In reading about Gov. Arnold today, I’ve seen again and again variations on “At least he’s not a career politician.” I love how if you don’t like someone, he’s a “career politician.” But if you happened to like someone who’d spent a long time in politics, you’d say he “spent his life in public service.”
Words mean things.
The “career politician” backlash is so flawed. They would rather have a superrich person with no demonstrated political track record over someone of more modest means who has worked in public service for years, maybe decades. They would rather deflect discussion from one’s track record to empty one-liners. Is that working in the public service?
The most frustrating misconception is that a rich candidate isn’t beholden to special interests just because they can finance their own campaign (which Arnold did not do). If they are that rich, they are beholden to the investments they’ve made, whether it’s in big corporations, real estate, international trade, megabudget movies, marijuana plantations or anything else. Their friends are the heads of big business. Donors or not, rich candidates are pressured as friends, which is more compelling than being pressured as a donor.