Why Arnold Lost
Since Republicans are so fond of running personality-driven campaigns, I’d be remiss if I didn’t point out that the reason Arnold Schwarzenegger pissed away $60 million dollars in pursuit of his “reform agenda” is because he’s a stubborn jerk who doesn’t work well with others. His spectacular failures last night weren’t the result of ideological differences, but personality flaws.
A real leader would have worked with the Democratic legislature, not attack them as “girly men”. A real leader would have made compromises and reached across the ideological divide to find common ground. A real leader would have done the heavy lifting himself, not put the burden of making the hard decisions back on the people of California. But Arnold isn’t a real leader, he’s just a bad actor.
6 comments
Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
The Democratic success last night was great, but I thought a couple of these California propositions were good policy. For example, the redistricting by non-partisan judges makes sense. There was a similar Reform Ohio Now proposition:
Issue 4: Stops the politicians from drawing their own legislative districts and puts an Independent Commission in charge of this process.
In my opinion, we can’t be against non-partisan redistricting in blue states like California and for it in red states like Ohio.
Comment by plastic peeps — November 10, 2005 @ 12:17 am
I’d be inclined to such “fairness,” if what you’re suggesting wasn’t unilateral disarmanent in the face of overwhelming firepower from the enemy, so to speak. Texas, for instance, has been so hopelessly redistricted as to make a Republican majority in perpetuity. Why then should a solidly democratic state like California redistrict, when Texas doesn’t?
If you think about it, this redistricting bill only makes sense when you forget how the rest of the country is run. It nueters a solidly democratic state leading up to a potentially critical mid term election (2006), and that is the whole point, why the stupidity of Tuesday happened at all- Republicans know that there’s a chance next fall they might (I realize this is a longshot) lose control of congress. Bush’s popularity, outcry over the war, the scandals, economuc concerns and corruption are combining to pry voters away from them. Assuming that the dems don’t fuck it up, or that Bush doesn’t somehow get his total popularity back, this could be very good for us next fall.
In the face of this, redistrciting California (but not, you notice, Texas, Florida, etc) would inevitbaly create more republican seats here, and possibly buffer against any losses elsewhere. So let me ask you, why in hell would you support such a thing, when you know that it would only hurt us?
Basically, it is the height of naivete to redistrict here, and only here. Or more to the point, to do so in Dem leaning states and not in Texas. I won’t support any redistricitng reform that affects democrats negatively, until it is applied nationally. However, a national law that forced all states to redistrict in the same way would get my support in a heartbeat.
However, one thing you might not know – The dems conspicuously didn’t push the Ohio bill, so that they could concentrate on defeating the california bill.
Comment by Ross A Lincoln — November 10, 2005 @ 9:40 am
Also, please forgive misspellings.
Comment by Ross A Lincoln — November 10, 2005 @ 10:51 am
How DARE you describe Arnold as a bad actor? Outrageous!!! I wept when John Matrix was re-united with his daughter in “Commando”.
I also wept when John Matrix threw that giant pipe through the chest of the bad guy… now that I think about it, I wept pretty much through the entire movie.
Comment by Dave — November 11, 2005 @ 11:28 am
Right on, Ross!
I mean, really, redistricting in general is a good idea, but why in hell would anyone trust such a proposal? It’s such an obvious scam – designed to appeal to citizen’s sense of fairness in order to screw ‘em. And who the hell were these “independent retired judges” anyway?!?
Comment by Dave — November 11, 2005 @ 11:31 am
(sorry for spelling)
you all are so uunbelievably full of it.
these props wwould have been a good start in putting the state back on the right track financially.
we elected arnold to fight the special interests (unions) that basically control california’s government.
but the unions were able to twist it all.through their rediculous deceptive advertising (they spent over $100 million)they were able to convince the majority to vote no, and in doing so the state is now left to stagnate in its own ignorance.
there would have been spending caps put in place for once in over a decade.remember with gray davis as governor and with the legislature in the back pocket of the unions, we were spent into a $30 billion dollar defecit.
now arnold is forced to borrow.to the tune of $50 billion…in hopes of still salvaging something positive for the future of california.
i hope all you who voted no really understand why you voted that way.
i hope your happy.
im disgusted…
Comment by slikk01 — November 17, 2005 @ 7:11 pm