California's Accidental Governor.. NYT op-ed May, 4 (Question..How is Bush doing there?)

NY times ^ | 5-4-2004 | NY Times edotorial board

[Trailer Trash]

 

---

May 4, 2004

California's Accidental Governor

ere's one recipe for political success: Wealth, independently acquired. Enormous selfconfidence. A brand of Republicanism coupling liberal social views with fiscal pragmatism. This mix has worked well for Michael Bloomberg, who, despite low popularity ratings, has turned out to be a productive and innovative New York City mayor. And it seems to be working even better for Arnold Schwarzenegger, California's governor. Six months into the job, the last action hero can seemingly do no wrong.

Of the two story lines, Mr. Schwarzenegger's is the more improbable. Though people questioned Mr. Bloomberg's political experience, nobody scoffed at him the way they scoffed at Mr. Schwarzenegger, who was variously derided as a Hollywood lightweight and as an accidental product of California's crazy recall system, a crippling economic crisis and the staggering unpopularity of the incumbent, Gray Davis.

This page was among the vocal doubters, but nobody's laughing now. Since ousting Mr. Davis last October, Mr. Schwarzenegger has ended years of paralysis in the California Legislature and delivered on a string of campaign promises, like winning public approval for a $15 billion bond issue and reforming the state's hugely expensive workers' compensation system. Last week, in an announcement barely noticed outside the state, the governor offered a comprehensive energy plan that dealt the final blow to the unfettered deregulation that helped cause a series of blackouts in 2000, bankrupted a major utility and marked the beginning of the end for Mr. Davis. He then flew off to Israel, Jordan and the troops in Germany.

Governor Schwarzenegger has had his stumbles. Given the fiscal crisis, it was surely a mistake to repeal $4 billion in automobile tax increases. His budget plan which essentially involves issuing new debt to pay off old debt could backfire if California's economy sours again. But at least things are beginning to happen. As Leon Panetta, a prominent California Democrat, said of the bond issue, adding to an already overburdened budget was the worst possible solution except for all the others.

Celebrity helps a lot, as does wealth. Both provide protection against special interests. The governor's independence from the White House on issues like air pollution and global warming cannot hurt him in an environmentally conscious, largely Democratic state. As an executive, he is at once flexible and determined. He prevailed on the workers' compensation issue by agreeing to settle for less than he wanted while threatening to go directly to the voters if the Legislature did nothing at all. For good measure he gathered the negotiators in a windowless war room, where they survived on M&M's and the governor's special blend of trail mix.

Even his critics find him a hard man to dislike. This is a governor who bombs around the freeways with his old motorcycle buddies every weekend, who loves a crowd and whose favorite word is "fantastic." His wife is "fantastic." Gray Davis is "fantastic." He even described a $4 million judgment against him in a campaign finance case as a "fantastic" decision. Criticism bounces off like rubber bullets. When John Burton, the Democratic leader in the State Senate, accused him of "pontificating," the governor called him up and said: "That's funny! Pontificate. Like the pope!" "Nothing fazes him," Mr. Burton observed.

Right now Californians are giving him fantastic leeway a 64 percent approval rating, including a majority of those describing themselves as liberals and Democrats, according to a recent Los Angeles Times poll. The poll also showed that if Mr. Schwarzenegger needed to renege on his no-new-taxes promise, most people would support him.

All this good feeling could evaporate. Colorful newcomers have a way of wilting, as Mr. Bloomberg's popularity did when hypothetical tax increases became real. But for now, the accidental governor, besides having a great time, is starting to seem almost inevitable.

[Trailer Trash]

Ok.... Here we have a NY Times op-ed yesterday reminding Arnold that the LA Times says that according to its polls, (we all know how accurate they are) that it's OK for him to go ahead and raise taxes.

His approval ratings are high enough to absorb the hit, and that he should ignore the voters..

Hmmmmmmm.........

It got me to thinking... Hey.. What about California????

Didn't we have a political earthquake there not too long ago??

It was of course wall to wall news when it hapened.

But now, during an election year it suddenly falls off the radar screen?

I have a question for for those who live in California.....

What color is your map these days? Blue or red?

[KJacob]

I wonder how much Arnold is going to campaign for Bush and how much of a difference it will make.

[Alberta's Child]

It doesn't surprise me that the NYT failed to point out the most obvious ingredient to Arnold's success (it was so obvious to me that it was the basis for my prediction of a Schwarzeneggar victory months before the election): He is not part of the political establishment in California, and therefore does not hesitate to tell political hacks to take a hike when the need arises.

[ken5050]

Good pick up. I read this yesterday, and laughed..

"It was a mistake to repeal the $4 billion automobile tax"

This line, more than anything, shows just how much the Times is off on another planet somewheres..Why do they think Arnie got elected in the first place. Becasue everyone in California HATED the auto tax..

[Alberta's Child]

Arnold ping.

[68 grunt]

... What color is your map these days? Blue or red?

Its still a mixed bag, with the urban area's still overwhelmingly liberal and the more rural the area the more conservative it's general population. Some of the koolaid'ers call me nutz, but I think Arnie might help Dubya carry the state. Fingers x'ed, anyway.

[So Cal Rocket]

Outside of the Bay Area and the City of Los Angeles, California is very much a Red State. However, SF and LA are so Blue that it's highly unlikely that Bush could ever carry the state. (if he did carry California, the election would have been called 2 seconds after the polls closed on the east coast - because it would be a landslide.)

[cripplecreek]

I have a cousin in the northern part of the state. He tells me that in his home the color went from pale blue to blood red.

[frossca]

Last week, in an announcement barely noticed outside the state, the governor offered a comprehensive energy plan that dealt the final blow to the unfettered deregulation that helped cause a series of blackouts in 2000, bankrupted a major utility and marked the beginning of the end for Mr. Davis.

Being the NYT they still have to work in the BIG LIE.

[calcowgirl]

The poll also showed that if Mr. Schwarzenegger needed to renege on his no-new-taxes promise, most people would support him.

drip... drip... drip...

[Amerigomag]

I disagree.

The San Francisco Peninsula is probably the most liberal area in the US @ 83% but LA is much closer to national norms with many issues being decided by 47%/53% margins.

Away from the urban areas the state is almost as apolitical as it is political with a plurality of the population disconnected from active US politics. These swelling numbers of Mexican immigrants are conservative in their values, but being besieged by the Democrat Party to join the gravy train of the "victim" class. They have yet, however, to produce a political impact commiserate with their numbers.

What makes California appear so liberal is its press which presents a solid liberal view point. The SF Chronicle, the SJMN, the McClatchy chain (Sacramento, Modesto and Fresno Bees) and the LA Silmes are among the most liberal publications in the US and they are without a conservative or even moderate challenger.

As an example California's press is so far to the left they honestly believe Schwarzenegger is a conservative.

[So Cal Rocket]

LA is much closer to national norms with many issues being decided by 47%/53% margins

LA County went Gore-64% to Bush-32% in 2000.
LA County went Boxer-61% to Fong-36% in 1998.

Looks closer to 60/40 to me

[Amerigomag]

Both examples are misleading in that they pick races that reflect personalities rather than issues/philosophies. Both Bush and Fong had the charisma of a paper bag compared to their opponents.

By presenting isolated, personality driven results the events of October 2003 would show LA County having an almost opposite character at 55%/32%.

[zoyd]

I wonder how much Arnold is going to campaign for Bush and how much of a difference it will make.

It doesn't really matter how much Arnold campaigns for Bush -- Bush won't win California. I doubt you'll see Dubya stumping for votes in California much, if at all, since it's basically a waste of time. It makes a lot more sense for him to campaign in states he might possibly win.

Understand this isn't a reflection on Bush -- it's just the reality that California is a Dem stronghold.

[roadcat]

The San Francisco Peninsula is probably the most liberal area in the US @ 83% but LA is much closer to national norms with many issues being decided by 47%/53% margins.

It hurts being one of the 17% here on the SF Peninsula. I have to fend off raving lunatics in the office every day (the Green party guys think the demos are too conservative). I get a chuckle when they accuse me of being brain damaged because I'm a conservative, while they scream and rant. Also hurts not having any local moderate newspapers (they are sooo far left).

[SierraWasp]

"Colorful newcomers have a way of wilting, as Mr. Bloomberg's popularity did when hypothetical tax increases became real."

Or when one LANDLOCKS private property in the eastern third of CA with a galling socialistic GovernMental conservancy!!!

[dufekin]

By my latest estimation, "likely Kerry," or plain blue. Kerry appears unable to put a lock on California, but Bush has a major uphill battle.

Nationally, I see Bush eking out a narrow victory. In the elector college, that would be 304-234, decided by a few thousand voters in key states, much like 2000. Bush has a 77-24 lead in states decided within the margin of error, so it's not certain.