What do Californians think of their governer? (Davis, Arnold: living, celebrity)

[Alexus]

How well can any person do as governor in the land of the larks, fruits, and nuts? I always thought Arnold was better seen than heard and I never thought he was qualified to hold such an office. He's an ex-bodybuilder and an actor. Period. He's not a visionary and can't possibly devise innovative programs to benefit this state. Hasn't done so thus far. He's also a Republican, so his instincts are flawed. One problem for him is that he has resided during the time when the village idiot was in office. Bush had nothing but disdain for the state and seemed to favor any steps that made life harder here in CA.

Arnold made that ridiculous tired Republican pledge about "no new taxes", yet "taxes" are now his middle name. Gray Davis might not have been good, but replacing him with an unqualified guy like Arnold was not a good move. If that pathetic, undeserving Gavin Newsom gets in, then the state of CA will have solidified its reputation as a state comprised of people who can't be viewed in a serious light.

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by Alexus

How well can any person do as governor in the land of the larks, fruits, and nuts? I always thought Arnold was better seen than heard and I never thought he was qualified to hold such an office. He's an ex-bodybuilder and an actor. Period. He's not a visionary and can't possibly devise innovative programs to benefit this state. Hasn't done so thus far. He's also a Republican, so his instincts are flawed. One problem for him is that he has resided during the time when the village idiot was in office. Bush had nothing but disdain for the state and seemed to favor any steps that made life harder here in CA.

Arnold made that ridiculous tired Republican pledge about "no new taxes", yet "taxes" are now his middle name. Gray Davis might not have been good, but replacing him with an unqualified guy like Arnold was not a good move. If that pathetic, undeserving Gavin Newsom gets in, then the state of CA will have solidified its reputation as a state comprised of people who can't be viewed in a serious light.

that is your opinion and you are welcome to it, but it is just that, an opinion. If I remember correctly his victory was a landslide. Obviously many do not agree with your take on him..

Could you clarify what Bush did or did not do for Calif? I think the mess Ca is in has little to do with Bush.. I am not a Bush supported nor a Arnold supporter for sure, but your rationale makes no sense. It is easy to put the blame on the other side. What about the elected democrat legislatures...Are they blameless? What about the banks that lent money to people who were totally unqualfied and the appraisers who allowed houses to be sold at a price 3 or 4 times what they were worth? And then we have the greedy sellers? I think there is a lot of blame to go around, don't put all on your governor or his party..


Nita

[Ludachris]

Originally Posted by ocexpo

He's doing amazing considering the idiotic democrats wont cut funding for the 24% of California's illegal immigrant population.

Considering only 75% of his states citizens are legal, hes doing really well.

And how exactly do you come to the conclusion he's doing a really good job? Because the state hasn't filed for bankruptcy? Is the bar really that low now?

[elousv]

And what exactly is wrong with a "no new tax" pledge?

[buckeyenative01]

Originally Posted by elousv

And what exactly is wrong with a "no new tax" pledge?

Things fall apart and need money to be repaired (education, transportation, etc)

[sav858]

Originally Posted by ocexpo

He's doing amazing considering the idiotic democrats wont cut funding for the 24% of California's illegal immigrant population.

Considering only 75% of his states citizens are legal, hes doing really well.

That is not true at all, 25% of California population is NOT illegal. The estimate is around 3 million, which puts it below 10%.

[elousv]

Originally Posted by buckeyenative01

Things fall apart and need money to be repaired (education, transportation, etc)

Still don't know why they need more money to fix these things. Ever-increasing spending on education does not lead to improved student performance. Transportation was already well funded and they stole that money to do something else. Simply use it for what it was intended. Rates should NEVER go up. In 40 years or so the population has only doubled, but the budget went up 25 fold. No, enough is enough.

[Sassberto]

Originally Posted by elousv

. In 40 years or so the population has only doubled, but the budget went up 25 fold. No, enough is enough.

Uhh.. you know that the cost of concrete, steel, and labor went up too... right? In 1960, 3k/yr was a pretty-darned good salary. My mom earned 6k/yr in 1975.

[bhcompy]

Originally Posted by Sassberto

Uhh.. you know that the cost of concrete, steel, and labor went up too... right? In 1960, 3k/yr was a pretty-darned good salary. My mom earned 6k/yr in 1975.

And a house that cost 30k in 1970 costs 500k today.

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by bhcompy

And a house that cost 30k in 1970 costs 500k today.

you are so right, in 1965 hubby was transferred to S.F. from L.A. we had 3 kids, the oldest was 5 and I was a stay at home mom: his new salary with a promotion was about $9,000 a year, we were so excited we could hardly believe how good we had it..

Nita