So now, with the election over, it’s time for our favorite unemployed journalist to say this:

A get out the vote operation is effective only on the margins. If you are in a close race, it can make the difference. This is why Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger raised $20 million for it, anticipating at the beginning of this year that he would be in a close race against a Democratic candidate. Which of course did not happen. The point is, unless a candidate is right there in the ballpark in a close race, GOTV doesn’t make much difference. Aside from Schwarzenegger and new Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner, the moderate Silicon Valley entrepreneur, California Republicans simply don’t have many good candidates.

This, of course, comes two months after Bradley’s long and glowing post about that same GOTV operation, called “Schwarzenegger’s Secret Weapon,” which couldn’t be more fawning about the super-duper high-tech facility (complete with video evidence!) that will “turn out a vote not only for Schwarzenegger, but also for his ticket mates.”  This blowjob of an article practically gives the whole state to Republicans, and glorifies Arnold’s campaign manager Steve Schmidt as the architect of the surefire GOP statewide resurgence.  Now, suddenly, when it fails, it wasn’t that important to begin with.

I’m telling you, there’s no bigger tool in politics than this guy.

( – promoted by SFBrianCL)

I suppose the Republican Party is putting all of its eggs in the California basket, backing a guy who dishonestly ran pretty much as a Democrat, who also can never be President under current law and admits that no change on that could possibly happen in his lifetime.  I’ll bet actual conservatives are out there thinking “With friends like these…”

So it was that the Republican nation, and Tim Russert, turned its lonely eyes to Arnold Schwarzenegger on Meet the Press yesterday, hoping to glean some kind of knowledge on how to win again.  Judging from portions of the transcript and personal experience with California, apparently the way to win is to have millions more than your opponent, and run screaming away from any conservative policy there is.

MR. RUSSERT: George Lewis, who works for NBC News, did an analysis, and he talked about the specific issues that you focused on. And let’s look at that.  “Schwarzenegger did something that is unheard of in politics these days, he said, `I messed up. I was wrong.’ And he made a hard turn to the center politically and started working with the Democrats, who control the state legislature. … The new Schwarzenegger backs stem cell research. … He also favors a measure, that was written by Democrats, to increase the minimum wage here in California and to combat global warming. So the new Schwarzenegger is a moderate.” Is that fair?

GOV. SCHWARZENEGGER: Well, no, because I have always been a moderate. When I came into office three years ago, you and I talked about it then. I, I was, you know, promoting and pushing stem cell research then already, literally.  Like, I was not even in office when I was already out there campaigning for stem cell research. I think this is just a very important issue.

And we shouldn’t look at those issues as Republican issues or-vs. Democratic issues, or conservative vs. liberal. It is just-these are people’s issues.  We need to address those issues because I think that if we really promote stem cell research and fund stem cell research, I think we can find cures for very, very important-illnesses that so many millions of people are suffering from.  And I think that if it is-has to do with global warming, or if it has to do with raising the minimum wage, or if it has to do with lowering prescription drugs for vulnerable citizens-all of those things are people issues, not Democratic issues or Republican issues, and I think we were able to bring both of the parties together and accomplish all of those things.

Of course these are actually all issues that get near-universal support among Democrats, and near-universal disapprobation among Republicans, including those in Arnold’s own state legislature.  California’s State Senate and State Assembly Republicans voted for exactly zero of these proposals.  The notion that it’s now sensible and centrist to support core Democratic ideas is great news for national Democrats as a whole, and it’s simply silly for so-called “moderates” to suggest that this is where they were all along.  It’s not, and it took a “thumpin'” at the polls to get them to believe this.  It so happens that Arnold took his thumpin’ a year before Bush did, and so he saw the writing on the wall.  Without a special election, who knows?

By the way, Arnold AGAIN said that his 2005 Special Election initiatives were a big batch of “good ideas,” and since Russert probably had no idea what he was talking about, he let it go unquestioned:

MR. RUSSERT: And when you went to the people on four different voter initiatives and lost them all, and you took on the unions, you took on the Democrats, you said, “I made a mistake.”

GOV. SCHWARZENEGGER: Well, the mistake was not on what we were trying to do, because we need the reforms, and I think slowly we are seeing reforms happening in California. But what was wrong in-was the approach. To go and to say to the legislators, “I give you two months, and if you don’t agree with all of those things that I put on the table here in my State of the State address, then I will go to the people.” Well, the people really, you know, rejected that. They basically have said to us, “Don’t come to us with every initiative and with every idea. You fix it in the capital. That’s why we elect you, to go to the capital, and Democrats and Republicans work together.” And that’s exactly-we all got the message.

I’d like to see him try to bust unions again through “paycheck protection,” good idea that it is.  Or to decrease teacher’s job security.  Or to give himself carte blanche to line item the state budget.  I’d really like to see how those “good ideas” fly in the state legislature.  Of course, he’s going to use redistricting as the example, and it is a needed reform, though not in the manner he saw fit to implement in 2005. 

Meanwhile, on economic issues, Arnold continued to act like a lying supply-sider and leave the crucial information out of the answer.  Again, Russert didn’t challenge this astonishing bit of ju-jitsu:

MR. RUSSERT: One of the issues that are confronting you is the continuing deficit in California and also the six million uninsured, without health insurance. The San Jose Mercury wrote an editorial on Friday and said this, “While other states have been racking up surpluses and squirreling away money, California has run up deficits and piled on debt. That can’t continue. In the latest five-year forecast, the non-partisan Legislative Analyst’s Office projects a $5 billion deficit in the coming year and a $4 billion deficit the year after. … Now, something’s got to give – either Gov. Schwarzenegger’s vow not to raise taxes or his campaign pledges to fix health care and reform education. The latter should be the priority. He shouldn’t abandon promises on behalf of students and the [6 million] uninsured. … Schwarzenegger should swallow hard and consider taxes: either a dedicated tax, like raising the tobacco tax, or a temporary tax. … [Another] option worth exploring: expanding the sales tax to include some professional services in exchange for reducing the sales tax rate.” How do you juggle that?

GOV. SCHWARZENEGGER: Well, Tim, when I came into office, they said exactly the same thing: I got to raise taxes, I got to raise taxes, please raise taxes by at least 5 billion or $8 billion a year. And I said, “No. We’re going to stimulate the economy,” and that’s exactly what we’ve done, we’ve stimulated the economy. Now our revenues went up by $20 billion, first from 76 billion to $96 billion without raising taxes. That is the way to go. I think what we have to do in the future is, is we’ve got to go and pay down our debt, which we have been doing. And we have done a tremendous job of bringing down the structural deficit from $16 ½ billion when I took office to now $4 ½ billion. And we’re going to come down further this year and we’re going to eliminate it by next year or the year after that. I think that’s what we need to do. Never raise taxes, it wouldn’t happen. The people of California have voted “no” on all the tax increases this year, if it is the tobacco tax, if it is any kind of additional tax, everything was voted no on, including the nurses, as you remember, the nurses’ association, they have had a proposition on there to raise taxes, everything was voted no, including, including the oil tax.

You borrowed billions and billions of dollars.  That’s it.  To the extent that the structural deficit is “fixed,” which it isn’t at all, the only reason is the continued borrowing of money to finance current project.  The birth tax on Californians is astronomical.  And somehow, Russert lets him wriggle off the hook with this dishonest, ridiculous answer.  Also unmentioned is the fact that most of the “increased revenue” came in one-time tax amnesty payments from corporations who simply refused to pay their bills, a gambit largely executed by Democratic gubernatorial candidate and State Controller Steve Westly and Democratic gubernatorial nominee and State Treasurer Phil Angelides.  If corporations were made to pay their taxes to begin with instead of being bailed out by “amnesty” payments, we wouldn’t be anywhere near where we are today.  Instead we’ve financed the debt through continued borrowing, all of which goes completely unmentioned.  Indeed the entire infrastructure bond scheme, which he touts the whole interview, is a gigantic bond issue.  Arnold is so eager to please that he’s kicked the can down the road on any hard choices that need to be made for the state, and the people have willingly followed him.  That’s why no taxes were approved but all bond measures were.  He’s got people believing that borrowing is magic.  It’s not.  Eventually you have to pay the investors off, with interest.  I expect ordinary people to be self-interested, and eschew additional taxation, but approve bonds in order to put questions of debt out of sight and out of mind.  I don’t expect anyone who calls him or herself a leader to do the same.  It’s political cowardice.

Arnold’s going to come hard after a health care compromise this year, as well as prison reform and redistricting.  He’ll probably pick one big thing a year and run with it until his term ends, at which point he’ll try and challenge Boxer in 2010 (he didn’t deny the rumors to Russert).  As long as we have Democratic leaders in the State Legislature who take bribes from telecom companies, he’ll probably be able to steer this course.  And certainly he’ll get nothing but big pats on the rump from the media.  This is quite the problem for the state, because clearly those of us who live here will pay for this faux-moderation with a dysfunctional debt for decades, as well as naked attempts to stifle the voices of working people and all of the other “good ideas” contained in his twisted vision of “bipartisanship.”

(The more the merrier. – promoted by SFBrianCL)

Thought I’d sum up my thoughts on the state elections. Brian had a good take too, and many of his points fall in line with mine.

? In the Governor’s race, we simply couldn’t overcome the complete co-opting of the Democratic agenda from the Republican incumbent.  I read something where an incumbent governor hasn’t been denied a second term in California in something like 70 years, and watching this campaign I believe it.  California is almost uncampaignable, and it’s gotten worse.  You need millions of dollars and, apparently, an IMDb profile.  I still believe Phil Angelides would have been a great governor, but he was a middling candidate with a miserable campaign team.  My 1996 comparison still stands; faced with no real options, the CDP took the loyal guy to run a suicide mission.  Then they gave him little support as the state legislators pretty much undermined him throughout the year.  Nobody got out early enough to define Arnold Schwarzenegger; instead it was the other way around.

more on the flip…

? I’m extremely skeptical that Arnold Schwarzenegger will continue to run as a stealth Democrat throughout his next term.  The pressure will be off him, and he’s already shown his true colors with that “signing statement” changing the anti-global warming law.  He’s said that his Special Election of 2005 was full of “good ideas” and I expect him to try and strong-arm them through the legislature.  There are going to be battles in this state for the next four years.

? On the good side, the California Republican Party is dead.  Buried.  They won the governorship by 16 points and couldn’t get more than one candidate to ride his coattails.  And Steve Poizner made his own coattails with $15 million dollars and the fact that he ran against a party hack who thought it would be a good idea to run on a platform of “I lost weight.”  There is no Republican in this state that can win a statewide race against anything more than a marginally competent Democrat.  Schwarzenegger completely sold out Republican ideals in order to get re-elected, and in so doing destroyed his party for at least a decade.  My post, on the end of the CRP, still stands.

? Debra Bowen, Secretary of State of California.  ‘Nuff said.  I’m so proud of her.  That was yet another netroots victory.  She was underfunded and under-publicized and still beat an incumbent.

? The only other incumbent to lose in the whole state: Dick Pombo.  Jerry McNerney was a brilliant candidate, who earned this victory one voter at a time.  McNerney had to fight off a DLC and DCCC-backed candidate in the primary, then withstand a barrage of negative attacks (millions of dollars in NRCC money) to win.  This is a tremendous victory, and great news for the country.  We have an ALTERNATIVE ENERGY EXPERT in Capitol Hill! 

Great props to Say No To Pombo, a local blog who was all over this race from day one.  And it’s important to note that both Dem candidates able to flip seats in California were grassroots/netroots candidates.

? My bold prediction: at some point in 2007, Charlie Brown will represent the 4th District of California.
There’s no doubt that John Doolittle is going down, down, down in the Abramoff scandal.  He’ll be the next guy forced to resign.  And Brown has built up great name ID and excitement in the district.

? As for the propositions, people decided that they would rather borrow than tax, even if it’s not them being taxed.  Shortsighted.  Prop. 84 passed because people probably thought it was part of the infrastructure bond issues, even though it wasn’t.  Anything involving a tax went down; the Howard Jarvis memory lives on!  I’m upset that Prop. 89 didn’t do better, but it was so crowded out by the other issues.

? Props. 85 and 90 went down, which is fantastic.  Can we put this parental notification initiative to bed already?  It did worse this time than it did last year!  And the stealth-developer law got nipped at the wire as well.  Among non-infrastructure propositions, only the feel-good, bad-policy sex offender law (Prop. 83) passed.

? The incumbents held in Santa Monica.  Machine politics continues.

? Overall, I think the Republicans are dead in the water in California, but the Democrats aren’t in such better shape.  I think the CDP needs MAJOR structural reforms.  The worst of middle-of-the-road, milquetoast Democrats are on display there.  The progressive movement needs to make inroads in Sacramento and try to take the Party back.

Here it is:

My initial thoughts are that it’s pretty good, it sticks to the issues at hand and basically asks the simple question “Who do you trust?”  It also hammers the line from the debate that the 2005 Special Election initiatives were “good ideas.”

UPDATE: I just got off a conference call with Angelides spokesman Bill Carrick.  Here’s what came out of it:

• This is a statewide ad buy.
• The key point he wanted to make in the ad is that the Governor’s campaign is a fraud – “the elephant in the room” (a somewhat clever play on words)
• The three big points Angelides makes at the end of the ad is that he would fully support and fund CA schools, roll back tuition and fees, and push for a middle-class tax cut.
• Carrick characterized the PPIC poll released today showing an 18-point Schwarzenegger lead as “wrong – an exaggerated, conservative, white look at the electorate.”  He says the campaign’s internal polls show it to be a single-digit race.
• In addition to Howard Dean today and Obama-Pelosi-Villaraigosa tomorrow, Sens. Kerry and Boxer will campaign with Angelides in Pasadena on Monday.
• The only thing any of the idiot reporters asked about was the PPIC poll because horse-race is all they can manage to understand.

(cross-posted at D-Day and Governor Phil)

The close of this week’s legislative session drew an unequivocal distinction between Democrats and Republicans in this state. It was not in any way a victory for bipartisanship. If it were, you would be able to find ONE Republican in the State Senate or the State Assembly who actually voted for the “cap-and-trade” greenhouse gas emissions bill. You’d be able to find more than Abel Maldonado, the only Republican in either chamber to vote to increase the minimum wage. You’d have a SINGLE Republican member of the State Assembly, and more than TWO Republican State Senators (Denham, Harman) who voted for the bill providing universal health care in California. The only “bipartisanship” on display was between a Democratic legislature who moved California forward on the big issues, and a Governor trying to save his job in an election year. In this way California is a mirror image of the country at large. In election years of the recent past, Republicans have typically thrown red meat at their base, hoping to increase turnout among conservatives to carry them to victory. California’s governor has completely abandoned that strategy, and in so doing neutured his party for decades to come.

By accepting such major legislation on global warming, on prescription drugs, on the minimum wage (although trying to steer a middle course on all, and rejecting universal health care), the governor has essentially validated that the progressive message is the right message for the state. He’s enabled Democrats to make the argument that they have the only positive message on legislative issues, that they are the only ones with any ideas to move the state ahead.

This website is about the 2006 California governor’s race. But I think it’s notable that Governor Schwarzenegger, in his desire to appeal to everyone and sell out his own party’s core principles time and again, has destroyed the CA GOP’s chances to win in 2010, 2014, 2018, and maybe beyond. There is no electable Republican in the state for the next decade and a half. Schwarzenegger is proving by his campaign that the only electable Republican is not a Republican at all, but a Republican that becomes a Democrat for three months leading up to the election. Republicans are out of touch on global warming, on health care, on wages for working families, on pretty much every major issue facing the state.

This really was not always the case here. In 1992, Bill Clinton broke a 28-year record of California voting for Republicans in the Presidential election. We’ve had a string of Republican governors and colorless technocrat Dems like Gray Davis. The changing demographics of the state and the disaster of Prop. 187 have shifted the balance. And this year’s legislative session provided confirmation that the only ideas that work in the Golden State are progressive ones.

This is where Phil Angelides comes in. He can deliver the knockout blow to the state Republican Party. If a guy who basically adopts dozens of Democratic frames can’t win, no Republican will be able to for a long time. Angelides’ Harry Truman analogy is apt: When given the choice between Democrat-lite and a true Democrat, what would you do? Take the guy who governs from the left for three months to get elected, or the guy who’s been calling for a progressive vision his entire career?

This is how the choice must be framed. This is what voters need to hear. And given those options, this can be a winning strategy that would send the California Republican Party home, licking their wounds, in a cataclysmic event that would reverberate for a long while.