Two lessons we all must learn from California . . .

Comparing people to Hitler is over-the-top, and not enough to win an election (except in Israel).

Clinton and Schwarzenegger have taken sexual impropriety off of the table, so do whatever you want - no, wait, I mean you need a better strategy.

We need a better strategy, and a better message, than "the other guys' a Nazi ass-grabber."

Whether it's true or not.

but those unserious bimoys and bimbos out in cali ought to be doing nazi ass grabber from now until november of 2004 or a recall, whichever comes first. Let's face it folks, that's what the rethugs would be doing if the tables were turned, and it would work.

I'll go one further: If nazi ass grabber had happened two weeks earlier, this would not be a contest.

Remember that great, ice cold Eric Baldwin's monlogue, from that Mamet movie? "You wanna be a good father? Fuck you! Go home and play with your kids!"

"Wanna be a nice person? Go volunteer at the pet shelter. Rethugs know what it takes to win in 2003 'merica. Do we?

... if you look at Arnold as a phenomenon, you find the truth - Americans are addicted to the idea of anything new, and this is how Schwarzenegger won this election - people know the process is f***ed up, and they think one man can change it.

Of course, they're wrong, but...

Even a mentally deficient, ass-grabbing, Nazi-sympathizer can beat you in an election, if the media is actively campaigning for him.

Arnold is clearly not mentally deficient nor a Nazi-symphathizer. He just as clearly is an ass-grabber on G-d knows what else.

Also, was the LA Times actively campaigning for him? They seemed to like Gray Davis.

He got more than his fair share of media attention in this campaign. That is what historians will talk about when they look back on this day.

Arnold is no Nazi Sympathizer..he has been contributing to the Weisenthal Center for years.

I really can't stand it when I see a group or person resort to slander in order to win. If a candidate cannot win on the issues..then they shouldn't resort to slander, just change their position on the issues.

BTW...my natural reaction to dirty campaign tricks committed by one candidate is to vote for the candidate being slandered...and I suspect that this reaction is true in most people.

The REASON why we are losing this election is because we have lost the CENTER! We are no longer moderate, instead our positions on the issues have become extreme, and we have resorted to slanderous tactics.

The same was true for PRI in Mexico: once we clean up our act, then we will start to win elections again. It is as simple as that.

We need another Pat Brown. Now he was a REAL Governor!

Play nice and win? Since when does that work? Look at the White House.

...to be learned: You can play nice, or you can win.

Since our very survival depends on winning, I'm willing to stop playing nice, and atone for bad karma later.

(BTW, Cat Atomic -- GREAT name!)

... funny guy.

doesn't seem to part of the same-old, same-old insider group.

Sure Arnold is a celebrity, but I think what he said, the words and phrases he used, made him sound like a Populist and that he would "Put People First".

People want that and that's why they voted for him. Unfortunately, he lied, but they don't know that yet.

I think it tells us that DNC/DLC, centrist, insider candidates can't win. People want someone who represents them.

Think about it.

Whoever has the best PR campaign wins because people aren't accustomed to thinking anymore. THAT is the lesson of this election.

How. If Davis came out and provided an eloquent statement on why all of Arnolds economic policies wouldn't work... would that get coverage? If Davis came out telling everyone that he has 13 women who say Arnold molested them... well, there ya go.

It's the corporate media. Of course media does sway right, because so do Corporations. Beyond that, this country doesn't seem to like to think about policies.

"What did he say about Arnolds policies? Is that even true? Who cares, he's Arnold, the other guy doesn't have an accent, and I hear he bankrupted the economy." (Long term memory is gone, Enron and Blackouts never happened.)

You say: "Two lessons we all must learn from California . . . Comparing people to Hitler is over-the-top, and not enough to win an election (except in Israel)."

I say: Nobody "compared" Arnold to Hitler, they just published Arnold's own words where he stated he admired Hitler. So what the hell are you talking about?


You say: "Clinton and Schwarzenegger have taken sexual impropriety off of the table, so do whatever you want - no, wait, I mean you need a better strategy. We need a better strategy, and a better message, than 'the other guys' a Nazi ass-grabber.'"

I say: You don't seem to be able to make up your mind whether it's "you" that you're talking to or "we"...more evidence of your thinley veiled intent to bait and inflame.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.