Title: Meg Whitman’s Campaign – What’s Old is Not so New…

Author: Robin Swanson

Date: February 11, 2009 8:26:07 AM or Wed, 11 February 2009 08:26:07

Summary: 

Cross-posted on News 10. 

With today’s announcement that Republican Meg Whitman had opened her campaign exploratory committee to run for governor, I expected the usual healthy dose of spin that accompanies a good candidate roll-out. But never did I expect that her handlers would try and package the Meg Whitman campaign as “new.” 

With a campaign website full of meaningless recycled platitudes and devoid of any actual concrete ideas or policies, the only thing “new” about Meg Whitman is her affiliation with the Republican Party.

That’s right, the “new” savior of the Republican Party was a decline-to-state voter only one year ago, who, according to the San Francisco Chronicle, “did not vote in more than half the federal, state and local elections since she registered to vote in (San Mateo) county in September 2002.” So I suppose she’s “new” to the concept of voting too. In fact, the same Chronicle article says that she failed to vote in every Primary since 2002, including the 2003 recall campaign, in which another Republican gubernatorial candidate with no experience in actual “governing” ran on a platform that Californians were looking for something “new.”

Oh – and she didn’t vote in the 2005 Special Election, where the aforementioned Governor Schwarzenegger rolled out all of his “new” ideas.  But her ideas must be “newer,” right? Because, according to the front page of her web site, “restoring California will not be easy...”

There's more...

Image courtesy Wall Street Journal.

Body: 

Cross-posted on News 10. 

With today’s announcement that Republican Meg Whitman had opened her campaign exploratory committee to run for governor, I expected the usual healthy dose of spin that accompanies a good candidate roll-out. But never did I expect that her handlers would try and package the Meg Whitman campaign as “new.” 

With a campaign website full of meaningless recycled platitudes and devoid of any actual concrete ideas or policies, the only thing “new” about Meg Whitman is her affiliation with the Republican Party.

That’s right, the “new” savior of the Republican Party was a decline-to-state voter only one year ago, who, according to the San Francisco Chronicle, “did not vote in more than half the federal, state and local elections since she registered to vote in (San Mateo) county in September 2002.” So I suppose she’s “new” to the concept of voting too. In fact, the same Chronicle article says that she failed to vote in every Primary since 2002, including the 2003 recall campaign, in which another Republican gubernatorial candidate with no experience in actual “governing” ran on a platform that Californians were looking for something “new.”

Oh – and she didn’t vote in the 2005 Special Election, where the aforementioned Governor Schwarzenegger rolled out all of his “new” ideas.  But her ideas must be “newer,” right? Because, according to the front page of her web site, “restoring California will not be easy...”

To the amateur observer, that sounds an awful lot like a dig at the sitting Republican Governor – but it must not be, since her “new” team roster (listed on her web site) reveals that many of her pivotal political advisors are the very same experts from the Schwarzenegger 2005 team… if only she had voted in that pesky Special Election! But I guess we’ve seen how those annoying civic duties can get in the way of being a high-powered corporate CEO in America.

Come to think of it, Meg has brought one “new” player to California, an attack-ad expert named Scott Howell. This is the very same consultant who brought Tennessee the race-baiting ads that helped destroy the senatorial candidacy of Harold Ford Jr., a prominent African American Congressman. Howell’s ads suggested that Ford solicited white Playboy playmates – a nasty political play in a Southern state, denounced by the NAACP. And yet Meg’s own web site says “Our greatest strength is the diversity of our people.” Hmm – a politician who says one thing and does another… what’s so “new” about that?

Let’s look at the rest of her not so “new” playbook:

• The CEO of BettyConfidential.com, the web site that “leaked” Meg’s announcement, worked for the Bush Administration.  Not so new.
• She is being marketed as one name – “Meg” – take a look at her web site – it seems they want to make her sound more familiar to us – kinda like “Hillary.” Perhaps they’d like to sneak her into our subconscious since she’s only got a 17 percent favorability rating, according to the latest Field poll. Not so new.     
• A gubernatorial candidate using a giant checkbook as their best qualification.
• Anyone heard from Al Checchi lately? Also not new.
• Another governor who needs on-the-job training. Definitely not new.

You know, all this “newness” makes me yearn for a little history. Empty promises with so-called “new” packaging is what got us in the mess we’re in today...

Image courtesy Wall Street Journal.

Notes: 

More fields may be available via dynamicdata ..

There are no comments attached to this item.

Ratings