Simple. It's the Big Tent theory. Only the True Believers and the already converted will support the conservative candidates. At least the current ones being offered. Reagan was the exception, but then again, just like Arnold, Reagan had *star power*. Star power goes a long way, especially in this state. I myself am in my 20s. I'm sure that is very young for this forum. I will explain something to you. If you want to have a Republican majority, at least a shot at it, you need to make some overtures to my generation, who are all solidly anti-republican. You need to change that perception before they finally get up of their asses and start voting. The Arnold appeal might be the catalyst.
See, conservatives are a minority in the state. I doubt very much they even make up the majority of Republicans - since as you keep pointing out the CA GOP keeps choosing RINOs - and as it is Republicans are the minority party. What does all of this add up to?
The only way to win elections is by having a majority. I know it is a new concept to people like you who think that if you just wish hard enough it will come true. You are just like the far-left howling at the wind on MoveOn who think Howard Dean could really defeat George W. We laugh at people like that.
Again, if you've spent a lifetime developing political philosophy, you'd know that *conservatives* aren't pushing for a religious sectarianism. That's a canard worthy of any progressive/communist around.
And yet the main complaint against Arnold is his acceptance of gays and his being pro-choice. The only canard is the one that the vehement opposition to these positions is somehow not completely religiously motivated. The adamant desire by the far-right to legislate Christianity is in fact indicative of said religious sectarianism.
This forum is for conservatives, you're the opposite of a conservative with maybe 2-3 issues where you're not completely a liberal...maybe not.
There are many different interpritations of "conservativism". I'm not going to sit back and allow the most extreme elements hi-jack the word. I get the feeling like most of the far-right are only "conservative" on issues of morality. They certainly aren't for limited government. They want the state to expand to include church.
I'm a libertarian. Saying "God" in a public place isn't an establishment of religion.
I agree with that. Individuals are free to say God where ever they want and as often as they like. However, putting "In God We Trust" on our national currency clearly establishes the US as a religious country. That is the very definition of "establishment of religion". The only argument used to weasel out of it has been claiming that "God" pertains to multiple religions. Yeah, three, and they are all inter-related, excluding anyone who doesn't practice a desert religion.
A great many Constitutional conservatives believe that "under god" and other such usages violate the 1st amendment. You may or may not know, several attempts prior to 1954 were made by fundamentalist Congressmen to stick that in the Pledge, and were defeated on the floor on Constitutional objections every time. Finally, after much lobbying by the Christian lobbyist group The Knights of Columbus. It was in fact quite controversial at the time.
Finally, If you accept the whole "ceremonial deism" justification put forth by activist judges that makes the old liberal argument of "well, it is, but it isn't", then that just might make YOU a "liberal" too. Perhaps YOU have no place on this forum being you are a Constitutional LIBERAL.
Now, it's not *my* fault that homosexuality is a mental disorder, it can be treated, it is absolutely wrong to recognize is legally as an acceptible condition.
First of all, let me tell you that your statement is extremely offensive to many people here even, I am sure. It smacks of pure bigotted ignorance. That attitude is not going to get Republicans anywhere in California. Once again, go join Pat Buchanan's party.
Worse...I haven't advcocated *any* government powers and I have a tag line that's very specific. Exactly what authoritarian schemes do you think I support?
Good. so you don't believe in legislating morality at all.
Then why are we having this debate?
I sort of assumed you desired controlling the morality of popular culture through legislative means, being that the moral views of political candidates are so important to you.
"I have said NOTHING about socialism. I have only talked about the evolution of American attitudes on culture."
The core of that culture is freedom. You *have* spoken about socialism it's the core of the "progressive" attack on culture.
I don't even follow this line.
The core of which culture is freedom? Socialism?
Because I've talked about the historical advancement of individual freedom in America only, NOT economic collectivism.
If you think what I've spoken about is the definition of Socialism, then I think you need a refresher course on just what Socialism is. I also think you may be a paranoid delusional.
It's part and parcel of Arnold's political economics and is reflected in his choice of economic advisor: Warren Buffet. Again...had you spent a significant amount of time thinking about a political philosophy, these things would be evident to you. You are intelligent enough to make this realization.
I wouldn't mind Warren Buffet as my personal economic advisor, regardless of his party affiliation. I would be a lot richer than I am today. But then again I suppose you are much more clever than him...
I have grown tired of your post. The rest of it doesn't even merit a response, other than me needing to point out that Arnold hasn't even laid out an economic plan yet. "The children should have first call on the treasury." is not a fiscal plan or even an economic philosophy. It is merely lipservice for the sake of politics.
And no, I don't really care what Arnold's economic plan is. I don't think either he or the other 2 Republicans can actually effect much change in Sacramento. It is totally in the Democrats' hands. If anything, losing McClintock from the State Senate would be a HUGE blow to our power in Sacramento.
So for right now my main priority is putting the best public face on the GOP in California, since that is all the Governor will actually amount to.