Posted on 10/22/2007 12:35:02 AM PDT by peyton randolph
...Giuliani is seen by Pringle resurrecting California as a significant player for both the nomination and election.
What seemed fanciful in March looks more realistic in October. Giuliani has maintained double-digit California leads over other Republicans all year. With the state primary moved up to Feb. 5 and voting beginning a month earlier, its results could negate the outcome in early small state primaries. Giuliani's popularity here with political leaders such as Pringle is based on the belief he is the only Republican who can challenge Hillary Clinton in blue states -- New York, Pennsylvania and New Jersey, as well as California...
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
Is Novak nuts ?
Wow. If California likes Rudy, I sure don’t
That’s a killer.
Godspeed
Yeah, a little bit. But mostly he's out of touch.
Romney? Novak thinks Romney will "romp through Iowa and New Hampshire"??
Good grief. Definitely out of touch.
At least he doesn't mention McCain. Did you know that there are PLENTY of lazy drive-by journalists who STILL believe that McCain is the frontrunner? I mean, it's stupid enough to consider the guy a contender at all, but the frontrunner??
That said, it's almost as stupid to believe that a former governor of stinking MASSACHUSETTS could be the GOP frontrunner....
With all the conservative voters saying no to Rudy...but still not conservative front runner..we stand the chance of being left with Rudy.
We need some small time players to pull out of the race.
If we did a straw pool of currently registered Freepers..what would it come out?
My voter is Thompson.
I was just being polite. Novak minus the late Rowlie Evans is just... well, a clueless grump.
Actually, the bigger problem here isn’t Novak, it’s Curt Pringle. I mean has he completely lost touch with reality ? Don’t these guys have a clue what kind of corrosive effect a liberal like Rudy would have with the grassroots ? How can they ignore polling data showing Rudy performs about as poorly as can be in Democrat leaning states ? There’s not a single Democrat state he is leading in, none. Not against Hillary. In my own state of TN, it is shocking in head to head matchups. My state is GOP leaning now, regardless, so “generic Conservative GOPer” would tend to lead Hillary by about 10%, but when they show Fred as the nominee, he wins by over 20%+ against Hillary. With Rudy, they are within the margin of error ! If Rudy is tied with Hillary in Republican states, they honestly believe he’ll somehow be able to win ? I mean, they can ignore the grassroots, but how do they ignore the polling data that makes my point ?
Folks, you have to understand that California’s Republican Party leadership would back Hillary if she ran with an (R).
Of course they back Rudy. These are the folks who talked Schwarzenegger into running.
Our only hope in the state is that the rank and file destroy the leadership’s plans to coronate Rudy.
Duncan Hunter is our favorite son. California conservatives, how about we put together a plan to stick a political figurative knife in Rudy’s back out here?
I’ll help all I can, even if that means going door to door.
Anyone else?
Tell me what convinces you that they actuall give a fig?
Honestly, hasn’t it occurred to you by now that this is so fishy that something just isn’t right? I am way past thinking the RP leadership really cares if they win anymore.
As for conservatism, if anyone thinks they support that any longer, I think they need to do some evaluation. They don’t.
If they won’t jump on Fred’s bandwagon, when he’s clearly a more sellable candidate by twenty points, what’s left to ponder. It’s clear as the nose on your face.
I don’t go for the “favorite son.” After all, I’m from NY...
Bless you! LOL
You’re right, it just doesn’t make any sense. The way some of the Republican state parties (especially the ones in rapid decline) are acting is crazy. Their goal seems to be less about getting people elected to office and more about preserving absolute control over the party itself, stifling reformers (Conservatives) or anyone that would upend the establishment and, gasp !, try to win offices.
I still cannot believe the grassroots stood for allowing a system of a Presidential candidate getting an equal number of delegates per each Congressional district (did that actually go through, or did my eyes deceive me ?) ?!?! That means that a handful of Republican voters in the likes of Muddy Waters and Pelosi’s district are equal to the ones in heavily GOP seats (Duncan’s, Rohrabachers’s, et al) ? That’s the kind of mis-representation that spurred on a lawsuit in my state (the infamous Baker v. Carr), where 100,000 people got the same single legislative House member that a rural district of 3 or 4,000 got.
I mean, what are we left with here ? Either they are naive or misinformed or they are simply crooked and somehow in bed with the opposition. Whichever it is, it is disturbing beyond description.
I agree with first part of your response, but am not sure what the answer is to your question. Let’s see if CalCowGirl can fill you in.
D1
It requires a closer look than that, IMO. Some Californians recognize that parts of our party have been infiltrated and are working to remove solid conservatives in favor of so-called moderates and liberals. In these cases, it is not "winning" as it is neither reform nor an improvement. When some of the same forces that brought us Arnold band together to bring us some new save-the-world candidate, we are suspicious, to say the least. It is not just elected offices, either--the conservative GOP chair in Orange County was taken out a couple years back after years of nasty tactics.
I still cannot believe the grassroots stood for allowing a system of a Presidential candidate getting an equal number of delegates per each Congressional district (did that actually go through, or did my eyes deceive me ?) ?!?! That means that a handful of Republican voters in the likes of Muddy Waters and Pelosi’s district are equal to the ones in heavily GOP seats (Duncan’s, Rohrabachers’s, et al) ?
Your eyes did not deceive you. Our party "leaders" have been trying to undermine conservatives and weaken conservative districts for quite some time. That was part of the problem with Arnold's "Redistricting" proposition a couple years back. In this case, it was a rules change that was made in 1999, to go into effect in 2004. Since Bush ran unopposed in 2004, it went under the radar until now.
GOP sniffs out delegates in California
In the past, the California GOP awarded convention delegates on a winner-take-all basis. The candidate getting the most votes statewide got all the state's delegates.Republican Primary 2008: Not one GOP race, but 53This election cycle, the party changed to apportionment by congressional district. Some 170 convention delegates are up for grabs in the February primary: three to the winner in each of the state's 53 congressional districts, for a total of 159; and 11 on an at-large basis for the top vote-getter in the state. Another three convention delegates will be top party leaders unpledged to any candidate.
For Republican candidates, the new system means that winning in Democrat Lynn Woolsey's 6th Congressional District -- including the liberal Marin County home of U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer -- is just as important as winning in Republican Rep. John Doolittle's archconservative 4th District in northeast California.It means that the GOP presidential clout is the same in Democrat Maxine Waters' 35th Congressional District in south Los Angeles as in Republican Rep. and presidential candidate Duncan Hunter's 52nd District in San Diego County.
Ping to above. As to the last part of FMdj’s question, I vote for “they are simply crooked and somehow in bed with the opposition.” ;-)
The ballot initiative to split delegate votes in CA has died. In the general election, the winner will take all as in the past. I think we have 55 electoral votes and those will most likely forever remain in the dem collumn.
Ahnold was NOT a win. Neither is Rudy.
I prefer Duncan Hunter, but the question becomes Who can defeat Rudy in the CA primaries? I may have to vote for Thompson instead. What’s the winning strategy here?
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.