Posted on 07/31/2005 6:57:20 AM PDT by Jefferson2000
You know Cedric, when democrats run, the sitting President drops by to help them out. The national DNC gets involved and helps. The state level DNC gets involved to help. Finances are forthcoming to help the candidate.
I don't recall if Simon got a vist from Bush or not. It seems to me he did get one. He got no financial help from the state or national.
I believe he came within five points of winning, without adequate funding. I don't think it's quite as easy to blame this on 'poor campaiging' as limited resorces.
Cedric, I also wanted to note that California is not as liberal as most folks think. If a guy like Simon can come that close with limited resources, it says a lot about the true make-up of the state.
When your sitting dem governor has advertising across the media platform, and you can't afford to run your own, it's a sinch the governor is going to benefit quite a bit.
It's hard to get the message out and frame the debate with no funding.
If McClintok was backed by his own party, not sabotaged because he was "too conservative for them" he would have won!
The mantra that "A vote for McClintok will put Bustamonte in" was started by the RNC so they could justify their support for the RINO Rnold !
Those hoping for another movie star government official bought it as the RNC knew they would!
This swill has been debunked endlessly by FReeper Carry_Okie.
Yes Carrie_Okie has made a fool of himself claiming that McClintock could have won even though he was at 10% in the polls. For the record, McClintock did pull in 14%. I noted 10% 'in the polls'.
Who did Carry_Okie vote for? He voted against the recall in favor of keeping a sitting governor that had taken us from a balanced budget to a $37 billion dollar deficit, and to the verge of fiscal collapse.
Even he didn't vote for McClintock. LOL
Follow the money.
...with a 9% spending increase.
Mr. Broder, you've really jumped the shark with this one.
I always wonder where you folks come up with this line. Does this imply that you would want another movie start government official? It certainly has no bearing on my thinking when I go into the booth, so I'm thinking this must be a deep seated problem in your own psyche.
I don't know anyone who voted for Schwarzenegger because he was an actor/public personality.
Now I wouldn't doubt that some on the left did vote for Arnold for this reason, due to crossover votes. Hey, if that kept Davis and Bustamante out, great.
As for the idea that voting for a 10/14 percenter is a good idea when you've got the likes of Bustamante running, I'll have to leave that up to your own concience. Mine said, no way in hell will I allow Bustamante to get elected, if I can help it.
I voted for McClintock and against the recall.
Yes Carrie_Okie has made a fool of himself claiming that McClintock could have won even though he was at 10% in the polls.
That is not what I have said. I have said that he would have beaten Bustamante one-on-one. I have said that his popularity exceeds Schwarzenegger's and that he is capable of winning in a heavily Democratic district. As for who makes a fool of himself, anyone with a brain can easily recognize make that determination.
Sanity has never been in California. Probably the Hollywood types infect the populace. I was born and have lived here since before WWII.
This quote is one of three things:
1) A joke or sarcastic comment only recognized by political "insiders".
2) Offered by a journalist who knows little about California politics
3) A Republican sycophant pushing the party line.
Whatever the motive, inclusion of the quote taints the rest of the article. Liberal journalists are smart enough to hide the "big lie" in the 3rd or 4th paragraph to maintain some reader interest and journalistic integrity.
Oh, so your saying you don't have one. Well, okay.
You are one dilusional fella. You sold your soul to McClintock and it's gone down hill since then. Today you even tout the idea that Davis would have been preferential to Schwarzenegger.
Yes, it would have been great if McClintock could have been elected. It wasn't going to happen and most adults understood that and reluctantly accepted it.
You mention that the most recent budget is going up 9%. I personally think that is terrible. Is there going to deficit spending to finance it? It not, shut up already.
If there is, then you should make that known and we should give Sacramento hell over it. I'm all for giving Sacramento hell over the 9% increase as it is, but coming on this forum to vilify Schwarzenegger every time he is mentioned is wrong.
We will need to support him at times. Killing any public appeal he has is self-defeatist. It aids the democrats when they oppose innitiatives and other items he supports, that we can and do support.
You've really got to get over this. It's eating you up.
The problem with California is the majority of Californians. Period.
They are a lot like Western Europeans. Californians know something needs to be done to reign in out of control spending and insanely high tax rates - but they are simply not willing to make the tough choices to do anything about it. It's a live for today and screw the future attitude.
You see the same thing in Western Europe quite frequently. The leftists/socialists wreck a national economy which results in the public getting upset enough to elect a conservative government. Then the moment the new right of center government tries to cut spending and enact free market reforms the people howl and scream, the conservative government caves, nothing gets done, and the leftist/socialist regain power.
For California to really improve, their needs to be a sea change in attitude amongst the majority of Californians. That has not happened, nor is it likely to anytime soon.
All I know is our unemployment rate is very low, which means there are jobs for all the illegals PLUS all the Americans who want work!
Davis didn't get us in this mess (it was the legislature). But he paid the price for it.
Had McClintock been elected, he couldn't accomplish anything w/ a stonewalling legislature.
I'm still waiting to see if Arnie can extricate us.
1. Simon had virtually unlimited personal financial resources.
2. He did, inded, run a lousy campaign. He got squishy on the social issues. He launched that last minute "bribery" charge which backfired big time.
3. CA is truly a liberal state {"Scoreboard, baby!"} There are currently NO statewide elected Republicans except for our RINO Governator. The Dems own the Assembly and the Senate.
4. The really encouraging thing about the election of Schwarzenneger is that rank and file Republicans put elecablity above conservative "purity" and realized that sometimes the guiding principle has to be whom you're voting AGAINST!
Yes.... Arnold is continuing to spend more revenues than the state takes in. He did last year, and he did again in this budget. Yet one is supposed to accept this dishonest article that getting an almost on time budget that gave him almost everything he asked for is a good thing? I don't think so! The budget Schwarzenegger proposed was outrageous, and the one he signed is equally as bad.
Perhaps if you looked more closely and realized these FACTS, you would realize why people are criticizing Schwarzenegger.
By the way, his "spending control" measure will defer yet MORE expense into future years, proposing to repay it over 15 years.... and to issue even more bonds.
Until Republicans start screaming about Arnold, the fiscal irresponsibility will continue. Who do you think will oppose him? The democrats? They are laughing all the way to the free clinic as the great ENABLE-NATOR does their dirty work for them.
My wife's sister and her daughters live out there too.
And I'm sorry to say that one of my neices is a Berkeley graduate and a recent UCLA Law school graduate who passed the bar last year.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.