Football player for Governor

[jayscheuerle]

While Republicans do have a poor reputation in race relations, there is the obvious incentive for them to nominate minority candidates, in hopes of converting swing minority voters.

Very true.

As the re-election of John Street illustrates, uneducated black voters would rather cast their ballot for an ineffectual, wire-tapped by the government, nepotistic, cronied, prideful, grudge-carrying black cancer than just about any white guy. At least he wasn't caught smoking crack with a hooker...

 

[Phat Elvis]

You know, not all Black Republicans are "Uncle Toms" that the GOP throws in there in an attempt to win votes. That's an offensive blanket statement to make about Republicans and African Americans. That said, the irony with Keyes is that he was vehemently against carpetbagging, but did the same thing himself in 2004. On a final note, your B point is a moot one since Philadelphia is a city and he's running for Governor, not mayor. He does have affiliations with the state.

I realized this morning that my statement was not really that clear. It just seems that when republicans need someone to run against a popular democrat they choose someone that would make the democratic base feel guilty about voting against. There are lots of minorities in the republican party, I agree that they are not "Uncle Toms". However, I think that the real agenda of the republicans is to keep power/money in the hands of the wealthy. That is why the gap between rich and poor has grown so much over the past several years. To do this they need to either create fear in middle america (check) or divide the democratic base. And now I have to take blood pressure meds...

As for the Philadelphia connection. I have lived on both sides of the state. Rendell is a great governor, however there has been a backlash against him for being too focused on Philadelphia. This backlash is not true - but it's out there. To perpetuate the myth the Republicans are running a non-Philadelphian.

 

[MongoTheGeek]

Very true.

As the re-election of John Street illustrates, uneducated black voters would rather cast their ballot for an ineffectual, wire-tapped by the government, nepotistic, cronied, prideful, grudge-carrying black cancer than just about any white guy. At least he wasn't caught smoking crack with a hooker...

I almost bought a T-Shirt many years ago that said "I saw the tape the bitch was paid"

Mayor Barely was mugged recently. He complained that there was always an agreement between him and the criminals that he was one of them that they wouldn't go after him. (Something to that effect. I wish I was making this up.)

 

[Counterfit]

Well, if Rendell decides not to run for re-election, then obviously what the Democrats want to do is draft a really good cornerback.

Well, Deion Sanders' career is done, how about him?

 

[mouchoir]

What next? A right-wing Austrian actor for Governor?!

 

[OnceUGoMac]

What next? A right-wing Austrian actor for Governor?!

He's a Republican, but I wouldn't say right-wing. He's socially liberal and fiscally conservative.

 

[FoxyKaye]

He's a Republican, but I wouldn't say right-wing. He's socially liberal and fiscally conservative.

Did you miss the whole special election debacle this past November? Not only was it both a social and political Right Wing agenda, it cost the state upwards of $30 million. This also doesn't include the costs of the recall election he championed back in 2003. Don't know about you, but $30 million would do a great deal better in K-12 educational spending that CA sorely needs.

Anyhow, it's a shame the only "ordinary folks" who can run for election that aren't blueblood Dems or Republicans are actors. It says a lot about the state of American representative democracy, that really only represents the people who can afford to pay in to the system.

 

[MongoTheGeek]

Did you miss the whole special election debacle this past November? Not only was it both a social and political Right Wing agenda, it cost the state upwards of $30 million. This also doesn't include the costs of the recall election he championed back in 2003. Don't know about you, but $30 million would do a great deal better in K-12 educational spending that CA sorely needs.

Anyhow, it's a shame the only "ordinary folks" who can run for election that aren't blueblood Dems or Republicans are actors. It says a lot about the state of American representative democracy, that really only represents the people who can afford to pay in to the system.

I thought the reforms were intended to save the state money and take some of the corruption out of politics. There was an antigerrimandering one, there was another that prevented people from being forced to support candidates. then there was one that was an attempt to improve teacher quality

 

[FoxyKaye]

I thought the reforms were intended to save the state money and take some of the corruption out of politics. There was an antigerrimandering one, there was another that prevented people from being forced to support candidates. then there was one that was an attempt to improve teacher quality

Prop 73 - Would have required parental notification and a waiting period for access to abortions for minors. Erosion of abortion rights.

Prop 74 - Increases time for teachers to reach full tenure status. Would have had the effect of making it more difficult to recruit qualified teachers in CA's ailing school system. Does nothing to lower class sizes, increase funding to schools. Would have blamed teachers for a systemic failure.

Prop 75 - Would have prevented labor unions from using dues or fees for political contibutions. However, in CA, corporate political contributions outspend unions 24 to 1. The only unions this would have affected were teachers, nurses, firefighters and police, which were incidentally the same unions opposed to Schwarzenegger's political agenda from 2003.

Prop 76 - Would have changed state minimum spending on schools and health care. Schools would recieve $600 less per student, grants executive power to both declare a fiscal emergency and cut any state program because of fiscal emergency. CA schools are currently 7th from the bottom of 50 states in funding for public schools.

Prop 77 - Would have allowed CA redistricting to be determined by three retired judges appointed by Schwarzenegger. Redistricting data is from outdated census information and redistricting would cost the state millions. Incidentally, Orange County, San Diego and LA Republicans have been asking Schwarzenegger to redistrict to prevent seat losses in the state assembly and Congress since his election.

Prop 78 & 79 - Two different flawed plans to provide prescription drug discounts, one from the Right and corporations, the other from the Left and public interest groups.

Prop 80 - Would have re-regulated CA public utilities. Personally, right after CA de-regulated and my electricity bill went from $30/month to $150, $212, $175 and other three-digit numbers per month (which, almost approached $300 during Enron's fake CA "energy crisis"), I think this was a good idea.

None of these Propositions passed.

 

[Phat Elvis]

Prop 73 -
Prop 76 - Would have changed state minimum spending on schools and health care. Schools would recieve $600 less per student, grants executive power to both declare a fiscal emergency and cut any state program because of fiscal emergency. CA schools are currently 7th from the bottom of 50 states in funding for public schools.

What are the odds that if this passed there would have been an immediate "fiscal emergency" and he would have cut all programs to the poor. Kind of like how a "war on terror" allows the president to listen in on any conversation since the terrorists could be anywhere... even in South Dakota!

I love the phrase social liberal and fiscal conservative. Doesn't that mean that you like programs for the poor but just don't want to fund them? And hasn't his record shown that he's the exact opposite of what he says he is?

 

[MongoTheGeek]

Prop 74 - Increases time for teachers to reach full tenure status. Would have had the effect of making it more difficult to recruit qualified teachers in CA's ailing school system. Does nothing to lower class sizes, increase funding to schools. Would have blamed teachers for a systemic failure.

Prop 75 - Would have prevented labor unions from using dues or fees for political contibutions. However, in CA, corporate political contributions outspend unions 24 to 1. The only unions this would have affected were teachers, nurses, firefighters and police, which were incidentally the same unions opposed to Schwarzenegger's political agenda from 2003.

Prop 76 - Would have changed state minimum spending on schools and health care. Schools would recieve $600 less per student, grants executive power to both declare a fiscal emergency and cut any state program because of fiscal emergency. CA schools are currently 7th from the bottom of 50 states in funding for public schools.

Prop 77 - Would have allowed CA redistricting to be determined by three retired judges appointed by Schwarzenegger. Redistricting data is from outdated census information and redistricting would cost the state millions. Incidentally, Orange County, San Diego and LA Republicans have been asking Schwarzenegger to redistrict to prevent seat losses in the state assembly and Congress since his election.

I thought these 4 were the only ones supported actively by schwarzenegger. These were also the ones I heard the most about.

For 74 how do you tell the difference between teachers failing and the system failing?

For 75 how would you feel about being forced to support a candidate you opposed. A $5 reelect governator tax lets say? Thats what some union members face.

76. Yes it cuts spending, reduces the deficit, allows for rapid response in deficit reduction.

77. As I said Anti-gerrymandering. Think Texas...

Prop 80 - Would have re-regulated CA public utilities. Personally, right after CA de-regulated and my electricity bill went from $30/month to $150, $212, $175 and other three-digit numbers per month (which, almost approached $300 during Enron's fake CA "energy crisis"), I think this was a good idea.

None of these Propositions passed.

The "deregulation" wasn't deregulation. It was regulation. They forced utilities to divest themselves of production so the people responsible insuring adequate production were statutorily forbidden from increasing it. Going back to the way it was would be better perhaps. Actually deregulating might be a nice change.

 

[jayscheuerle]

He's socially liberal and fiscally conservative.

Austria disavowed this social liberal for supporting the death penalty, removing the name of Arnold Schwarzenegger Stadium and changing their pet name for him from "Our Arnie" to "Terminator".

 

[FoxyKaye]

For 74 how do you tell the difference between teachers failing and the system failing?

Have you ever seen the facilities condition of some CA schools? Do you teach in one of them? Did you ever have to ask the community for help purching toilet paper when you were in gradeshool? Do you know the history of Proposition 13 and its impact on CA social services over the last 30 years? CA schools are deplorable - they don't even consistently provide A-G track classes required by the UC system for admissions, the reason? Money. Schools can't afford the textbooks and materials to teach with. It would be a very different question if CA schools had adequate funding to meet basic educational demand. They don't.

For 75 how would you feel about being forced to support a candidate you opposed. A $5 reelect governator tax lets say? Thats what some union members face.

However, Prop 75 specifically targeted unions that were opposing Schwarzenegger from the get-go. It was entirely political motivation that put it on the ballot. Hey, how do I feel about living in a state that won't let me legally marry my partner? I still pay state taxes.

76. Yes it cuts spending, reduces the deficit, allows for rapid response in deficit reduction.

You forgot to mention that this reduction is at the cost of CA's education and health services - divestment in both of which actually costs more in the long-term.

77. As I said Anti-gerrymandering. Think Texas...

LOL - that's funny. Last I checked, Texas was redistricted under Bush the Governor specifically to divide Democratic districts to create Democratic minorities in newly-created Republican districts. 77 was nothing but playing with politics.

The "deregulation" wasn't deregulation. It was regulation. They forced utilities to divest themselves of production so the people responsible insuring adequate production were statutorily forbidden from increasing it. Going back to the way it was would be better perhaps. Actually deregulating might be a nice change.

Are you talking about energy subsidies or farming subsidies here? I still have the propeganda that the energy companies sent out when the industry was de-regulated under Pete Wilson (a freemarket Republican). Every company stood right behind him and begged to pass his version of de-regulation. The companies got exactly what they wanted, and CA residents bore the results.

Schwarzenegger is a menace - it's even in the NY Times today. Heck, he had to go on TV and apologize for the special election and his Propositions last night during the State of the State address.

In his annual State of the State message, Schwarzenegger said he had gone against the people's will by sponsoring a costly special election in November that was widely seen as an effort to punish public employees and Democratic lawmakers... "I didn't hear the majority of Californians when they were telling me they didn't like the special election. I barreled ahead anyway when I should have listened." He said.

 

[solvs]

Political forums here we come...

He's a Republican, but I wouldn't say right-wing. He's socially liberal and fiscally conservative.

I'd like to know your definition of socially liberal. Besides the ones already mentioned, he also doesn't support gay rights. He talked a good game about being middle of the road, but he is anything but, and most of the Californians I know don't like him. They only voted for him because they thought he'd be different than the rest of the politicians, but he's become just like them. My Mom is a teacher, my Dad teaches at a prison, and my Stepmom is a nurse. None of them can stand him for what he's doing with education, crime, and health care, and they know what they're talking about.

As for the football player, I'd say he couldn't be any worse than what's already there... but sadly that's what I thought of the Governator.

 

[OnceUGoMac]

Austria disavowed this social liberal for supporting the death penalty, removing the name of Arnold Schwarzenegger Stadium and changing their pet name for him from "Our Arnie" to "Terminator".

You're spinning tne truth, my friend. Arnold ordered them to remove his name from the stadium.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051227/ap_on_re_eu/austria_schwarzenegger

 

[Pittsax]

PA statewide politics are a little wierd, in that the eastern and western parts of the state are very different, and tend to vote for the "locals".

Republicans like to find candidates that are not from the Philly area because it is about 90% Democrat. Thus, if they nominate a Philly Republican, they miss out on the "native son" votes for that candidate.

Basically, this is going to be a major year in PA state politics, due to an unconstitutional pay-raise for the state's judge's and legislaters that has resulted in a major backlash.

You're pretty much right.

Basically, you can divide Pennsylvania into two groups: Philly and Pittsburgh, which are your Democrats, and everything else, which votes Republican and is known affectionately by a friend of mine as "Pennsitucky" Anyone who has driven across the state will understand where that name comes from.

 

[OnceUGoMac]

I'd like to know your definition of socially liberal.

Pro-Choice, Pro-Environment, wants to insure health care for low-income families, wants to reduce costs of health care, and he does support gay rights including adoption rights. He supports civil unions, but not marriage (Just like Kerry, Edwards, and Clinton). Sounds like a flaming conservative to me.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Arnold_Schwarzenegger.htm

 

[solvs]

Pro-Choice, Pro-Environment, wants to insure health care for low-income families, wants to reduce costs of health care, and he does support gay rights including adoption rights. He supports civil unions, but not marriage (Just like Kerry, Edwards, and Clinton). Sounds like a flaming conservative to me.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Arnold_Schwarzenegger.htm

What he says and what he does are 2 different things. He vowed to veto a gay rights bill, cut funding for free clinics and hospitals (I know, my Stepmom used to work at one before they closed it down), supported legislation to limit abortions, cut funding for public schools, has supported legislation that is anti-union, supports the death penalty, and I don't remember him doing anything pro-environment, though he does seem to be pro-business, which is usually not very environmentally friendly. Sure sounds like a liberal to me.

Kerry, Edwards, and Clinton were not exactly great for their side either, so I don't know how that's a good comparison.

 

[Billicus]

and an actor was US president.

Please, don't remind us.

I think we can discuss Swann's possibility for election without unfairly commenting about President Reagan like that.

That being said, Mr. Swann has as good of chance as anyone of winning the Republican primaries, not to mention that he obviously has the name recognition to have a threat about him here at Macrumors.