Schwarzenegger Announces : Running for CA Gov.

March will have an entirely new voting machine system in place. I also think it will give time for voters to reflect instead of the pile driving new election. And I do mean pile driving because some politicians really know how to shovel **** into the system. I'm not completely happy with Davis but then I'm never completely happy with and politician. Ahnold's appearance on Oprah Winfrey confirmed that he's not fit to hold public office.

Question:

If the election is delayed until March, Will the current list of candidates, have to redeclare and re register their candidacy and/or will more candidates be able to join in?

I respect your opinion, and your info on the system and it's shortcomings are valid, but that isn't what is going on here. Why now?

I explained my statement, please respect that thanks.

Also, some people have cast their vote.

Oh, right! The ballots arrived just the other day! More fodder for a potential recount controversy....

Will the current candidates also get the money they have spent campaigning refunded to them? I think the court should be responsible for any costs incurred by a deferrment of the election date.

Interesting question, McG.

If I'm not mistaken, I heard someone say on a news cast that they had voted. Possible? Thanks.

Well, yes Brand, the sample ballots arrived in the mail the other day it includes the official absentee ballot!

I'm not good at all in US civil law - but it such really possible? A court responsible for effects of sentence?

I doubt the state would be responsible for returning the campain expenses, (I mistakingly read that to include the filing fees) but who knows. One of them could file a new suit to have the filing fees returned. It just goes on and on.

But my original question still stands:



Can of Woims!

The 7th CoA is the can of worms....

Just to get back to basics about the Schwarzenegger candidature again, I may be a darned European, but I still dont get where Americans get the idea from that an actor, for some reason, would be especially well qualified to take up a top political post. I mean, to be fair - Schwarzenegger, of course, has involved himself in State politics already before, so its not just his actor's fame that does it. But still - waging a single-issue campaign is something different from taking a top political position.

Is it perhaps a fundamental egalitarian belief that anyone can do such a political job well, provided he can reasonably be considered smart enough - the less a professional the better, actually? Or is there really a specific trust in actors as being specifically qualified?

The latter is the part that would baffle me, and I only come back to it because I saw this poll:



54% think Hollywood celebrities can offer a new perspective on political issues. There's a missing figure there, of course (apart from the questionable phrasing): how many people think plumbers, or lawyers, or masseurs can offer a new perspective on political issues? If that would also be 54%, then nothing strange is going on - just a desire to see more of a layman's voice in politics, which is normal. But if its specifically Hollywood celebrities that are expected to be able to bring something to the political world, what on earth is the deal about that?

Just to give an indication of how improbable it sounds to a Dutchman, after Schwarzenegger announced an opinion poll here asked about which people those polled would consider voting for, if they'd stand for an election here. The question included a range of some 20 celebrities: singers, actors, TV-presentors, DJ's, comedians and the odd writer. 65% replied, "none of the above". Not one of the celebrities polled over 11%.
(And asked if they'd vote for Schwarzenegger as PM 6% said yes, 83% no.)

name recognition nimh, I thought Reagan as a politician was a great joke - well, now that I think about it, I still do..............

I think when it comes to running for political office, Hollywood celebrities are laymen just as plumbers are and both are potentially as qualified as any career politician.

I think we are saying that politicians are not the only people that qualify for public office.

I think if they included other laymen in the poll, Hollywood Celebrities would rank the same as any other non-politician. We see all non-professional politicos equally in that respect.

nimh, It's perhaps the success of Ronald Reagan that most people relate to actors and politics. Maybe that's the reason the poll shows the majority who favor actors in politics. I really don't know. However, in a democracy, anybody with the money and know-how can run for most offices in this country. Having personal wealth and money connections can help tremendously, no matter what profession the candidate. I think there's about 134 candidates on the California ballot for governor; over 95 percent are unknowns, and they'll garner very few votes in the election. For some folks, maybe it was worth the $3,500 to have your name on the ballot. People have been known to spend more for more foolish pursuits.

http://georgyforgov.com

Arnold seems to be making a bad impression -- well bad and/or comical -- now (judging from different talk shows I heard today). I think he's entering the ring of Jesse Ventura.

I agree with feolola. Its not so much Arnold's celebrity, to me, but that he is not a career politician. I think more farmers, plumbers,... should edge into public office. Of course, in this country, the crappiest reality is you have to have ungodly sums of money to do it. Actors have that--and the name recognition.

My fondest dream is for this country to reform campaign finance, and enable the school teacher, pharmacist, social worker to get a hearing from the public and have a chance for national public office.

I am against career politicians. I don't know if Arnold will, or should be elected--but I love the fact that he isn't taking money from PACs.

Schwarzenegger, despite eschewing contributions from tribes and unions, is taking hundreds of thousands of dollars each from agriculture interests, developers, financial service providers, the high-tech industry, state contractors and others with pending legislation and other interests he would influence if he is elected governor.
One of the most generous contributors to Schwarzenegger's campaign this year and his Proposition 49 after-school initiative last year is Diversified Collection Service Inc., which collects defaulted college loans and is lobbying to help collect overdue federal income taxes.
Diversified and its CEO, James Tracey, are longtime Republican donors. The company is under investigation for violating a Texas prohibition on corporate donations, after giving $50,000 through House Majority Leader Tom DeLay's Texans for a Republican Majority toward a successful effort to win GOP control of the Texas House.
Company officials did not return telephone messages Thursday from The Associated Press, and Schwarzenegger spokesman Rob Stutzman said he was unfamiliar with the company.
"There's no question the special interests are lining up behind the Democrats, as usual," Stutzman said. But Republican interests back Schwarzenegger, he said, because of his promise to create a better business climate because "job creators are attracted to that message."
Parker Blackman, spokesman for independent candidate Arianna Huffington, said Schwarzenegger "has decided to split hairs between special interests and powerful interests. I don't know how you make that distinction. They obviously expect something in return."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/09/11/state2059EDT0220.DTL