Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

Dark Horse Republican Meg Whitman

  • 19-08-2010 04:21PM
    #1
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 47,768 CMod ✭✭✭✭


    Former President and CEO of eBay Meg Whitman is the Republican candidate for governor of California, which will be decided in the November 2010 elections. She runs against former governor and Democrat Jerry Brown.

    If you live in California you know without a doubt that she is running for Governor, as you continue to be bombarded with "Meg in 2010" telly ads several times a day.

    Her plan for California is simple. She plans to run it as if it were a business. She has no experience in government, and there are some questions about her voting record as a citizen; i.e., not bothering to vote in decades; or if she did vote, it was rare (depending upon the source you consult).

    Unlike former Alaska governor Sarah Palin with a spotty academic record, Meg Whitman has an academic CV that compares to Obama, having graduated from Princeton University and Harvard University, and now holds a post on the Princeton board of trustees.

    A major question emerges from the current 2010 California elections. Is it in the interests of the US political system to have billionaires like Meg Whitman essentially buy elections? She has already spent $100 million dollars in her 2010 governor's race, outspending the Republican primary candidate, and will probably spend an additional $200 million to beat Jerry Brown.

    Look out Sarah Palin! Should Meg Whitman win the governorship of America's largest state, she may follow the steps of Ronald Reagan all the way to the White House, perhaps spending a half billion dollars of her own money to get there.

    Sources:
    http://www.megwhitman.com/
    http://www.notablebiographies.com/news/Sh-Z/Whitman-Meg.html
    http://topics.sacbee.com/Meg+Whitman/
    http://www.sacbee.com/2009/10/07/2236262/meg-whitmans-voting-history.html
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38621024/ns/politics/


Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Don’t live there, but I’d rather see Megzilla trample the pillars of California incompetence than ride the Moonbeam to ruin... regardless of the cost.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 47,768 CMod ✭✭✭✭Black Swan


    This post has been deleted.
    Just because Obama bought his office, does not justify someone else doing the same does it? Should high offices be for sale in America?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,565 ✭✭✭southsiderosie


    This post has been deleted.

    I don't get why so many people think that business skills automatically transfer over to government. People's incentives in politics are completely different, the accountability structure is different, and the ability to control information is different. California is particularly dysfunctional; no corporate managers would hand over every decision to shareholders, but that is basically what California's political system allows through ballot initiatives. Frankly I think anyone who has had a successful private sector career would have to be insane to want to take over a large government bureaucracy, much less the California government.
    This post has been deleted.

    I think a key difference is that he raised that money. Whitman is spending her own. Obama's campaign war chest was a function of his ability to mobilize grassroots support. Whitman's is completely independent of voter support.

    California has a long history of wealthy people blowing their personal fortunes on political campaigns (Arianna Huffington's ex-husband for example), which are often vanity projects. However, they have had better success in governor's races than in Senate races.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,271 ✭✭✭kev9100


    She could be a contender, but if she isn't a full blown fiscal and social conservative she won't get the nomination in today's GOP.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,565 ✭✭✭southsiderosie


    kev9100 wrote: »
    She could be a contender, but if she isn't a full blown fiscal and social conservative she won't get the nomination in today's GOP.

    We are talking about California here though...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,082 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    I don't think she has a hope. I know more Republicans who are going to vote for Brown than will vote for Whitman.
    I think a key difference is that he raised that money. Whitman is spending her own. Obama's campaign war chest was a function of his ability to mobilize grassroots support. Whitman's is completely independent of voter support.

    That can also be a boon. She is less beholden to interests, fundraisers and otherwise attempting to please anyone for any purpose other than votes. At least the level of independence provided is useful. I'm not sure the Governator would have made it without his own money, he's bucked the official GOP in CA a few times now.

    NTM


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,565 ✭✭✭southsiderosie


    That can also be a boon. She is less beholden to interests, fundraisers and otherwise attempting to please anyone for any purpose other than votes. At least the level of independence provided is useful. I'm not sure the Governator would have made it without his own money, he's bucked the official GOP in CA a few times now.

    NTM

    I would generally agree with you on this point, but in Obama's case, he got a lot of relatively small donations. People were really excited about his campaign, even if it's all gone to hell in a handbasket now.

    I think the danger of some of these self-funded campaigns is that those running think all they have to do is put a lot of ads on tv, and they'll get in...and a lot of the time those ads do more to tell you why you shouldn't vote for the other guy (or gal), rather than why you should support the candidate. So they don't invest in the kind of grassroots volunteer canvassing efforts that less well-funded candidates have to rely on. There is a lot of research on the effect of campaign strategies, and having your neighbor knock on your door to tell you why they support a certain candidate is a lot more effective than a tv commercial telling you why you shouldn't support the other candidate.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 47,768 CMod ✭✭✭✭Black Swan


    There is a lot of research on the effect of campaign strategies, and having your neighbor knock on your door to tell you why they support a certain candidate is a lot more effective than a tv commercial telling you why you shouldn't support the other candidate.
    Generally I would tend to agree with you, but the mid-term California elections promise to have low voter turnout, and Whitman has closed the distance with Brown in the latest poll, running neck-and-neck, essentially using telly ads to account for her competitiveness with him (and not door-to-door canvassing).

    One of her telly attack ads against Jerry Brown is completely misleading and disingenuous, claiming that Jerry Brown was the reason why the state went from a surplus to a budget deficit while he occupied the office of governor. The fact of the matter was the citizen initiative (Proposition 13) authored by major land developer Howard Jarvis (Jaws I), and passed by the voters substantially lowered the revenues from real estate taxation driving the state from surplus to deficit. Had Proposition 13 not passed, Jerry Brown would have left office with a huge surplus and a balanced budget.
    kev9100 wrote: »
    She could be a contender, but if she isn't a full blown fiscal and social conservative she won't get the nomination in today's GOP.
    She is a fiscal conservative that is moderately to the right of center in social policy, if you can believe her plan for California. Further, she does not identify with the fringe elements of the GOP as Palin does, nor has the proclivity to be caught in scandals that frequent Palin. If Whitman wins California and somehow contributes to improving the state economy, Sarah Palin's hopes for 2012 sink considerably.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,565 ✭✭✭southsiderosie


    ...The fact of the matter was the citizen initiative (Proposition 13) authored by major land developer Howard Jarvis (Jaws I), and passed by the voters substantially lowered the revenues from real estate taxation driving the state from surplus to deficit. Had Proposition 13 not passed, Jerry Brown would have left office with a huge surplus and a balanced budget.

    Prop 13 is everything that is wrong with American politics today..."We want government programs, but we don't want to pay for them"...argggghhh...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,460 ✭✭✭demonspawn


    Jerry Brown has been involved in Californian politics for about 40 years now. Californians know who he is and what he stands for. Whitman will have a hell of a time wrestling any votes off him, regardless of how much money she throws into this campaign. At least that's my hope anyway. This guy has busted his ass for California and deserves the office imo.

    Any chance of a bit of cross-party support from the Governator? These two seemed to work pretty well together over the years, despite the party divide.

    On a side note, if Brown is elected he will break 3 California records. One for longest period elapsed between non-consecutive terms, one for oldest governor at time of inauguration, and one for longest serving governor if he serves a full four years.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,460 ✭✭✭demonspawn


    Prop 13 is everything that is wrong with American politics today..."We want government programs, but we don't want to pay for them"...argggghhh...

    And the lesson is: never let the public decide on economic matters, especially taxes. They'll just shoot themselves in the foot.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,082 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    Any chance of a bit of cross-party support from the Governator?

    I doubt it.

    If, for some reason, he chooses to run for Senate, he can't completely give the finger to the GOP. He's most likely just going to quietly step aside and consider his options for the next couple of years.

    NTM


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 47,768 CMod ✭✭✭✭Black Swan


    Prop 13 is everything that is wrong with American politics today..."We want government programs, but we don't want to pay for them"...argggghhh...
    "Upon taking office [as governor], Brown gained a reputation as a fiscal conservative. The American Conservative noted he was 'much more of a fiscal conservative than Governor Reagan.' His fiscal restraint resulted in one of the biggest budget surpluses in state history. He was both in favor of a Balanced Budget Amendment and opposed to Proposition 13, the latter of which would decrease property taxes and greatly reduce revenue to cities and counties."

    Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Brown
    He's most likely just going to quietly step aside and consider his options for the next couple of years.
    Methinks that Arnie the Governator thinks of himself now as one of The Expendables.


Advertisement