A new paradigm?

There has been a lot of chatter about the fact that we don't know much about Arnold Shwarzenegger's policies. "We don't know anything about him!" comes the cry from people who apparently know enough about him to dislike him. Truth is, anyone who bothers to listen to him knows a fair amount about him. He's a social moderate and fiscal conservative--he's said this time and time again. He's pro-choice and anti-tax. We also know a lot about some of his advisors: Pete Wilson, George Shultz, Milton Friedman, John Cogan, Warren Buffet--these people's views are widely known and widely published. But it is true: he has not said much about specific actions he would take on the job. Instead, we are left with a choice of whether to vote for him based on his principles, not his policies, and his character and charisma. On NPR this morning historian Kevin Starr asked: is this a new paradigm? Let's hope so.

It is perhaps ironic that a process that has on the one hand brought us closer to direct democracy has also, because of the abbreviated timeframe, has brought us in anoter sense closer to representative democracy. There is not enough time to micromanage our candidate--we just have to pick who we trust and hope he makes the right decisions. Folks, this is a good thing.