I totally disagree that eight years of a liberal Republican is better than four years of a Democrat. Voting for the liberal Republican guarantees no conservative candidate for twice as long a period. And, McClintock WOULD have won a head-to-head match up with Bustamante.
But, more importantly, the country as a whole IS NOT a liberal as California. A conservative obviously can be elected President. Thus, it is incredibly poor judgement to vote for someone like Giuliani and assure a liberal is in office for eight years. That is suicidal to the conservative movement.
I'm hoping this will turn out to be a non-issue. Hunter polls low among the general public because no one has heard of him yet, but he's polling very strong among conservatives.
I think once people see him side by side with the others, he will emerge as the front runner. In my opinion outspoken conservatives always do better than closet conservatives; people are persuaded by confidence, they are not persuaded by timid or embarrassed conservatism. We've seen a lot of that over the years.
People are fond of saying that to win we need to attract Democrats to cross over, and thats right. But Dems don't cross over for weak or fuzzy conservatives, or "moderates". They cross over for bold ones. They are called "Reagan Democrats" for a reason.
The field of candidates on the Dem side are some of the most un-serious people I can ever remember, which is saying something considering they come from a fundamentally un-serious party. Up against a serious guy like Hunter they will look like the flakes they are.