[nyconse]

I agree. I have seen your posts on the last Arnold thread. You were the voice of reason-If we don't support McClintock than we are not pure conservatives (according to some freepers), but what is the sense of supporting a candidate who will undoubtedly lose, thus leaving californa in the hands of a Democrat-a wacky one at that?

[JohnnyZ]

but what is the sense of supporting a candidate who will undoubtedly lose

If people vote on principle McClintock would have the votes to win; thus he is electable. If people who would otherwise vote McClintock instead vote for someone they consider more electable McClintock won't have the votes to win, thus making him unelectable in a self-fulfilling prophecy.

It's like contributors deciding they won't give to a candidate because he can't raise funds. Well of course he can't if the contributors won't give to him! Whether the "prophecy" will come to pass depends how many folks it is pulling the rug out from under a candidate.

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

Photograph of a self-proclaimed "pure" conservative: