GOP has star-power dilemma: How will party use Schwarzenegger? [Kerry vs. Arnold?]

San Francisco Chronicle ^ | June 19, 2004 | Carla Marinucci, Chronicle Political Writer

[RonDog]

.

       www.sfgate.com        Return to regular view

---

GOP has star-power dilemma
How will party use Schwarzenegger?
- Carla Marinucci, Chronicle Political Writer
Friday, June 18, 2004

With less than three months to go before the Republican National Convention in New York City, a prime-time cliffhanger is in the works over whether the Bush camp will use it or lose it -- the megawatt influence and star power of California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Among the most sensitive issues is whether Schwarzenegger, a GOP marquee name, will be given a prized prime-time speaking spot at the party's presidential convention August 30-Sept. 2 at Madison Square Garden.

On the pro side: As the party's star actor, Schwarzenegger would get worldwide attention, and -- to the delight of networks -- draw millions of potential viewers to the now scripted-for-television political convention.

On the con side: The White House worries about lavishing too much attention on one Republican elected official who has shown an uncanny ability to upstage the party's star, Bush himself. A prominent role for Schwarzenegger also could anger the Republican right wing, which opposes his social views on such issues as abortion and same-sex marriage.

Ken Mehlman, campaign manager for Bush-Cheney '04, in an interview with The Chronicle, made no commitment on the specific role the Bush team expects the California governor to play, saying only that Schwarzenegger "is one of the great leaders of our party.''

Asked about talk that the White House is worried Schwarzenegger might outshine Bush at the convention, Mehlman downplayed the matter, suggesting that Schwarzenegger is one of many stars in the GOP...

[NittanyLion]

CA Governor and superstar Arnold is a HUGE GOP asset.

Because you feel that it's so, doesn't make it so.

[onyx]

Yes I have.
Arnold is a huge draw.
Bush wants to win reelection.
He can't do that without the squishy middle.


Arnold's approval rating it still at 67% in CA!
That is fabulous.


You don't like him.
Tough for you.

You're not calling the shots.

[NittanyLion]

You've said it all. I couldn't agree more - what some folks may fail to understand is that the nation as a whole is significantly right of CA. While Arnold may appeal to Californians, his issues simply do not resonate with the mainstream GOP outside his home state.

That's simply the way it is.

[Howlin]

Just imagine the hell that is going to be raised on these threads when the GOP Platform is released.

[NittanyLion]

You don't like him.

I'm sure he's a real nice guy. Just too liberal to be a prime time speaker at the convention.

[onyx]

HE is a huge asset!

NOT to YOU, but to the GOP,
and more specifically to Bush.

If Arnold campaigns with POTUS,
CA is in play. Imagine that.

[NittanyLion]

If Arnold campaigns with POTUS, CA is in play. Imagine that.

You had me going for a minute...good one!

[onyx]

Just imagine the hell that is going to be raised on these threads when the GOP Platform is released.




*SIGH*
And we know it's coming.

[onyx]

Please do not ever agree with me.
It would force me to reexamine my views.

[NittanyLion]

Please do not ever agree with me. It would force me to reexamine my views.

If California is in play, this election will be such a landslide Bush won't need CA's electoral votes. We could change the Constitution, Bush could select Arnold as his VP, and CA still wouldn't be in play.

Anything else is wishful thinking in the extreme.

[hchutch]

John Warner stabbed a Republican in the back and helped re-elect Charles Robb in 1994.

Why do you want to give that RINO a pass?

[onyx]

CA is in play with Arnold.
And IF Arnold campaigns with POTUS,
CA just might go to POTUS.

Kerry is too liberal for most of CA.
CA is NOT Massachusetts.
Kerry doesn't energize demcorats.

Psssssst: I am looking for a landslide.

[NittanyLion]

John Warner stabbed a Republican in the back and helped re-elect Charles Robb in 1994. Why do you want to give that RINO a pass?

What - does "ideological purity matter more than winning elections"? Or does that principle only apply to people other than yourself?

[NittanyLion]

CA is in play with Arnold. And IF Arnold campaigns with POTUS, CA just might go to POTUS.

No offense, but you're out of touch.

[hchutch]

No, you aren't thinking.

Arnold has a 67% approval rating in CA. He's got a lot of backing, and he is also good at fund-raising. If he is stumping with Bush in California, Kerry has to spend resources there that he will then be unable to spend elsewhere (say in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Michigan). Snubbing him, on the other hand, will only anger a lot of people in California.

[counterpunch]

What I stated at the time was that you certainly don't talk like a libertarian. It was only later that I discovered you have no ideology whatsoever; that you prefer to simply bounce around among a number of conflicting and contradictory statements.

No, you confused statements about the way things are as being statements about the way I personally think thinks should be. You confuse factual statements about the way the judiciary operates for statements about my own personal philosophy.

There is no contradiction between being ideologically in favor of smaller government and acknowledging that it isn't the case in reality.

You still have failed to refute the simple fact that established case law in the Supreme Court has taken issues such as AWB and abortion away from the states to determine.
I stated this as a legal fact, not my personal view, "libertarian" or not. You have argued all around the issue from every angle you can think of, without ever addressing this salient point.

[hchutch]

Warner is the one who sabotaged a Republican nominee and re-elected Robb in 1994.

I wanted to win the election. Warner placed his ideological purity over winning an election. Why the hell should I support him? I'm not going to let myself be tied down to your straw-man argument over this.

John Warner should have the integrity that Jim Jeffords did, and declare himself an independent. That is really what he is, not a Republican.

[Reagan Man]

You're wasting your time, NL. "Thepunchdrunkone" is a go with the flow, washy-washy centrist at best. He lacks an understanding of the basic concepts of conservatism and republicanism. He has no core principles, values or beliefs that I can see. It's impossible to engage him on any rational and logical thought level.

In America today, there are two major political ideologies that are fighting for the heart and soul and future of America itself. They'd be liberalism and conservatism. People like "thepunchdrunkone", think that good politics is like a smorgasbord of leftwing and rightwing ideas, values and beliefs. A mixture of everything that makes you feel good. LOL Not true. Politics is the art of gaining power, holding onto power and governing with power. You can only have success in politics, if you bring a principled set of values and beliefs into the arena of ideas.

The Constitution is the law of the land and first among all rights, is the right to keep and bear arms. Without it, all other rights have no meaning. You can't defend your right to freedom of speech, if someone is pointing a gun at you and you have nothing to point back at him. You can only defend your individual rights, like freedom of speech, if you have your own firearm. It makes for a level and fair playing field.

[NittanyLion]

Just so everyone understands that you hold others to principles to which you don't yourself adhere.

[counterpunch]

>>If Arnold campaigns with POTUS, CA is in play. Imagine that.

You had me going for a minute...good one!

I believe this to be the case too, despite your best efforts to undermine it.
Some recent California polls have put Bush and Kerry within one point of each other.

Here in California, Governor Schwarzenegger has amazing influence, turning support around for propositions 57 and 58 from losing by 30+ points to winning by 30+ points.

California is not nearly the Democrat state many have dismissed it as. In 1988, California went for Bush while Oregon and Washington state both went for Dukakis. This election both oregon and Washington are considered "in play", and as a Californian I know that means we will be in play too.

California has mainly suffered from having a divided and rudderless Republican party. Californians are fairly open-minded, but if only one side is out there making their case, then that is the way the state is going to vote.

Arnold brings new hope, purpose, unity, and energy to the CA GOP, and Bush will benifit from that.

With a powerful and influential local figure behind Bush, Californians will feel comfortable and confident in supporting him. He didn't have that in 2000 here, and because of that the Republican vote was extremely supressed. Arnold has changed the landscape, and Republicans are starting to come out of hiding here.
The GOP is no longer in retreat in California.