Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Morning Fix: Meg Whitman and a Brief History of Not Voting



Meg Whitman's voting record (or lack thereof) has become a major issue in the California governor's race. Photo by David McNew/Getty Images

Former eBay chief executive Meg Whitman's spotty record as a voter -- she was never registered before 2002, according to reporting by the Sacramento Bee -- has become a major issue as she seeks the Republican nomination for governor of California in 2010.

"This news is disqualifying to a candidate for governor, her campaign knows it, and they are on the defensive," concluded Jarrod Agen, communications director for California Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner who is challenging Whitman for the GOP nod. Poizner's campaign has also released a 30-second video slamming Whitman for her missed votes; "Whitman didn't vote for one president, congressman, senator or governor," says the ad's narrator. "She didn't skip some votes, as she claimed, she skipped every one -- for 28 years."

Whitman, who told the Bee that she had been registered before 2002 and challenged reporters to "go find it," exacerbating what was already a very tenuous situation for her candidacy. "It is a big deal and her handling of it is making it worse," said one California Republican who is not affiliated with a candidate.

Politicians running for elected office with spotty (or nonexistent) private voting records are nothing new but the damage incurred by that lack of attendance at the ballot box is mixed.

A few of the more recent -- and well-known -- examples of politicians running for elected office with spotty (or nonexistent) private voting records:

Al Checchi: The former Northwest Airlines chairman spent tens of millions on his race for the California Democratic gubernatorial nomination in 1998 but voters ultimately rejected him -- he won just 13 percent of the primary vote -- due at least in part to his seeming disinterest in voting prior to his bid. (He didn't vote in the 1994 Democratic primary and missed casting a ballot in four out of the previous six state elections.)

Jon Corzine: Corzine, who is in a battle for a second term as governor of New Jersey, had to overcome the fact that he hadn't voted in a Democratic primary since 1988 and had missed three general elections in that time when he first ran for the Senate in 2000. He did it by spending more than $60 million of his own money.

John Edwards: When Edwards, a successful trial lawyer, decided to challenge Sen. Lauch Faircloth (R) in the 1998 election cycle, the Democrat had voted in only half of the elections over the previous seven years -- missing the chance to cast a ballot in the 1994 Republican tidal-wave election among others. North Carolina voters didn't seem to mind, electing Edwards and then watching as he ran twice -- unsuccessfully -- for president in 2004 and 2008.

Bill Frist: The former Senate majority leader had never voted before 1988, despite being able to do so since 1971. Now-Sen. Bob Corker, who unsuccessfully challenged Frist in the 1994 GOP primary, ran ads slamming Frist for his inconsistent voting record. "Bill Frist didn't vote for 18 years, and he's never voted in a Republican primary," said the ad's narrator. "Now he wants to be our Republican nominee for the United States Senate. You've got to be kidding." Voters didn't buy it -- handing Frist victories in the GOP primary and over appointed Sen. Jim Sasser (D) in the general election.

(Are there other examples we missed? The comments section awaits.)

With the Whitman voting controversy still developing, it's hard to know whether she will ultimately wind up in the political scrap heap with Checchi or will be able to turn her lack of votes into a talking point that reinforces her outsider image (unlikely but not unheard of).

How things turn out for Whitman depends -- largely -- on two factors.

The first is whether or not voters want a change in the sort of people they elect badly enough to opt for someone who has not regularly (if at all) taken part in the political process. While that argument worked for the likes of Edwards and Frist, it's a bit more complicated for Whitman to sell due to the fact that the current governor of California -- Arnold Schwarzenegger -- is a celebrity Republican candidate who missed lots of votes before being elected. (Sound familiar?)

The second factor is how much Whitman is willing to spend of her own fortune to get elected and whether or not Poizner or any other candidate can come close to matching those sums.

If Whitman is committed to spending $100 million of her own money on the race -- we have heard estimates both higher and lower than that -- she may be able to turn this voting record controversy into a blip on the radar. Simply because it is a major issue with the political chattering class does not mean that the average vote is paying ANY attention to the story or is even aware of it.

Whitman's mega-millions -- if spent properly on television -- could go a long way to ensuring that when voters hear about her voting record (and Poizner will make sure they do) that there is lots of context provided that paints her in a favorable light.

Whitman's guide in this strategy could be Corzine, whose personal fortune helped him overcome a series of negative stories and claim the Senate seat by three percentage points.

For the untested Whitman, this voting story represents the first -- and biggest -- test of a process-heavy campaign that has been defined to date by the amount of money she is spending and the number of consultants she has hired.

If she can't find a way to get past it, her long-awaited bid may never get off the ground.

Monday's Fix Picks: Frank Gore's ankle killed the Fix fantasy football team.

1. Obama waits and sees on Afghanistan.
2. MoDo on W and Bubba.
3. Jon Corzine's cash edge explored.
4. George Will hearts Marco Rubio.
5. RIP: William Safire.

Crist Positions for 2012?: Florida Gov. Charlie Crist (R) isn't even in the Senate yet but many of his critics took his comparison of President Obama to former President Jimmy Carter as evidence he has already begun to position himself to run in 2012. "I believe that the people have seen that they wanted a change but not this much," said Crist in a speech at the Mackinac leadership conference. "Not this kind, and not this way. America is awake and we're coming back." Rep. Kendrick Meek, Crist's likely Democratic opponent in next fall's Senate race, immediately sent a fundraising email to supporters insisting that "Governor Crist is using our Senate race to jumpstart his 2012 run." Crist, who is a strong favorite in the primary and general election for Senate, has made no secret of his national ambitions; his endorsement of Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) just days before the 2008 Florida presidential primary was widely regarded as an attempt to position himself as a vice presidential pick. But, it remains to be seen whether his image as a moderate -- not to mention the quick turnaround time from the Senate race -- could sell at the national level.

Benkiser for Perry: Tina Benkiser, the Texas Republican party chairwoman and one-time candidate for the vice chairmanship of the Republican National Committee, is resigning her post to join Gov. Rick Perry's (R) reelection race as a senior adviser. "I am stepping down as chairman so that I can enthusiastically support the only true conservative in the Texas governor's race, Governor Rick Perry," said Benkiser in a thinly-veiled shot at Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison who is challenging Perry in next year's primary. Benkiser is one of the first prominent Republican pols in the Lonestar State to choose sides in what will be the nastiest -- and most captivating -- primary in the country next year. Polling suggests the two pols running neck and neck, and both Perry and Hutchison will likely spend north of $20 million each to win the nomination.

Click It!: The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee spoofs former Hewlett Packard CEO Carly Fiorina's Web site. Well played.

Snyder Wins Straw Poll: Businessman Rick Snyder (R) surprised the Michigan Republican establishment over the weekend by winning a gubernatorial straw poll at the Mackinac leadership conference. Snyder led the field with 386 votes followed by state Attorney General Mike Cox at 300, Oakland County Sheriff Mike Bouchard at 298 and Rep. Pete Hoekstra at 219. "Our organizational strength has defied expectations and the results demonstrate that Republican voters are more interested in reinventing Michigan and fresh leadership than the status quo that career politicians are offering," said Snyder in the wake of the vote. Snyder's win -- despite his low standing in the polls -- is rightly seen as a victory for his campaign team -- led by John Yob and John Weaver. The Michigan Republican primary will be among the most competitive in the nation and, if polls are to be believed, represents one of the GOP's best gubernatorial pickup chances in 2010.

Say What?: "I'm blind but I'm not oblivious." -- New York Gov. David Paterson makes a funny during an interview with NBC "Meet the Press" host David Gregory.

By Chris Cillizza  |  September 28, 2009; 5:40 AM ET
Categories:  Morning Fix  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Friday House Line: A GOP-Friendly Environment
Next: The Most Important Number in Politics Today

Comments

And, some more food for thought …

Shill Bidding on eBay: Case Study #2

Shining some light on the more sophisticated and therefore harder to detect shill bidding activity by some “professional” sellers on eBay auctions

This time a spreadsheet analysis of multiple auctions, from some "professional" sellers from the US and Australia. Needless to say the analysis demonstrates, once again, that, contrary to eBay's claims, shill bidding by many “professional” sellers is rampant on eBay auctions. The full comment and spreadsheet download links at:
http://www.auctionbytes.com/forum/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=24296
And, the earlier case study of blatantly naïve shill bidding at:
http://www.auctionbytes.com/forum/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=24033

A most disingenuous, unscrupulous organisation—eBay that is.

Posted by: PhilipCohen | September 30, 2009 2:36 AM | Report abuse

Gotta love Meg. A far-right Mormon who didnt even bother voting until her church told her to get out there and stick to the gay folks. The last thing California needs is someone to divide it again when it is just starting to recover from 2010.

Posted by: MarcMyWords | September 29, 2009 2:53 AM | Report abuse

Just for grins, comment count on today's most commented post. Drum roll please...

25 JakeD
13 drindl
10 justjoeking
9 GoldAndTanzanite
4 PurlGurl
3 nodebris
3 margaretmeyers
2 4 posters
1 26 posters (including our gracious host)

Welcome back, drindl.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | September 28, 2009 11:46 PM | Report abuse

First of all, Frederic, that's three. And all against-votes. I thank you for voting against Bush, I wish there had been more.

"Then we wouldn't be in this mess today" -- Dave Mason

But when you talk about Obama as a Socialist I really have to wonder. I don't think that one out of a hundred using that word these days has any idea what Socialism is. But Obama sure isn't one, if you think the guy who bailed out the banks instead of the people losing their homes is a Socialist then your roots are firmly in 99%-Land

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 28, 2009 11:36 PM | Report abuse

I've been eligible to vote for nearly fifty years and have voted twice -- once against Richard Nixon (dishonest and incompetent) in 1972 and once against George H. W. Bush (incompetent and a war monger) and Bill Clinton (low morals and liar) in 1992.

I don't vote because I don't see candidates I trust to represent me or to do the right thing. McCain was stupid and ill-tempered; Obama was inexperienced, incompetent as an executive, and too likely to prove a Marxist.

If you have noticed, you may have voted, but the country is a mess -- and getting worse. If an honest, competent, ethical person were to run, I would definitely vote.

Posted by: fredricwilliams@netscape.net | September 28, 2009 10:39 PM | Report abuse

"Palin's" book is finished and will be out in November.

Worth clicking the link to see how suddenly and savagely the years are catching up with every conservative male child's T&A candidate:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/28/AR2009092802867.html?hpid=topnews

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 28, 2009 7:48 PM | Report abuse

Someone please come up with some Buy It Now / No Reserve / etc. jokes here. I'm at a loss.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 28, 2009 7:38 PM | Report abuse

She didn't vote because she's a Republican who doesn't believe in Government. She doesn't believe in civics. She believes that money and power should lead to control. Very Corporate very un-democratic. Elect me and get with the program. Otherwise your negative attitude will be considered inconsistent with future access to government.

She doesn't have a chance.

Posted by: thebobbob | September 28, 2009 7:29 PM | Report abuse

I believe that was the first time I've seen such a post from RUKidding0.

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2009 6:15 PM | Report abuse

This kind of endlessly repetitive thick-witted crap is why fewer and fewer people post here.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 28, 2009 6:11 PM | Report abuse

No grand "conspiracy" was needed for that -- for all I know, Obama may honestly think that he WAS born in Hawaii -- what he has not done is PROVE that he was born in Hawaii. My post to RUKidding0 re: the producers of America vs. the takers still stands.

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2009 6:04 PM | Report abuse

"It's no use trying to reason with nodebris."

This from someone who propagates the birther conspiracy theory. Right-o.

Posted by: nodebris | September 28, 2009 5:58 PM | Report abuse

What Meg should have said is this:

"Look, guys. When I was climbing the corporate ladder I just didn't take the time to vote. I was busy. I *hate* standing in lines. But then I got to be CEO, and then I cashed out big. So now I want to play in politics, but I'll be darned if I start out in Podunk City Council. I'm willing to pay big bucks to buy the governorship, so what's the problem. And hey, give me some credit for figuring out a few years back that I needed to at least register to vote, OK?"

==

Post of the Thread if not Post of the Day.

Nailed it, Joe.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 28, 2009 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Given that Whitman certainly knew her own voting record, the fact that she let it get out without being prepared to answer should help her undercut her own candidacy.

Where she might have made a virtue of not having voted, and having had an epiphany, and thereby been a campaigning outsider, or been an apologetic latecomer, she chose to bet that no one would notice, and when they did notice was quite obviously unprepared for the fervor her interrogators showed playing gotcha.

Where she could have used her non voting status to play to the Anti-politician Right, she went out of her way to show that she really wasn't in the habit of thinking of things political in an organized way even when she decided to join the ranks of organized politicians.

THAT ought to be suicide, but since California is busy making itself a totally ungovernable state, from its property protecting anti tax referenda, through its super majority budgeting process, to its willingness to immediately impeach a newly elected governor because it takes so few signatures to start a recall, it only means that California's Gubernatorial contest will be another zoo, providing entertainment for the jaded masses and work for Letterman, Leno, and any other stand up West of the Central Valley.

Posted by: ceflynline | September 28, 2009 5:12 PM | Report abuse

When reporters wrote that Hillary Clinton was "shrill" in her speeches they were excoriated for raising misogynist stereotypes. As reflexive as a knee twitch in response to the rubber hammer.

Fact of the matter is that HRC *was* shrill. She had a tendency to go higher and louder as she approached an applause line. Barack Obama used to watch tapes of his speeches to correct bad habits. HRC could have done the same, and didn't.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 28, 2009 4:49 PM | Report abuse

How about when a woman criticizes a woman politician? That's not sexism. Stop whining.

Posted by: drindl | September 28, 2009 4:45 PM | Report abuse

What Meg should have said is this:

"Look, guys. When I was climbing the corporate ladder I just didn't take the time to vote. I was busy. I *hate* standing in lines. But then I got to be CEO, and then I cashed out big. So now I want to play in politics, but I'll be darned if I start out in Podunk City Council. I'm willing to pay big bucks to buy the governorship, so what's the problem. And hey, give me some credit for figuring out a few years back that I needed to at least register to vote, OK?"

Posted by: justjoeking | September 28, 2009 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Whitman is getting so much negative press, she better be spending enourmous sums of cash just to break it even. Tom Campbell is enjoying this fiasco and so is Steve Poizner. Poizner will spend millions from his pocket to win and will certainly be competitive on spending with Whitman, although Campbell will be left way behind in the money & advertising race. I think at this stage, with Poizner being just as successful in business plus being a proven statewide vote getter, a successful state insurance commissioner & well financed he is the front runner for Republican nomination in California.

It's obvious Crist want's his US Senate race to be a starting point to the R Presidential primary in 2010. Before his senate race is over, he will wish he had ran for reelection as governor, which he would have likely won easily. Now he must face a conservative primary against Marco Rubio. Rubio will run hard and give Crist a real run for his money. The Bush folks are backing Rubio, and he may just knock off Crist come primary day.

The Conservative branch of the Texas Republican party will certainly back Rick Perry. As well as Texas has been doing, actually decreasing unemployment and creating jobs in the state, Perry stands in a great spot to beat Hutchinson. This race will be so nasty, expensive and good it's worth the top spot for primaries in 2010! Although, Specter vs. Sestek in the Pa. US Senate race will be very close nasty, expensive and good as well!

Rick Snyder is really impressing in Michigan. With his vast personal wealth and willingness to spend it, he has a real shot at not only being the Republican nominee, but the next Governor of Michigan. Winning the activist straw poll plus the endorsement of the Ford family and vast personal wealth, he has a great shot to win this race. I think the primary will come down to Snyder vs. Cox. A great 4 way primary.

Posted by: reason5 | September 28, 2009 4:10 PM | Report abuse

Oh for god's sake. A woman enters politics, she gets some criticism, it's sexism.

No, it's not.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 28, 2009 4:08 PM | Report abuse

Kansas28 comments, "I see an abundance of sexism here. Just watch."

Yes, masculine based sexism is well at play. I can see this coming; Washington Post has already published a number of editorials riddled with masculine sexism aimed at Meg Whitman. New York Times, Los Angeles Times and many other media outlets are gearing up for bashing female political candidates.

I think those boys take lessons from Guy Cimbalo of Playboy magazine.

There is a short and sweet article on this topic written by Jim Geraghty over at the National Review: "How Dare She Not Vote!"

Appears Geraghty does not much care for the Washington Post, a sentiment shared by many Americans.

Kansas28 asks, "Whatever happened to real journalists?"

Sadly, Walter Cronkite died. He was the last truthful and real journalist in every traditional sense of news reporting.

Okpulot Taha
Choctaw Nation
Puma Politics

Posted by: PurlGurl | September 28, 2009 3:40 PM | Report abuse

How fortunate for the state of California that a well qualified business woman is willing to use her formidable skills to take over massive debt in California and all of its other problems.

==

Yeah, "businesswoman." Sorry (not really) but the devil is in the details.

How is someone devoted to cutting taxes and other right-wing compulsions going to solve any financial problem?

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 28, 2009 3:11 PM | Report abuse

what the hell do the book of Revelations and Tim LaHaye potboilers about the Second Coming have to do with anything? I thought this was a political blog, not a supernatural discussion forum.

Fundamentalism is for psychotics.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 28, 2009 2:50 PM | Report abuse

How fortunate for the state of California that a well qualified business woman is willing to use her formidable skills to take over massive debt in California and all of its other problems.

So what does Balz, Cillizza and others do? Tear her down even before the primaries begin. I see an abundance of sexism here. Just watch. All the male columnists will headline this story until and through the primaries. Whatever happened to real journalists?

I always vote but I cannot see any relevance at all between voting and being qualified to bring a state back to solvency.

If Californians want to recover from the mess they are in they would be wise to vote for Meg Whitman.

Posted by: Kansas28 | September 28, 2009 2:41 PM | Report abuse

I believe Carly Fiorina has exactly the same problem (along with a few others such as never registering either her "company" or her "charitable trust" in the state of California.

Posted by: lml7120 | September 28, 2009 2:04 PM | Report abuse

Re the "Say What?" line--I saw the Paterson interview. Gregory kept after him to get him to say that the White House asked him not to run, and he wouldn't do it.

He used national interest in the Obama angle to get an interview on national TV, and then kept talking about "responsible government" and New York issues. And he was a little funny. Overall, my opinion of him went up, but I still think if Cuomo doesn't run this guy will get beat in the general.

Posted by: justjoeking | September 28, 2009 2:01 PM | Report abuse

Pete Wilson was the most unpopular governor california ever had.

it's interesting that the rightwingers all seem to have their own secret loony code words. like schizophreniacs. hmm.

Posted by: drindl | September 28, 2009 1:57 PM | Report abuse

I believe that anybody who doesn't vote should be allowed to complain about their "elected" officials, even though, note voting IS a vote. Maybe, there should be a law that makes everybody, just once, run for a political office. I did. And I won. And in the first election, I won by a coin flip because of a tie, of all things.
NEVER, EVER tell me one vote never matters! And how many of you out there can remember who he/she voted for since you first blacked out a square with a pencil, pulled a lever or created a hangging chad. I can. Here's the list:
Gus Bell - CPUSA 1972 (1st protest vote)
Jimmy Carter - 1976 & 1980
Walter Mondale - 1984
Mike Dukakis - 1988
Bill Clinton - 1992 & 1996
The guy who wrote "Unsafe at any Speed" - Green party - 2000
Kerry - 2004
Obama - 2008 (and I hope to reelect him in 2012)
----------------
And as for Gitmo, I'll vote to build a Supermax here in Wisconsin (specificlly Beloit, mainly because WE NEED THE JOBS! I'm not worried about Muslim terrorists. I'm more worried about our own, home-grown right wingnut extremists. You know, McVey, the Unibomber, religious zealots, etc.

Posted by: hobsry7350 | September 28, 2009 1:57 PM | Report abuse

In terms of Crist, people need to remember that your average voter is going to look at the candidates' track record of accomplishment when pulling the lever in the GOP primary. Rubio is a smart man with a bright future. However, he doesn't have the substantive record on issues like balancing the budget, the environment, attracting business to the state that Crist has. Pure conservative credentials is simply not going to be enough to win the primary. Now, in terms of Crist being the GOP nominee in 2012, well ... I think that's a shakier proposition. Romney, Huckabee, Gingrinch and Palin have all been (or in the process of being) vetted by the national media because of their role as national candidates or high-impact former national leaders. Pawlenty, Santorum and Crist really have not been. If I was a betting man, I would guess that Crist is not really serious about running for president in 2012; he is, however, quite serious in having a dry run for the position in 2012, innoculating himself from the attacks to his record and personal life that will inevitably come from such a race and then positioning himself as the moderate wing's frontrunner in 2016 -- assuming the GOP doesn't win outright in 2012. What are your thoughta on this folks?

Posted by: Jay20 | September 28, 2009 1:31 PM | Report abuse

Chris Cillizza, you have missed the real story, the saucy story here. You have missed Poizner being a RINO who favors massive tax increases.

However, I have covered this story for you.

Okpulot Taha
Choctaw Nation
Puma Politics

Posted by: PurlGurl | September 28, 2009 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Returning to Poizner and proposition 13, working alone, I could defeat this Poizner bid for governorship.

Poizner has a long history of supporting repeal of Prop 13 here in California. This year, Californians suffered the most massive tax increase in national history at the hands of select Republicans who signed pledges to not raise taxes. Most are now under recall.

Poizner signed a pledge to not raise taxes. Poizner is working at repeal of Prop 13. Poizner has already violated his written pledge to not raise taxes. Poizner has already proven himself a liar.

Repeal of Prop 13 would be a tax increase a thousand times more massive the record breaking tax increase back in April of this year. Repeal of Prop 13 would financially drive Californians out of their homes and further skyrocket our foreclosure rate.

Ironically, property taxes, despite Prop 13 protection, is the fastest growing source of California government tax revenue. Growth in property taxes has simply exploded because of the California real estate market, specifically turnover in home sales which spikes property tax rates to current market value at time of sell.

Poizner attempting to repeal Prop 13 is simply political suicide. During these hard economic times, during these times of tea party tax protests, raising taxes is worst action a politician can take.

Poizner pledged no new taxes. Poizner is working at the most massive tax increase not of national history rather of world history. Poizner has proven himself a liar.

Whitman only needs to highlight this deceit on the part of Poizner to defeat him; Americans are fed up with lying politicians and higher taxes. This is well evidenced by recall efforts against Republicans here in California.

Should I take to widespread blogging about Poizner planning massive and frightening tax increases, I do believe, working alone, I could defeat any bid by Poizner to be governor of California.

"A vote for Poizner is a vote for massive tax increases."

Seems an eye catching political slogan, yes?

Okpulot Taha
Choctaw Nation
Puma Politics

Posted by: PurlGurl | September 28, 2009 1:25 PM | Report abuse

RUKidding0:

It's no use trying to reason with "nodebris".

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2009 1:20 PM | Report abuse

to nodebris,

The producers of America must, of necessity, pay increasing attention to government for, as I’ve already said, self defense.

Californian producers, in particular, must pay increasing attention, since we live in the state with the highest number of rentseeking takers, both in the form of political wealth redistribution takers and bureaucrats with an insane and entirely unsustainable sense of entitlement (see Bubbette1’s comment).

For my part, I support the central valley farmer’s initiative to split the state of California in two, with the social democrats occupying the coastal strip from L.A. to Marin County and the rest of the state left to those who reject the notion of massive redistribution by political takers.

Posted by: RUKidding0 | September 28, 2009 1:16 PM | Report abuse

Peter BARTON Wilson won in 1990 with 3.8 million votes and 1994 with 4.8 million votes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_gubernatorial_election,_1994

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2009 1:15 PM | Report abuse

Purlgurl is apparently off her meds today and channelling rush limbaugh. what a surprise.

"Her primary obstacles will be state worker unions and left loonies out of San Francisco.Her secondary obstacles will be the Hispanic vote and the black vote."

Which together, amount for about 90% of the California vote. Calling blacks, hispanics, teachers, firefighters and police officers 'obstacles' quite aptly captures the mindset of the small white elite who will support whitman.

you are right, sverig. Whitman is just another snake oil salesman like pete wilson, a loser who will spend millions and come up with a tiny percentage of the vote.

Posted by: drindl | September 28, 2009 1:11 PM | Report abuse

Okpulot Taha:

I wouldn't vote for Meg Whitman either.

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2009 1:08 PM | Report abuse

mark_in_austin:

Could you please respond to sverigegrabb's allegations against Pete Wilson? Thanks in advance.

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2009 1:03 PM | Report abuse

Meg Whitman has no voting record. Barack Obama has never held a real job.

Whitman enjoys a magic word: Ebay.

Barack Obama suffers a magic word: Socialism.

There is no argument Whitman holds the prerequisite financial clout to mount a very effective political campaign. Whitman holds impressive credentials; her Ebay success story.

Setting aside her being self-financing, her history at Ebay is an easy sell to voters. Our dire economic times will inherently sell Whitman to voters. California residents, least those who have not moved elsewhere as is beginning to happen in New York, our Californians will be desperately looking for a governor with practical business experience and who offers lower taxes, smaller government and fiscal responsibility. Whitman offers both qualities; she is an easy sell.

California serves as a classic example of a left liberal economic policy. Rather clear to almost all residents California is an economic disaster; a left liberal tax and spend policy is a proven disaster.

Whitman represents classic capitalism. Hers is a wild success story and a well proven story. Her business savvy is very attractive to financially strapped California families. Again, she is an easy sell to angry California residents.

Her primary obstacles will be state worker unions and left loonies out of San Francisco. Her secondary obstacles will be the Hispanic vote and the black vote.

However, our current political climate all across America is a building backlash against Democrats. Barbara Boxer will probably be ousted by Chuck DeVore, Nancy Pelosi is already dead meat, Dianne Feinstein and Maxine Waters are hurt by their corruption scandals. Democrats, most likely, will be swept out office in 2010 in California and nationally. This backlash against Democrats will benefit Whitman.

Steve Poizner is the only viable contestant against Whitman. Poizner, though, is a RINO, a "Republican In Name Only". Poizner consistently favors tax hikes, is a major player in repealing proposition 13 and Poizner has close relationships with left liberal unions and welfare gamers in general. Poizner has no real world business experience, certainly not at the level of Whitman.

Currently, many recall efforts are be pursued in California against Republicans, against RINO types. Easy enough to connect Poizner to those under recall, including California's Muscle Head governor; an endorsement by Muscle Head of Poizner will be a political kiss of death.

Whitman is in a strong position, she only needs to play her political poker cards well. Her lack of a voting record is a very insignificant issue; this will not slow her down one bit.

Money talks and Whitman is talking money.

Okpulot Taha
Choctaw Nation
Puma Politics

Posted by: PurlGurl | September 28, 2009 12:58 PM | Report abuse

drindl:

At the risk of having K-o-Z (or whatever he's calling himself today) and JakeD spew their usual torrent of...whatever, I must say I TOTALLY agree with your comment.

Whitman's kowtowing to 'party elder' Pete (let's-let-undocumented-immigrants-die-in-the-streets-for-lack-of-medical-care-and-forfeit-the-Hispanic-vote-for-20-years) Wilson by making him, a failed Presidential candidate himself, head of her campaign is a far greater retrogressive sign than the R. before her name.

You forgot to mention that Wilson was also the driving force behind the 1999/2000 energy deregulation that drove the average home electricity bill from $60./mo. to $300. within a single billing cycle and bankrupted many, many of the small businesses he claimed to champion.

Whitman might still recover from this non-voting business (although Poizner will see to it that the public is well reminded), but it's clear she is a neophyte with deep pockets who just wants to add 'Gov. of California' after 'CEO of e-bay' on her resume.

Never say never in politics, but I see her as such a dark horse she'll have a devil of a time winning.

Posted by: sverigegrabb | September 28, 2009 12:54 PM | Report abuse

"It is of much less interest to America’s producers."

Interesting. Did you see The Fix's most important number today? It includes this observation:

"First, that there is some disparity in the level of attention being paid by Republicans (41 percent paying very close attention) and Democrats (30 percent close attention) . . ."

Posted by: nodebris | September 28, 2009 12:53 PM | Report abuse

"It is of much less interest to America’s producers."

Yes, we can tell by the millions they spend influencing the vote each election cycle to increase their subsidies, government contracts, and tax breaks.

Posted by: nodebris | September 28, 2009 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Bubbette1:

John & Ken on KFI 640AM are pushing for part-time Legislators too.

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2009 12:45 PM | Report abuse

Voting is irrelevant, but illuminating.

The left must always be more interested in government and the processes associated with it than the right, because elections are the vehicle for their rent seeking agenda. Electing the right (sorry, the left) politician to push never ending redistribution is a necessity for America’s whining takers.

It is of much less interest to America’s producers. You know, the people who actually produce the wealth that the left so covets. The wealth that it feels so entitled to as to consider it their very own - to be taken at the point of government’s gun.

Admittedly, America’s producers must become more interested in government if for no other reason than self defense against the ceaseless demands of both our leftist, rent seeking whiners and the very bureaucracy of government itself, for which there is no sufficient funding - ever.

Posted by: RUKidding0 | September 28, 2009 12:41 PM | Report abuse

The fix that we need in California is to vote out of office every Democratic State Legislature and Senator. The Democratic Party are on the union payroll. Government unions have been gifted 100% pay and full medical on retirement at the taxpayer expense. Arnold tried to challenge this and was shut down by the Democrat Legislature. It is a sick system. The government unions use taxpayer money to fund the Democrat campaigns, and these Democrats then gift the unions massive entitlements in return.

If you want to identify the most bankrupt States in the unions simply look for democratic control and large government unions. California, New York, New Jersey, Mass., and the list goes on.

Next year it is predicted that the taxpayers in California will have to make up a 60 billion dollar shortfall in the government union pension plans. A fire chief in Moraga retired on a salary of $261,000.00 per year guaranteed by the taxpayers. The Legislature was told at these entitlements were passed that it would eventually bankrupt the State, they still passed it.

The City of Vallejo had to go to bankruptcy court to get shed of these unsustainable government union pensions and entitlements. The firefighters union then had their lackeys in the democratic legislature pass AB 165 to try and prevent a city and its citizens from going to bankruptcy court.

Want to see how your State is doing:
http://www.pensiontsunami.com/

Come 2010 we need to vote out of office any candidate supported by a union (look for the union label). Restore fiscal responsibility and stop spending and borrowing.

Posted by: Bubbette1 | September 28, 2009 12:40 PM | Report abuse

justjoeking:

Lord Voldemort = Dick Cheney ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2009 12:39 PM | Report abuse


Ah, politics in America!

No doubt Whitman (like many others with money and time) believe they can purchase a political office.... Otherwise, like many others, she is disinterested in politics....

Posted by: abbydelabbey | September 28, 2009 12:38 PM | Report abuse

If fiction book sales are to be the barometer, then I humbly suggest that more people live in fear of Lord Voldemort than the Antichrist.

Posted by: justjoeking | September 28, 2009 12:37 PM | Report abuse

drindl:

Just like the "mass lunacy" that elected GWB in 2000 and 2004 ; )

justjoeking:

I am not concerned about terrorists escaping from SuperMax prisons either.

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2009 12:36 PM | Report abuse

It's a little early for the vast left-wing conspiracy to be attacking potential candidates, isn't it?

Posted by: Ogman | September 28, 2009 12:33 PM | Report abuse

"Complete lunacy" wherein the Left Behind total sales surpassed 65 million copies, right?"

Outbreaks of mass insanity and delusion have always been a feature of the human race.

Posted by: drindl | September 28, 2009 12:32 PM | Report abuse


If President Obama is not able to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, it will not be for lack of trying. I would not punish him for such failure in 2010 or 2012. It is not a major issue, as I said, but only a symbol of the bad policies of his predecessor.

I would be more likely to think less of the legislators who applauded the line at the convention, then turned around and voted against having these prisoners on US soil. We had Nazis in POW camps in the states during WWII. Surely a Super-Max prison can handle a few jihadists.

Posted by: justjoeking | September 28, 2009 12:26 PM | Report abuse

"Complete lunacy" wherein the Left Behind total sales surpassed 65 million copies, right? Oh yeah, you don't answer simple questions about your own posts. Never mind.

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2009 12:25 PM | Report abuse

Complete lunacy.

Posted by: drindl | September 28, 2009 12:24 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2009 12:22 PM | Report abuse

666 (Rev. 13:17-18)

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2009 12:11 PM | Report abuse

Some people are obviously unaware that 'one-world currency' is code for Anti-Christ and bar codes via tatoo (now, if pResident Obama suffers a fatal head wound but "rises" from the dead, then all bets are off ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2009 12:08 PM | Report abuse

The outstanding idea at the humorously titled 'Republicans Take Back america' Conference--

"Bachmann touched on the priorities of Republicans if they retook Congress in 2010, to “pass repealer bill after repealer bill,” to prevent the creation of a one-world currency."

And destroy all black helicopters.

Posted by: drindl | September 28, 2009 12:05 PM | Report abuse

Yes, Sutter, I remember Gary Hart (but challenging reporters to discovery your adultery is just a bit different than a voter registration card). Besides Al Checchi, name ONE other politician not elected because he/she was too busy to vote? If this is suddenly the new standard, can we get all of those Hollywood celebrities who don't vote to shut up about politics finally?

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2009 11:57 AM | Report abuse

Maybe Whitman should just put out an ad saying "Sure, I haven't bothered to vote, but who better to understand your financial woes than a multi-millionaire?" It can backfire to challenge reporters to find information. Remember Gary Hart?

Posted by: Sutter | September 28, 2009 11:52 AM | Report abuse

That's right, justjoeking, if you can't even answer simple questions probing the basis for your own posts, please don't waste your time posting in the first place.

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2009 11:52 AM | Report abuse

Foreigners amazed at how crazy rightwingers have become:

'Speaking about health care reform at the Congressional Black Caucus gala Saturday night, President Obama relayed an anecdote from the G-20 Summit, in which an anonymous world leader said he was dumbfounded over the health care debate -- especially the comparisons to Hitler.

"One of the leaders, I won't mention who it was, he comes up to me and ... he says, 'Barack, explain to me this health care debate.' He says, 'We don't understand it. You're trying to make sure everyone has health care and they're putting a Hitler moustache on you. That doesn't make sense to me, explain that to me,'" Obama said. "He didn't understand."

Posted by: drindl | September 28, 2009 11:51 AM | Report abuse

don't waste your time, justjoking.

Posted by: drindl | September 28, 2009 11:50 AM | Report abuse

justjoeking:

What if Obama doesn't close GTMO before Election Day 2012?

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2009 11:38 AM | Report abuse

Ironic mistake.

Got news for you, tc - every vote is one vote. And I'm sure the people of California will not waste their one vote on her.

"maybe some people are smarter enough to realize that one vote really doesn't matter."

Posted by: tctexas

Posted by: Dadrick | September 28, 2009 11:37 AM | Report abuse

optimyst:

Ouch!

Seriously, though, I'm not sure if California is ready for another "outsider" politician -- I assume that Jerry Brown will win if he gets the Dem nomination -- keep in mind that Poizner is also a Silicon Valley mogul.

So, Meg Whitman is not the first successful person from the tech world to attempt a leap into politics, but she is perhaps the most well-known, said Mark Z. Barabak, a political writer at the Los Angeles Times. Less famous tech personalities have run for lower offices in California and have had some success, he said.

It's also becoming increasingly important for politicians of all stripes to show some level of tech savvy in order to get elected and to maintain their popularity.

President Obama, for example, came across as a BlackBerry-toting, tech-informed candidate; his main opponent for the White House, Sen. John McCain, became the butt of jokes because he didn't use e-mail. McCain now has a Twitter account BTW ; )

Republican strategist Allan Hoffenblum has said that, although Whitman is by all accounts an "extraordinary talent who has made extraordinary money," she doesn't hold much "star power outside of the tech world."

Nevertheless, the high-tech vote is an important voting bloc in California. Most of the industry consists of young, diverse, educated people who tend to be politically active.

Hoffenblum says California's tech-minded demographic realizes that "bad government can have a negative impact on industry ... and that's why they get involved."

The "Silicon Valley vote" has traditionally leaned toward moderate conservatism. That could help Whitman, but we'll have to just wait and see.

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2009 11:37 AM | Report abuse

Maybe Whitman should say she's been dabbling in journalism, the Fix's excuse for not voting.

Posted by: optimyst | September 28, 2009 11:31 AM | Report abuse

He voted present 133 times, out of thousands of votes. There are procedural reasons for doing so, as when there are amendments you would like considered before passage.

Posted by: justjoeking | September 28, 2009 11:27 AM | Report abuse

'almost issues' don't count. only actual issues.

Posted by: drindl | September 28, 2009 11:24 AM | Report abuse

Obama voted "Present" on almost issues before the Illinois Senate. That's pretty much the same as not voting in my opinion.

Posted by: bartling | September 28, 2009 11:16 AM | Report abuse

I wonder if we could find 400 or so Norm Coleman supporters in Minnesota who still feel that one vote doesn't really matter.

Anybody care to guess how Coleman would vote on cloture for the Baucus bill??

Posted by: justjoeking | September 28, 2009 10:40 AM | Report abuse

Threadjack so I can make fun of anatomically challenged 'compassionate conservatives'

'Just before the Senate Finance Committee wrapped up for the long weekend, members debated one of Sen. Jon Kyl's (R-AZ) amendments, which would strike language defining which benefits employers are required to cover.

Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) argued that insurers must be required to cover basic maternity care. (In several states there are no such requirements.)

"I don't need maternity care," Kyl said. "So requiring that on my insurance policy is something that I don't need and will make the policy more expensive."

Stabenow interrupted: "I think your mom probably did."

The amendment was defeated, nine to 14.

Posted by: drindl | September 28, 2009 10:40 AM | Report abuse

Sorry, the actual Bush quote is:

"Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again."

The Obama administration ran into many roadblocks on implementing a Gitmo closure strategy. The lack of coherent files on many of the detainees, for starters. And the suddenly NIMBY attitude of politicians who were for the closure before they realized the prisoners might be held in a super-max in THEIR state.

Given that, Obama has been making a good-faith effort to move on that issue, and if it takes an extra 6-12 months, that's time well-spent. Gitmo became a symbol of all that was wrong with the "War on Terror," but the new policies in place are more important than closure of the facility.

Posted by: justjoeking | September 28, 2009 10:34 AM | Report abuse

Non-voting should be deeply offensive to everyone. You might as well spit on the graves at Arlington.

Then again, nothing should be surprising considering American voters gave Bush two terms!

Posted by: TaparellimeetsRawls | September 28, 2009 10:32 AM | Report abuse

maybe some people are smarter enough to realize that one vote really doesn't matter.

Posted by: tctexas | September 28, 2009 10:22 AM | Report abuse

Regarding Afghanistan (Fix Pick#1), Obama has planned since spring to wait until the outcome of the Afghan election before committing to more troops. That has not yet occurred. Even if Karzai avoids a runoff, the structure of his new government (eg. including Abdullah?) will speak to whether we have a willing partner.

I find it interesting that many of the same people who found no fault with Bush neglecting Afghanistan for 7 years are suggesting that Obama is doing that now, mere months after the biggest increase in troops there in several years. All because he didn't immediately kowtow to the general's request?

Likewise with those demanding a timetable for the decision--the same ones crowing that Obama may miss the deadline on Gitmo. As GWB once famously said, "Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice, um, er..."

Posted by: justjoeking | September 28, 2009 10:21 AM | Report abuse

Like the "fact" you were going to BOYCOTT THIS THREAD?

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2009 10:19 AM | Report abuse

Saying you're sorry is a pretty pathetic excuse for doing the right thing. It doesn't change the facts.

Posted by: drindl | September 28, 2009 10:14 AM | Report abuse

Evidently, Steve Poizner isn't satisfied. The question is how she handles political challenges. I believe the relevant quote from the post is:

"Whitman, who told the Bee that she had been registered before 2002 and challenged reporters to 'go find it,' exacerbating what was already a very tenuous situation for her candidacy."

I think there is near unanimous agreement that Mark Sanford has (a) apologized repeatedly and (b) made this situation much worse. Sometimes, saying I'm sorry isn't enough.

Well, I'm off to work on a paper today, so I'll say a fare thee well until the PM. Meanwhile, ponder how drindl got ahold of the Post's internal readership numbers.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | September 28, 2009 10:10 AM | Report abuse

FairlingtonBlade:

She has APOLOGIZED repeatedly. What more do you want?

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2009 9:54 AM | Report abuse

willandjansdad:

Good point, but if the alternative is a liberal who voted FOR Carter or Dukakis, then the choice is clear ; )

kmwray:

Thanks for the example (yet another) of someone being elected with a spotty private voting record. I always "donate" and "vote" for my wife too, but she always signs on the dotted line.

mark_in_austin:

Let me know if you thought I was being argumentative with you.

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2009 9:47 AM | Report abuse

I think the most relevant point is that it's a test of how she handles a bump in the road. So far, not a good initial impression.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | September 28, 2009 9:47 AM | Report abuse

A more salient fact about Whitman from the LA Times:

"At a time when California has frozen tax refunds and halted highway construction to preserve solvency, Whitman, who described herself as a billionaire, said the state should not ask even those in the highest income-tax bracket to pay more."

At the same time, Whitman praised former Republican Gov. Pete Wilson for his role in the 1990s budget crisis. She said the tax hikes imposed by Wilson -- whom she described as the greatest California governor in memory -- made sense at the time, even if they would be inappropriate now.

"I trust his judgment back then," she said of Wilson, her campaign chairman."

Pete Wilson, by the way, when he was California's governor, was
repeatedly given approval ratings among the lowest ever recorded for a state chief executive. And Whitman shares a great many of his traits. Plus, she is a clumsy, inconsistent novice with no charisma.

We'll have to see whether, like Wilson, her entire 'strategy' consists of whining about immigration.

Posted by: drindl | September 28, 2009 9:46 AM | Report abuse

Following up on nutmegger's comment: Indeed, wealthy citizens do vote by proxy. They would rather attend an exclusive fund-raiser, schmooze with the candidate, and write a big check, than stand in line in the cafegymnatorium of their local elementary school on the first Tuesday in November.

Financing TV ads that convince hard-working people to vote against their own interests is SO much more effective than voting yourself.

Posted by: justjoeking | September 28, 2009 9:35 AM | Report abuse

margaret, thanks for the spirited defense of my writing!

Jake, I did notice PW and I know he supports her. I agree that this [previous failure to register/vote] is typically a non-issue because an earlier disinterest in electoral politics does not indicate a current failure of comprehension. Nor should a party change [see Sen. Webb] be of any concern if it was done without electoral motive [as with Specter]. But these issues of party loyalty and interest are often of interest to a band of voters of every persuasion. See, for example, the post here by willandjansdad at 9:04A.

I also want to chime in on Gitmo. I think it is OK to extend a deadline when it becomes obvious it cannot be met safely. I liked Gates comment Sunday - where he took some of the responsibility for setting the deadline - to the effect that if one does not set a deadline in DC the response is to never do it. I think McC's position on this was just fine; but either would have got to the same place in the same time, eventually.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | September 28, 2009 9:20 AM | Report abuse

Funny how folks who never cared about the well-being of their state/country enough to vote suddenly reverse themselves when they stand to gain...

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: parkerfl1 | September 28, 2009 9:20 AM | Report abuse

You shouldn't even bother with JokeD or kingofzouk, margaret. They are both mental patients with far too much time on their hands.

Since Mr. Cilizza fails to moderate and remove their destructive influence, I see that the Fix's readership has sharply declined.

Well, Chris, don't say I didn't tell you they would kill your blog.

Posted by: drindl | September 28, 2009 9:19 AM | Report abuse

Any Republican candidate for any office that cannot prove that he or she voted for Ronald Reagan, if qualified based on age to do so, should be stripped of party membership and be driven out of town at the business end of a buggy whip.

Posted by: willandjansdad1 | September 28, 2009 9:04 AM | Report abuse

William Safire was a brilliant columnist. If you've never read him, try this piece from the NY Times archive they re-published today:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/24/opinion/24safire1.html

He will be greatly missed.

Posted by: Gallenod | September 28, 2009 9:02 AM | Report abuse

If you think Meg Whitman has a spotty voting record, just look at Connecticut's millionaires lining up to buy the GOP nomination against Dodd. Linda McMahon, late of World Wrestling Entertainment, didn't even vote when she was running a campaign to encourage voting at WWE, and gave significantly to politicians, far more to Democrats than Republicans. Tom Foley, George W. Bush fundraiser extraordinaire and chair of his 2004 campaign in CT who was rewarded as Ambassador to Ireland...didn't even vote in 2004. And Peter Schiff has skipped voting because he says he didn't think it mattered. Ho-hum. Maybe, like in the Civil War for military service, millionaires can buy substitutes to take on the hazardous duty of voting.

Posted by: nutmegger2 | September 28, 2009 8:57 AM | Report abuse

Jake, I have not followed GITMO closely, and so I have no opinion on what the President is trying to do. I only have so much time to give over to politics, so I try to stick to a few topics where I feel I can contribute honestly. As a person who reads the papers, my gut reaction is that this is yet another George Bush mess that my President is earnestly trying to put right. I admire the President for being willing to risk his popularity in an effort to put things right.

In order to avoid your childish follow-up demands, “You didn’t answer my question” or “Why don’t you answer my question or “What part of … don’t you understand,” here is my answer:
“Sir, I do not have an opinion, sir.”

P.S: Don’t be argumentative with Mark-in-Austin – your best post couldn’t touch his worst post.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | September 28, 2009 8:56 AM | Report abuse

The biggest non-voting candidate I recall was Christie Todd Whitman. She had never voted until she ran for Nj County (Essex I think) Board of Freeholders a couple of years before her gubernatorial run. What made it particulaly galling was that her husband was on the RNC and she had always maxed out political contributions with husband

Posted by: kmwray | September 28, 2009 8:54 AM | Report abuse

I think Crist is underestimating his primary opponent in a big way. With the country club folks like George Will getting behind him and a big push from Jeb Bush I think Rubio can make a race of this.
Also Meek is making a good calculated move to siding with Obama for the next election. If he can make the next election a referendum on the President then Crist (or Rubio) will be running not only against Meek, but also against Obama, who by the way still has a 55% approval rating, and if the Economy continues to improve I would expect those numbers to to go up.

Posted by: AndyR3 | September 28, 2009 8:38 AM | Report abuse

For voters unfamiliar with Whitman, her apparent lack of interest in government up to now does not make a good first impression.

What is she waiting for?

Posted by: justjoeking | September 28, 2009 8:34 AM | Report abuse

AH! Apologies on the Sasser error; he of course beat Sen. Bill Brock in 1976. Apologies and thanks for the diligence.

Chris

Posted by: Chris_Cillizza | September 28, 2009 8:16 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2009 8:03 AM | Report abuse

Meanwhile, obimbo, who was supposed to be able to multitask, can't even walk or chew gum. Or decide.

Posted by: snowbama | September 28, 2009 7:59 AM | Report abuse

snowbama:

Did you read the Dan Balz hit piece that Chris links to? They sure are TRYING to make this a "major issue". What stunning revelation is next: as CEO she never bought / sold anything herself on eBay?!

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2009 7:58 AM | Report abuse

Cc seriously modo? She hasn't made sense in decades. Do you dying dinosaurs have some sort of agreement to try to keep each other relevant.

Posted by: snowbama | September 28, 2009 7:55 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2009 7:47 AM | Report abuse

Our gracious host attempts to make a "major issue" out of politicians running for elected office with spotty (or nonexistent) private voting records, but only provides ONE (out of six) examples where that was a major issue. Far from making this more complicated, the fact that Schwarzenegger WAS elected and even re-elected with the same "spoty" voting record belies this as a major issue at all. Perhaps Mr. Cillizza is trying to make amends for all of the "pro-Republican" posts lately?

P.P.S. to mark_in_austin:

Did you notice Pete Wilson to her right in that photo?

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2009 7:39 AM | Report abuse

Check your history. You refer to Bill Frist beating "appointed" Senator Jim Sasser. FYI: Sasser was elected beating incumbent Senator Bill Brock in 1976

Posted by: dsteimle | September 28, 2009 7:27 AM | Report abuse

mark_in_austin:

Wes Clark wasn't elected. Considering our CURRENT Governor didn't vote much as he was busy making Terminator movies, that's the most relevant example for the busy ex- eBay chief.

P.S. to margaretmeyers:

What do you think about Obama NOT closing GTMO?

Posted by: JakeD | September 28, 2009 7:19 AM | Report abuse

Hi Chris: Jim Sasser was not an appointed senator, and as I'm sure you know, he was angling to be Senate Democratic leader in '94, which made his loss to Frist even more stinging.

Posted by: rscottwoods | September 28, 2009 7:13 AM | Report abuse

CC asked:

"(Are there other examples we missed? The comments section awaits.)"

Wes Clark?

Posted by: mark_in_austin | September 28, 2009 7:02 AM | Report abuse

Judging by the results of their straw polls , the "all politics is local" Mackinac Republican Leadership Conference drew a bigger crowd than the national Value Voter.
... oh, wait...
at Mackinac they took the straw poll during a four hour, open bar cocktail party. I guess that isn't an option at Value City but it sure turns out the vote.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | September 28, 2009 6:35 AM | Report abuse

The parody is funny -- especially considering how it almost exactly duplicates the original -- but the amazing thing is how ridiculous Carly Fiorini's own web site is. "It's cats and dogs" is part of their campaign positioning?

That and they were willing to use that really annoying trick where the back button won't browse you away from their site. I sense amateurs in charge all the way around.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | September 28, 2009 6:24 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company