left.

All this begs the question whether recall elections will be the new political weapon of choice between Arizona’s conservatives and liberals?

Sen. Sylvia Allen: Democrats’ Method of Governing: Boycott Meetings and Start Recalls

Senator Sylvia Allen

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: November 9, 2011
CONTACT: Mike Philipsen

(STATE CAPITOL, PHOENIX) – As Republicans prepare for another legislative session focused on getting Arizona back to work and improving our economy, Democrats have embraced a curious strategy of boycotting meetings and threatening recalls against Republicans who don’t vote with them.

“Recalls have never and were never meant to be used against lawmakers whose sole fault was they disagreed with you on the issues. They’re designed to target people who may have committed crimes or were guilty of gross misconduct in office,” says Senator Sylvia Allen, President Pro Tem of the Senate.

“But Democrats are now talking about making this their go-to strategy. Contact some outside interests, pay people to collect signatures, and bingo, you have a recall election. This is no way to govern.”

Democrats also boycotted meetings for the recent Joint Legislative Committee on Redistricting, even though many members of their party complained about the draft maps and the process.

Democrats are also twisting last night’s recall election results into a referendum against enforcement of illegal immigration. SB 1070 remains widely popular in Arizona, and the bulk of the law is being enforced in our state.

“SB 1070 mirrored federal immigration law. We must have legislation like this, because there is no physical barrier at the border. The border is not secure,” says Senator Allen.

# # #

Who’s Next? Arredondo or Arpaio?

In August, we ran a post asking why Randy Parraz was not targeting the 2nd worst offender in the Fiesta Bowl scandal – State Representative Ben Arredondo. After all, Parraz and crew were adamant that one of the major reasons the recall was taking place was because of corruption over the Fiesta Bowl.

Yesterday’s recall election was a major success for Randy Parraz and crew. They made political history by defeating a sitting State Senator and placed the “trophy political kill” of Russell Pearce on their wall.

With their success behind them, will Parraz and crew now be intellectually consistent in their agenda of cleaning up the corruption by pursuing the recall of State Representative Ben Arredondo?

Perhaps Parraz’ comment from an interview with the Arizona Republic on election night will shed some insight where he intends to take his leftist political machine next:

Parraz said he and his allies may go after other politicians whom he blames for poisoning Arizona’s political discourse, singling out Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who was at Pearce’s side throughout the recall campaign.

“We’re looking at other people, like Sheriff Arpaio,” Parraz said. “If that’s the type of politics Sheriff Arpaio wants, we’ll see what happens in the new year.”

Parraz’ political agenda has never been about cleaning up corruption – especially the kind of corruption Democrats thrive on. It’s about taking down elected officials who are strong on immigration policy. Parraz’ motives are racially based and align with the La Raza agenda. And he will use that racial hatred to divide communities and bolster his political resume.

So who’s next on Parraz’ political hit list? Arredondo or Arpaio?

Don’t say we didn’t warn you.