Posted on 01/13/2006 4:35:43 PM PST by FairOpinion
A recent poll shows the born-again "moderate" Republican governor has gained back some popularity, especially in the Bay Area, and is now in a dead heat with Democratic competitors.
"Our survey demonstrates that Schwarzenegger's retreat from the more conservative rhetoric and agenda he brandished during the latter part of 2005 has paid off among middle-of-the road voters," said Melinda Jackson, director of the Survey and Policy Research Institute at San Jose State University.
The governor's job performance rating among voters in a Democrat-leaning state has climbed from 36 percent positive and 53 percent negative in September, to 40 percent positive and 51 percent negative this month.
(Excerpt) Read more at insidebayarea.com ...
But Arnold never hid the fact his big thing was education.
That having been said, at least you have the right strategy for a ground war to retake California if the elitist left wing airheads who have run the GOP into the ground in California will get the hell out of the way or even if they don't. The GOP limps in California because it is too proud or too lazy to go door-to-door organizing and asking for votes. There is NO SUBSTITUTE for door-to door.
AND, ummmm, Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa is not exactly a Chippendale or a charismapuss but (ex-farmer and blue collar worker) he has done very nicely indeed. Senator Grassley is to charisma what a pound of butter is to the latest low-fat Hollywood social x-ray diet. His secret is that he has SUBSTANCE and PRINCIPLES, ummm, like McClintock. It is not that Iowa is a bastion of conservatism. Not with Tom Harkin as its other long-time senator.
Good to see you back again.
It's only money. Ahhhnold surrendered on ALL the issues that count before he was governor.
Liberals haven't been making California worse?????
How can we tell?????
Absolutely correct. He did not. Neither did he hide many of his core principles. They were simply lost in the rush to oust a corrupt liberal.
The grass roots train was leaving the station and the CAGOP, at first hesitant, finally scrambled to hop on board. The rush precluded the normal screening process that partisan convention wrangling and primary campaigns provide.
... "the Musclehead"?
Few to none ever, regardless of "arnold" support or not refer to Tom McClintock in derogatory. Obvious reasons why. He embodies conservatism AND he's a Republican (vehicle by which conservatism is winning) but isn't getting elected in CA.
Ever studied economics?
There's this thing called "The Production Possibilities Frontier". It has to do with combinations of output that the economy can possibly produce given the available factors of production and the available production technology. It can also be applied in politics, metaphysically.
And that's why Arnold won, given all factors, in CA. And why he will win again. In time, as more "resources" (voters) become less "scarce", opportunities arise for a more conservative Governor to hold office.
We can all sit around and argue all day for a "pure conservative" to be elected; but if the votes aren't there, the potential for such a victory is drastically reduced. This is called "reality".
Wishing, and/or asserting what you'd LIKE reality to be: is normative thinking -- it's policy advisement.
So, as usual, the CA Arnold/McClintock debates, still YET TO DATE resemble Positive versus Normative thinking. It's not necessary that these two war nor necessarily disagree with each other. They can and should be working together as they have the same drive -- maximum output using actual available resources towards the goal of highest level possible Gross STATE and INDIVIDUAL income/profitability which then at apex produces equity. CA has for overlong been centered and run ragged based upon a fiscal/"social" policy of "externalities" (the impact of one person/group's actions on the well-being of a bystander - abortion, race/gender quotas, subsidies, incentives, illegals, ) and "market power" (in this case CA Unions, special interest groups and the MSM) -- referring to the ability of a single person or group to unduly influence market.
Folks VOTed for Arnold based on a thinking we might call "Marginal Costs and Benefits".
You might call that "RINO"; and you are free to. I'm free to see it as people voting using all available input and resources.
Some of the data posted by the anti-Arnold-CAers is very good. It's economically true. Subsidies and incentives, etc., are long term, a very bad idea. As a principle. AS a principle. But, when one is down a hole, simply citing that the way out of the problem is UP, is insufficient. Usually, less than desirable activities must be engaged in getting one's self out of a hole. And one gets dirty in the process of getting out of that hole.
This is where I find some of the anti-Arnold "verbiage" superfluous and non-meaningful.
There's conservatism. And conservatism encompasses much more than just A and B. What doesn't usually get covered under the "mantra" of conservative principles is Strategies in the Path towards Conservatism. This always involves a measure of creativity -- creativity some will find offensive, some will like, etc.
And that's where the rub lies, IMHO, in these debates concerning Gov Arnold.
Or, as William F. Buckley might pen: Up From Liberalism.
34 years ago, actually. Ahhhhhnold's father-in-law, Sargent Shriver is not as bad as Ahhhhhnold. Even though he ran with McGovern, Shriver is a lifelong pro-lifer which puts him ahead of Ahhhhhnold any day.
Oh, BTW, nice new lesbian leftist Demonrat Chief of Staff that the Gropinator has acquired. Is it true that she is about to convert. Ahhhhnold says he can get her to smoke cigars!
I posted several articles which specifically stated that the turnout in "conservative strongholds" were several percentage below the normal, while in Dem stronghold it was higher.
That's clear evidence that conservatives didn't bother to support the propositions that would have made the changes conservatives claim they want: reduce power of unions and reduce spending.
And some people, who CLAIM to be conservative, such as yourself, calcowgirl, actually came out to VOTE WITH THE DEMOCRATS against the propositions, which would have helped reform CA.
Your case is a valid one for the nation as a whole. But you're forgetting, California isn't typical of the nation. The only way to make conservativism palatable for California voters is to win multiple local elections and govern conservatively in that capacity over the years. As some moderate-to-liberal voters discover that conservatives don't have horns & fangs, they gradually become more open to their ideas.
The California public isn't anywhere near that point yet.
Ironically the invasion of Mexico's poor holds the greatest hope to dislodge liberalism in California. Today, the anchor babies rising to power in the Legislature are gilded with union credentials but in the not to distance future they will have enterenpenurial credentials and their appeal will be tremendous in a cultural block that is, by nature, very conservative.
Talk about your Hollyweird myths... After gobbling all those steroids? You gotta be another one of them 10,000 comediannes lookin for employment!!!
I stayed offa this thread till you got me giggling with that amusing and amazing little phrase!!!
Conservatives do NOT NEED Ahhhhhnold. They want and need their California GOP back for Presidential purposes and platform purposes. Ahhhhhhhnold needs them and should act accordingly or pay the price. Probably too late to avoid paying the price anyway. He is not a very good governor, just a smidgeon better than he campaigned as.
Calfornia apparently needs another season in social issue and fiscal Demonratic hell to really learn the lesson that should have been learned under Greyout Davis.
My goodness that's a nasty case of verbal diahreah!!! Whew!!!
Money, money, money, money!
Liza Minnelli and the cast of Caberet starring as the California GOP! Wow, what a great idea! NOT!
The problem with the explanation is that it relies on the mainstream press for definitions. Frequently, driven by agenda and simply laziness, the MSM labels areas with high Republican registrations as "conservative strongholds" and, as we've seen on this forum repeatedly, there are great differences between "Republicans" and conservatives and the gap widens each year.
It remains to be seen if conservatives failed to vote. And yes, it was the aim of many conservatives to defeat Prop 76. Their support helped bury this nasty deception. The evidence, when published by McPherson, will probably show that the other three, more acceptable propositions were close because of conservative support but lost because Republicans stayed home.
what are you talking about?...did he or did he not always say his big priority was education? Stop the insults, the less-than-clever snippets and just answer the question.
Exactly so.
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.