Posted on 05/10/2010 1:22:58 PM PDT by sdkruiser
Madame "Too Busy To Vote Even Though I Had A Household Staff" isn't holding up well now that the people who do vote are paying attention.
Meg Whitman would be an absolute disaster for California. At best, she's Arnold Schwarzenegger in drag. At worst, she's a more masculine version of Jerry Brown.
(Excerpt) Read more at stephenkruiser.com ...
Dont worry i hear Meg is going to get a Palin endorsement - that way she will no longer be a RINO
at least according to a lot of people here once a RINO is endorsed by Palin they are no longer RINOs.
Well, we already know what Poizner is from his stint as Insurance Commissioner. At least Meg portrays herself as a fiscal conservative. That is more than what Poizner has actually been doing the past several years.
Plus, she ain’t Arnold, a man with no administrative experience. Someone needs to step into the governor’s office and let the corrupt legislature know who is in charge. Poizner is NOT that person. As for Meg, while I do not agree with her views on a number of issues, she will be able to beat Jerry Brown who would make mincemeat of Poizner. Take your pick - Whitman or Brown. It is that simple.
Yes, endorsements from the R establishment, which Palin has joined, are the perfect way to prevent RINOs from gaining R nominations. Why, until Inhoffe endored Fiorina, I was afraid she might be a RINO. Now I sleep soundly knowing that respected politicians who know about as much about her as they do about nuclear physics believe she can be trusted to vigorously defend conservative principles. So, if Palin endorses Whitman like she did Fiorina, we will all know Whitman is a die-hard conservative.
I really like it when politics is made easy.
This being California, I feel lucky that I have any candidates to the right of Joseph Stalin to vote for.
I don’t care who wins, CA will still be a basket case.
BTT
The only conservative on a major ticket is Devore. Little choice with the other Republican candidates. Only thing is the RINO’s will vote with the Republicans on occasion and while the dimoKKKRATS never. Not looking good for California.
I lost all respect for Poizner, when he pulled his “Meg is mean to me” media stunt, and went running to Jerry Brown for help. State Unions would make Poizner their bitch in about two days. Meg is far from perfect, but she is the best choice available.
That's good enough for me.
Amen! Tom McClintock is one statesman whose judgement I actually trust.
Re: “Amen! Tom McClintock is one statesman whose judgement I actually trust.”
*********************
Agree — Tom McClintock is the ONLY pol in CA I have listened to for years now. His endorsement of Poizner is sadly the best we can hope for here.
Are you OK with Tom Campbell taking the race without breaking a sweat?
“During the campaign for U.S. Senate in 2000, Campbell touted his 100 percent pro-choice voting record. He opposed a ban on “partial birth’ abortions, one of the most horrific abortion practices. (”Conservatives Agonize Backing Campbell,” Roll Call, August 7, 2000.)
Campbell in 1992 made abortion the center stage of his campaign. In the 1992 election, Campbell’s TV ad ran with the following caption: “For choice, for jobs, for U.S. Senate.” In another ad, he said, “I’m pro-choice and one of the most conservative members of Congress when it comes to spending.”In a Republican debate, he described his abortion views, as good for voters “looking for someone who is willing to break with the party line from time to time.” (Gerry Braun, “Herschensohn Won’t Pledge to Back GOP Pick; Senate Opponents Renew Acrimony in Last Debate,” San Diego Union Tribune, June 1, 1992.)
Herschensohn, for his part, described Campbell exactly as he is during that debate:
“I don’t believe a Republican has to pass a litmus test, (but) I feel that Tom Campbell is so far away from the Republican umbrella that it would be easier to run against a Democrat. . . . Furthermore, when it comes to issues, experience can be attained.”
And Romney picked Bennett...so much for his endorsement.
Steve attended two Gore fundraisers with his wife, who is a Democrat, in 2000. Those events accounted for $1k to Gore and $10k to the DNC.
Steve’s wife also wanted to give to the 2000 recount, so Steve made a $10K contribution to the recount in 2000 from their joint checking account.
Finally, in February of 2001, Steve and his wife attended an event for Kerry’s Senate campaign which accounts for $2k.
So the front-runners for the GOP nomination have both contributed to high profile Democrats. Fine.
Which one is more electable and which one is more likely to push for and achieve the fundamental reforms that Arnold failed to secure and without which the Golden State is sunk?
They've both contributed to democrats, but only one of them is a wimp. He can't stand up to his wife, but he'll take on SEIU. lol
Only one of them is making real moves to win conservative votes, and has won the enthusiastic, and energetic, and continuing, endorsement of Tom McClintock.
so what your saying is Poizner is better? i dont live in CA i was just curious as to what is happening in the race
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.