Republicans Debate Merits of Following Schwarzenegger to the Center

Republicans Debate Merits of Following Schwarzenegger to the Center
The New York Times ^ | 10/11/03 | ADAM NAGOURNEY

SAN JOSE, Calif., Oct. 10 — In Arnold Schwarzenegger, the national Republican Party now has a magnetic movie star in charge of the most populous state in the union, a governor-elect who has already emerged as an articulate, media-savvy and earnest figure who does not play by the conventional rules of politics.

But far from simply rejoicing over his election, the party finds itself entangled in a debate over whether it should follow Mr. Schwarzenegger's path by moving to the center on social issues in order to become even more competitive in state and national races.

Mr. Schwarzenegger's sweeping victory stirred anxiety among some conservatives, as much as it has cheered moderate Republicans, who have seized on it as evidence of how the party should position itself to fortify its standing, even at a time when it has proved increasingly dominant in American politics.

Several moderate Republicans said Mr. Schwarzenegger was now in a position to be a hugely influential and moderating force on his party, should he choose to be.

"How he won tells me that his message — he's both fiscally conservative and socially inclusive and moderate — was one that appeals to the middle," said Christie Whitman, a moderate Republican and former New Jersey governor who recently stepped down as head of the Environmental Protection Agency.

"To me, it's a very strong signal to win statewide in a state like California," Mrs. Whitman said on Friday. "It's a socially inclusive message, but not hard-edged and leaving-people-out. And I think that's a national thing."

William F. Weld, the former Republican governor of Massachusetts, said: "There's a lesson here for the national party. This absolutely takes the curse of the stereotype off of Republicans that the opposition seeks to hang around their necks."

That argument has run up against stiff opposition from other prominent Republicans. Some suggested that moderates were seizing on an anomalous election — a movie star defeating a highly unpopular incumbent in a largely Democratic state — to try to relight the coals of an old fire.

SNIP
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/11/national/11ARNO.html&OQ=hp

I think the NYTimes is debating recharacterizing what it means to be in the center.

positions and that he was helped elected by folks who couldn't tell the fantasy of the movie screen hero from the reality of the corporate puppet actor.

Also, Arnold was elected because many Democrats aren't as partisan as most Republicans. I think that Democrats need to become more partisan to be able to fight back puppets like Arnold and Reagan.

Ha Ha

Outside of Krugman, nobody who writes for the SCREW YORK TIMES tells the truth about anything!

That would be delicious....

under the surface for over two years now.

And they'll take a veneer of liberalism (on meaningless social issues) if it hides that greed and wealth-shifting that goes on beneath the surface.

Did you read CapnSunshines post about Arnold deregulating the energy market?

The Republicans ran a guy who looked moderate in a Democratic-leaning state so he could be a fiscal fascist. That's a success. That's not a crack-up.

And when the energy companies get more money, and the middle class taxpayer gets more screwed, that'll mean even more success for the Republicans because they'll have more money to buy public opinion through, oh, say, stupid articles in the New York Times which tell lies like the Republican party is moving to the center when it's actually taking a sharp turn towards fascism.

but what those outside of Cali do not understand is that
Arnie is the Puppet elect, the pupeteer elect is Pete
Wilson, don't look at the man behind the curtian and Pete Wilson
is not a liberal on anything.

The people of Cali were snookered, but this division in the GOP
is quite real... yep they are about making money
but some of them are more ruthless than others.

shifting from middle class to the wealthy. People fall in line when that much is at stake.

I have seen it, personally seen it, as high level
Party officials have changed their registration because
they are personally disgusted with what is going on.

Arnold came in second place in the Recall and he's governor. Counting heads doesn't matter when you have all the money on your side.

And what are these defectors going to do? Come over to the Democratic party and draw it even closer to the Republican party?

There's been a building tension between the "Libertarian" types (Schwarzenegger, Nugent, Toby Keith) and the snake-handlers (Ashcroft, Falwell, Robertson.) But no matter who comes out on top, they're still all a**holes!

and split that takes and voices away... or the other
way around, i hope this weakens the party.

between the party's laissez faire wing and it's fundy wing....

We need to exploit this tension....

marbles in his mouth and walnuts under his skin is now an articulate member of the reight wing????

The whoring is unbelievable.

analysis.

A more honest headline would be "Republicans PRETEND to Debate Merits of Following Schwarzenegger to the Center."

The entire PURPOSE of Republicans is to be screwing the majority on behalf of a tiny minority. If they didn't do that, they wouldn't be Republicans.

Thus, it suits them to have the silly NYT acting as though it's a perfectly real possibility that the party would now "decide to move to the center." Yeah, right. That's as likely as the Nazis deciding to "move to the center," to become "kinder and gentler Nazis."

A very real danger of Arnold is that he might help make our present-day Nazis seem much more cuddly and loveable -- without, of course, doing the slightest thing to change their rotten hateful inner being.

What I see in the Republican Party backing Swarzenegger is that he is their "Great White Hope". They are still scared of the number of states that are going to be "tipping" to what they consider non-white majority. (Republicans I know consider white Democrats to be traitors to their race-yes I am in the South and so is the leadership of the Republican Party).

They don't want to share the wealth. (and I am not talking about charity-they don't want to share the natural resources that belong to all of us and they don't want to share the opportunity, and they don't want to pay their fair share of the costs).

In order to win the California governorship they had to tell their gun-toting, anti-choice uber-religious right wing to shut up and accept Arnold. That they had to use this strategy is, in itself, a victory for us.

When you have a victory acknowledge it, praise, it and shout it out.

Then tell the NY Times before the they write the story that this represents the Republican Party having to jettison a big part of their national platform to "save" the part that is their core-the taking from the many to give to the few.

I would like to know whose job it is in the Democratic Party to send out the victory press release and therefore shape the news articles and the debate. Are they not doing it or are they not being listened to?

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

I like him more then Bush who is a social retard and fiscal ignoramus.

he is the man behind the curtain, Armie is just a trained
actor, who will read his cue cards.

He is a Union member at least, so he is qualified.

(one of the funniest lines ever spoken by Ronald Reagan)

He's totally culpable.

of Cali do not undestand this, are yuo going to
clue them in?

and 95% of the elected R officials in this country....

Folks like Schwarzenegger with many moderate-for-GOP positions have been termed, by conservative-but-gay columnist Andrew Sullivan, as "Eagles." (Apparently the requirements are being pro-choice, pro-gay-rights ... and otherwise GOP.) Marketing, boys and girls, marketing.

Welcome to DU!! :toast: