CALIFORNIA SDNET'ers, THE RECALL IS ON

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-07-24 09:59pm

Solauren wrote:If he pulls California out of it's current 'slump', in 2008, I can see him as the Republican candiate for President, and winning

Except that he's a naturalized citizen, and thus ineligable for the presidency...

Wicked Pilot · Post by **Wicked Pilot** » 2003-07-24 10:31pm

Gil Hamilton wrote:Experience, easy. I'd much rather have an elected official that knows what he's doing than one who only got elected because he in summer blockbusters. The latter is meaningless, since all his advisors would be doing all the thinking and he'd just be sitting their smiling and reading what others have wrote for him. In that case, he might as well be gotten rid of and the state be governed directly by the commit that is running it anyway.

And you base this assertion that Arnold would be only a mouthpeice on what? Do you seriousily believe that he does not have the aptitude to take in ideas, arguements and data and be able to logically think them out and make a decision?

Sam Or I · Post by **Sam Or I** » 2003-07-24 10:31pm

Exactly, he cannot go beyond California. That means he will try and do his best for California, instead of pursuing other goals, like president. He has my vote.

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2003-07-24 10:55pm

I should note that business experience is far more valuable that pol-sci or law experience to California right now. Pol-sci is just theory about how politics operates, and is totally worthless to any real politician. Most real politicians are lawyers. Well, okay, that is useful. But you have lawyers on the staffs to get the drafts of the laws down solid--heck, I bet it's probably done by interns who are law grad students, considering what the average state produces. So the guy at the top? Run the place like a business! -- Get someone in with economics experience and try to trim things down so they actually work. And Arnold is far better qualified for that than anyone else in the field so far.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2003-07-24 10:59pm

Wicked Pilot wrote:And you base this assertion that Arnold would be only a mouthpeice on what? Do you seriousily believe that he does not have the aptitude to take in ideas, arguements and data and be able to logically think them out and make a decision?

Do you think Republicans in California want him to run because of any business skills? Hell no, they want him to run because he's a highly visible and charismatic celebrity who they figure is popular enough to get them the state. He is practically a poster child for being a figurehead and I do in fact fully expect that it will be his advisory staff governing the state.

Darth Yoshi · Post by **Darth Yoshi** » 2003-07-24 11:47pm

Despite my generally not aligning with the GOP and my not being able to vote, I'd go with Arnold.

GrandMasterTerwynn · Post by **GrandMasterTerwynn** » 2003-07-25 12:04am

Gil Hamilton wrote:
Wicked Pilot wrote:And you base this assertion that Arnold would be only a mouthpeice on what? Do you seriousily believe that he does not have the aptitude to take in ideas, arguements and data and be able to logically think them out and make a decision?
Do you think Republicans in California want him to run because of any business skills? Hell no, they want him to run because he's a highly visible and charismatic celebrity who they figure is popular enough to get them the state. He is practically a poster child for being a figurehead and I do in fact fully expect that it will be his advisory staff governing the state.

Aye, they wouldn't actually want Arnold running things, since he's a bit further left-of-center than most Republicans are entirely comfortable with. (He's not a hard-core right-winger by any stretch of the imagination.)

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-07-25 12:33am

Gil Hamilton wrote:
Wicked Pilot wrote:Not even the best governors know everything there is to know on every issue. What means more to you, experience or character?
Experience, easy. I'd much rather have an elected official that knows what he's doing than one who only got elected because he in summer blockbusters. The latter is meaningless, since all his advisors would be doing all the thinking and he'd just be sitting their smiling and reading what others have wrote for him. In that case, he might as well be gotten rid of and the state be governed directly by the commit that is running it anyway.

I remind you, politicians with "experience" got you into the mess you're in right now. I doubt any successful businesman is going to allow himself to be pushed around by advisors--he's used to being the boss and making decisions, remember? A bigger potential problem is that Gov. Ahnuld could face the same sort of obstructionism from the legislature as Jesse Ventura did in Minnesota. However, as Arnold would be a member of a major party, he can count on at least some support from the legislature, even if the conservative Republicans don't like him (the conservative Republicans didn't like Christine Whitman in New Jersey, but she still managed to push her agenda through. Thus we see that legislative deadlock isn't necessarily a bad thing).

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-07-25 01:27am

Gil Hamilton wrote:
Howedar wrote:Thats all a governor ever has been and ever will be: a figurehead.
Then the position is meaningless.

Essentially. The purpose of a governer is to go out and press flesh, and to make the state look good. Thats about it IMHO.

Jason von Evil · Post by **Jason von Evil** » 2003-07-25 02:11am

Iceberg wrote:
Solauren wrote:If he pulls California out of it's current 'slump', in 2008, I can see him as the Republican candiate for President, and winning
Except that he's a naturalized citizen, and thus ineligable for the presidency...

Time to bribe Congress to make alittle change to that rule.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-07-25 02:12am

It would need to be a Constitutional amendment.

Jason von Evil · Post by **Jason von Evil** » 2003-07-25 02:14am

Howedar wrote:It would need to be a Constitutional amendment.

Point being? Come on everyone, let's grease up the wheels of the government.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-07-25 09:05am

And see American politics be overrun by foreigners who won't necessarily have America's interests nearest and dearest to their hearts? No thanks. I'd rather keep the Constitution the way it is and make sure that America's highest office is always filled by one of her native sons or daughters.

Wicked Pilot · Post by **Wicked Pilot** » 2003-07-25 06:20pm

Iceberg wrote:And see American politics be overrun by foreigners who won't necessarily have America's interests nearest and dearest to their hearts? No thanks.

You'd rather have American politics be overrun by citizens who won't necessarily have American's interest nearest and dearest to their hearts? Oh wait, that's already happening!

I would submit that naturalized U.S. citizens who worked for their citizenship are on average more patriotic and civicly minded that those who are simply luckily enough to be born within U.S. borders.

Darth Fanboy · Post by **Darth Fanboy** » 2003-07-26 03:19am

Wicked Pilot wrote:I would submit that naturalized U.S. citizens who worked for their citizenship are on average more patriotic and civicly minded that those who are simply luckily enough to be born within U.S. borders.

Agreed, this provision was warranted and necessary back before 1900, hell maybe even 1900. Still though, there is still the question of wether a potential foreign born president would be biased towards his own homeland over other nations in the international community which is probably why this still stands.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-07-26 03:28am

Wicked Pilot wrote: I would submit that naturalized U.S. citizens who worked for their citizenship are on average more patriotic and civicly minded that those who are simply luckily enough to be born within U.S. borders.

Perhaps. But there is still likely a good deal of loyalty to a foreign power, something we do not need in the Executive branch.

Darth Fanboy · Post by **Darth Fanboy** » 2003-07-26 05:27am

Maybe Cali should just put itself up for corporate sponsorship.

This Budget Bill has been passed thanks to Budweiser!

Wicked Pilot · Post by **Wicked Pilot** » 2003-07-26 11:00am

Darth Fanboy wrote:Still though, there is still the question of wether a potential foreign born president would be biased towards his own homeland over other nations in the international community which is probably why this still stands.

Patriotism is not encoded into one's DNA, nor is it dependent upon where one is born. Would you say that someone who spent only the first five years of their life in a foreign nation before being naturalized would be biased to their homeland? What if someone was born in the U.S., but whose parents just immigrated. Would him or her be biased to their parent's homeland?

Darth Fanboy · Post by **Darth Fanboy** » 2003-07-26 08:20pm

Wicked Pilot wrote:
Darth Fanboy wrote:Still though, there is still the question of wether a potential foreign born president would be biased towards his own homeland over other nations in the international community which is probably why this still stands.
Patriotism is not encoded into one's DNA, nor is it dependent upon where one is born. Would you say that someone who spent only the first five years of their life in a foreign nation before being naturalized would be biased to their homeland? What if someone was born in the U.S., but whose parents just immigrated. Would him or her be biased to their parent's homeland?

Can you read minds though and make sure that isn't the case for every single candidate though? Like I said, I didn't agree with the policy but it would be crazy for anyone holding office in DC to back that rule and expect to get any respect or support out of it.

On the flip side, It doesn't have to be an immigrant from a foreign power, it could be someone actually from a nation such as Liberia, and a hasty and possibly unwise decision regarding policy could be made out of sympathy. You can't be 100% sure every time and even with that little bit of doubt it poses a risk to that person's credibility.