Posted on 09/26/2006 5:20:47 PM PDT by FairOpinion
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has a commanding 17-point lead over Democratic rival Phil Angelides with just six weeks to go until the November 7 election, according to a just released Public Policy Institute of California poll.
Forty-eight percent of likely voters support the Republican governor, with just 31 percent saying they would vote for Angelides, who is currently the state treasurer.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Hey, I agree with you. I don't find them conservative at all. But they claim to be 'fiscal conservatives' on their website, and I've seen them be openly hostile to social conservatives, who of course aren't 'inclusive' and 'mainstream' like the New Majority.
http://la.thenewmajority.com/about/mission.php
I would choose "neither".
Mission StatementThe New Majority will broaden the appeal of the Republican Party by promoting a fiscally responsible philosophy toward government and lending resources to Republicans who support an inclusive, mainstream approach toward politics.
WHOOPS!!!
I forgot to mention Tony Strickland in my last posting. My mistake!
In any event, there are good conservatives running in the down-ballot state races and they benefit from Schwarzenegger's growing strength, even though he's a RINO.
YOU, the unions and all the Dems were AGAINST Prop. 76.
One can tell a (wo)man by the company (s)he keeps.
"His more liberal behavior as of late can be traced DIRECTLY back to his crushing defeat at the 2005 special election. It cut the heart out of his credibility, and took away his most powerful negociating tool: That he'd go to the people to do what the legislature wouldn't.
Unfortunately, he gave the people in this state to truly change the direction of the state, and failed. "
===
I agree with this.
But I don't agree that the timing was the main reason it got defeated.
It was another example of conservatives cutting off their nose to spite their face, they would have done in 2004 too.
The choice is Arnold or Angelides, "neither" defaults to Angelides.
Any conservative, Republican, moderate who doesn't ACTIVELY VOTE FOR Arnold, is voting FOR ANGELIDES.
Angelides is actually counting on that.
I'm not that surprised. Angelides has to be running the worst ads that I have ever seen.
The "neither" was in response to him being either socially or fiscally conservative.
As for your comment, it's the basic "our guy sucks less" that has become the GOP default position. I've heard it before. Arnold is indeed the better liberal Democrat of the two.
Good point. I don't like them no matter what their spin is.
Claude Parrish is not a conservative.
Prop 1B Transportation Bond $19.925 Billion Prop 1C Housing Bond $ 2.850 Billion Prop 1D Education Bond $10.416 Billion Prop 1E Levee Bond $ 4.090 Billion Prop 84 Park Bond $ 5.4 Billion Prop 86 Cigarette Tax $ 2.1 Billion Prop 87 Oil Tax $485 million Prop 88 Parcel Tax $470 million
Wrong, as usual.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1511120/posts?page=46#46
Arnold is against Prop. 86 to 89, I just got a mailing on it.
We need the transportation bond and the levy bond.
Even McClintock is for 1E.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1674107/posts
Yes, facts are those little things that reveal your true colors: Democrat Blue.
A Recipe for Success (for Angelides) (Conservatives are Angelides' secret weapon)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1689690/posts
Here are some things he could do:
o Attack Arnold from the right :
§ Illegal immigrationArnold has angered the conservative base with some of his comments on this issue. The Angelides campaign, or perhaps an anti-Arnold independent expenditure campaign, could attack Arnold in the mail or on the radio and use Arnolds own words against him.
§ Taxes/government spendingThe state government continues to run what is essentially a deficit and Arnolds numerous proposals to increase government spending and borrowing turn off Republicans. This line of attack could also mitigate some of the tax attacks against Angelides.
====
This must have been your assignment.
Looks like you are one of the people that Assemblyman Villenes(R) is trying to educate.
Prop 1B is more pork spending at twice the cost!
'Pay as you go' for transit projects - Another view: No on 1B
Sacramento Bee ^ | September 26, 2006 | Michael N. Villines
Posted on 09/26/2006 11:39:55 AM PDT by calcowgirl
CA: Road money spread thin in transportation bond ($20 Billion Prop 1B)
AP - Contra Costa Times ^ | Sep. 09, 2006 | AARON C. DAVIS
Posted on 09/09/2006 11:13:04 AM PDT by calcowgirl
.
California Tops the List of Worst Roads in the Nation
http://www.allstays.com/Features/CaliforniaWorstRoads.htm
Dec. 27, 2001--California's rutted, cracked and neglected roads now rank at the bottom of all 50 states in roadway quality and per capita dollars being spent to improve them, according to a new study from Transportation California.
Last year the state's roads were third worst in the nation. With 37 percent of 168,000 miles of state and local roads rated poor, the state has fallen to dead last on the list, according to The Road Information Program, which prepared the study.
====
Prop | CA GOP | McClintock | CRA | Chamber | Schwarzenegger | CA Dem | Angelides | CTA |
1A | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | - |
1B | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | - |
1C | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | - |
1D | Neutral | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
1E | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | - |
83 | Yes | Yes | Yes | - | Yes | Yes | Yes | - |
84 | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | - |
85 | Yes | Yes | Yes | - | Yes | No | No | No |
86 | No | No | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | - |
87 | No | No | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | - |
88 | No | No | No | No | No | No | TBD | - |
89 | No | No | No | No | No | - | Yes | No |
90 | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | TBD | No | TBD | - |
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.