Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ElkGroveDan

No surprise here, and I always said Arnold was the only kind of Republican (RINO) that could win in Kalifornia.

Your state has made Finestein and Boxer Senators for Life, remember? Its not like you have a viable block of conservatives living there.

No offense, but it is what it is.


6 posted on 09/18/2007 11:29:13 AM PDT by Badeye (You know its a kook site when they ban the word 'kook')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Badeye
No surprise here, and I always said Arnold was the only kind of Republican (RINO) that could win in Kalifornia.

It is spelled California, jerk.

And you are wrong. California has gone through wild political swings, most of it relating to turn out. Until 1992 California was the most reliably Republican presidential state for the preceding fifty years. In 1994 Republicans won all statewide offices but one, and captured control of the Assembly. From 1982 through 1998 California enjoyed 16 years of Republican governors. Arnold WON the Recall running as a conservative Republican. If you add up the votes cast for both Arnold and McClintock in the recall, over 60% of Californians voted for candidates running to reduce the size of government and cut taxes.

McClintock has come within a whisker of winning statewide office three times despite the fact hat the RINO establishment has done everything they can to underfund and thwart his candidacy. The problem is not conservative candidates it is liberal Republicans who undermine them. Its not like you have a viable block of conservatives living there.

What would you know? California gave the Republican nominee 5.5 million votes in the last presidential election. How many did your state kick in?

9 posted on 09/18/2007 11:38:08 AM PDT by ElkGroveDan (Take the wheel, Fred.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: Badeye
No surprise here, and I always said Arnold was the only kind of Republican (RINO) that could win in Kalifornia.

Wrong. Arnold won in CALIFORNIA because he sold himself as a FISCAL CONSERVATIVE, not a RINO.

Had he not lied and obfuscated his true liberal intentions, he would have lost. Those who vociferously supported him are now calling him a liar. Had they wanted a RINO, they would be applauding his efforts.

25 posted on 09/18/2007 12:03:25 PM PDT by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: Badeye
Its not like you have a viable block of conservatives living there.

Depends on what you mean by "viable." We have plenty of solid conservatives who are "viable" with grassroots conservatives like me: Tom McClintock, Bill Simon, Bruce Herschenson, etc. But San Francisco and L.A. liberals outnumber the "red" California vote.

Their ranks are swollen by illegals, unions, public employees, Silicon Valley "flower child" capitalists, etc. Plus the CA "Republican" party under the "leadership" of RINOs like Brooks Firestone have wanted to out-pander the Democrats to buy votes, forcing candidates like the perennial and unelectable Tom Campbell on us. CA Republicans can only come out of the wilderness by contributing directly to real conservatives and refusing to be flim-flammed by the "but he's electable" BS.

63 posted on 09/18/2007 1:28:15 PM PDT by Bernard Marx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson