Posted on 07/01/2006 8:16:42 PM PDT by FairOpinion
Incumbent Arnold Schwarzenegger is the top contender in California’s gubernatorial race, according to the latest poll by Zogby Interactive. 49 per cent of respondents in the Golden State would vote for Schwarzenegger, while 41 per cent would support Democrat Phil Angelides.
(Excerpt) Read more at angus-reid.com ...
Tom McClintock backs Arnold.
Such an inconvenient truth, eh?
Perfect example of your spinning and twisting, (lying), about what someone has said. I try and protect Republicans from the ilk herd. While I do use that type of confrontation, I don't use it against elected Republicans. I do use it against the California ilk herd, and any who would suggest other than voting republican may be constructive. I'll also admit to calling brownshirts; brownshirts.
Thanks for your deceitful example, I can count on you.
I hope as we get closer to the election we will be allowed to have discussions of the polls and nuances of the campaigns, without every thread being hijacked by your performance art, attack activism.
If I read your response correctly you still didn't mention anything about who to vote for, or to not vote at all, you said your point is to continually bitch and point out the negatives of the Republican candidate.
On some threads that should be the very thing to do, but you can imagine how annoying it is to the rest of us that are trying to analyze the race.
You must realize at this stage, most of us know who we are going to vote for, now we are shifting into election mode where our focus is on defeating the opposition candidate.
Try to differentiate between a thread about the Governors work and a thread about the campaign.
Not inconvenient at all.
There was no lying or twisting or deceit. Check for yourself:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/990133/posts?page=287#287
Protagoras : "Liberalism has a bitter taste. You seem to have grown to like the flavor."
Grunt: "Yep, I wanna win! I want the x-tremes put in their place! I want the intolerant and bigoted to know their bile and falsehood and fear and empty threats are now impotent, their day is over. Republicans will not be identified as racist, intolerant brown-shirted totalitarians. We will capture the great middle ground. The middle ground which we lost due to the x-treme's gross intolerance causing the flight! Time for them to regroup. What are you going to do?"
It's a simple question.
Who will be getting your vote for governor?
"I do have a strong distaste for his LIBERAL ACTIONS as I see them as destructive to the State in which I have lived for decades."
===
In that case, why are you working so hard to get Arnold defeated and ANGELIDES ELECTED???????????????????????
Close ....
The reason that moderate businessman fled the Democrat Party in California was the rise of union influence in the legislature. Prior to the Wilson administration, unions were allowed freedom to play but business profits were protected by unwritten, but clearly understood, agreements. With the reemergence of Democrat power in the mid 90's and the redistricting that resulted, th paradigm shifted as unions, especially public employee unions, flexed their power.
Those previously Democrat businessmen jumped at the chance to support the New Majority and finance a resurrection of the old system.
In other words, you would like to be able to post unsubstantiated comments and have them go unchallenged?
If I read your response correctly you still didn't mention anything about who to vote for, or to not vote at all,
That is correct--because I don't know. I see only bad choices.
you said your point is to continually bitch and point out the negatives of the Republican candidate.
No. I said that politicians should be held accountable and called out when they stray from their promises or work agains the party they supposedly represent. Do you disagree with that?
On some threads that should be the very thing to do, but you can imagine how annoying it is to the rest of us that are trying to analyze the race.
I appreciate analysis. I'll be waiting to see some thoughtful posts, along with supporting rationale and data. I didn't see that on this thread.
You must realize at this stage, most of us know who we are going to vote for, now we are shifting into election mode where our focus is on defeating the opposition candidate.
Then perhaps the cheerleading would be more effective over at DU. Last I checked this was still a conservative forum for discussion about advancing conservatism (as opposed to a Republican Party campaign forum).
Try to differentiate between a thread about the Governors work and a thread about the campaign.
I probably wouldn't have said a word on this thread had I not been pinged to it and read the questionable comments about the work record.
>> It's a simple question.
>> Who will be getting your vote for governor?
I honestly don't know at this point. I see no good choices.
I stand by those words now, and my message has stayed on track. It has developed some. I hadn't realized the extent of the emplacement of the fifth columnists then. I will acknowledge that extreme right seem to be more gullible in following the tripe of the ilk herd, both here in California and nationally.
Well, I gave it a shot, what I have learned is that this thread is a place for you to expend some type of emotional energy, that serves no usefulness to the rest of us, that I can see, but you did manage to make yourself the subject of the thread here at the end, so hopefully it gives the little shot you were looking for.
Vote, don't vote, I don't care, your decision on that activity has about as much interest to me, as it seems to have for you.
Interesting. It makes me wonder about a few things.
1) The communist and GLBT types seem to go in lockstep or have a strong alliance with the pro-Union types (Alarcon, Goldberg, Kuehl, etc.) forging a strong alliance within the Democratic Party in California.
2) It seems unlikely that the DemRats will change much. Are there any other sub-groups(D) that have influence on the direction of the party that aren't in lockstep? There seemed to be a semi pro-business element gathering behind Westly (but I didn't think his policies were very pro-business).
3) Short the Union Dems establishing a Labor party (which they probably have little motivation to do if they are in control), it seems there is little hope that our so-called "moderate" businessmen who infiltrated the party (R) will return to their own Party (D), instead wanting to make the CA GOP their permanent home.
4) How prevalent is this phenomena in other states?
5) What is in the future for Conservatives, or those who embraced traditional Republican principles and the platform? Chase out the infiltrators or start anew?
LOL. Had you been able to support your comments, you wouldn't have had to turn it into a thread about me.
Nice liberal tactic!
Basically, the whole thing. You pretty much insulted anyone who actually believes in the Republican platform!
Fire up the torches, grab the pitchforks ...
Read it again. I think it was pretty well said. Unless, of course, you'd prefer to be perceived as bigoted and racist. I know a fifth columnist would prefer the more disgusting image.
Your words. Not mine.
Why accept people in a party that want to change 95% of what that party stands for?
I did read it again.
Anyone who does not embrace the so-called "middle", and abandon the basic principles of the Republican Party, was being referred to as extreme, a racist, bigoted and a brown-shirt. Pretty insulting.
Your namesake disagreed with your line of reasoning, as I'm sure you know--- otherwise he would have run against President Ford in the general election. Yet Ronald Reagan certainly advanced conservatism.
Voting for third party candidates is what elected Bill Clinton.
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.