Meg Whitman is trying to shoot the moon with her latest announcement of a position on Prop 23:<\/p>\n
Whitman has said she would suspend the law, AB 32, for at least one year, and in a written statement this morning she called the law a “job killer” and said it needs to be revised.<\/p>\n
However, Whitman said Proposition 23 “does not offer a sensible balance between our vital need for good jobs and the desire of all Californians to protect our precious environment.”(Sac Bee<\/a>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Here’s her math here: Prop 23 is trailing in the polls, and Democrats are generally bludgeoning the Republicans on this issue. Boxer used it effectively against Fiorina at the last debate, and Jerry Brown has been hammering at Whitman for her failure to announce a solid position.<\/p>\n
But, this isn’t a solid position. Now, it will be enough to convince a few folks perhaps, but anybody that is really voting on the candidates based upon environmental concerns is hardly going to love this position. That one year moratorium isn’t really that hidden as a means of killing AB 32.<\/p>\n
There’s a dark side for Whitman on this too. The conservative base has been pushing for her to take a strong Yes position on Prop 23<\/a>. This will not make them all that thrilled to rush out and vote for her. Nonetheless, Carly Fiorina has been running really hard to the right, so does that help Whitman’s Right flank on turnout? <\/p>\n
Whether the political tradeoff for whatever centrist votes she can get for whatever Right-wing votes she lost was a good one for her is an open question, but expect some additional anger on the right. But hey, they like that sort of thing.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Meg Whitman is trying to shoot the moon with her latest announcement of a position on Prop 23:<\/p>\n
Whitman has said she would suspend the law, AB 32, for at least one year, and in a written statement this morning she called the law a “job killer” and said it needs to be revised.<\/p>\n
However, Whitman said Proposition 23 “does not offer a sensible balance between our vital need for good jobs and the desire of all Californians to protect our precious environment.”(Sac Bee<\/a>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Here’s her math here: Prop 23 is trailing in the polls, and Democrats are generally bludgeoning the Republicans on this issue. Boxer used it effectively against Fiorina at the last debate, and Jerry Brown has been hammering at Whitman for her failure to announce a solid position.<\/p>\n
But, this isn’t a solid position. Now, it will be enough to convince a few folks perhaps, but anybody that is really voting on the candidates based upon environmental concerns is hardly going to love this position. That one year moratorium isn’t really that hidden as a means of killing AB 32.<\/p>\n