HOW MANY TIMES DID A CONSERVATIVE GOVERNOR FOLLOW A LEFT LIBERAL ONE?"
Say it, don't spray it. Do you want an analysis of all 50 states for the same period that I debunked the myth that a RINO/liberal Republican paves the way for a Conservative ?
"YOU are the one who is ignoring history: Davis, who has the charisma of a turnip, beat conservatives Simon and Lundgren by such a huge margin that it was pathetic."
He beat them both, indeed, but you ignore the reasons why this happened. Lungren had the enormous albatross of Pete Wilson tied around his neck, combined with the fact that he ran a very politically tone-deaf campaign. Simon had a smashing opportunity to beat Davis, but had the problem that the RINO establishment kneecapped him out of the chute AND his own mistakes that he allowed the momentum coming out of his smashing primary victory to peter out by November (you know full well the problem that CA has with such a huge amount of time between the primary and the general). Davis's margin was no "huge margin" in '02, scoring a paltry 47%, 11 full percentage points below his '98 performance (and over 1.3 million fewer votes). Simon, despite a lackluster performance, still scored 42%, 4% higher than Lungren's '98 performance.
"Nobody who has any attachment to reality could possibly think that McClintock's chances of becoming governor would be higher, if he would be running against incumbent Angelides, then running after he's been Lt Gov under Arnold."
I've already proven that they are greater for him than serving under Ah-nold. Have you already forgotten Jerry Brown and how the state (in a BAD GOP year nationally) in 1982 propelled a Conservative to the Governorship with Attorney-General Deukmejian ? That wouldn't have happened if some lackluster RINO boob had been retiring that year -- and we probably would've lost Sam Hayakawa's Senate seat, too.
Sure, let's see your great research.
HOW MANY TIMES DID A CONSERVATIVE GOVERNOR FOLLOW A LEFT LIBERAL ONE?
You have to show THIS too, for your claim to have any validity.
We have a choice between Arnold and Angelides. Please tell us again, why it's better to hand over CA to a leftist and why conservatives should support the leftist? Unless you can prove that leftist Dems are followed by conservatives governors most of the time, your agitation for support for the election of Angelides has just been unmasked as having nothing to do with conservatism, and everything to do with your pushing a leftist Dem on CA.
And of course you don't think that CA's demographics and the Republicans running ultra conservatives has anything to do with ALL elected statewide offices in CA being held by Dems, with the execption of Arnold.
Thanks for posting, marshal.
I remembered your analysis so thought I would reference it.
It seems that party-myths are favored by some, over history and analysis.