"Arnolds party is Arnold. Arnolds politics are defined by what it takes to win. Just like his career. He learned from mistakes and did what he had to do to win. Be it in body building, box office or ballot box.
He reflects the dysfunctional California electorate well.
That being said.
I will take an Arnold over a nut like Angelides anyday.
I have a chance with Arnold on some things. I have no chance at all with democrats."
I think yours is the best post I've ever seen on the Arnold threads.
Here are the obvious problems the viewpoint represents.
1) Approving a liberal at the top of the Republican ticket in California gives license to the CAGOP hierarchy to promote other liberals to high office and expand the footprint of liberalism within the CAGOP
2) Most of the elected Republican officials in California are clearly conservative. They are the force behind Schwarzenegger's veto. Had Schwarzenegger allowed them to act, they would have stopped the increased spending at the legislative level. Under a Democrat administration, this conservative minority, is a legislative roadblock to higher taxes and increased spending for liberal pursuits.
3) Schwarzenegger can continue double digit spending increases and raise taxes with application of the force of the CAGOP campaign purse strings. Angelides couldn't without minority cooperation and if legislative Republicans cooperate, Angelides is the least of our worries.
4) Reagan and other conservative stalwarts have repeatedly pointed out that chance is not good politics. A chance doesn't even represent a 50% compromise and an acceptable threshold for compromise is 75% by the Reagan doctrine. Chance represents whimsy. Our system is republican, not whimsical.