Okay, I'll bite. How is it possible to be a "fiscal Conservative" and a "social Liberal" at the same time? Hell, Arnold gives a 10% budget hike to the Dems and they scream that it's a "budget cut" because he didn't give them the 20% increase that they wanted. I'd like to see a "fiscal Conservative / social Liberal" make it in that environment.
This will work for about one year until all of the revenue generators move to happier climes and there are no more gooses from which to yank golden eggs.
His "brand" of "social liberal" means he's not afraid to spend the People's money on the things the People need but not over do it. If he was a big liberal he would've given them the whole $5 billion. Or increased taxes. Or signed homosexual marriage and driver's licenses for illegals. Remember his after school program initiative? It had a set of spending triggers.
The problem tonight and, generally, aren't "the Dems" because the legislature and union bureaucracy are not mainstream Democrats. They're no less than outrageous radicals.
He's not getting any credit for working with them any more than Bush has gotten any credit for working with Ted Kennedy on "No child left behind." No Republican is ever going to get credit for that. Even if Arnold had given $5 billion more in education spending, not $3 billion, they'd attack him just as vigorously.
Even when he does good for California, when he makes progress, he can't please select litmus test conservatives around these parts.