Voting for Schwarzenegger
I held my nose and did it. I voted for my first ever Republican, Arnold Schwarzenegger. As mentioned here before, I don’t much like Schwarzenegger. I disagree with him on issues most of the time, and I’d been looking forward to the chance to get rid of him. I woke up this morning an undecided voter, a state I’d never before experienced, or understood, in an election of this magnitude. Ultimately, I just couldn’t convince myself to vote for Phil Angelides, his Democratic challenger.
The Angelides campaign got off to a late start. When I started pondering not voting for him, I said I just wanted to hear him campaign, to hear that he wanted the job, after months of the candidate’s seeming disappearance. Then he started campaigning, and it got worse from there. While Schwarzenegger had been talking about what he’s done and wants to do for California, Angelides talked about his dislike of Schwarzenegger. Period. He’s been showing video of Schwarzenegger endorsing George W. Bush. Poor judgment on Schwarzenegger’s part, to be sure, but Schwarzenegger is a Republican. He’s been accusing Schwarzenegger of having all sorts of other political positions I don’t agree with, and most of those charges are true, but I already knew that. Even the TV commercials starring Phil Angelides, in which he could presumably have said whatever he wanted, just showed him making fun of Schwarzenegger.
The big question, then, was what did Angelides actually want to do as Governor. He kept saying he would “stand up to Arnold Schwarzenegger.” This seemed unconvincing, both because he wasn’t doing a very good job of it where it counted, and because if he were elected, Schwarzenegger would no longer be a factor to stand up to. He briefly ran TV commercials claiming to be “a leader, not an actor.” Again, it was unconvincing. When really pressed, he seemed able to quickly rattle off some stock sound bytes from the Democratic Party platform, but it didn’t sound like anything he’s put much thought into.
The San Francisco Chronicle’s endorsement of Schwarzenegger summed up what I’d been thinking of Angelides:
His Democratic opponent, Treasurer Phil Angelides, has not demonstrated the leadership traits required to build coalitions that can overcome the egos, ambition and partisan rivalries that stand in the way of progress in Sacramento. Angelides has struggled to inspire Democrats in this election. In his meeting with us, many of his answers gave no indication that he either heard or cared about the question -- time after time, he defaulted to his wind-up stump monologues about education or closing tax loopholes.
The lack of excitement about Angelides is not just about his deficiencies in campaign donations and charisma. He has yet to articulate a compelling case that his election would make a difference in Sacramento. His increasingly strident appeal to Democratic loyalties is not resonating with the many Californians who worry less about party label than whether Republicans and Democrats are working together in their interest.
The Chronicle also posted video of their editorial board’s meeting with Angelides. A part I found particularly telling was where he was asked why he was having so much trouble connecting with voters. He launched into a diatribe about how the evil Schwarzenegger campaign had been defining him through negative ads, and how unfair this was. This struck me as strange. I’d seen lots of campaign ads in the last few months, including quite a few from Schwarzenegger. Schwarzenegger barely mentioned Angelides. He didn’t need to. Angelides sure ran a lot of negative anti-Schwarzenegger ads, but Angelides barely mentioned Angelides either.
This is not to say that I agree with the Chronicle’s praise of Schwarzenegger. Ultimately, I agree with a lot of what Phil Angelides said about him. I just wish Angelides, or the Democratic Party, had provided a palatable alternative.
