LOS ANGELES (CNN) - Meg Whitman says she was wrong.
The Republican candidate for governor of California Thursday night issued a statement on her failure to vote in multiple elections in California. Whitman, the former eBay CEO and former adviser and surrogate for John McCain's presidential campaign, calls her own record "inexcusable" and "simply wrong."
Whitman, who officially announced her bid for governor at the beginning of the week, issued her statement after GOP gubernatorial challenger Steve Poizner criticized her for her lack of votes, and after an investigation by the Sacramento Bee newspaper that pointed to her failure to vote over several decades in five states where Whitman has lived since 1979.
"Voting is a precious right that all Americans should exercise. I have repeatedly said that my voting record is inexcusable. I failed to register and vote on numerous occasions throughout my life. That is simply wrong and I have taken responsibility for my mistake." said Whitman in her statement.
"California needs leaders who are accountable for their actions. I take responsibility for mine, while my opponent, Steve Poizner, runs from his. On everything from his position on taxes to his political contributions, Steve hides behind others or misrepresents himself. I look forward to a vigorous campaign and to a discussion of the issues that matter to the people of California," added Whitman.
Poizner issued a statement of his own Thursday, saying "in the history of America, no one has been elected governor of a state with Meg Whitman's 25 year history of no show voting."
Too lazy to register and to vote. Sounds like someone who could really fix California's problems.
come on Meg, we don't need to see your voting record to find out who you are.. Just look at the your past statements like the Van Jones endorsement... Now that says lot about your judgement....
Hey don't every apoligize for making mistakes. Don't you know that's the mantra in the Republican Party.
NEVER admit mistakes.
Ambition is now trumped by apathy? The biggest losers are the people of California and their search for responsible leadership. Elect another moron! Perhaps Palin would move to Sacramento if allowed to hunt at the zoo?
She doesn't believe in the election system but she wants to run for governor? The sad part about it is that someone will vote for this slacker and then wonder why things get worse. I was always taught that if you don't vote...you don't count.
since she's a republican, i'm glad she didn't vote. but no, even if i agreed with her politics, i would not want a governor who was previously so apathetic about politics that she didn't even both to vote (which only take an hour or two every few years).
government is not a business and it shouldn't be – just because she's a CEO doesn't mean she knows how to govern, especially if she hasn't been paying attention to politics until recently.
I wouldn't bother to vote for her either and this is why:
Whitman is a business woman. She only does things that earn money. voting didn't particularly bring in money for her at that time.
Unless she didn't remember that it was voting day. after all, ebay is 24/7.
Well, I am a regular voter, but I often forget the names of some people when I get to the voting boot too. So, She had the right, not the obligation to vote. I have the right, not the obligation to vote for her.
Voting is a precious right Americans should excercize – when I am on the ballot.
As a former resident of CA who did vote, I say, yeah yeah yeah yeah. Puleeeze!
Is this the best Republicans have to offer?
Shame, shame, shame! Who wants anyone in public office who doesn't exercise their right to vote!
The mantra of the Taliban..." I did it all wrong ...so vote for me!! "...
She made a mess of her career in the corporate sector. Now she wants to do the same in the public sector.
Is this woman serious?
Doesn't vote??????????? Nitwit!
Doesn't matter what you did or didn't do.
Take Palin, for example. She's showed us that in America, you can quit being governor halfway through your term and still be considered a viable candidate for president!
Meg, you got this in the bag.
I guess its wrong to have a change of heart and start to believe that getting involved is sometimes worth it.
So, in 30 years, she has not voted not once and she wants Cali to vote for her? Hmmmmm............
Perhaps wrong is not the right choice of words. Perhaps voting has become too much, about the lesser of 2 evils, and not about making a good choice. Perhaps the incentive to vote, is not what it should be.
Only once, have I voted, for someone I really wanted. In every other case, it was for the lesser of 2 evils. That does not instill in the individual, much of an incentive to vote.
Her voting record says what we already knew about her. She is selfish and only now is thinking about her voting history because she wants Californians to VOTE FOR HER. I'm not buying her blathering statement. And how on earth is she "taking responsibility for her mistakes", it's over, history.
Now that she wants to become the first female president, and don't let he bid for the governorship fool you, she's sorry. Go away Meg, California doesn't need you or any other selfish woman. Are you listening Carly?
So she's saying: Ok, so I screwed up for 25 years. Now elect me Governor! Riiiight, we'll get right on that.
Is voting now a requirement for office?
I rather think governing experience would be an asset.
If she truly views her voting record as inexcusable, Ms. Whitman will withdraw from the race, not just give us lip service. Voting is rarely convenient but should be viewed as important. Now, if you don't like any of the candidates, don't vote. But 25 years of not even voting with an absantee ballot is just laziness and not very patriotic.
"I have repeatedly said that my voting record is inexcusable. I failed to register and vote on numerous occasions throughout my life. That is simply wrong and I have taken responsibility for my mistake."
The political process is simply not important to Conservatives. They believe that all decisions about health care, foreign policy, child welfare, wages, job safety, employee benefits, emergency management, etc. should be made in the board room, not at the polling place. They are not interested in autistic kids because autistic kids don't buy anything. They are not interested in you or me except as a low-wage employee and a big-spending consumer.
It was very couragous of her to "take responsiblity" for her actions. What does that mean? The translation from Conservo-speak to English would be: "Yeah, so I didn't vote. So what? That was before I wanted to be a Senator. What's your point?"
If you don't vote, you don't deserve to hold ANY public office. PERIOD!
Nice. Why do these morons become good citizens only after they announce their candidacy for some ego driven office?