The four best-known candidates for Governor of California in the upcoming recall election are Arnold Schwarzenegger, Arianna Huffington, Larry Flynt, and Gary “What You Talkin’ About, Willis?” Coleman. Will they be selling elephant ears and corn dogs at the polling place?
It concerns me greatly the number of people who will vote for Schwarzenegger simply because he’s famous. He has absolutely no qualifications, and the state is in shambles. But hey – he played a robot! A sample of his campaign rhetoric:
“I’m running for governor and I promise you that I will be the people’s governor,” Schwarzenegger said after emerging from the recorder’s office. “I will be there for everybody, young and old, men and women alike, it doesn’t make any difference.”
From Daily Kos, the most obvious and yet best bumper sticker idea for Arnold:
VOTE FOR ME IF YOU WANT TO LIVE!
Who better to run the fifth largest economy in the world than a spoiled, pampered movie star with no political experience?
I like the Daily Kos perspective that if Gray Davis can be thrown out of office for turning a surplus into a deficit*, then the same argument can be used to oust dubya.
* For all Davis’ faults, the deficit was mostly the fault of the energy policy of his Republican predecessor Pete Wilson and the downturn in the national economy
And which power company was the one that bilked California out of millions and millions of dollars? Enron.
I’m happy to see someone mention that. All through this most recent debacle, I couldn’t help but wonder how much of California’s woes were actually his fault. I’m sure he has many faults but he’s really taking the blame hard for this when many people in and out of the state should be held responsible. Weren’t his hands basically tied when it came to the energy thing?
I agree that it’s a freakshow and love the bumper sticker idea. I have heard that Ahnuld supports gay rights, at least, so I’m pulling for him ahead of the other freaks. Plus if he wins that may mean fewer bad movies for a few years.
Tuesday, for the first half of the crisis, his hands were tied by Pete Wilson’s energy policy. In the midst of the crisis, he had to take a gamble and buy energy from the likes of Enron, and it turned out that the prices were unreasonably high. At the time, he complained about Enron’s ethics, but no one listened. I believe CA even sued over the issue. These are the things that have been forgotten.
He seems to be an unlikable figure, but that is not grounds for a recall and for interrupting the operations of the state. At this point, I would hope that if a Republican is elected that another recall petition is made on the day of his inauguration.
And why DOES Arnold still have that accent after living here for donkey’s years?
I have a serious question about Arnold and his so-called lefty-centrist views. I keep seeing and hearing the “he’s pro-choice, pro gay rights” but never any evidence of those beliefs. It’s not that I know of anything counter to those statements, just thatt they are often repeated, and never given any back-up. I mean, what has he said or done to make the entire newsmedia agree that those are tow of his beleifs? does anyone know?
Dismissing Arnold as a contestant simply because he is a movie star ignores the fact that the country was once run by another movie star, Ronald Reagn who incidentally gained most of his political experience as governor of California. Admittedly Reagan did get the governor post with a lot more experience behind him and a clearly defined set of policies which Arnold has not yet done.
I believe Arnold needs to define himself on a set of issues. Esquire carried a fairly long interview a couple of months back where he candidly his interest in government. While he hints at his standings, he doesn’t put himself in any boxes very specifically. While this may seem like avoiding the issue, it actually makes sense for a man who had not yet begun consulting with experts.
I would say that his limited political experience actually makes him a better person to run the state. The political process and politicians are almost universally slimy. Hence I would imagine that a smart and essentially decent person who learns to play the game would be more effective than a fiercely ambitious politician.
I think as he forms an advisory committee, hopefully of smart and relevant people (Buffett knows investments but I’m not sure how good his macro economics are), his ideas and intentions will come to light. For better or worse, he probably will run California. If his views are what they are rumored to be, he’ll probably do a better job with it than King Bush has done with America.
———————————————-
We all hold on to our opinions fiercely and emotionally. If we do not acknowledge the possibility that we can be wrong or the other person may have seen something we missed, we should not even waste our time in spurious debates.