Chrysoula ([info]chrysoula) wrote,
@ 2003-10-08 11:59:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
Confession:
I'm horrified at how snarky my livejournal friends list is about Arnold as governor. I'm not sure I've seen that much bile and hatred spewed for Bush and God knows, everybody hates him. And I don't understand it. Maybe it's because I haven't been in California, but from the outside, it looks entirely like Arnold is being rejected simply because he's a big, strong actor who has played in action movies. Not on the basis of any of his platforms, not on the basis of being a Republican candidate, but because he's Arnold Schwartznegger. What the hell? I'd expect people to at least be willing to give him a chance.

I can understand people being against the recall in principle, and being dismayed that the recall went through and the precedent that will set. But why be so savage against Arnold? That seems amazingly narrowminded.

The only thing I can figure is that people are embarassed, that they're sensitive to all the jokes that can be built around Governor Arnold. Which I guess makes sense in a schoolroom, but I'd expect adults to be a bit less quick to judge.

(14 comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]tamago
2003-10-08 12:10 pm UTC (link)
Have you heard any of his platform issues? I disagree with them, and I think that his qualifications for political office are poor. I am also uneasy about the allegations of sexual harrassment (though that didn't seem to stop Clarence Thomas, either) and the fact that he has refused to speak to any of the controversial issues that have come up around this campaign.

He is not a political leader, he is a figurehead, and I defend my right to contemptuously scorn the famous pretty face who got elected, not on the basis of his noble goals or prior record of public service, but because he's a famous face with a large budget.

No offense intended, just trying to clear things up.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]isildur
2003-10-08 12:34 pm UTC (link)
Huh. Since I'm not a CA resident, I haven't looked too closely at Arnold's platform, but after reading this, I've taken a look at it (http://www.joinarnold.com/en/agenda/arnoldsviews.php).

He seems to be strongly pro-choice, pro-environment and pro-education (going as far as to say that increased education funding is his 'number one budget priority'). On most other issues, he's very, very moderate-Republican. More moderate, in fact, than almost any other Republican candidate I've seen for any office. And while the wording isn't entirely clear, he seems to be in favor of gay civil unions with marriage-level legal status.

The only sticking point seems to be his support for Prop 187 -- and as governors don't have any real power over the proposition system, his support or lack thereof is basically irrelevant. He seems to (rightly) want to shift responsibility for illegal immigration back onto the Feds, though, which is again very moderate.

He's got good advisors from both sides of the political fence -- Buffett is a smart and leftist economic wonk, and chairs his economic policy committee along with the smart and rightist economic wonk George Shultz. Seems like the right move to me; practicality based on getting smart people together to figure the problem out, rather than ideological grandstanding.

As to the allegations of harassment: Clinton's far more verifiable harassment charges didn't stop him from being a very competent President. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, much as Clinton was given said benefit, if he can perform his job competently.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]chrysoula
2003-10-08 12:37 pm UTC (link)
No offense taken. But I'm going to ask more questions!

Who is he a figurehead for? As I understand it, Arnie has been interested in politics for quite some time, and was planning on running for governor in the next election before this whole recall extravaganza got started. So, to my eyes, he clearly has an interest in political leadership above and beyond being propped up as a figurehead by whoever, which suggests to me that he'll be more than just a front.

I'm curious to see what the man is going to do. If he's a bad governor, I think that accomplishes one reasonably good thing: it promotes the image to the voting public that recalls are not really the answer. But I'd rather he was a good governor and I think there's a reasonable chance he might be. But I also think it's way too early to tell.

Thanks, though, for answering me. My post is rooted in 'outside oberserver' rather than 'inside and inundated with the Issues'


It would be really nice, one day, to have an election where people vote FOR somebody rather than AGAINST somebody.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]wildpaletz
2003-10-08 01:19 pm UTC (link)
I'm not sure I've seen that much bile and hatred spewed for Bush and God knows, everybody hates him.

Oh, don't worry, as soon as things settle down and there's not, you know, a recall just having happened, everyone will go back to bitching about Bush.

Well, I'm against the recall in general. If I'm making jokes and whining about Arnold, which has actually been very mild from me so far, it's because his only experience in politics, ever, was doing that one proposition last year, and he won this election on popular appeal, charisma, and frustration with the establishment - NOT because of his platforms.

In fact, he hasn't run on any platforms (maybe they haven't told you that up in Seattle). He's run on "I will make things better". "I will figure it out". He's had an intensely short, carefully managed campaign that leaves us, California voters, knowing in actuality very little about what he'll do to solve all the woes. We know he will TERMINATE our woes. That's it. When he IS specific, he says he'll keep education AND balance the budget AND get rid of various fees - which sounds more than a little like a fantasy.

Personally, I like that he has a sense of humor and I like that he's a social moderate. I hope he stays that way, and I hope he actually gets some good work done.

But does that help educate you as to why people are more than a little dismayed that this guy is governor to a state with one of the 10th largest economies in the world?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]wildpaletz
2003-10-08 01:24 pm UTC (link)
To help clarify:

Clearly, he does have some stuff on his web site re: his views. However, when interviewers ask him things like "how will you deal with the budget crisis", "how will you work together with the democrats and republicans", etc., all of his answers have been consoling but substance-less. "I will work with them until we have an agreement." That kind of thing.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]chrysoula
2003-10-08 01:36 pm UTC (link)
Sure, it explains a bit. I find myself in favor of a man more committed to finding the answers than to making sure his specific answer is the one found. But I am very very very very bitter about the extremely partisan state of affairs in politics, in a way few people I know share. I find myself feeling hopeful about somebody getting into office mostly on the strength of being himself, rather than on his party.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]wildpaletz
2003-10-08 01:41 pm UTC (link)
Still, specific ideas that can be judged in, say, comparison with Camejo's, Huffington's, etc. would have been very useful. So, a cute comment he's said about how he'd work with Democrats is that he's been married to one for (whatever it is, 20+ years). That's an adorable, funny comment, but in the end implies he's pretty naive about the political process.

Though I like what one of the Kennedy's said. I can't remember the exact quote, but it was in response to how Arnold would work out - something like, it's very hard to argue with Arnold when he is holding you upsidedown.

But, you see what I mean? Funny, cute, but no, really, what are his ideas...

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]tersa
2003-10-08 01:37 pm UTC (link)
Speaking as someone inside of California, the vitriol is annoying me.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]wildpaletz
2003-10-08 01:42 pm UTC (link)
I want you to be governor.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]yessod
2003-10-08 02:03 pm UTC (link)
[info]tamago and [info]wildpaledtz, between the two of them, summed up why I'm so bitter about it.

It comes down to this: While I don't have a very serious problem wit his personal politics, he never brought them up. He never brought up any genuine political issues or reasons why he might make a good governor or platforms or anything. He said he was an outsider, without ties to special interests, which is a direct lie. Though he denies it now, in the 1970s he not only praised Hitler but, according to his trainers, "emulated an SS officer." No fewer than 16 women have come forward saying that they were sexually assaulted by him.

I just have a problem with lying neo-nazi serial abusers who run a campaign based solely on turning the election into a junior high school popularity contest.

(Reply to this)


(Anonymous)
2003-10-08 02:32 pm UTC (link)
Eh, it is snarky. But I think there is substance behind the disgruntledness.

Arnold has no experience - not on a school board, not in a state assembly. Reagan at least had been president of the SAG... and that's hardly ideal. There is no track record for Arnold because he hasn't been on the track, and apparently, a majority of California voters don't care.

It effectively torpedoes even the idea of expertise and experience and statesmanship. And that is kind of sad, IMHO. Brand recognition outweighed anything substantive.

(Reply to this)


[info]eilonwey
2003-10-08 03:57 pm UTC (link)
First of all, I was against the whole recall election on principle. I feel that unless an elected official commits a serious crime, they should serve out the term that they were elected to. Then the electorate has an opportunity to choose another leader in the next election.

I feel that some very wealthy Republicans bought this election because they weren't happy with the election last November. That seems wrong to me.

Also, I have never been comfortable with scapegoating Davis. Yes, California was/is in a recession. So was/is most of the rest of the country. I don't see anyone recalling Bush. There are plenty of people (10, as a matter of fact) trying to beat him in the next election. I think that's perfectly just, and what should have happened in California.

Now we come to Arnold. What this election has taught me is that many Californians don't care about substance or intelligence. All they care about is someone who can spew little sound bites and look pretty for the camera. Oh, and appearing as a tough guy in action films seems to be a big plus.

The sole previous political experience that Arnold has is helping to pass an initiative for after-school programs. While giving more children access to after-school programming is a commendable goal, legislating more programs without providing any source of funding for them is not a brilliant move. Especially when California's finances are in their current state.

The fact that Arnold refused to participate in any non-scripted debates is another mark against him. I feel that politicians need to be able to think and speak on their toes. They need to respond quickly to remarkably complex situations. Unscripted debates are one way(if an imperfect way) of seeing how candidates measure up in that regard.

He was also extremely vague when questioned about policy issues.

I can find a couple positive things to say about him: he is supposed to be a very affable man, so perhaps he will be able to work well with the legislature and get stuff done. (The legislature hated Davis so they usually refused to do anything that he suggested.) Also, I appreciate the fact that he doesn't seem to be tied to the religious right on issues such as abortion and gay marriage.

I don't know what to say about these allegations of him being a Nazi sympathizer. Obviously, if true, that would make me think that he was the scum of the earth. But that's a pretty serious allegation to make without more substantiation. The womanizing thing frankly doesn't bother me as much - it didn't make me hate Clinton.

Basically, I think that the electorate chose glitz over substance in this instance. Maybe he'll surprise me. His wife seems to be intelligent - I guess I can hope that she will take an active role in the new administration.

By the way, I found the other candidates for governor equally unappealing.

(Reply to this)


[info]eyelessgame
2003-10-09 11:34 pm UTC (link)
I don't feel I have to add anything, except say "yeah, me too, what they said." That's why.

(Reply to this)

I don't feel particularly vitriolic
[info]ebonlock
2003-10-16 09:10 am UTC (link)
I pretty much agree with what [info]eilonwey has said and would also offer up some interesting articles on the subject as food for thought:

The Frame Around Arnold

Recall Redux

Both are interesting, but the second is downright fascinating and the more highly recommended of the two.

(Reply to this)

(14 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…