Just a quick and dirty reading of all the initiatives going down to defeat in California. First, it doesn’t surprise me. Second, I believe it spells the end to Arnold Schwarzenegger’s political career.You may know I was involved with Props 74-77 early on. I was told by the “Governor’s People” how much I would be paid (about 20 percent of my normal fee for twice the work) and that I should be excited about such magnanimity because I had the honor of toiling for the Great Arnold Schwarzenegger. Of course you say “yes” to such a lousy offer because in my business, turning it down means losing not only the Governor’s future work, but not working with the “Business Community,” a group that will come to work on Wednesday with a not-so-wise expression on their collective faces.
I’m not sure if it’s part of human nature or just part of me, but I know I grumbled the entire time I was working and cared less about the outcome than I ever had before. Low pay and a lousy work environment do that to me. I put up with a lot of crap for a little money and I am sure it showed in my work effort. I am always more willing to pour my heart into a job when I am working with a client I respect and who respects me enough to pay me for the value of the job. I also like to be treated as if I am part of a team rather than a line-item budget. And, oh yeah, after agreeing to pay me so little, it would have been nice if I hadn’t been stiffed on the final bill. To make matters even worse, I should have taken President Bush’s advice of “Screw me once, shame on you, screw me twice . . . well, ain’t nobody gonna screw me twice” because the money I wasn’t paid just went on a rather large tab that has been accumulating with the Governor over the past three years.
Why is this important other than How It Effects Me? Because Schwarzenegger treated his entire campaign staff the same way. He pressured them, missed appearances, attempted to interject too much of his novice advice, and paid his consultants about five percent of what they normally earn. Take a look at the ads – and his ragged campaign – and it looks like it was all done without enthusiasm. Which I am sure it was.
He got a lot of free advice (naturally) at the beginning and most thoughtful people were telling him he was biting off more than he could chew. I was one of those people and was quite happy when he decided to drop a fifth constitutional amendment dealing with the screwed-up pension system due to severe legal drafting problems. But his ego and natural enthusiasm knows no bounds and you’d be hard pressed to find a consultant willing to talk any politician out of spending money, even if it is a piddling amount. So we got ourselves a Special Election because we just couldn’t wait to fix reapportionment, something that by law won’t even be considered for another five years.
A lot of money and effort was wasted on unbridled hubris on initiatives that just didn’t resonate with the people; not because taken on their own they were not worthy, but because he tried to sell them as a package of unrelated issues and because they were for him, The Governator. I don’t think people ever got the connection. What does teacher tenure have to do with restrictions on union dues, spending caps, and giving the art of redistricting to someone other than Judge Wapner (who, by the way, wins the award for the all-time worse political ad spokesman)? I was told to sell these as “Schwarzenegger’s Reform Package” to mend the state’s ills, but he has a lot less political capital than he believes and this state is far more to the left (as he is) than what he was peddling. IF he didn't learn this tonight, then he never will.
The writing is clearly on the walls now; Schwarzenegger’s foray into politics is about as big a flop as Terminator 3. He has no stomach for personal attacks and no desire to drag his family through more dirty politics that he is sure to face during a second election, this time with 12 months for Maria to grit her teeth rather than the three-month campaign following the recall of Gray Davis. A poll today said that 52 percent would not vote for him today if was running and, in effect, he was running through his initiatives where he faced a tougher adversary than in Predator – the unions. Additionally, his supporters are tapped out and stunned at the turn of events. All they have received for their financial support was worker’s compensation reform and a few vetoes of loony legislation. It’s not enough to show for the enormous tab they’re stuck with tonight.
I suspect the Governor will head off for a vacation, speak with his family, and figure out a way to make the next 12 months as painless as possible. You may even see him working more with democrats. But I doubt you’ll see his name on next year’s ballot. Can anyone say Governor Angelides? Time to stick the for sale sign in the yard and check out real estate in Montana. The only mandate coming out of this election is for the democrats to feel emboldened and every time they feel that way, they come gunning for your wallets.
4 comments:
Free advice is often worth what you paid for it.
Much to comment on here but will do it in small doses. I was unaware that you had been working on these Props. (We never talk anymore...whine, whine) You are right about so many things in what you've said here. I never got the big connection between the propositions and how he was trying to fix the state. My short memory has nearly forgotten what a mess we were in and how bad Davis was...and I couldn't stand Gray Davis! Arnold never really reminded us of that and he never brought it together. On top of that the CTA or whoever was bombarding us with attacks on Arnold himself and he had very little response. Even though I swore at the TV everytime one ran I have to admit that it eroded even my support.
As for Judge Wapner, I must completely disagree with you. He was a brilliant choice by the opposition! He was familiar to a large segment of the actual voters. He was clear in his argument against the Prop. He made even me think that he was the kind of guy I didn't want making redistricting decisions. And finally, his ad followed on the heels of the one about 3 old white men making the decision. I agree that Wapner would not make a positive political spokesman but he certainly was good at being an "anti-spokeman".
More to come from me...
To the first post, I always believe when you pay peanuts, you get monkeys.
As for the infamous Mr. Slade, I just never thought of Judge Wapner with any credibility but, perhaps to the average voter he is the only judge other than Judge Judy that people regcognize.
All and all, though, I thought Arnold's people were just awful at articulating what he was trying to do. If they said we have to fix the fiscal crisis in Sacramento (as he did in 2004 but on Props 57 and 58) then he had a chance at selling his spending cap measure. If he said he wanted to clean up the cesspool in Sacramento and limit the control of special interests (other than his), then it would have made sense to link the union dues and reapportionment reform measures.
All of the together, seemed disjointed without the kind of urgency that required a special election ballot. In other words, it seems as though Arnold borrowed the President's PR team and had them work for him. How else do you explain both of them dropping 40 points in the polls while never responding to the criticism? Good to see the Prez fighting back today tho.
You be right, my political expert. Only people who listen to conservative talk radio MAY have understood the connections the props had to helping solve California's problems. That's not enough people to win at the ballot box if people that supported Arnold in the governor's race are bombarded month after month with millions of dollars worth of personal attacks on their governor, who then barely responds.
Post a Comment