I think McAuliffe had the right strategy in California

I know a lot of DUers hate McAuliffe and thought his strategy of not running another candidate in the recall election was wrong, but I disagree. Bustamante sucker punched the party. I don't live there and I don't know anything about him other than what I've heard since the recall efforts started, but I think it was a terrible move.

McAuliffe's strategy was gutsy. It said "No, we're not going to play this game. We have a governor. He was elected fair and square. If the Republicans want to try and recall him, let them. But if you vote for the recall, you're on your own, and we aren't going to supply another candidate as a hedge bet. It's Davis or nothing. Take your chances." It was a game of chicken. And one that I think we would have won. Bustamante sabotaged the plan. It gave the recall legitimacy.

If Bustamante hadn't run and we had lost the recall, at least we would have lost with some dignity. Arnold would have looked worse. And it would have made it easier to recall him later because everyone would have known the situation was unfair. It would be like Arnold had shot a man who refused to draw his weapon. And losing isn't the worst thing in the world. We'd get California back, and voters would know the party stood for its principles even if it means we risk losing. Bustamante played a coward's game.

knowing he would still have his job if he lost....He was and is a selfish opportunist.

..they could. If Davis dropped out, it would have been an admission that the party fucked up. If Bustamante didn't run, it would have taken away ANY democratic voice from the debates. That would have been stupid, and Arnold probably would have showed up for a debate like that. If anyone but Bustamante ran, the 17-20% of CA latinos probably wouldn't have voted for a Dem again until 2008.

The only hope the Dems had was winning that court case. The tried it. They had great lawyers arguing it (Tribe). And it failed. They lost their only chance of winning right there.

Yes, Bustamante interfered and tried to gain power for himself. He not only split the limited resources of the Party, he went behind their backs and encouraged his supporters to vote FOR the recall. That cost Davis dearly. He sabotaged the whole process by getting his sorry ass involved at all.

I also place some responsibility on 3rd Party interference who can't seem to wake the fuck up to the fact that a half a loaf in hand is better than no loaf AT ALL. It's not enough to martyr themselves, they have to drag everyone else down with them, and that seems to be just fine with them. I have no tolerance whatsoever for their cause anymore.

and then voted for Bustamante?

Acording to the Washington Post exit poll, 10% of Bustamante voters voted yes on the recall.

3% of total voters in the exit poll voted the yes/Bustamante combination.

Could it be that a lot of silly people thought that to vote for Bustamante they had to vote yes on the recall? Maybe this was McAuliffe's strategy. Did he think that to tell everyone to vote no and not on the second part, it would be more understandable to them and achieve the desired result?

So did supposed "liberal" Green and Arianna supporters.

The problem wasn't with the Dems. The problem is the recall is designed to let the second place person win.

Like a link or something. I see it has been said today a couple of times on DU, but no proof has been offered.

Since she was an insider, actively involved, and always knew what she was talking about, I consider the information reliable. She analyzed the figures and could spot it herself, and I consider her judgement highly reliable.

Since she is not here to speak for herself I searched and found some of her recent comments on this.

From this thread
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=494480

nothingshocksmeanymore sez:
It was DNC saying no other

candidate which WOULD HAVE worked and would NOT have split our precious limited resources to compete with a guy who has probably a hundred million dollars worth of free air time including every major market radio station on the morning drive.

Cruz Bustamante (Lieberman's campaign manager in California) and one of the DLC's top 100 fastest rising ( and apparently fastest falling) stars played the politics of division..it had Dems running against themselves and his stupid ass "tough love" (what the fuck was that?) campaign went over like a lead balloon.

He divided the Dems in the past and just did it again. HE shot us all in the foot.


and later in the thread
nothingshocksmeanymore sez:
This state will go for Bush in 04 and we will have Arnold stumping for him
to thank for it.

Today is the last day I am posting on this site but to everyone who said we needed a name at the bottom of the ballot, all I can say is that it was the WORST possible decision, it split the message AND THE RESOURCES and behind the scenes Bustamante's supporters that DID go for him planned on voting for the recall in order to get him and his overinflated not ready for PRIME TIME EGO elected.

Bustamante pulled this shit right before the last election ( Nov 02)as well with a crucial farm vote and withdrew his support of Davis thereby dividing the party right before the election as well.

The CALIFORNIA Democratic party could have pulled this off. Interference from the NATIONAL DEMOCRATS is what did NOT work because Davis either had to defend his record from BOTH sides or play nice like everyone said.

Arnold on the other hand won with good old Republican politics by playing the RACE card.

The two issues that were IMPOSSIBLE to get past were : licenses for "illegal aliens", and Indian casino taxes. I know..I talked to those union workers. Hundreds if not thousands of them.


In another thread
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=494626


nothingshocksmeanymore sez:
Three things won this vote (from an insider)
1. Racism..Arnold played the "illegal immigrant drivers' license card" and the Indian Casino card. REPEATEDLY IN HIS COMMERCIALS.

2. Cruz Bustamante and Ritchie Ross's division of the Democratic party in the state along with their division of the resources and his pathetic campaign.

3. HOURS of free press and radio devoted to Arnold. We would have needed 100 million dollars to compete with it dollar for dollar, minute per minute.

and later in the thread
nothingshocksmeanymore sez:
Davis went soft because the party was calling for it

Frankly, I think we would have seen a far different campaign and it would have been difficult for Arnold to overcome if Davis had played his own game. He got Riordan (one of the most likable Republicnas in the state) defeated by his own party.


And finally in this thread
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=495601#495901

nothingshocksmeanymore sez:
Democrats had momentum in this state TWICE in the last year. Once before the election when Bustamante interrupted it by forcing Davis to sign a piece of legislation he would have signed anyway after elected ( Bustamante ACTIVELY TOLD LATINOS NOT TO VOTE FOR DAVIS 2 weeks prior to the election) and when this recall was FIRST certified MOMENTUM was against it. Again Bustamante appealed to a SMALL sect of voters, took advice from Washington and DIVIDED and interrupted the MOMENTUM. The negative press created by him and Ritchie Ross didn't help either and created a FRONT of disarray.

His stupid ass TOUGH LOVE bullshit was BEYOND pathetic and his appeal to SINTAXES was hardly popular - in case you didn't notice the California WINE industry is a powerful lobby in the state (The only person more hated in Hollywood than Arnold is ROB FUCKING REINER)

Democrats do not understand momentum to their own disadvantage.

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

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

?

but his heart wasn't in it. He didn't defend Davis and in fact seemed to agree during the debates that the people had a right to be angry, etc. His mere presence in the race should have been enough -- he should have stood with Davis and the main thrust of his campaign should have been no on the recall -- instead he added the Vote no as an addendum, and then when on to pitch for himself. He definitely hurt the cause. And he sucked as a candidate anyway.

Davis should have been less contrite and more confrontative about the recall. He should have been more forceful defending his record. Davis actually has a pretty good record -- not as progressive as I'd like, but remember he was being ambushed from the right. He basically is a centrist democrat who should not have particularly raised the eire of anyone except for a confluence of peculiar circumstances --- none really of his own making. The engineered energy crisis and the perception that he struck a poor bargain with the energy companies -- but people forget that at the time of the crisis the pressure was on him to keep the electricity flowing and actually he did that fairly well. He actually should get credit for 12 new energy plants (Wilson started none). When the truth came out later about the machinations of the energy companies, he was tarred and feathered for having made a bad deal -- as if he was supposed to have known the dirty tricks they had played. And remember the deregulation that permitted them to play these games were the product of Pete Wilson. Same with the car tax, when times were good (Clinton) they agreed to lower the car tax with the proviso that it would rise to previous levels when times were not good (Bush) -- and poor Davis gets smacked with it. The attack about Indian gaming was over the top -- we don't even have the right to tax Indians. Davis actually drove a fairly hard bargain with them.

?

Perhaps you might link to some indication that your contention is anything but inaccurate......Bustamonte continually advised a no vote on the recall and a vote for him. I never once saw , in any ad of his, or heard ,in any of his speeches, any request to vote yes on that recall.
As to your slur that Arianna or the Greens did the same,well, more of the same from you....

And if Davis lost, we would have had no chance.

Even though it was released by the Los Angeles times.

ThatÕs why I said this article SHOULD have been the Democratic message.

http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=283&row=0

The media may have made the groping charges the Democratic message but donÕt kid yourself, the Democratic party leaders did nothing to back away from the groping story either.

ItÕs their fault they LET the media frame the Democratic message.

Face it, Their strategy sucked.

Who cares what Pukes think, Bustamante was right to run but he didnÕt put out the right message.

I wasn't there to see the ads or messages put out, so I can't judge that. I'm referring only to the strategy of not running a recall candidate.

And I do think it confused voters. "No on recall, Yes to Bustamante" may not seem like rocket science to us, but most voters don't pay that much attention. Arianna got 42,000 votes and she had already dropped out. It seems incredible that voters could have missed that, but apparently many did.

...isn't a good one. It's always better to win than lose.

McAuliffe's plan was foiled, so we'll never know whether it would have worked, but I believe it would have. We know Bustamante's strategy failed.

But even if McAuliffe's plan had been implemented and Davis, lost, I still think we would have been in a better position politicallt than we are now. With Bustamante's machinations, we not only lost the seat, we lost the high road.

It is possible to win the battle and lose the war and vice versa. With McAuliffe's strategy we might have won the war even if we lost the battle.

right?

?

was Gary Condit's political consultant. Now he's got this clusterfuck on his resume. He needs to get out of the business.

?

...step aside for at least the next cycle and let some fresh blood - DLC or otherwise - take a shot at things. I don't think that's likely to happen, however.

...since his strategy was ignored there.

He should have been able, via force of his personality and the strength of campaign planning and party machinery control, to keep his fellow Dems in line. That's a shortcoming, and one the right usually doesn't have to deal with.. look at Delay!

Bustamante told people at every opportunity to vote no on the recall and the people who are saying otherwise in this thread are just the kind of people that Al Franken titled his last book about. And it disgusts me. No citations, just lies. Damn lying lies told by lying liars.

Bustamante helped me to ask people to vote no on recall and Bustamante for Governor. I would not have had any motivation to ask anyone for just a no on recall as Davis is an asshole jerk who basically did exactly the things he was accused of (raising money in exchange for signatures on bills, the exact sort of thing that disgusts me about Repukes).

We are done with Davis, and damn good riddance.

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

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

I'm waiting.

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

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

Working inside the machine gives a person a unique grasp of the situation that's impossible to get otherwise. I've been in similar situation and I know it firsthand.

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

And why don't you knock off this shit and give it a rest. No one has a bigger anti-Davis bias than you, nor a bigger anti-truth bias. Go pull someone elses chain tonight.

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

The lady knows her shit. She is very heavily sourced and knowlegeable on things politic in California and issues involved in this recall including the candidates.

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

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

can't provide one! OK.

A competant leader would have pulled through for us, DESPITE Bustamante.

Your analysis appears valid, but you blame ONLY Cruz- Apparently McCulliffe handled this wrong, considering we lost one of the most liberal states in the union...

McAuliffe had the right idea. The problem wasn't so much Bustamonte, it was the fact that the recall process was a two-step.

One of the big rules in advertising is the KISS principle ("Keep It Simple, Stupid," for those who may be wondering). Want fuck up your ad campaign? There's an easy way to do it - ask your target audience to think of more than one thing at a time. Even "tastes great...less filling" is about one thing (ie: the beer is so good we're arguing about it).

Asking people to walk and chew gum at the same time is asking for trouble, in advertising, or in voting. Never, EVER, two-step a process. It's hard enough to get customers to take the first step, let alone take a second step.

So, Terry had it right. The voters should have had only ONE idea in their minds and ONE choice to make - this recall is WRONG, and I'm voting "No." Simple, clear and direct. Bustamonte should have stayed out of the choice part, put up a loyal front for Davis and guaranteed the Hispanic vote.

Had Cruz stayed out, the Dems would have had a much easier time focusing on the wrongness of the recall, rather than giving the voters too many choices when the ONLY choice they should have had was: Davis, yes or no.

It wasn't too complicated. "Just check the yes box, then go down the page and find the Schwarzenegger box. Gee, that was quick. Oh wait, what are these two ballot measures? Aw, fuck it, just vote no on both of them."

Davis ran his usual luke-warm wonk campaign, while Ahnold got the celebrity red-carpet treatment. Seems like Ahnold got 10-to-1 coverage over all the other candidates combined. He showed up at one debate, made an ass of himself, but no one cared.

THAT is the problem. Ahnold was the republican candidate, but he was also the nihilistic know-nothing candidate. As in his film career, people identified with his simplistic shallow attitude: extreme ignorance and physical violence as a response to complex problems.

The problem was never with ballot complexity, it was a total failure to present the issues in an interesting way. Anyone who can read the box score to a Lakers game can figure out how to recall Davis and vote for Schwarzenegger, or vote no on the recall and for Bustamante. It's getting people to see why they shouldn't be cynical about Davis and his politics of the usual that was the problem all along.

I mean jesus what kind of rationalizations are going on in your brain?

Did I miss something or is it about winning?

and interfered with it to use the recall as a power grab for himself. He fucked the Party and the strategy by doing so.

He only had a 20% approval rating. If Davis wasn't interested in power, why didn't he quit. Davis sacrificed the governership to the republicans out of self interests and now his supporters are shitsmearing Cruze.

Just because a bunch of Republican sore losers got together and organized a blatant power grab? Is that what we should do every time Republicans challenge us -- give in? If he was so unpopular why was he re-elected just last year? Any other Democrats were free to challenge him in the Primary if he was so unpopular then. And I am not a Davis "supporter" other than the fact that I support any incumbent Democrat by default. I don't even live in California, and the only thing I know about Bustamante is that this stunt of his cost the Party big time.

He was newly elected to the office in a fair election and was rightly entitled to the office and under no obligation to defer to Bustamante. Bustamante was not entitled to ANY say in the matter and should have kept his personal political and ego aspirations out of it entirely. He fucked the California Democratic Party BIG TIME, and his political status is now rightly falling because of it.

:kick:

He should have paid lip service to opposing the recall
and then immediately found a high profile candidate
-even another actor like Rob Reiner or Martin Sheen,
one that didn't have their fingerprints on every pair
of mammaries in LA. Had he done that the muscle-bound
groper would be looking over scripts for Terminator IV
today instead of making plans to move in the governors
mansion.

...to counter the Republicans running an actor with no political experience is for Democrats to do the same? I mean, I like Sheen and Reiner, but how would that have given us credibility? It would have undercut our strongest talking point against Arnold. If Democrats wanted to run another candidate in the CA primary, that was their choice. Why should a Republican power grab turn into a free-for-all?

This is about winning - something Terry M doesn't
seem to know anything about. Davis had approval ratings
in the 20's - it didn't take much to figure out that any
viable alternative was going to beat him out.

Bustamante's strategy that failed. He not only split the limit resources of the Democratic Party, he divided the Party when the recall was first certified and interrupted the momentum that was against it. He is as responsible as anyone for California losing the Governor's office.

McAuliffe had a huge misunderstanding, not only of Californians specifically, many of whom are proudly apolitical and independent, but of voters in general, who could care less whether a candidate belongs to a party with an R or a D in their name. Voters don't hold any all-suffering loyalty to the Democratic Party. Most Californians couldn't even see their energy crisis as anything but Gray Davis's fault.

The recall process, fair or not, it's the rules of the game.

I think he saw them as honorable and able to smell bullsh*t. I think he believed (and I believed) that if we stuck to our guns and didn't let the Republican draw us into a rematch that we would prevail. Californians would see the recall strategy as the power grab that it was and would defeat it. We could have focused on the problems with the recall instead of getting into a personality matchup with a movie star. Bustamante is the one who assumed voters would be partisan and simply vote along party lines. McAuliffe wanted to fight the recall itself. Bustamante forced us into another election where we had to fight Schwarzenegger and where the playing field was definitely in their favor.

Fight the recall? Who cares? Of course there is a "vast rightwing conspiracy"? There's always been a vast rightwing conspiracy. That's the game. This is a strategy of losers and whiners. It's what lost Florida and what lost the pr war to convince voters that Florida was unfair. The rules are not fair. So what? Play by the rules of unfairness or lose. McAuliffe major strategy was to parade through the Golden State every prominent Democrat who could still stand up. The message was a kind of simiple-minded "be true to your school" pep rally. It didn't work. It said "We know this guy is a nonentity, but vote for him anyhow because, as Davis kept repeated, people will do the right thing." McAuliffe just doesn't get it. The DLC doesn't get it. And generally Clinton doesn't get it. They say they're Democrats but they still think like power insiders who have grown smug and complacent.

It is inflammatory. It is also against DU rules to call out other members of DU.

Thanks,
MrsGrumpy
DU Moderator