SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : WHO IS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT IN 2004 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: calgal who wrote (3727)7/29/2003 12:17:17 AM
From: calgal  Respond to of 10965
 
When the biggest wild card is the voter

URL:http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0703/recall.asp

jewishworldreview.com | (KRT) The Republican-led bid to oust Democratic Gov. Gray Davis has set the stage for an unprecedented recall campaign that is certain to be one of the shortest, strangest trips in California political history.

Over the next 72 days, the Golden State will pioneer a new brand of hyperactive campaign far removed from the normal yearlong vetting process for choosing leaders.

First, potential candidates, whose numbers rise daily, have two weeks to decide whether or not they think they can run a $100 billion economy. The governor's would-be successors will then have 10 weeks to raise money, hire advisors, develop a game plan, produce campaign commercials, dig up dirt on their competitors, and - most importantly - figure out what they would do if they took the governor's office.

"It's going to be even worse than a beauty contest, it'll be a bad reality TV show: Who is going to be voted off the island - only we have to live with the results for three years," said Democratic consultant Bill Carrick.

The prospect of compressing what is usually a yearlong campaign for governor has left veteran political consultants scrambling to develop innovative ways to reach voters and allow their candidate to stand out in a confusing, fast-paced race.

"It's beyond challenging," said Republican Kevin Spillane, who helped run former Los Angeles mayor Richard Riordan's unsuccessful campaign for governor last year. "There are no words to describe how hard it will be."

Look at the state of affairs for George Gorton, the political strategist for Arnold Schwarzenegger who may be about to kick off the most closely-watched campaign in the world.

Gorton, a veteran consultant who has helped everyone from former California Gov. Pete Wilson to former Russian President Boris Yeltsin to victory, is all but twiddling his thumbs at home while he - and millions of people around the globe - wait to see if The Terminator decides to jump in. Gorton has a slate of veteran operatives ready to launch the campaign but, for now, Team Arnold is treading water, and Gorton isn't used to it.



Adding to the stress is that if and when Arnold does decide to run, the team will have to deal with an avalanche of reporters demanding to know where Arnold stands on everything from gay marriage to workers' compensation reform.

"Everything is quick," said Gorton. "Especially if you're a political consultant used to having polls and a staff of 60 to 80 people on your team 60 to 80 days before an election and - instead - you're sitting in your house by yourself."

While Schwarzenegger's consultants would like to jump in as late as possible to contain a media frenzy, that will also make it more difficult for Schwarzenegger to develop comprehensive policy positions and a solid fiscal plan.

But GOP consultants say the election will boil down to one issue: Has Davis failed as California's CEO and, if so, who will do a better job.

"Are you going to see a lot of detailed policy position on agriculture in San Joaquin County?" Spillane said. "I doubt it. What people are looking for is leadership and Davis hasn't provided it."

What the race looks like will depend a lot on who decides in the next two weeks to run for governor - and the circus has already begun.

Democrats and Republicans are trying to divine what the other side is going to do so each party can outflank the other. Davis is trying to boost his chances of survival by keeping high-profile Democrats from running. If he fails, Republicans want to make sure they don't miss their golden opportunity with a crowded GOP field that splits the vote a dozen ways and turns off voters.

Even if the parties maintain discipline, the ballot is likely to be befuddling. Anyone who collects 65 signatures and turns in $3,500 dollars can put his or her name on the ballot - a low bar that has everyone from a young Democratic Mountain View, Calif., software engineer to enigmatic Hollywood blond icon Angelyne contemplating a run.

"Californians deserve an alternative," said 26-year-old software engineer Georgy Russell, who already has a Web site and a light-hearted campaign slogan: "Brains, beauty, leadership."

The prospect of a long ballot filled with fringe candidates could go a long way towards scaring off Californians. Davis pollster Paul Maslin said voters in focus groups have been turned off when presented with a mock ballot filled with scores of candidates to replace Davis.

Fringe candidates aside, the field may still include a long list of well-connected contenders. Republicans are practically falling over each other to pick up filing papers and pay the $3,500 as the first steps on the road to candidacy.

Rep. Darrell Issa, the conservative San Diego-area Republican who spent $1.7 million to put the recall on the ballot, says he is running no matter what GOP leaders say. Los Angeles businessman Bill Simon, who came within five percentage points of beating Davis last November, is angling for another shot. Former Rep. Michael Huffington paid the $3,500 on Friday. And, if Schwarzenegger decides not to run, many expect Riordan to take a second shot at Davis.

The short campaign will aid those who have a plan and a big bank account. Davis has already shifted back into campaign mode. Simon and Riordan can dust off their 2002 playbooks and Issa can rely on his three-year record in Congress.

Those with a plan then need money to get the message out - and new state campaign finance rules will make it hard to raise the cash. Donors will be able to give no more than $20,000 each to candidates, so the top contenders may have to rely on their own personal fortunes.

In a twist, however, Davis and his allies will be able to raise unlimited amounts of cash because the new political reform laws don't apply to campaign committees set up to fight the recall.

The biggest wild card, though, is the voter. Even the best pollsters can't be certain who is likely to turn out on Oct. 7 for California's first-ever special recall election. Maslin predicts that Democrats will be so outraged by the Republican-led recall that they will turn out in force.

"Right now their choices are basically: right-wing crook, right-wing boob, supposed moderate that nobody knows what he stands for, and a cigar-smoking movie actor killer," he said. In the end, Maslin added, voters will vote no on the recall rather than take the risk.

But Republican pollster Frank Luntz predicted Davis will face what he calls the "mad as hell" voter - a large, disgusted, disgruntled group of Californians so frustrated with the governor's leadership that they are committed to throwing him out no matter who is on the ballot to replace him. Luntz said he has never seen a politician with such low approval ratings - hovering at about 20 perent - and that the campaign that can galvanize voters will win.

"Turnout is going to make the difference in this campaign and the intensity is weighing against Gray Davis," said Luntz. "They are more than just angry - they're absolutely apoplectic."



To: calgal who wrote (3727)7/29/2003 12:26:09 AM
From: calgal  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 10965
 
John Leo
Mangled quotes take on a life of their own

newsandopinion.com | Maybe we should give an award for mangled quotation of the year. Misquotations are becoming a regular feature of journalism and politics, partly out of carelessness but mostly because anything-goes partisanship so deeply afflicts our discourse.

So here are the nominees for the first award:

(1) The Associated Press for butchering a line from Justice Antonin Scalia's dissent in the Texas sodomy decision. The AP quoted Scalia as saying he has "nothing against homosexuals." This misquote was endlessly recycled in news stories and commentaries, usually to mock Scalia for a gay version of "some of my best friends are Jews."

What Scalia actually wrote was this: "I have nothing against homosexuals, or any other group, promoting their agenda through normal democratic means." He wasn't offering his feelings about gays (he is on the non-touchy-feely wing of the court). He was talking about the rights of all groups to organize and lobby.

(2) Maureen Dowd, for her quote from President Bush saying that al-Qaida and the terrorist groups of 9/11 are not a problem any more. ("That group of terrorists who attacked our country is slowly but surely being decimated. ... They're not a problem any more." -- Dowd's version of Bush in her New York Times column of May 14).

Here is the full Bush quote, without the three misleading dots: "Al-Qaida is on the run. That group of terrorists who attacked our country is slowly, but surely, being decimated. Right now, about half of all the top al-Qaida operatives are either jailed or dead. In either case, they're not a problem any more."

(3) The BBC, probably the most relentlessly anti-American organization in Britain, recently altered a transcript of one of its own stories, thus misquoting itself. The story dealt with Park Jong-lin, a 70-year-old veteran of the Korean War who "served in the North Korean army fighting against the imperialist American aggressors and their South Korean accomplices." In the altered version quote marks now surround "imperialist American aggressors" and the BBC's reference to "accomplices" was changed to "allies."

Prediction: Because Internet bloggers now watch the wayward BBC carefully, more touched-up transcripts will come to light. The BBC, by the way, falsely reported the Jessica Lynch rescue as a made-for-TV special faked with U.S. soldiers firing blanks for the cameras. (Change that transcript!)

(4) The Democrats, for a TV ad in Madison, Wis., misquoting President Bush's uranium reference in his State of the Union message. The Republicans have offered so many conflicting versions of Bush's now-famous 16 words that you would think that the Democrats wouldn't have bothered to remove the first six words crediting (or blaming) British intelligence for the uranium-from-Africa report. But they did. The ad has Bush saying flatly, "Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

(5) The French, for changing an apparently anti-American remark made on July 21 by President Jacques Chirac. In Malaysia to meet with Prime Minister Mahathir bin Mohamed, Chirac called for multilateralism in world affairs, then added: "We can no longer accept the law of the strongest, the law of the jungle." When a reporter called the Elysee Palace to ask about the reference, he found that the quote showed up on their transcript as, "We can no longer accept the evolution of men, the world, we can no longer accept the simple law of the strongest."

Oh, I get it. Chirac wasn't attacking America or the war in Iraq. He was just sharing his abstract opinion on faulty evolutionary theories and social Darwinism.

So who deserves the award? One vote here for the AP. It can't be that the reporter somehow failed to notice the second half of Scalia's sentence. At Slate, Dahlia Lithwick wrote that this was "a case of the media getting a quote completely wrong and disseminating it so that it becomes universally believed." Give the award to the AP. It's a statuette of Nathan Hale, with his famous quote, "I regret that I have but one life."