Yeah. You're right. But he can't win without Dem votes either. We can choose sides and say the devil with the rest. He can't.
I know there are some who say if McClintock can't win then a pox on both houses, or we might as well have Angelides if we don't have a "real Republican".
I just don't see how that gets us anywhere with conditions being what they are in this state. I'd love to see a solid conservative bloc running this state -- shoot, let's have Antonin Scalia leading the parade. Maybe we'll get there someday. But we had a bold and optimistic agenda and it got clobbered at the polls. We had a governor with cross-party support. Whether he can regain that position is unclear.
One thing most Reps and the more sensible Dems can agree on is fiscal responsibility. So I'm willing to wait and see what comes of this new approach.
All I can do is repeat:
I'm no hard-right ultra conservative, but am a life-long loyal Republican. I'm not a single-issue voter. The big tent concept doesn't scare me, and I understand that politics is about building winning coalitions. But, as I said in an earlier post, the one thing I expect in return for my loyalty and willingness to do grunt work on campaigns is for Republican politicians to be loyal to us party grunts in return.
It is one thing to court moderate Democrat votes, as Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush have done. It is quite another to sell out to the hard Left like Arnold has done. The former I can understand -- not like it, perhaps, but understand. The latter is a deal-breaker to me.