[Field] Poll Finds Governor's Support Still Eroding [Bustamante-25%.. Schwarzenegger-22%]

New York Times ^ | 8-15-2003 | DEAN E. MURPHY

[deport]

Poll Finds Governor's Support Still Eroding

By DEAN E. MURPHY

AN FRANCISCO, Aug. 15 — A new statewide opinion poll shows that Gov. Gray Davis of California continues to lose support in his effort to keep his job, while Lt. Gov. Cruz M. Bustamante and Arnold Schwarzenegger, the actor, are at the top of the list of possible successors.

Mr. Davis, who faces a recall election on Oct. 7, has become so unpopular among registered voters that the pollsters, Field Research, likened his standing to that of President Richard M. Nixon before he resigned in August 1974.

"We've been doing polling for 56 years, and the current rating of the governor, 70 percent disapproval, is equivalent to the lowest job rating we have ever measured for an elected official," said Mark DiCamillo, director of the Field (California) Poll.

In the first half of the poll of 1,036 Califorinians, which was released today, 58 percent of likely voters said they favored removing Mr. Davis from office, up from 51 percent last month.

Asked whether they thought he would be recalled, 68 percent said yes.

In the second half of the poll, to be released on Saturday, Mr. Bustamante, a Democrat, and Mr. Schwarzenegger, a Republican, placed well ahead of the 133 other candidates on the ballot. The recall ballot will pose two questions. First, should Mr. Davis be recalled, and second, who should succeed him if he loses?
The survey showed that 25 percent of likely voters favored Mr. Bustamante, while 22 percent said Mr. Schwarzenegger was their first choice. Three other Republicans followed the front-runners, with State Senator Tom McClintock picking up 9 percent, Bill Simon Jr. 8 percent and Peter V. Ueberroth 5 percent.

The margin of error in the poll was plus or minus 5 percent.

Mr. DiCamillo said the ranking of the candidates, even with the margin of error, showed that Republicans voters were dividing their votes among the top four Republican candidates and that Democrats had more or less settled on Mr. Bustamante, the lone prominent Democrat on the replacement ballot.

"It is one of the problems that the state Republican Party has had over the years, that they have not been able to come up with consensus candidates," Mr. DiCamillo said.

That said, the poll suggested that many voters had yet to settle firmly on one candidate. Forty-four percent of likely voters indicated that they might change their mind before Oct. 7.

Peter Ragone, a spokesman for Californians Against the Costly Recall, a group formed by Mr. Davis, said the recall had been so volatile that it would be unwise to place much credence on any poll.

"It is like trying to grab a fistful of water," Mr. Ragone said. "It is so fluid. The polls that have been out there have been all over the map for the past several weeks."

Mr. Davis, in an appearance in Los Angeles, did not talk about the polls. Instead, he criticized remarks by Warren Buffett, a newly named economics adviser to Mr. Schwarzenegger, about property taxes.

In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Mr. Buffett suggested that the state's property taxes were too low, something that Mr. Schwarzenegger's opponents portrayed today as an assault on Proposition 13, the ballot measure from 1978 that limits on property taxes.

"The people spoke," Mr. Davis said, "and all of us who have held office since then have honored the will of the electorate. Lord knows, we have some things that cost a lot of money in this state. But property taxes are not one of them, and no one is about to change that."

[bradactor]

I alredy heard Arnold say that he disagrees with Buffet on taxes but has him for an adviser. Even the White House got Buffet's help I think with secretary of the treasury. The thing is you can disagree with someone on policy but use their help in other areas. I am beginning to wonder if even Ronald Reagan could be elected today. I heard he supported issues in California as governor that upset conservatives.

[ImpeachandRemove]

I sure hope Huffington stays in because as far as I can tell she draws support from the loony left. She appears to be working hand in glove with the Green Party candidate, and may even withdraw in his favor.

Again, let's see how McClintock and Simon and Uberoth do for a while. Let them make their case. Let's see if Arnold implodes. But if things stay about as they are now, Arnold should bring them onto the team in the traditional manner of political consolidation... making rivals part of the team and giving them jobs. Reagan gave Bush41 a job. Clinton gave Babbitt a job. Kennedy gave Johnson a job. Got the picture?

[Sabertooth]

I prefer NOT to be a good solid conservative LOSER, who FEELS great, but suffers from continued RAT poison.

RonDog, I would prefer that Arnold make a few substantive statements on the issues, before I'll consider giving my vote to him.

This celebrity "A" (rnold) Team shtick is getting old fast. Warren Buffet and Rob "statutory rape" Lowe? Every time Buffet yaps about our property taxes being too low (code for "repeal Prop #13") a lot of Californians get uneasy, me included.

I was earlier looking for answers to questions about Arnold's positions on Illegal Aliens. Now I need to know if he and his team are thinking about taxing my Mom out of her house.

Arnold needs to start acting like a real candidate this week, or I think his meteor might arc out sooner than you anticipate.

[grania]

If people like you don't consider Arnold a 'real' republican, how can you say the party loses its social values with his election? If he's not one of you, what does it matter? Remember, its about WINNING elections, not losing honorably.

The Republican Party is about two things. It's about corporate interests and it's about socially conservative values.

Often, those two groups are in conflict. For example, cheap foreign labor might be great for corporate profits but it's awful for middle class families who want to know they'll get a paycheck tomorrow.

If the Party chooses a social liberal, and the Dems always choose a social liberal, there will be no restraint on the looniness and the disintegration of our values and culture.

Remember, GWB won as a "compassionate conservative". And he has done all kinds of unacceptable things to grow government interference in education, in drug subsidies, with the Patriot Act, etc. And your saying the conservatives should just take this? WE WON !!. Republicans have the HOR, the Senate, and the Presidency. And conservatism is supposed to stand back and take it so California can have a Republican governor who doesn't represent those values?

A lot of us are very, very upset that GWB didn't immediately resolve the two versions of the "PBA" (pre-separation murder) ban, before the NOW nuts figured out how to stop it. Now, are we going to be told to "wait until after Arnold is elected, you can trust us"? Then are we going to be told to "wait until GWB is elected again"?

We (social conservatives) are being played for fools. It's a dangerous game. Remember, people didn't go to Ross Perot even though Bush I did his job. They went because of NAFTA and the lie about taxes.

[Sabertooth]

Rove is a winner.

In California? Against a Democrat? When? Where?

The only time Bush and Rove have won or backed a winning candidate in California was in the 2000 primary, when Bush scored well with conservatives and folks voting for Proposition #22, the "one man-one woman" definition of marriage referendum.

It's understandable that Arnold is generating excitement, but we Californians see celebrities all the time. It gets old in a hurry. As we get close to election time, voters are going to take closer looks at how the various candidates' positions are going to affect Califronia.

As yet, Arnold has no clear positions on anything.

[Those_Crazy_Liberals]

"They went because of NAFTA and the lie about taxes."

No one really cared about NAFTA. And its been a good thing for the country. Remember, despite Bill Clinton, the 90's were a wonderful decade economically. Its all about capitalism baby. No one is in business to provide jobs, other than employment agencies.

[Those_Crazy_Liberals]

"I sure hope Huffington stays in because as far as I can tell she draws support from the loony left. She appears to be working hand in glove with the Green Party candidate, and may even withdraw in his favor. "

Yah, you have a good point. Everywhere Arnold shows so does she. She's a good contrast.

[farmer18th]

If this poll is to believed, a flaming liberal (Cruz) slightly outpolls a flaming liberal (Arnold), but both of them together don't make a majority. I wonder what the strategists make of this??

[Lazamataz]

Listen, Rove is a mastermind. He needs to insure that wacko candidates don't tear down the hard work he's done with the president in reaching out to difference consituencies. Its all about getting Bush reelected.

Does Karl Rove agree with your sentiment, when you wrote "You say a lot of evil things about our President. I think you need to be held accountable for running your mouth and making these insulting, outragous claims. Like President Bush said, you're either with us or against us. I can only presume you're an enemy of this nation."

Is it true that you believe that anyone who makes comments that you deem 'evil' or 'outrageous' or even 'insulting' must be 'held accountable' as an 'enemy of this nation'?

How would you hold them accountable? Would you torture them? Hold them at Gitmo? Deport them? Tell me your exact fascist plans for the 'enemies of the state'.

[Carry_Okie]

I swear there some EAST COAST Republican party think tank that has come up some time back with some model of what they think they need to win in California base to some bicoastal Hollywood stereotypes and a visit or two the LA and the bay area.

We've seen it before: Nixon.

Wage and price controls. The EPA and the Endangered Species Act. "Opening" China (which may really cost us yet). Some conservative he was.

[ImpeachandRemove]

"She's a good contrast."

... and a publicity hound/self promoter who is remarkable even by California standards:) Her candidacy should really be lumped with Gary Coleman in the show biz promotion category. Flynt, on the other hand, really exemplifies the ideals of what appears to be a very large segment of Californica democrats. If he hands out free Hustlers the way old time politicians handed out free whiskey, I'm sure he'll attract a dedicated core of support among democrats:)

[Carry_Okie]

Issa was the one who put in millions of his own personal money, without which the recall would have gone exactly nowhere.

It was going fast enough that he decided it was worth it. It was only a matter of time. Imagine how he felt when the CAGOP told him to butt out. No wonder he was crying. Those guys are real gems.

The Republican Party didn't deserve him.

[Lazamataz]

No one really cared about NAFTA. And its been a good thing for the country.

Wrong.

Wrong.

[Carry_Okie]

Listen, Rove is a mastermind. He needs to insure that wacko candidates don't tear down the hard work he's done with the president in reaching out to difference consituencies.

BS. First, no "mastermind" would import a constituency that votes 70% Democrat. Second, conservative principles do more for the dispossessed and non-traditional constituencies than Statists do, about which you clearly understand very little.

Its all about getting Bush reelected.

He's slipping there too.

[Ann Archy]

Arnold.....you can NOT go from a Liberal to a Conservative without a liberal republican stepping stone like Arnold. It can't be done.

Arnold will make it "OK" to vote for a republican maybe in the future for most of these people who would rather DIE than vote "R".

[grania]

No one really cared about NAFTA.

That's just not true. Remember the "giant sucking sound"? Well, that was about the concern that NAFTA would suck good jobs out of the US, into Mexico.

Its all about capitalism baby. No one is in business to provide jobs, other than employment agencies.

That's just not true. Capitalism is about the owners making an honest profit while providing a more decent society than government could. Employees should make an income that they decide how to spend. The best of the employers realize that their employees are part of it.

It's all about being able to look in the mirror and knowing that the person you see is a decent person, who makes his/her profits honestly, who never deliberately screws someone for a few extra bucks, who realizes that the important connections are about people and a life grounded in values.

If you don't see that, we certainly aren't going to be happy in the same political party. Heck, I'm not sure we belong to the same human race.

[Those_Crazy_Liberals]

"That's just not true. Remember the "giant sucking sound"? Well, that was about the concern that NAFTA would suck good jobs out of the US, into Mexico."

A concern that never materialized. Try again.

[grania]

A concern that never materialized. Try again.

No...I'm out of here for now. We'll never agree on anything, and we'll never have one iota of impact on each others beliefs.

[Those_Crazy_Liberals]

"If you don't see that, we certainly aren't going to be happy in the same political party. Heck, I'm not sure we belong to the same human race."

We certainly don't share the same high level of intellect. What is it to you that an employer decides to buy his paperclips from Mexico rather than some bloated unionized paperclip factory that charges twice as much? Who cares if the domestic paperclip factory goes out of business? Do you have a problem being in bed with Richard Gephart on this NAFTA issue? Rather my money go to some schmuck in Mexico than to some union coffers to spend against conservative candidates *I* support.

[Those_Crazy_Liberals]

"BS. First, no "mastermind" would import a constituency that votes 70% Democrat."

You're from the flat earth school of political thinking, eh? He's not reaching out to 'import' a constituency that votes 70% democrat. He's speaking to the swing voters who decide elections. I suspect you're of the mindset that thinkis its not ok to give $1 to get back $2. You want your $1 for free.