Posted on 12/28/2005 5:59:57 PM PST by calcowgirl
Despite him calling himself a "fiscal conservative" during the recall election, evidence indicated otherwise and the actions to date prove that he is not. As for the "Libertarian" part, I don't see it. He has grown government and promoted more social programs, not less.
Well, yeah, looks that way. There sure is a lot of animosity on each and every blasted thread about California so-called Republicans, and particularly about Schwarzenegger. So much strife, it's shocking.
I've rarely read or found any other site where people who are conservatives have to defend their degree of conservativism within this context to such a degree as here, these threads.
I often wonder if there are some here who intentionally attack/malign for purposes of getting others banned, use throwaway registrations for that purpose.
Because, otherwise, I can't figure it out.
Thanks for your comments. I often agree with what you write and when I don't, I do understand. Which is usually as it should be.
She wants the strife ...
He did campaign upon being a fiscal conservative and continues to claim he's Republican, so that lead me previously to define him as such, and yet I agree, based upon who he's revealed to be after taking office, is not.
I don't know much about Libertarianism other than many Libertarians I've interacted with on the internet are personalities very similar to Schwarzenegger's: very socially permissive, liberal, even indulgent, and yet dedicated to "fiscal conservativism" and whittling away the entire issue of taxation.
Schwarzenegger pretty well campaigned and solicited upon such views, and thus, I've also described him that way, as more Libertarian than anything...he's certainly not enacting as Republican (from what I've viewed and read, which is upon what I've based my opinions here) and SAYS he's not a Democrat, even ridicules some of them, their party on some issues (unions, social spending)...
At this point, I'm not going to categorize him any longer but I am disappointed in him, from a Republican perspective. I realize he's had a rough go of it with all the treacherous Democrats -- even Bustamante would have but I can't bear to think of what life would have been like with him in Sacramento -- but I do believe it's quite possible for a conservative, Republican governor to govern the state and intellectually and intelligently maneuver the Democrats in our state legislature.
Story of Simon is a good one. I never realized he was not supported by the CA GOP, to generalize, and he was who I thought would take the election, actually, based upon issues alone. I was actually quite surprised that Schwarzenegger 'won' on a people-to-people level but not so much so on a funding level (it was obvious that he was carrying some degree of incentivization that other candidates lacked, is my point). However, Simon was my preference as to issues.
Me? You guys have all had way too much morning coffee for me...I'm at the end of my working hours and am approaching sleep so my ability to contend with this has already waned.
I'm just surprised at the strife about this issue, is all. Why doesn't everyone with any familiarity with anyone else just accept that people are conservative and get that out of the discussion? No one's ever going to be found to have "matching conservative suits" or some such thing.
Simon is not the only one left high and dry by the CAGOP. Evidence shows conservatives can win (if the GOP would just lift a finger instead of undermining the effort). Check out these posts. Carry_Okie may have some more links.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1438460/posts?page=19#19
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1438460/posts?page=12#12
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1279542/posts?page=19#19
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/834950/posts?page=19#19
The simple fact of the matter is, alleged conservatives claim they want to support Schwarzenegger, when in fact they stayed home and Schwarzenegger's propositions went down in flames because more Democrats showed up at the polls to vote against his propositions.
The truth of the matter is, the ones whining the loudest are the ones who proclaimed to us "out-of-state mystics" they stayed home.
You can accept these facts or run away from them. Your choice.
No you don't. Which was the basis for my challenge of the diatribe. A warning to lurkers and others not familiar with California's election results reporting, that the offering was, when posted, simply one man's uninformed opinion, albeit presented as factual. Very similar to the MSM presentations Californians suffer regularly under the misnomer of news
I'll take you off the ping list when the how many and who voted for what facts become available on McPherson's website.
I read Al Gore bought a mansion in San Francisco.
Maybe he'll be the Dem candidate for CA governor and you'll get the chance to vote for Gore, against Schwarzenegger.
Put me on that ping list. When do those normally get published?
"The plan is to wait him out until they can get their own man in. Then, watch out. Expect a serious proposal for single payor health, incredible environmental regs., massive tax restructuring and redistricting to lock in their power indefinitely.
This is all being taken very seriously in Sacramento. "
I agree with you 100%. Republicans ignore this at their peril, not to mention at the peril of CA.
If that's how far you have to go in order to defend your action hero, then you don't have very much.
1. It is very ironic to hear YOU say that Arnold did get support from conservatives on his propositions. You were agitating vigorously right here on FR against several of Arnold's propositions, being in agreement with the Dems and Unions who, fought hard to defeat Prop. 76.
2. Hildy is right, and you know she is, there were several articles about how light the turnout was in conservative areas.
ROFLMAO...you don't know me, do you?
You sound like a reasonable person, and I'd be glad to give you my thoughts on the subject, as is apropos to FR.
The great majority of us are indeed conservative, as are the important group, the lurkers. These folks read our writings which contribute to their opinions and it is their opinions which direct their vote. We can debate among ourselves and understand that reasonable people can disagree, or, we can rant and rave and lash out in unreason at those who may disagree. Unreasonable posts, people, opinions, etc, do nothing but deter lurkers from participating and leave them with a tainted view of conservatism. Our enemies, the demonratz, know how much the rightwing ranting hurts us and they augment the ranting with plants. Folks who pretend to be arch-conservatives for no other reason than to discredit us. These plants try to encourage the dimmer ones among us to rant, knowing that an honest rant will be easier tolerated yet even more effective than the plants constant negative harping.
Perhaps you need to read again what I posted. Or, perhaps you might remember just one of those things I posted over the last several months where my support for Props 73-75 were reflected in my tagline. He DID get support from conservatives (including mine) on several of his measures. He did NOT get support when he started pushing for more borrowing (Prop 76) and socialized medicine lite (Prop 78). Opposing these things does not put me on the side of Dems and Unions, except maybe in your twisted one-dimensional outlook on things.
Hildy is right, and you know she is, there were several articles about how light the turnout was in conservative areas.
LOL. As has been pointed out on this thread, there are absolutely ZERO statistics that have been published on what the breakdown of voters was by party, let alone by type within party (i.e. conservative, moderate, etc.) How can Hildy be right? She failed to respond with any factual basis for her assertions resorting to personal attacks and namecalling while relishing in the demise of the State. Since the most conservative measures did the best, it is counterintuitive to believe that it was conservatives who didn't show up at the polls. Its just more nonsense from the uninformed out-of-staters.
As I said, there were plenty of articles discussing it.
Did you not bother to keep informed, or do you have a selective memory?
====
http://www.shns.com/shns/g_index2.cfm?action=detail&pk=HERDT-12-07-05
Typically, a higher turnout rate among Republicans serves to soften the Democrats' seven percentage-point advantage among registered voters.
But Nov. 8, 43 percent of the electorate were Democrats and 36 percent Republicans _ meaning Democrats got the full advantage of their seven-point spread.
Worse for Schwarzenegger, the vote was sharply partisan. On each of his four ballot measures, Democrats voted about 84 percent against him and Republicans about 74 percent with him.
A repeat of that dynamic next November would send Schwarzenegger back to Hollywood.
And that explains why Schwarzenegger right now needs Kennedy _ or someone like her _ a great deal more than he needs the true-blue support of conservatives.
===
"Turnouts in Orange, San Bernardino and Riverside counties, all GOP strongholds, were several percentage points below the statewide average. Turnouts were above average in heavily Democratic regions such as the San Francisco Bay area."
http://www.investors.com/editorial/IBDArticles.asp?artsec=20&artnum=1&issue=20051202
So again, my question...why do Conservates ferverishly believe that a Conservative could ever win in California?
My memory is fine, thank you very much. Your excerpt says Republicans, FO... NOT conservatives. Again, the most conservative measures did BEST, therefore, it was not a low turnout of conservatives. Also, the Governor did everything imaginable to motivate the OPPOSITON to get to the polls while doing little to motivate the moderate action-hero doting followers that got him elected. There was a greater than expected turnout--of the opposition! (thanks to the antagonistic confrontational campaign approach)
Because facts show the support is there. If the GOP would do their job and support the platform, instead of stabbing conservatives in the back and foisting big-spending, big-borrowing, gun-grabbing, enviro-wacko, pro-abortion, pro-GLBT candidates on the electorate, we could be successful.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1438460/posts?page=19#19
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.