Why the CA-Recall results are bad for Democrats.

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

Alright. I am briefly returning (like promised) to just give my insight on this election result:

1. Would've been better if you just dropped the cherade and didn't promise anything. But I get it, you need the attention.

2. Newsom could've beat the recall 90-10 and there'd still be a thread on how that's actually a bad result for Dems. Because on Atlas, every possible scenario is actually bad for the Dems.

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

They're bad for CA Democrats because they have to keep dealing with Gavin f**king Newsom while Larry Elder, the worst replacement candidate, received almost a majority of the vote.

This is what happens when you choose Yes for Question 1 and leave Question 2 blank.

This is the real bad news. Elder padded Newsom’s margin, and because he won by a lot, he’s less likely to change course (and there will be less external pressure on him to do so).

Newsom is a bad Governor in need of humbling or a primary. The recall made both of these things less likely.

Newsom is emboldened by his victory in the recall, and I'm sure he now believes that he has a mandate from the electorate, even more so than what he possessed before. California voters will now have to deal with the consequences; they have no grounds to complain about Newsom in the future.

I didn't see many Dems clamoring for an expensive & wasteful recall that may have actually emboldened Newsom more than ever to pass more leftist/liberal policies.

Whose fault is that?

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

Non-Californians analyzing California elections is fast becoming my favorite comedy bit on this board.

Bonus points when they don't even bother comparing it to previous midterm/off-year elections