An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

« Iraqi Politicans Learn the Fine Art of Spin

Civil Rights Roundup: 07/14/08 »

“The Terminator” Gambit

Posted by TONY CAMPBELL, Columnist in At TMV, Politics.
Jul 14th, 2008 | Comments

What is going on behind the scenes of the Arnold Schwarzenegger / Barack Obama love fest? In December of 2007, Obama made a public statement that he would be willing to offer the California Governor a spot on his cabinet. Yesterday, Schwarzenegger returns the volley by stating “I’d take his call now and I’d take his call when he’s President, anytime.”

I can understand the politics of Obama offering the olive branch to the Governor of the nation’s most populous state before the California primary, but what does Arnold hope to gain from this alliance? I can even understand the pragmatic need for Obama to reach out to Schwarzenegger during the general election, but why should Arnold return the favor besides the obvious point that all of his in-laws are huge Obama supporters, what is the political payoff for him? The key point to remember is that if Schwarzenegger wishes to stay in politics he is limited to only a few options of public service. The Constitution of the United States Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 is the prohibition against Arnold’s run for the Presidency. However, he can not be Vice-President either, as the Twelfth Amendment states “But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.”

He is term-limited as Governor and his second term is up in 2010. There are rumors that he may run for the U.S. Senate to replace Barbara Boxer, if she retires. If he does not run for the Senate, his only option for political service is in a presidential administration.

In my opinion, Schwarzenegger is playing both sides of the political universe. He has already endorsed McCain and has handed an olive branch to Obama.

Ultimately, it comes down to the Electoral College. If Obama loses California, the race is a landslide victory for McCain and Arnold will have a choice of either running for the Senate or receiving a Cabinet portfolio. If Obama wins, Arnold will be one of a few moderate Republicans who will serve on Obama’s cabinet. No matter what the outcome is on November 4th, Schwarzenegger will be gainfully employed on January 20, 2009.

The big question is will the “Terminator” serve on the side of good or bad for the United States. In the three films, his character went from hunting John Conner to saving him twice. In 2008, lifelong Republican Schwarzenegger may go to work for a Democrat…sounds like an example of real life imitating art.

Ads by Project Wonderful! Your ad here, right now: $0

Silhouette

"I can even understand the pragmatic need for Obama to reach out to Schwarzenegger during the general election, but why should Arnold return the favor besides the obvious point that all of his in-laws are huge Obama supporters"
********

They are all Obama supporters for the same reason: they want McCain to win. Seems weird that a group of influential democrats would want McCain to win? Just think "entrenched" and you'll begin to see why.. *wink*

They know an Obama nomination means a McCain win. Don't ask me why, but I think "everyone in journalism" could maybe tell us why this is "in play"?

Ricorun

Ahnold has good creds on climate and energy issues out here in CA. He also has lots of Republican friends. If the foolishness we've seen in congress this year is any indication (and I would say it is), effective climate and energy legislation is going to require bipartisan support. So in that respect I think he'd be a good choice. Then again, so would Bill Richardson.

DLS

"Ahnold has good creds on climate and energy issues out here in CA."

Among liberals, yes. This helps the many who voted for Clinton because they had reservations about Obama to have their concerns allayed.

The governor is a RINO who would be at home working for Clinton as well as Obama.

DLS

If Lincoln Chafee can endorse Obama (we're still waiting for similar endorsements from Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, and Arlen Specter, and from John McCain, likely, were McCain not seeking the Presidency himself this year) then someone like Arnold S. (a West Coast liberal's idea of "an acceptable Republican" or "a moderate Republican") certainly can be in Obama's cabinet.

Ricorun

DLS: Among liberals, yes. This helps the many who voted for Clinton because they had reservations about Obama to have their concerns allayed.
The governor is a RINO who would be at home working for Clinton as well as Obama.

That's pretty much the point, isn't it? He'd also be at home working for McCain. You say RINO as if it's a dirty word. If it is, I'd say you're living in an awfully small tent.

DLS

"He'd also be at home working for McCain."

McCain's flirting at times with being a Dem Lite are well known. McCain could work with Obama, too (as long as McCain got the attention he craves).

"You say RINO as if it's a dirty word."

It certainly is critical. If he's a so-called Republican he should be conservative, not liberal. (Same goes for liberals' darling over-hyped Bloomberg in New York City.) Some places have developed a culture so liberal that this is what passes for a Republican and it's not the real thing at all. He is a Republican in name only. If he were honest (same for the others I mentioned, in the Northeast) they would register and profess themselves to be Democrats (and liberals).

"If it is, I'd say you're living in an awfully small tent."

No, it's an honest and principled as well as correct and precise tent, and the real issue is why honesty and principle would be considered "smelly" (except among many Democrats, heh, heh).

Ricorun

DLS, are you saying that unless someone adheres to your point of view they can't be honest or principled?

Ricorun

Let me flesh that out a bit... it seems to me that a person can be honest and principled regardless of their point of view. It also seems to me that a person can be dishonest and unprincipled regardless of their point of view.

DLS

"DLS, are you saying that unless someone adheres to your point of view they can't be honest or principled?"

Obviously not. You're committing an elementary logical fallacy. (Or assuming it of me, which is equally incorrect.)

"it seems to me that a person can be honest and principled regardless of their point of view [the point of view is independent]"

Yes. Many liberals want action on "the environment" (including greenhouse gas political-circus buffoonery) and they like what the governor there is doing. This is not surprising, as California has a "Massachusetts Lite" political complexion and even culture (the Democrats have ruled Sacramento for ages; Willie Brown was no fluke there; there are also notoriously liberal-news-making locations such as Hollywood, San Francisco with its deliberately criminal and purposefully controversial government, the People's Republic of Santa Monica, Berkeley, Marin County, etc.). They may not be foamy-mouthed panting Bush-haters as there are in New England, but California (as are Eugene, Portland, and Puget Sound farther north on the West Coast) is definitely left of the overall US mainstream and public.

It shows, by the way, with the numerous problems that state has had for some time now.

Maybe "Ahnuld" wants to get in good with Obama to get a big bailout of California home owners or even money to cover California's latest broken-budget problems before the state hits an eventual debt trap or even approaches New York City's conditions. (federal receivership and demotion to territorial status would be in order)

blog comments powered by Disqus