Actor's Team Sprints, but Can It Finish a Marathon?

LA Times ^ | 9/19/03 | Mark Z. Barabak and Joe Mathews

[NormsRevenge]

For weeks, Arnold Schwarzenegger has run a lavish campaign — more like a bid for president than a run for California governor.

A private jet ferries him to events, and personal bodyguards shadow his every step, Secret Service-like. A small army of handsomely paid aides fills his Santa Monica headquarters —others spill into a second building — and TV ads air virtually round-the-clock, alone costing the campaign roughly $2 million a week.

The expensive trappings have given Schwarzenegger, a first-time candidate, a political stature that even his Hollywood celebrity fails to confer. His team includes some of the best talent the Republican Party has to offer. He draws from issue advisors, such as investor Warren E. Buffett, who are the cream of their professions.

But Schwarzenegger's free-spending ways carry a cost, and not just the millions the actor is shelling out each week.

In interviews, campaign aides and others familiar with the Schwarzenegger operation who spoke on condition that they not be identified described a bureaucratic organization, riven with disputes and slow to make strategic decisions.

[NormsRevenge]

Further on in the article are some additional comments that make one pause and wonder .. Can California afford his style of governing?

[NormsRevenge]

.

[pogo101]

As another TomBot posts every article his scouring can locate, in an effort to tar Schwarzenegger -- no matter how irrelevant the article may be to how Schwarzenegger would govern. Yeah, like having a posh personal life means LOGICALLY that he won't cut spending, etc. Tchyeah.

[NormsRevenge]

is that you , auntie in the attic? yawwwnnn

[pogo101]

Shut it. The only reason the post even shows to you is that you posted the article. D.E.P.M.A. Learn it. Live it. Shove it.

[pogo101]

While I'm ridiculing you: Let's note that, again, you can't come up with any substance in response to my point, namely that there's absolutely no logic to your #1 post ("Can we afford his style of government?"). Can't do it.

[It's me]

Can you explain why Arnold has not gone up in the polls and remains stagnant despite all his spending, and Tom McClintock has?

[BibChr]

"Actor." The past. Not (the truth) "GOP frontrunner."

Did McTickTock ever have a job before he was a pol? Why isn't he "Accountant," or "Security Guard," or "Towel holder," or whatever?

Oh, right -- because the media and all the other Demo hacks LOVE McTickTock, their best friend and only hope, and hate Schwarzenegger. How did I forget?

Dan

[pogo101]

My gosh, a substantive, fairly phrased question!

I think he's been hurt by the perception, 80% fair, that he's using vague statements to explain what he'd do, that he's trying too hard to be all things to all people. That's fine for the first week or two, but after then, people want more meat to chew on. I've done research and happen to believe it's there, but AS is holding back some because he wants to be flexible in office, rather than have to say, "here is exactly what I'll do and everything I'll do."

He can still recover his momentum if he starts getting specific. He needs to name a few "enemies" other than Indian gaming and public employee unions. He needs to tell us specifically what he would cut. The debate on the 24th is really the latest he can do this.

[NormsRevenge]

Ridicule away, It's so nice to see we're talking again. ;-)

Oh, my question would imply that Arnold will lead layers of bought off bureaucrats that will either do as he or Maria says and that's it. Plain and simple. You want that style of gvernance, Fine, Vote for him.

[pogo101]

You didn't answer the question. Here it is (again, really, to intelligent folks): "How is it that Arnold's, or any person's, having a lavish PERSONAL lifestyle as a candidate, any indication of his/her being 'lavish' in spending the state's money, nearly all of which in no way touches the governor's PERSONAL life?"

I think there is no answer to this that is logical and convincing. But then, you ONLY posted the article to bash AS, so I'm hardly surprised.

[pogo101]

Did McTickTock ever have a job before he was a pol?

No, and I wish he had, at least for a few years.

[NormsRevenge]

How do you Tom didn't deliver pizza or sell encyclopedia britannica when he was going thru college?

Arnold's style is evident, while trying to act inclusive, key word act, I don't trust his judgment any more than yours or the rnulled bots. You don't like it, too bad.

Like I just responded to you in a PM, Politics is war.

All this crap about it any longer being about compromise is a lie too many buy into. Get with the program or get out. Simple as that.

Look at the attacks on Tom, and you want immunity for Arnold. Go figure.

[BibChr]

So maybe it should be, "Unemployable Hack"?

Dan

[pogo101]

How do you Tom didn't deliver pizza or sell encyclopedia britannica when he was going thru college?

Norman, that's so lame -- and it was your best shot. Pizza delivery is not a career that would lend someone any first-hand understanding of note about running a business or how government can hamper commerce. Nice apology, but no one's buying it. (I'm not one of the ones saying lack of such first-hand understanding rules Tom out. But as I said straightforwardly, I wish Tom had a few years of it to go with his unquestioned expertise IN government. I meant it. See how I can compliment Tom even as you lie and reach to bash Arnold? It's neat not being closed-minded.)

Arnold's style is evident, while trying to act inclusive, key word act, I don't trust his judgment any more than yours or the rnulled bots. You don't like it, too bad.

That's entirely rhetoric. Zero argument. All you've just said is, "Me not like Arnold." Wow. That's convincing. And bear in mind my first choice IS Tom, so you really wouldn't have to be THAT convincing.

Politics is war.

Metaphor is not your strong suit, Sun Tzu. At best, you're ADMITTING you're using FR to tar a GOP candidate: "All's fair in war!"

All this crap about it any longer being about compromise is a lie too many buy into. Get with the program or get out. Simple as that.

Maybe you can explain this, uh, "argument." I'm "lying" if I say I may sigh and vote AS if Tom still trails badly on October 7? If I say that that's a "compromise" until we can get more true conservatives in? Gee, it sure feels true to me. And "get with the program" and "simple as that" are empty rhetoric. D minus.

Look at the attacks on Tom, and you want immunity for Arnold. Go figure.

So you admit your post here is as empty as many of the attacks I've seen (and deplored in many posts; have you noticed?) on Tom. So you admit you are as bad in principle as they are. There's a word for people like that and it begins with "H." And to address the part of your, uh, question that's fair: No, I don't want immunity for ANY candidate. But I want criticism to be fairly related to how the guy would govern. And "he has a private jet, therefore he'll bankrupt the state" don't cut it, Norman.

[daviddennis]

As an Arnold supporter, it seems to me that this is a perfectly valid article to post.

I might remark that since Arnold is a rich man, and he can afford to enjoy the trappings of wealth, he's running his campaign as you would expect.

I doubt that Tom McClintock minded being ferried around in a private 737 by Bill Simon's campaign. I saw the jet.

I may have to buy a copy of the Times to read the rest of the article.

Norm, could you post the excerpts that you're talking about that give you concern about Arnold? You should be able to post that thanks to fair use rights, no problem at all since it truly is for discussion.

Anyway, I happen to like and appreciate both Arnold and McClintock supporters. Remember that in the end, you all want the group to unite behind whichever candidate can win come election day; your only beef is which candidate this is :-).

So it's best to move your interactions back to civil terms. At first, Arnold's people were a lot easier on McClintock than the reverse, but now it seems to have degenerated into a screaming match.

There's no reason for that. I think we would all be better off with Arnold or Tom than Bustamante.

D

[Publius6961]

Governing?

A little premature maybe ya think?
There is a recall being ignored!

See ya.

[pogo101]

I totally agree that it's a valid article. I also think there was a good, related question up there, Why is he stagnant in the polls with all that loot in his campaign?

My quibble was with the "therefore he'll spend too much PUBLIC money" assertion in the poster's startoff comment.

[pogo101]

(re hack)

Oh, come on. Tom's neither unemployable nor a hack. He just loooves the wonkery of politics. So do I. But I'm just saying I wish he had taken some years in his life and been in private industry somewhere. (Just as I happen to believe that Arnold would be a better governor later if he first had some at-least-brief role in politics before.)

[kingu]

Can California afford his style of governing?

In short, yes. He's not using public money for these junkets, he's using his own and money donated to his campaign. If, for some reason, Arnold suddenly fell broke, you can count on the movie studios to still provide him a private jet, security, and vehicle transport.

Besides, how can you complain when a canidate has already brought an improvement in the economy of the state? :)