Posted on 08/09/2003 7:03:40 AM PDT by NYC Republican
No one seems to have a phrase to describe Arnold's politics. Is he a "conservative," a "moderate," a "liberal" or a "pragmatic libertarian?"
None of the above. Arnold Schwarzenegger is... a Soccer Mom!
Your prototypical Soccer Mom isn't a hate-the-greedy-corporations Democrat. Heck, her husband is probably a middle manager at Procter & Gamble. She's a "fiscal conservative," in the sense that she doesn't want more taxes and regulation. She doesn't like affirmative action either, since it goes against her sense of fairness and threatens her childrens' future.
On the other hand, she doesn't want to be seen as a meanie. She thinks Republicans are too hard-edged on some issues. She wishes they were more "tolerant" of minority groups like gays and blacks. She's pro-choice, although she doesn't want abortion to be a widespread practice. She is, of course, an "environmentalist." And she's not averse to Big Government programs like Medicare and Social Security. An easy way to win her vote is to claim that some big-spending entitlement is "for the children." She doesn't see why ordinary people need assault rifles, but she can see why pilots should have pistols.
Now look at Arnold's stated beliefs - vague as they are - and see how they dovetail nicely with Soccer Mom values. When he comes out with detailed policy prescriptions, I bet they'll reflect Soccer Mom values too.
Democrats should be scared of Arnold. He has a massive advantage when it comes to the male vote. If he can appeal to Soccer Moms, he can also steal away women voters who ordinarily provide Democrats with their margin of victory
So what's the answer? The present party system invites compromise including compromise of principles, because there are not enough TRUE conservatives or far leftists to elect someone on their own. Personally, I've always advocated a realignment of the parties along strictly philosophical lines, so that when you cast a vote, there's no doubt as to what the person you're voting for stands for, but would that work presidentially with the Electoral College?
As should Republicans. Arnold's mushy stances on many issues makes it uncertain on what issues he is gonna champion. He could get a hair up his butt and advance gay marriage or ask for more gun control. I don't mind Arnold being mushy on some of the social issues that I have strong opinions on, as long as he doesn't act on them. But I see Arnold as too much of a wild card who may do some dumb things that are counter to the core values of most Republicans.
game over
Tell that to the Florida and New Jersey Supreme Courts who love to re-write clearly written laws based on their feelings. So far California Supremes have not stooped to the lowest of low levels reached by those two courts.
1. Pro-death.
2. Self Proclaimed Environmentalist.
3. Viewed those who impeached Klinton with contempt.
4. Thinks the answer to Californias problems are more "programs".
5. Supports gay rights.
6. Has the intelligence of a damn cabbage.
Yeah Ahhnold is just what California needs. That is if you're like me and hope it - along with all of it's liberals from both parties - falls into the Pacific where it belongs.
More like a Soccor Mom on steroids.
The result of philosophical alignment is apparent. We have it and as a result nothing can ever get through the Senate. At least 40 senators will always be in the minority. They will filbuster everything the majority wants to do. When a party is part liberal and part conservative filibusters do not work very well. People always jump ship. The minority DINOs or RINOs always have more reason to jump than the DINOs and RINOs in the majority.
Right now it is the united Democrats filibustering. But if the Democrats get control of the senate and the presidency the Republicans will fillibuster. The result is a government that can do nothing... not even defend itself.
The Democrats were very effective from 1932 until 1968. The Demoratic party back then was made up of liberal northerners and southern conservatives. The northern liberal Democrats under FDR and LBJ used the party loyalty of the conservative southern Democrats to enact the new deal and the great society.
When NIXON did the realignment strategy you espouse, the right came to power but rolled back next to nothing the left had done with a mixes ideology democratic party. Now 35 years later, the leftist agendas of FDR and LBJ have become the centrist norm. And what used to be the right is now expanding on the old leftist agendas.
In california a traditional Old Europe Socialist emigrant is about to take over the Republican party in the most populus state in the nation. He will make it in his image.
Realignment does your homework on voting for you but it also allows the left and the socialist center to rule the United States no matter which party wins.
I don't know anything about the personalities (except, of course, The Governator).
But, for the sake of God, can't you California Republicans PICK ONE GUY AND SUPPORT HIM?
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.