Why I'm Voting For Arnold Schwarzenegger (Another Conservative Backs Arnold)

Townhall.com ^ | 8/13/03 | Ben Shapiro

[goldstategop]

Conservatives are upset with Arnold Schwarzenegger. Cal Thomas writes that Arnold "is a social liberal and is bound to disappoint conservative Republicans." George Will states that Schwarzenegger "could hardly be less like Reagan." Mona Charen derides the leading candidate for California governor as a Ross Perot clone.

Thomas, Will and Charen are right. But I'm voting for Arnold anyway.

Schwarzenegger is the best thing to happen to California politics since Ronald Reagan. Which isn't to say that his positions resemble Reagan's -- they don't. Reagan was staunchly anti-abortion, while Schwarzenegger is pro-choice. Reagan was obviously an opponent of same-sex marriage, while Schwarzenegger is ambiguous on the issue. Reagan was a dedicated fiscal conservative, while Schwarzenegger espouses higher government spending.

So why would I vote for someone who is the epitome of the liberal Republican? Specifically because he is a liberal Republican. In California, nothing else will cut it. It's very easy for pundits to espouse the candidacies of hard-core conservatives like Bill Simon and Tom McClintock. But they have no chance of winning. None. In California, politics trump principle every time.

In the last gubernatorial election, I naively believed that the principles of solid conservatism could triumph over the unsuccessful record of liberalism in California. In the Republican primary, when Bill Simon went up against Richard Riordan, the popular former mayor of Los Angeles and liberal Republican, I voted for Simon. The conservative base felt betrayed by Riordan's liberalism, and it too went with Simon.

If ever a real conservative had a chance to win in California, Simon was the guy. Even Democrats were disenchanted with Davis. But Simon ran a brutal campaign, bumbling, fumbling, stumbling his way to defeat. And I realized that I should have voted for Riordan. Even though Riordan was no Ronald Reagan (or even Pete Wilson), he couldn't have been worse than Gray Davis has been. Riordan would have crushed Davis in the general election. Republicans blew it.

Now, Republicans have another chance. This is Riordan vs. Simon, part two, with Schwarzenegger playing the part of Riordan. Schwarzenegger is more popular than Riordan. He's younger, better looking, more charismatic and with better name recognition. He's also a smarter politician. Just as he kept the public guessing for weeks about whether or not he would run for governor, he's now keeping the public guessing about his positions. This means that the incompetence of Gray Davis remains the focus of the recall. And after Schwarzenegger is elected, his name recognition will prevent the Democrats from staging a retaliatory recall effort.

Schwarzenegger won't fix the state in the short run. It's too far gone for one man to fix. The California assembly is dominated by socialists, so Arnold will spend much of his time vetoing. The only bills he will be able to jam through are those that funnel cash to his favorite causes, education in particular.

But in the long run, the Schwarzenegger candidacy can help the state far more than just another conservative defeat. The vast majority of voters in California pull the lever for Democrats on a regular basis. In the 2000 presidential elections, George W. Bush campaigned hard in California. Al Gore didn't spend a dime and won the state easily. Why? Not because the positions of Californians are so far to the left but because Californians are accustomed to voting Democrat. Registered Democrats outnumber registered Republicans in the state 45 percent to 35 percent. It's inconceivable to many Californians to even consider voting Republican.

That's how Arnold will change things. Independents, who break heavily Democrat in California, will consider Arnold. Democrats who are disillusioned by Davis and attracted by Schwarzenegger's middle-of-the-road stance will consider Arnold. Young voters who have never stepped into a polling booth in their lives will go vote just to punch their cards for Schwarzenegger. The Hispanic populace, which greatly admires Schwarzenegger's masculinity and charisma, will pull the Republican lever.

In California, these groups dominate the voting constituency. And for the first time in a long time, the Republican label won't turn them off. That is Schwarzenegger's big contribution. His candidacy will change minds about voting Republican. Then, in the future, when ideologically sound Republicans run for office, Californians won't dismiss them out of hand.

Arnold won't change the makeup of the Republican Party from the inside -- he'll change the perception of the Republican Party from the outside. California Republicans will be marketable -- and more importantly, electable. That's something even the strongest conservatives should appreciate.

[Princeliberty]

The guy said it in his article Simon ran an terrible campaign. If Simon had run a clear focused campaign
in the general election he would have won
without being a liberal, without being pro-abortion.

You don't have to run a liberal to win.
In fact in the long run you will destroy
the party that way not build it.
We built the Republican party being being
conservatives not by being liberal.

It was Wilson's being a liberal that ripped
it down.

We have to win the battle of ideas not
act ashamed of our beliefs. We will never
win that way.

[Princeliberty]

Different lable same results.

You still have a socialist as Governor.

[onyx]

Former two-term CA governor, Pete Wilson, is schooling candidate Schwarzenegger.

Of course, some here refer to Pete Wilson as a RINO, overlooking the fact that it's RINO WILSON'S judiciary that permitted this recall election to proceed!

[goldstategop]

Of course we have to win the battle. There's no way it can be done overnight in California. If it couldn't be with Simon, McClintock can't do it. We have to lay the groundwork for a conservative majority first. Rome wasn't built in a day. At least with Governor Arnold we will get a hearing for our views. Under a Governor Bustamante we will get zero. All things considered the choice couldn't be easier.

[goldstategop]

Exactly. Without George Deukmeijian and Pete Wilson's terms as GOP governors we'd have a Rose Bird court and no recall election. If we want to have a conservative state Supreme Court in the future, we have to have a Republican Governor in Sacramento.

[nopardons]

Nope.

There are none so blind, as those who will not see. Your purity NEVER wins a damned thing.

[Diplomat]

Welcome aboard, been waiting a few months for the VRWC come to grips with California reality. Guess most of them are too busy rooting for our demise. We're still here and we will take the State back. You'd think the guys who gave you Reagan wouldn't have to live under the "what have you done for me lately" mantra. Oh well, here is the beginning of our resurgence.

Posted by Diplomat to kellynla On News/Activism ^ 06/17/2003 12:51 PM PDT #52 of 77 ^

She may want the job as a stepping stone to the presidency. If she has that ambition, she will dictate the terms of dufas' surrender. Otherwise, say hello to your (my) next governor, Arrrrnold. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[onyx]

I posted a similar comment on another thread today, but in case you missed it, I think you will enjoy it.

It seems that one of the polls show Arnold getting quite a bit of support from blacks. Know why? Maxine Waters!

Thanks to Ms. Waters for vociferously screaming about Cruz's use of the N word, blacks say they will not vote for him! LOL!

[danmar]

Arnold won't even put conservatives in his cabinet.

...and how did you figured that one out? You think I can borrow your cristal ball?

And when Arnold runs things further into the ground which he will

Again how did you come to that conclusion?...do [me]us a favor, don't vote on Oct 7th!

[BonnieJ]

What bothers me most about the RINO label and the OFTEN-repeated outcry that someone is not conservative enough, etc, is the judgmental aspect of it. WHO defines a Republican? You? We are a diverse group, we have to be to win in 50 states. There is no way we can all agree on issues, and the leaders of our party cannot either. A Republican in Utah is far different from one in New York. The core beliefs and convictions of each of us are unique. To try to exclude some simply for differing beliefs makes no sense whatsoever.

[nopardons]

And only leads to total losses after more losses ad infinitim.

[onyx]

The "purists" are only Republicans when it's their candidate who's getting the party's support.

Simple, and simply stupid, but that's the sum of them.

[nopardons]

They're dog in the manger "purists"; principle ever BEFORE wining. Losing, is a badge of honour for them.

[danmar]

Schwarzeneggar, the charismatic moderate, and Tom McClintock, the thoughtful conservative, are the Republicans with the best chances of defeating Bustamante and the Democrats in the likely event of Davis’ recall. Schwarzeneggar’s poll numbers show a substantial advantage over McClintock in the early going, but many McClintock supporters remain unimpressed.

Well Cat, I still don't get it...based on you statement above, we pretty much agree, although 51% vs 7% (today's pollings) is more than "substantial" advantage (AS over TMac). My posting was aimed at the ones who based on their statements pretty much were saying it is "the hi-road or no road" in regards to their stance on AS vs TMac.

Well, based on my life experience (40+fellow), one has to take at times some winding, treacherous, small roads, potholes and obstacles et all, in order to reach the "hi-road". Is not a given, no matter how pure one principles are.

Thats my take on the road to Governor's Mansion whether you like it or not!

[capitan_refugio]

I agree with your logic, but Rose Bird died some time ago.

[Viet Vet in Augusta GA]

Why does Arnold's candidacy infuriate so many politicians, journalists, pundits, etc.? Simple -- because it shows all politics is a farce and a joke, and the one thing liberals can't stand is not having their pious little claims taken seriously. All libertarians should welcome Arnold, Coleman, Angelyne, Mary Carey (porn movie star), and the other 246 candidates with open arms and a laugh -- the latter being what all politicians deserve.

[goldstategop]

I can't say anyone misses her... people haven't regretted booting her from the CSC and our state was much better off without her on the bench.

[samtheman]

His candidacy will change minds about voting Republican. Then, in the future, when ideologically sound Republicans run for office, Californians won't dismiss them out of hand.

News flash: it does matter if there is an R beside the name. If the R's start winning in California, even if they are liberal R's, then George Bush has a chance of taking the state.

Get off the purity horse. This is a revolution. California is a one-party state. This is a crack in the wall.

[goldstategop]

Exactly. Politicians are morons... especially the liberal ones and they know they're full of hot air!

[goldstategop]

Exactly. Get Californians comfortable with voting Republican one step at a time. And one day we'll be in the saddle. Don't laugh - we did it in Texas and the Democratic Party machine there or what's left of it is fighting to remain relevant.