Replies

I think that a candidate can be pro-life and win. Look at GWB. He was pro-life, but didn't wear it on his sleeve. He's been probably the best president since Roe v. Wade in working to change the hearts and minds of the American people on this issue.

Regarding Simon, I agree with you partly: he is pro-life, people know it, but we need to make sure that the RIGHT people know he's pro-life. He's obviously not going to go on TV and spend $2 mil on an ad talking about the sanctity of human life, but prolifers need to get his message out to the prolife community through emails, the internet, churches, religious organizations, friends, etc.

I think that when the public -- after March 5 -- sees and hears Bill Simon, they will know that he is not Dan Lungren. They will know that he is not a hard-sounding, mean-sounding "white male"; instead, they will see a compassionate conservative, someone who is smart and articulate and has good ideas for California's future. It will be hard for Davis to wrap the pro-life albatross around Simon's neck because Simon doesn't sound like liberals think pro-lifers sound like. Does that make any sense?

I guess what I'm trying to say is that Lungren lost votes not because he was pro-life, but because he was "hard" and couldn't get out on any issues. Simon has a well-rounded policy plan and will come off as being a compassionate businessman. And he can bring coalitions of disparate interests together, just like Ronald Reagan.