We look at Arnold Schwarzenegger and people began to oppose him from day one when he prevented driver's license from being distributed to illegal immigrants. He also came under backlash when he appointed Democrat Susan Kennedy as his Chief of Staff. He has been accused of becoming towards the center in terms of the political spectrum. Ventura to my knowledge hasn't been questioned about his politics to the extent that Schwarzenegger has.
Naturally, Arnold would face opposing given he's a dual citizen and coming in from originally being a native Austrian. But is the matter that he stopped illegal immigrants from getting instant driver's license a bad thing? I think when it comes to the right to drive, you should be registered to a location to be able to drive. If illegal immigrants want to drive, they should learn in their own country or be registered as a citizen to be able to drive. Where America might be a country that is welcoming to immigration, there should be some control and I think Arnold was big enough to make that move because he knows immigration can get out of hang. Sure it will be questioned, be he did something that no-one did before him, something new will always get opposition.
Ventura's first action when he became governor was choosing not to live in the governor's mansion, he chose to shut it down and stay at his home in Maple Grove. And rightfully it came under heavy criticism because he made several working-class people become jobless and it cost more to re-open it. Where Arnold was opposed to making a choice on controlling immigration through the driver's license, Ventura already cost jobs and money for his personal taste in accomodation!
One of Arnold's biggest accomplishments was overturning, in just one week, the views of voting on Proposition 66. This was amending the California's three strike ruling, this would have been where the third felony would need to be either violent or serious in order to mandate a 25-years-to-life sentence.
Prior to Arnold's involvement, likely voters interviewed in the first four days favored the proposition 58% to 34%, after he became involved and his ads came out it changed to 48% to 47% (The samples had a margin of error of plus or minus 4%). This is how influential he became, he managed to make those settled on yes, change to no and the proposition failed to pass. Because of this, a recent paper in 2007 saw a drop in crime in California, it shows how successful Arnie's campaigning against that proposition was effective in the long run.
The more I keep reading on Ventura's run as a governor, it's more about the controversy and his "offhand" comments like calling the media "jackals", preferring Minneapolis to St Pauls because the latter "was built by drunken Irishmen". While I feel his support for gay rights, voluntary patriotism and improving the transport system of Minesota is great and I feel that should be credited, this seems to come listed after his controversy. I know it's part of a media influence with the internet, but evem today, out of office, he will continue to speak his mind. Whilst I feel he is exercising his right to free speech, when you're part of the system, you should work with it, Ventura didn't seem to do it with his open mind and was made to retract statements or apologise for them on a frequent basis, I think to this day, Arnold has only been made to correct one offhand comment he made.
In short, where Arnold has been questioned, it was more down to him making a decision and changing the direction of something norm, he makes changes and uses his power to benefit the state he represents, what I've been reading aside from what has been mentioned, Ventura seems to have his political career tarnished through his personal views and opinions. While he may have been a good and benefical governor for Minesota, he remained controversial compared to Arnold who made get opposed, but still gets the job done in a more professional manner.
