Posted on 10/26/2009 7:46:16 AM PDT by SmithL
One candidate in next year's gubernatorial race contributed thousands of dollars to Democratic Sens. Barbara Boxer and John Kerry.
Another wrote $21,000 in checks to Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore and the Democratic National Committee in 2000.
A third was a registered Democrat in the early 1970s and has acknowledged supporting George McGovern as the party's presidential candidate in 1972.
All three – Meg Whitman, Steve Poizner and Tom Campbell – are vying to become California's next governor, but not as Democrats. They constitute the entire GOP gubernatorial field, a fact that has some Republicans wondering where their candidates' loyalties really lie.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
Time for a Party purge, big time.
How do we like being co-opted? Hey Newt! Which democrat should we vote for?
Ronald Reagan was also registered as a democrat at one time.
There is no 2 party system. It’s one big party in Washinton, at the taxpayer’s expense.
Republicans are moving to other states.
Voting with their feet.
The Democrats of Reagan's era would today be considered right wing fanatics.
Does Campbell have a history of contributing to Democrats or not? He was a Democrat when he was 20. So was Ronald Reagan. What was his record in Congress? (IIRC, he was fairly liberal, so I’m not meaning to argue with the larger point of how well he’d represent the GOP.)
Sorry, but there is absolutely no excuse — none — for a “Republican” candidate (Steve Poizner) to have contributed $10,000 to the Gore/Lieberman recount lawsuit. That is a disgrace.
Meg Whitman’s donations have been 71% for Republicans, and 3% for Democrats, and 26% to PACs, which have been overwhelmingly Republican. Many of her Republican contributions have been to moderates (Sue Collins, Mitt Romney), so I think it is fair to suspect her of liberalism. But it’s plain from her giving history that her campaign contributions have been paying for access. That’s another legitimate character issue.
As for Steve Poizner, his gifts seem to have shifted from left (Kerry, Gore, DNC) to right (Bush, McCain, anti-immigration House candidate Kris Kobach) around 2002 or 2003, when he also seems to have gotten far more politically active. In this time, he served as a Bush White House fellow (2001), taught in public schools (2002-2003) and co-founded a charter school Association (2003). It’s plausible these experiences pushed his personal philosophy to the right, but it’s also possible this is a result of beginning to get politically ambitious.
First, put on disguise, or use Trojan horse, to gain entry into camp.
Then, jockey for decision making roles, and if a candidacy opens up, go for the position, as more can be controlled that way.
We are in a position now, where the only explanation for actions of many republican leaders are that they in fact are democrat operatives under cover.
On gay marriage, abortion and similar issues, yes.
On the role of government? Absolutely not. In the 1950s, under a Republican President, the top marginal income tax rate was 92%. Under FDR it went as high as 94%. Fortunately, the country came to its senses. Even Obama only wants to raise in to 39%.
The statists lost, and on the size of government the country has moved far to the right.
“Time for a Party purge, big time.”
It’s “Time” for conservative voters to look at all their options, and choose a party that fits their ideology.
I personally don’t vote party line... I vote for the candidate that best fit my beliefs.
and so was i... Tom Campbell was my Congressman back when i lived in the South Bay... about as conservative as you're going to get in that area of California... after he left, we got Mike Honda--who was the principal of my elementary school... that area will never get another Republican in that spot... i do not consider Tom Campbell a conservative... but i do think the writer of this article is stretching it by including him in this list just because he was a Democrat back in 1970... if they wanted to be intellectually honest, they could have talked about where he stands on the issues... i'm sure they would have found something...
Just looked at all 3 of their websites. We’re screwed. None of them list their positions on issues. Just a bunch of wishy-washy platitudes. None of them identify themselves as conservative. Bottom line: conservatives do not have a canditate.
Some freeper quoted once, “America is at that awkward stage. It’s too late to work within the system and too early to shoot the bastards.”
Meg Whitman, Steve Poizner and Tom Campbell = Useful Idiots
I wouldn’t automatically reject a candidate because they were wrong in the past. I wouldn’t overlook it either. Some people learn from there mistakes when they get older. Others stay liberal there whole life. It would be interesting to find out how many Freepers were democrats at one time.
Also I can think of more reasons not to vote for Steve Poizner too.
Couldn’t agree with you more. We have been infiltrated.
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.