What was outrageous was he never got out of the race when he was still way down to Arnold even a week out.
It could have easily sabotaged the Governor's race for the Democrats because they had one Democrat candidate (Bustamante) and two Republicans in what ended up being a three way split for the vote.
It was selfish, inept and made me doubt his sanity at that time. It was like he was making the statement that if he couldn't have the Governor's position, he would sabotage it so the Democrats could win.
Well that fear didn't pan out did it? In fact, the fear fell short by about 15% plus or more. Is it at all possible that McClintock considered the matter in the final week or two, and concluded (rightly) that Bustamante was stuck at 30%, that there was no risk that his continued candidacy would elect Bustamante, and that therefore the value of him continuing to advance and popularize his issue agenda (an agenda no one else was advancing in any articulate of convincing way), remained worthy?
Making flat and unqualified statements about that which we do not know for certain to be true, as to motives, is one road to facilitating rancor in the ranks, of which this thread has exhibited a more than ample supply.
I myself have a bias in favor of folks of all views running for office, in order to try to advance those views. It is what makes the public square work, and what gives it strength and legitimacy.