Posted on 08/31/2005 2:03:20 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is beginning to sound like Candidate Schwarzenegger, hinting in interviews that he plans to run for re-election in 2006.
The Republican governor could announce his plans as soon as mid-September, around the state GOP convention and after the Legislature adjourns for the year. At the same time, he will be ramping up a campaign for three ballot initiatives set to go before voters in a Nov. 8 special election.
"I think he needs to do it for two good reasons," said Bill Whalen, a fellow at the Hoover Institution who worked for former Republican Gov. Pete Wilson. "It will invigorate the Republican base, which he sorely needs to do if he has any chance to win the special election. And it sends a positive message to the donor community that he's not going to cut and run."
Schwarzenegger has fooled political prognosticators before, and few can say for certain what his announcement will be.
Two years ago he surprised nearly everyone, including many of his own advisers, when he announced on the "Tonight Show with Jay Leno" that he would run to replace Gov. Gray Davis in the state's historic recall election.
Since taking office in late 2003, Schwarzenegger has been vague about whether he would seek a second term. But recently, amid sagging poll numbers and little public support for his reform initiatives, the governor has begun signaling he won't give up on the job anytime soon.
"I am not here for the short run. I am a follow-through guy," he told Sacramento radio host Tom Sullivan in a call-in program last week.
Later, he told a television reporter he might agree soon to an interview about his re-election plans.
"I don't walk away from things that I think are unfinished," Schwarzenegger told KCRA-TV in Sacramento.
The hints of an impending announcement come as the Hollywood star and former body building champion struggles to burnish his image after months of criticism from labor unions and Democratic activists. Since launching his "year of reform" in January, he has been dogged by protesters, denounced in television spots and criticized for his fundraising practices.
His decision to skip next week's opening of the University of California, Merced, the first new UC campus in 40 years, has only added to the perception that the governor is under siege.
Still, GOP strategists said they have been urging Schwarzenegger for months to announce his re-election plans — in part for the sake of the ballot initiatives.
Without an assurance that the governor wants to remain in office, state Republican officials said they fear he will have a hard time generating support for implementing a state spending cap, changing the way legislative districts are drawn and making teachers work longer to get off probation.
Democrats contended the initiatives are little more than a Republican power grab.
"This special election is about Arnold Schwarzenegger's agenda, and it's the platform for his re-election," said state Treasurer Phil Angelides, a Democrat planning to run for governor next year.
You would have to apply logic to abandon it. In order to apply logic correctly you aren't free to define your own sets subjective definitions in the English language.
Since 36% of the vote went for the prop, YOU are the one that are saying that Arnold considers them all "right wing crazies" - this is absurd. You have abandoned logic.
Arnold's own words define what he considers right wing crazies, and the election outcome has nothing to do with that.
Introduction of spurious data is not logical, unless your purpose is to blow smoke.
In my opinion he will hold to what he says.
He SAYS he will cut spending. He INCREASED spending faster than Davis did in the budget that was at his own discretion.
I think that he will have a better chance making the Dem legislature go along with it then his opponants.
With no substantiating data at all to support that contention.
How about this ?
Answer the request as posed.
For EVERY item on your list that refers to things that he COULD have said something about at the time, It is my opinion he has held to what he said.
Then you are a liar, a dupe, or have a talent for deliberate and dishonest misconstruction that rivals Arnold himself. Take your pick.
For EVERY item on your list that refers to things that he is attempting to have the Dem legislature go along with, I still believe he is doing better then Tom would have.
A total strawman based in pure speculation and therefore a worthless argument.
Do you actually expect me to go through your laundry list and figure out what is really meant by your misleading and/or unsourced statements ?
So far you have failed to argue effectively that Arnold didn't direct his comment of "right wing crazies" to supporters of Prop 54. That's just ONE and you've struck out completely.
Odds are they did/do. My question was regarding just HOW they combine that data, as I illustrated in post 150 where a small contribution from you NOW to a group supporting one of the Props could be classified by them on their charts as a "special interest" donation to Arnold.
The chart is composed directly from the table. The table is traceable to the SOS office per the author of the graph.
Done, as I said I would.
Here you accuse me of not having done my homework, when you have yet to do ANY. All you have proven is to be a persistent heckler without substance.
I showed sufficient proof and you haven't seen fit to even deconstruct it. A hand wave won't suffice.
Thanks for taking the time to expose the twisting and turning.
"I showed sufficient proof and you haven't seen fit to even deconstruct it."
no need to, your premise is based on your contention that Arnold thinks everyone who would vote for prop 54 is a right wing crazie, unsupported by Arnold's statement.
Your contention fails.
Try the spell checker. The singular for crazies is "crazy." Another handwave built around something I didn't say. I never wrote what Arnold thinks, but what his words plainly mean.
If I put that statement before 1,000 people, I'd hazard a very different answer than yours. It must be those reading reading skills of yours again, or rather, the lack of them. You can have this thread now, because I've got enough of your prevarication on it for future reference to be most useful.
Thank you very much.
"If I put that statement before 1,000 people, I'd hazard a very different answer than yours."
I can understand that if when you hear the term "right wing crazies" used you think it refers " all conservatices" you might feel that way, but it dosen't.
When you do that 1000 person poll, please ask the question also " Do you think all conservatives are right wing crazies. ?"
If they say no - you have your answer.
School's out! You've been dismissed!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.