Arnold vs Hillary in 2008? What kind of man is Arnold?

1) Yes.

2) Yes.

3) I agree.

4) I think that it might be hard for a Democrat to beat Arnold because he would plop himself down right in the political center.

He may have beat an unpopular Democrat. But when he came into office Arnold faced some daunting challenges. He faced a state government in which angry Democrats controlled both houses of the legislature and virtually all elected state offices. He faced all of the terrible problems that had just driven Gray Davis from office.

Arnold hit the ground running and moved with a fascinating mixture of authority and sensitivity. He went down and actually visited state officials and legislators in their offices to introduce himself, the first time in living memory that a Governor had done that. He invited everybody at various times to his tent for drinks and cigars. (There's a state law against smoking in government office buildings, so Arnold moved a desk into a tent outside and it became the place in Sacramento to make deals.) Arnold shmoozed everybody in sight, made everybody feel special, and started getting concessions that nobody ever thought that they would live to see. It helped that Arnold had a steel fist in his velvet glove, and everyone knew that if they didn't play ball, Arnold would just go over their heads directly to the voters with a referendum.

My point is that Arnold unexpectedly showed both a grasp of subtle political issues and an old-time deal-making skill that was simply impressive. And everywhere he goes he brings a sense of enthusiasm and excitement that one simply doesn't associate with government offices. Given the state's situation, and his own, it was probably just what the state government needed to break loose the logjams and get things moving again.

 

I am not sure I understand your remarks. Are you saying Truman couldn't get elected today or are you saying one without a degree couldn't get elected?

If it's the latter there are many in office who have no degree including congresspersons, state legislators, governors, etc.

Jesse Ventura was elected Governor of MN and he had no degree.

 

Arnold sensitive? I would never describe the man as sensitive.

Is he a good gov? The jury is still out. He "solved" the budget crises by a $15B bond measure (hence the Visa card analogy). He still hasn't addressed the energy problem. He has done some good things with Workers Comp reform, (well - he reeled in some of the fraud but still didn't reel in the bad faith on the part of the insurance companies). He has put CA in a good light and hopefully he will make it attactive to do business in the Golden State.

I was at a company function today and spoke at lengths with our CEO. He said that most business leaders in the Tech industry are here in CA for two reasons: The tech sensitive environment and the atmosphere in general. (which includes the multi-cutural environment as well as the physical environment). You just won't find that in any other place. That is probably why there are still more tech jobs and more tech jobs being created right in the Silicon Valley than all of the other tech areas in the country combined. Having spent entended periods of time in Austin, Dallas, and East Fishkill, I can attest from personal experience that these areas pale in comparison to the Silicon Valley. (too hot and redneck in Dallas)

 

What was the alternative?

 

Using a bond measure to balance the budget is no solution in the least. It is like using your Visa card to balance your family budget.

Make the hard decisions Mr. Schwartnegger. You have to either make big cuts in government or raise taxes. It is that simple. What both Arnold and GW is doing is pushing their agendas onto future generations which has never been a solution.


The biggest problem I have: Under two Republican and one Democratic governor, they have been conned by the correctional officer's association that they should be paid as much as the highway patrol. Come on fellas - the average CO makes 80K a year. Dangerous job - yes, but there are many jobs (CalTrans road worker comes to mind) that are more dangerous. With an average education level of just over 12 years, it just isn't justified. My suggestion: Tell the CO officers association to screw themselves. If they don't like the pay offered, they can quit. Beleive me, with unemployment high in some rural counties, you would be able to locate qualified officers as replacements. No matter how much they have BSed us over the years, the six weeks of training that CO's receive pales in comparison to the nearly 30 weeks of comprehensive training most Police Officers receive (and the hiring standards in law enforcement is much much tougher than CO's)

Just my two.

That and merging a lot of agencies would save billions. You can't say that you are fiscially responsible and continue to hire public employees - it just doesn't work that way.

 

What you are suggesting was simply not possible. The problem was NOT the debt that the state was accruing under Gov. Arnold, it was the debt that they had already accrued.

Moreover, using bond measures to "equalize" revenue through bad economic times is NOT a bad policy.

Raising taxes and cutting spending enough to make up for Cali's deficit would have caused an ENORMOUS number of people and companies to leave the state. It would start a horrific downward spiral.

Arnold inherited a bad situation, and I think that he is doing a very good job to insure a properous future for California.

 

You are right that I was a bit "trigger happy" in my comments (I rarely comment on political topics on this forum). However, I was reacting directly to the phrase, "He still hasn't addressed the reasons why CA had budget problems, namely..." I still stand by my view that budget problems were caused by massive spending increases based on anticipated--rather than actual--dot-com revenues. Increasing spending by 44% when revenues increase 25% quickly turns surpluses into deficits, which is precisely what happened in California.

My 1 1/2 cents (or sense, as it were)

Tony

 

Re: Re: From a little more knowledgeable source....

You are right about California politicians on both sides being influenced (okay dictated) by special interest groups. Not only have governors (both republican and democrat) been part of the problem, but California's legislature has also been a major factor in the states bad situation.

You are right to recognize the influence of the DOC. It is huge, but it is hardly alone in its influence. The Trail Lawyers Assoication and the California Teachers Association are also 800 pound guerillas.

California spending on education has increased markedly. Has that money trickeld down to schools, teachers and students? Hardly. When teachers in my local school district in Riverside County, CA were told that they would now have an extra $100 deducted from their paychecks because there was not enough money to cover their health insurance, the Riverside County Superintendent of Schools was giving himself another pay raise (his salary has gone up $60,000 in six years).

California has major systemic problems. Only someone willing to make tough decisions without having to worry about his or her short-term political future can really start to make repairs. Arnold is as well positioned as anyone could be to do this, but the system is so broken that it will take more people than him to fix it.

Another 1 1/2 cents.

Tony

 

As for Arnold vs. Hillary...highly doubtful. I don't think that an amendment to change the Constitution for will pass. I also cannot imagine who would vote for Hillary that would not also have voted for Kerry. It seems unlikely that Hillary would be viewed as less liberal than Kerry. Like Bill Clinton, Kerry was not that well-know by the general populace, but Hillary is a media icon. Most people either love her or hate her. She does not have the bi-partisan appeal that Arnold enjoys.

People believed Bill Clinton when he promised to be a "new" more centrist democrat. I don't know anyone who considers Hillary to be a centrist on any issue. I think that she is about as (un) electable as Dick Gephardt. If the democrats are serious about reclaiming the White House, they might take a more serious look at centrists like Joe Lieberman. If they wanted a clean sweep, they would persuade Oprah to run.

There, that's my 1/2 cent!

 

What a great way to put it. Thanks.

 

There probably are a few exceptions but they are just that, exceptions. Just as you can probably find a few people teaching in big colleges with just a Bachelors or find a few people running big companies without degrees. They are exceptions to the rule.
Jack