While I agree with you on the above principal, and while my argument against Arnold smacks of ideological puritanism (which it is not), allow me to point out the obvious fact that there is less difference between a Dean and a Lieberman than there is between Arnold and McClintock.
On the issue of Arnold, all I am asking for is honesty, not purity. Please supply evidence of one policy espoused by Arnold which indicates that he is a Republican (other than his claim to be one).
Lieberman, on the other hand, has mainstream Democratic views on almost all issues (incl. AA, abortion, tax cuts, gun control, judges, immigration, gay unions), except for the war. Thus, the ideological purity that you accuse us of is actually more severe and suicidal on the other side.
BUT he has an R after his name so he must have a conservative impulse somewhere in that mass of muscle. Second, this is a very short campaign and McClintock is an obscure pol who has neither the resources nor the perceived ability to win. He may be the Second Coming, but unless he’s got a secret weapon, he will not win.
In World War 2 we allied with Stalin to defeat Hitler. After the war was won we changed our position. After someone with an R after his name wins in California we can begin the big debate about ideological purity and getting “our” guys into positions of power. To do that, we have to win, not make a virtue of losing well. Right now, that person is Arnold. I may wish it were otherwise, but as someone once said “if wishes were horses, beggars would ride.”