California Recall: The most Unsubtantive Campaign Ever?

[skyzics]

Was this not the most 'issueless' major election campaign ever, or what?

It seems as if almost all the media coverage has centered on horserace, sound bites, scandal-mongering and personalities to the almost total exclusion of the issues facing California (and the nation) and proposed programs for solutions. The mainstream media, of course, was of no help in this regard and in fact seemed to relish its role in confusing the electorate with distractions and trivialities. But distressingly, the Dems themselves were little better at presenting an honest discussion of the stakes in the outcome of the recall or of offering a compelling reason for the electorate to defeat Arnold - besides, that is, his boorish behaviour and general lack of 'qualifications.' (News flash: That did not stop Bush!)

Is a similar superficial campaign what we have to look forward to as the 2004 election cycle heats up?

Was this campaign an aberration,, or just a continuing trend?

[poskonig]

1. A growing trend. Look at Clark.

A Rhodes Scholar with degrees in economics, philosophy, and political science that doesn't know where he stands on fiscal, social, and foreign policy?

I don't buy it.

[skyzics]

2. Clark appears to be a person of substance, alright..

But will he use it in the campaign to define a compellingly different program from the Republicans?

[Democrats unite]

3. It's amazing how this thread is about the Recall

And it automaticly went to about Clark?

[skyzics]

4. It's still on the recall..

Just responding to the poster.

[Democrats unite]

5. Sorry was not talking about you skyzics, was talking about

the one you responded to.

[boxster]

8. Yep, gotta make sure we get the unsubstantiated anti-Clark

"info" into every thread, even the completely unrelated ones.

One of these days, posters like this will figure out that their ignorance doesn't reflect very well on their candidate.

Or maybe they won't.

[Spider Jerusalem]

6. The lack of substance is thanks to Schwarzenegger.

The recall was a circus from the beginning, but Schwarzenegger's involvement turned it into the other real contenders vs. him, and he's been coasting on his celebrity without defining any real substantiative positions. Which is why the other major candidates have been waging a campaign in opposition to Schwarzenegger the man rather than in opposition to his stands on the issues...because he hasn't really defined any save in the most vague and nebulous terms. Hard to campaign on the issues against a candidate with instantaneous name recognition and a high level of popularity and almost nothing else, especially since most people seem to view politics as a glorified popularity contest.

[lebkuchen]

7. It's about the state budget deficit, right? Arnold's answer:

rescind Davis' plan to increase the vehicle registration tax.

Okay. So we know Arnie doesn't plan to raise taxes. So how DOES he plan to balance the budget? What, exactly, are pro-Arnie supporters voting for? Do they know what his plan is? I don't. So I voted NO.

[skyzics]

9. Reply to 6 and 7..

6- True, but does not explain why the Dems failed to take any initiative in response. Popularity contests seems to define elections of late.

7. True again - no program. My thesis, in response to both.. the Dems could use a thesis. They seem to lack an adequate one. This is the basic thrust (so to speak) of my comment.

No program, no election win..