Posted on 08/11/2003 9:16:06 AM PDT by RonDog
From the outset the California recall was a bad idea for Republicans. It was a lose, lose, lose situation. Without the recall Republicans would have contended for an open seat in 2006 against a non-incumbent Democrat running on a crippled legacy. The recall introduced three basic possibilities into this mix, all of them bad.The first of these would be a defeat of the recall and hence a win for the Democrats. The second would be a victory for the recall but the election of a Democrat to replace Davis, forcing Republicans to face an incumbent in 2006. The third would be a victory for the recall and a Republican governor. Ironically, this would have created the possibility for the worst scenario of all.
The victory of a Republican would have meant a conservative governor with a plurality of 20 percent. Even this would probably be optimistic since Republicans notoriously lack discipline, guaranteeing a full Republican field. Thus a conservative victory would set up a conservative disaster.
If Issa, Simon or McClintock had indeed won with 20 percent of the vote, he would have absolutely no mandate to govern. He would inherit a $38 billion deficit. He would face an overwhelming Democrat majority in the state legislature and the press. Moreover, being an isolated conservative with a small constituency, he would be unable to counter these disadvantages by going over the heads of the legislature and the media to the public to promote his agenda. He would have no popular base in the state. Thus, he would have no option to reduce the deficit by cutting the programs and payrolls fattened in the Davis years as the economy and state revenues were bottoming.
In other words a Republican victory would have led to the discrediting of fiscal conservatism and the prospect of twenty years of unchallenged liberal Democratic rule.
But the entrance of Arnold Schwarzenegger into the race has changed all that. Suddenly Republicans have an opportunity to take back the governorship, revive their all but dead party, and make themselves competitive again in the Golden State.
To understand this one must first understand that Schwarzenegger is above all a "modern" candidate (I borrow this term from Democratic strategist Michael Berman, who wickedly defines it as being pro-choice, anti-cigarette companies and believing that God is a tree). The last Republican Governor, Pete Wilson, if not entirely modern in this sense, was nonetheless a pro-choice, social moderate, He put together an electoral majority by taking two conservative issues which some modernists covertly support -- opposition to racial preferences and illegal immigration and forging a winning majority behind them.
Nearly a decade of statewide electoral contests since Wilson's retirement have shown that no candidate can win statewide office in California -- any statewide office -- who is not "modern." The insipid Gray Davis beat a pro-life typically starched Republican conservative, Dan Lungren, in a 1996 landslide election that took down the entire state Republican Party. In the wake of the Davis's tsunami, Republicans were left with two minor statewide offices. One of the offices was held by a crook, who had to resign. Now Republicans hold none.
Four years later, Barbara Boxer -- unpopular even with Democrats -- beat Matt Fong over the gay issue and with a phony but effective attack that represented him as an anti-environmental extremist. George Bush who is pro-life and does not believe that God is a tree, lost to Al Gore by a million votes in the same election despite a campaign of "compassionate conservatism." The Gore camp did not have to spend a penny in the state to win. Then in 2002 a hugely unpopular Gray Davis thrashed conservative Bill Simon despite droves of Democrats who sat on their hands because they could not bring themselves to even hold their noses and vote for the incumbent. These results should show anyone who cares to look that the California electorate does not resonate with social conservatism and will not vote for anyone who isn't "modern."
Another term for "modern" might be "cool." John McCain is a cool Republican and could have carried the state in 2000 if the Republican primary electorate had not preferred George Bush.
Now comes Arnold Schwarzenegger a fiscal and national security conservative who is the epitome of cool. Suddenly Republicans have become people that Hollywood not only wants to know, but already does know. And respect. With Arnold's entry into the race the political landscape of California -- and beyond it the nation -- has changed.
I am amazed at Democrats who have been quoted saying that Schwarzenegger can be damaged with references to possible amorous indiscretions and dalliances with Sixties recreational substances. Californians will love him for that -- or forgive him. I am more amazed at Dick Morris who thinks that Arnold's celebrity has peaked. It is only beginning. He is one of the few actors in Hollywood that the American public regards as serious person, a shrewd businessman and a master of his own image. Perfect credentials for a prospective governor.
I am less amazed at conservative Republicans who still don't get it (because that's actually what Republicans are famous for) and are still in the race. As previously noted, even if a Republican candidate like Tom McClintock or Bill Simon could win the plurality to become governor, which they can't, their administration would be a disaster -- for them, for Republicans and for their conservative cause. If conservatives want to make California a conservative state they need to lay a lot more groundwork for that to be possible.
Arnold's is a dream candidacy for the Republican Party, which he alone can rescue from the dead. He has already made Republicans more user friendly to the public at large. He will make it easier for media talent in the state to relate to the Republican Party, which has ramifications for campaigns beyond California. He will inspire significant numbers of independents to vote for his party. And if he is elected -- unlike the conservatives biting at his heels -- he will be a formidable counter-balance to the Democratic legislature, which means he could actually improve the financial condition of the state.
If Governor Schwarzenegger were to do the right thing -- for example veto Democratic attempts to protect their expensive programs -- he would be in a position politically to resist their override. He could just take his enormous popularity and media presence into their individual senatorial and assembly districts and immediately threaten their electoral futures, so great is his popularity and media presence. Of course politics has its uncertainties and unseen pitfalls and no one knows if Arnold will be able to navigate them successfully. But if he manages to do so and win, he will actually have a chance to revive the state and run for a second term.
Even more important, Governor Schwarzenegger would change the political equation for the next presidential contest in 2004. A Bush 2004 campaign with Arnold as the President's point man in the state would unquestionably turn it into a competitive affair. This means that even if Bush does not ultimately win the state, the Democrats will have to pour big dollars into the state to contest the election. The drain of money and resources will impact close races across the country.
For all these reasons Republicans of all factions should rejoice at the Schwarzenegger candidacy. It offers the only possibility of a win for state Republicans or for the Bush campaign in California. It will help to revive the California Republican Party. And it could reshape the politics of the nation.
David Horowitz is the author of numerous books including an autobiography, Radical Son, which has been described as “the first great autobiography of his generation,” and which chronicles his odyssey from radical activism to the current positions he holds. Among his other books are The Politics of Bad Faith and The Art of Political War. The Art of Political War was described by White House political strategist Karl Rove as “the perfect guide to winning on the political battlefield.” Horowitz’s latest book, Uncivil Wars, was published in January this year, and chronicles his crusade against intolerance and racial McCarthyism on college campuses last spring. Click here to read more about David
FrontPageMagazine.com - June 3, 2003
Republicans in California are also mounting a moral campaign that is making them feel very good about themselves but which will result in a defeat for the Republican cause. It is generally conceded that Gray Davis is an atrocious governor. Under his administration a $4 billion surplus has been turned into a $40 billion deficit. His approval ratings are as low as Nixon’s were on the eve of his Watergate resignation. Davis is despised by Democrats and Republicans alike. Some Republicans have seen this as an opportunity to punish a man who deserves to be punished and to make a political gain in the process. They have sponsored a recall movement which if successful would remove Davis and elect a successor at the same time. Republicans are pouring millions of valuable political dollars into this campaign and mobilizing the passions of their rank and file to bring it to success.
All this makes perfect sense until you look at what will actually happen if the recall campaign is successful. In the worst-case scenario, Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein, who is about to retire at the end of her term, will instead put her name on the ballot and become the new governor of California. She will then appoint her own successor in the Senate. California Republicans will have achieved two knockout blows (but of themselves) at the same time. The California Republican Party already holds no statewide offices. With Feinstein retiring Republicans had a chance to run for an open Senate seat in the next cycle, which is always an advantage for a party out of power. If this recall scenario holds they will have created a situation in which they will have to run against an incumbent instead. Likewise, instead of running for an open gubernatorial seat against the legacy of a discredited Democratic administration they will either have to run against a popular Democratic incumbent or her anointed successor.
There are other possible scenarios – California Attorney General Bill Lockyear a savvy Democratic politician might run (and win) the governor’s seat for example. This is not quite as certain as a Feinstein victory but it is certain enough. But what if the Republicans win? They will then inherit the monster deficit and all of its unpleasant problems, with less time than even Davis has to fix it for the next election.
You could talk to the leaders of the recall campaign until you were blue in the face and never convince them that this is a bad idea. I will undoubtedly be criticized for writing these words, even though they are friendly advice. Conservatives will say Horowitz is defending Gray Davis, just as Christian conservatives presumed I was criticizing their theological views, and pro-reparations blacks that I was denying that slavery was unjust.
But of course the justice of the Gray Davis recall movement is not what I am challenging. It’s the political wisdom of the recall campaign. Politics is about winning. If you don’t win, you don’t get to put your principles into practice. Therefore, find a way to win, or sit the battle out.
You are grossly underestimating Davis' abilities as a candidate to trash and burn his opponent. He has NEVER been elected because people liked him or thought he was best for the job. He is elected because he is able consistently to paint his opponent as the Devil personified. Also, he wields enormous influence among opinion makers, and the media here act as cheerleaders for all things liberal.
IMHO, the worst part of the recall is that the media who were complicit with Davis in covering up the severity of the budget crisis and in painting Simon as a corrupt, "silver-spoon" rich kid are now benefiting from the boost in ratings from the recall coverage. The media have helped destroy the state, and it is too bad there is not a way to hold them accountable.
I don't get that kind of candor very often from politicians, especially when they are conducting a peer review. It was refreshing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.