Can anyone comment on Arnold's tenure as California's governor? What was the consensus of his performance there? This video, his post January 6th video, and his general positioning the last few years have done a lot to elevate him in my eyes.
Can anyone comment on Arnold's tenure as California's governor? What was the consensus of his performance there? This video, his post January 6th video, and his general positioning the last few years have done a lot to elevate him in my eyes.
Arnold began with a lot of bravado and gusto - recall the ads riffing off Hanz and Franz talking about "political girly men" - and got a sobering smackdown as his initial push of his legislative agenda fell on its face.
But he learned from that, and afterward became a much more even-handed and capable political figure. He was already pretty liberal for a Republican (he was pro-choice and pro-environment, for example), so being the reasonable moderate certainly wasn't a stretch. He performed well enough to win re-election. And yes, his favorability ratings were low by the time he ultimately left office - but this isn't exactly an uncommon thing for politicians finishing out their second term, especially if politically, they have nowhere else to go from there (Schwarzenegger isn't eligible for the Presidency since he's foreign born).
As far as the day to day job of being an executive to manage the state government he did a remarkably good job considering his lack of prior experience. He was good at communicating his ideas to the public, much better at that than anybody since Regan. His agenda was very good I thought, improving the state's balance sheet, building up a rainy-day fund, improving the state's water infrastructure. But the state Republican party had been grown out of touch with the majority of California residents and was unable to win statewide office except for the very special circumstances that got Arnold elected. So he governed with the opposition party in power in the legislature. And he very publicly chose to take on the states two largest public employee unions (the source of many of the state's financial woes), and the teachers union in particular just hammered him in all the elections.
I don't think his performance as Governor is especially memorable--- he left office with a 27% favorable 63% unfavorable rating. But the way he ascended to office through the INSANE California recall process damaged his chances of being a unifying leader. This is a fairly good assessment of his terms as governor.
I liked him, but he was a moderate with a liberal supermajority legislature so he was stymied in a lot he wanted to do. Who knows how things would have worked out with a freer hand. Ultimately the fact that he had a child with his maid and subsequent divorce kinda tarnished his reputation. All in all California has had much worse governors and at least he was never married to Kimberly Guilfoyle unlike our current.
Can anyone comment on Arnold's tenure as California's governor? What was the consensus of his performance there? This video, his post January 6th video, and his general positioning the last few years have done a lot to elevate him in my eyes.
Arnold began with a lot of bravado and gusto - recall the ads riffing off Hanz and Franz talking about "political girly men" - and got a sobering smackdown as his initial push of his legislative agenda fell on its face.
But he learned from that, and afterward became a much more even-handed and capable political figure. He was already pretty liberal for a Republican (he was pro-choice and pro-environment, for example), so being the reasonable moderate certainly wasn't a stretch. He performed well enough to win re-election. And yes, his favorability ratings were low by the time he ultimately left office - but this isn't exactly an uncommon thing for politicians finishing out their second term, especially if politically, they have nowhere else to go from there (Schwarzenegger isn't eligible for the Presidency since he's foreign born).
As far as the day to day job of being an executive to manage the state government he did a remarkably good job considering his lack of prior experience. He was good at communicating his ideas to the public, much better at that than anybody since Regan. His agenda was very good I thought, improving the state's balance sheet, building up a rainy-day fund, improving the state's water infrastructure. But the state Republican party had been grown out of touch with the majority of California residents and was unable to win statewide office except for the very special circumstances that got Arnold elected. So he governed with the opposition party in power in the legislature. And he very publicly chose to take on the states two largest public employee unions (the source of many of the state's financial woes), and the teachers union in particular just hammered him in all the elections.
I don't think his performance as Governor is especially memorable--- he left office with a 27% favorable 63% unfavorable rating. But the way he ascended to office through the INSANE California recall process damaged his chances of being a unifying leader. This is a fairly good assessment of his terms as governor.
https://www.npr.org/2011/01/03/132445643/no-hollywood-ending-to-schwarzeneggers-term
I liked him, but he was a moderate with a liberal supermajority legislature so he was stymied in a lot he wanted to do. Who knows how things would have worked out with a freer hand. Ultimately the fact that he had a child with his maid and subsequent divorce kinda tarnished his reputation. All in all California has had much worse governors and at least he was never married to Kimberly Guilfoyle unlike our current.
I know--- she is a kind of incurable venereal disease isn't she... I can't look at him without seeing her!