You can tell more untruths accidentally than a professional liar could on purpose. Simon was all over the place calling Davis names and accusing Davis of things he did not do. Simple Simon was given tons of coverage by the media from the day he announced. They knew he was a joke as a candidate and the more people saw him the fewer votes he would get.
Simple Simom thought 30 percent of the voters could cast 51 percento of the vote. Simon was the most vitriolic and obnoxious candidate in my memory. He was so unlikable an unwinable candidate beat him. Simon could not beat Gray Davis.. that says it all.
There are not enough conservatives in California to elect anyone. There are not enough conservatives in the USA to elect a president.
Bill Clinton had to be a NEW Democrat to win becuase there are not enough liberals to elect a Democrat. Republicnas have to be Compasionate Conservatives to win becuase there are not enough conservatives to win.
And as far as Dick Nixon, what part of Nixon wining the biggest popular vote victory in our history escapes you. Nixon won 61 to 38 percent in 1972. Reagan only got 58 percent in 1984. FDR never approched 61 percent. Neither did Ike or JFK. Lincoln didn't and niether did Jackson, or Wilson just to name a few.
The best presidential vote getter in history was Richard M. Nixon.
Only 34 percent of the voters are Conservative.
Polishing your reputation by slander again, eh? Unfotunately for your thesis, the complaints of "when is this campaign going to get going?" with promises from ElkGroveDan that it would all start to happen after Labor Day were all over this website.
Simon was the most vitriolic and obnoxious candidate in my memory.
Vitriolic? Simon? LOL! He was enough of a milktoast that he got rolled by his own Party. He didn't hold Russo accountable for accepting CAGOP money in return for forging his signature on the Log Cabin letter. He didn't even blame his staff when Rollins et al. set up that bogus campaign check photo. He didn't complain about the crappy work he was getting out of Wilson Jones. He even understated the size of the deficit. He made few references to Davis' obvious corruption.
There are not enough conservatives in California to elect anyone. There are not enough conservatives in the USA to elect a president.
Just keep trotting that lie Tator, because you've got nothing else to say. California voters gave wide margins to Props 187, 209, and 22. When the issues are well defined, they go conservative more often than not. Even after Simon's most incompetent campaign in memory, despite having been outspent two to one, AND despite nothing less than backstabbing by the CAGOP and RINOs like you, he still came to within just over 300,000 votes with well over a million registered Republicans having failed to turn out.
Bill Clinton had to be a NEW Democrat to win becuase there are not enough liberals to elect a Democrat. Republicnas have to be Compasionate Conservatives to win becuase there are not enough conservatives to win.
False again. Bill Clinton won because of Ross Perot who ran on a campaign of fiscal responsibility. Can't you get any facts straight?
The best presidential vote getter in history was Richard M. Nixon.
Oh, you mean the guy who lost to Kennedy and then lost again running for governor of his home state? And then, in the next election, the gubernatorial victor was, who? You know, the The only election in which he ran well was against George McGovern! Nixon left the Republican Party in a shambles, and it wasn't just Watergate.
People like you and Bill Simon think that 34 percent of the voters can cast 51 percent of the votes.
First of all, there was a 49% turnout for the gubernatorial election in 2002. Had 34% of the voters turned out for Simon, he would have won, handily. Second, the record of ballot propostions shows the error in your thinking:
People like you think that swing voters can't be convinced to vote for conservative positions on issues.
How ignorant do you have to be to believe that?
LBJ won a higher percentage of the popular vote in 1964 than RMN in 1972. As such, LBJ holds the record, not Nixon.
In fact, Nixon is 3rd all time in popular vote margins:
1. LBJ - 1964: 61.05%
2. FDR - 1936: 60.8%
2. RMN - 1972: 60.7%
No, that would be RR, who rec'd 54,455,075 votes in '84.
In '72 Nixon rec'd 47,169,911, and RMN did beat McGovern with a larger margin of popular votes than RR bested Mondale with, but RR topped RMN's total in EC votes.
The top three in EC votes would be:
RR - 525 ('84)
RMN - 520 ('72)
RR - 489 ('80)