McClintock now has a clear field - - conservatives have one horse to ride!

churchillbuff ^ | AUG. 23, 03 | churchillbuff

[churchillbuff]

With Simon out, there's only one conservative in the race -- - McClintock's 1) the most experienced; 2) the most knowledgeable; 3) the one with the most well-articulated vision; 4) the one with Reagan-like CONVICTIONS (not convenient "opinions" adopted yesterday -- and subject to change tomorrow; 5) the one who's from the MIDDLE CLASS so he KNOWS that TAXES HURT -- he feels it in his bones, not through a focus group -- so we can trust him to keep his word.

NOTE: LYN NOFZIGER HAS JUST ENDORSED MCCLINTOCK!

[grania]

A vote for McClintock is a vote for Bustamante. If you want to save California from the Democratic plague, vote Arnold.

It sounds like McClintock would have had an excellent chance at victory if the party hadn't decided to abandon the conservatives, again.

Ahhhhhnald's a liberal. He'll have to share the whacko vote with Bustamente. Why don't you Arnold supporters do the math and realize one conservative (McClintock) against two scary liberals is a good way to get a conservative win?

Or, could it be that you really don't want to cede the Republican Party to its core voting constituency...the ones who keep winning the elections for corporate, cheap foreign labor, globalist types?

[F16Fighter]

Nice work...

[EGPWS]

If I were McClintock, I'd announce instead that I was running against Barbara Boxer. He'd be the instant frontrunner, and also have a political future.

That my friend would be the focus of a politician that is wanton of power and notoriety. Although I live 2000 miles from LAX I do see the "Tom McClintock" vision and see it as an unfaultering conviction to the point of donating to his election fund which is the first time I have EVER given to any politician in my life! (middle aged as I may be)

I see Tom McClintocks endeavors for election to the Governors seat as priority for him to help alieviate California's woe's and is steadfast in his focus on doing so. If he were to be focused on just maintaining political power, and the betterment of himself, then yes, I could envision his pursuit for the Senators seat.

[Amerigomag]

If McClintock is *UNELECTABLE Arnie should be willing, if not anxious, to enter into a public agreement with McClintock.

McClintock and Arnie negotiate a public contract. A simple list. What Arnie WILL do if elected, what he will TRY to do, what he will try to AVOID, and what he WON'T do, regardless of the consequences to himself or the state.

Arnie signs the contract, it's published and publisized and McClintock supports Arnie.

[grania]

Yeah, that's the same kind of thinking that led voters to vote for Perot instead of GHWB in '92. You know what that got us? 8 years of Clinton. And now you want at least 2-6 years of Bustamante. Great...

Perot wouldn't have gotten hardly any votes at all (except maybe himself and his wife) if GeorgeI hadn't lied about taxes and gotten us involved with the NAFTA disaster.

I'd wager that Perot's votes mostly came from those who would've stayed home and those who would've gone to Clinton out of disgust for having George I abandon the principles his supporters believed in.

This sounds like a case where the Conservative Republicans aren't abandoning the Republican Party. The Party abandoned them by supporting Ahhhnold. So, live with it. (Just like GWB will have to next election if he doesn't start doing something about the invasion, jobs, and getting PBA signed)

[af_vet_1981]

I'm voting McClintock not for "principles" but for SELF PROTECTION!

The end result does not protect you when Gray Davis or Cruz Bustamante is Governor of California. If you think they are equivalent to Arnold Schwarzenegger than you deserve what happens.

[Dog Gone]

Why is a US Senate seat unimportant? Why would that be selfish instead of actually helping the country?

[af_vet_1981]

We have you to thank for Gray Davis and Cruz Bustamante then because you will not support a candidate that can defeat them.

[Two-Bits]

You're right, who gives a care what Clinton has gotten away with. I'm sure the victums of 9/11 could not agree with you more !!
Thank Heavens, we have people like you around to keep us in focus..Because it is thoughts like yours that keeps us in the "deep Kimchi right now".

[speekinout]

You really need to rethink your insistence on an anti-abortion candidate. Prior to Roe v Wade, abortion was a state matter. The most liberal abortion laws were signed into law by the then CA gov, Ronald Reagan.
Now, abortion is a Fed'l matter, and a gov. can do nothing about it.

Actually, most social issues are being determined by the Fed'l courts these days. That's wrong, but that's another subject. The only thing that matters to a state is the gov's fiscal policy.
And that comes from the candidate, not quotes from unauthorized "spokespersons" or movie scripts.

[Those_Crazy_Liberals]

"McClintock is *UNELECTABLE*. Vote Schwarzenegger for a *REPUBLICAN* victory!"

BUMP BUMP BUMP

An opinion shared by many!

[floriduh voter]

California would have a Perot or Nader situation here if there are too many Republicans in the race. Can the GOP beat the democrats if they are split? I don't think so. Time is short and I hope the GOP doesn't waste valuable time fighting amongst themselves instead of fighting for the recall and ouster of the entire Davis team.

[EGPWS]

Why is a US Senate seat unimportant?

Now where oh where did THAT come from? Not me. All I was trying to convey is my immpression of Tom McClintocks agenda is that it is focused on California's woe's and he feels that he could be much more of an asset to California as Governor than a US Senator from California. MHO of course.

[freedumb2003]

Please look here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/969281/posts

[Those_Crazy_Liberals]

"Haven't heard that chestnut since the "moderate" Republicans used it against Reagan in Republican primaries! Thanks for jogging my memory!"

Sure you did, you heard it in the California GOP primary for Governor last year. My my my what a short memory you have.

[Those_Crazy_Liberals]

"What makes McClintock "unelectable"? Didn't he score more votes than Simon, and for a lesser-known office, and with a pitiful fraction of the money, in the last statewide election? "

Ummmmmmm. . . didn't he also LOSE?

[sofaman]

....bow out and stop dividing the votes.

I stopped reading right here. Arnold has 30% of the votes. He should pullout because he is taking votes from McClintock who has 4%?

That defies logic.

The guy that is way out ahead should drop out to make way for the guy that is barely on the radar screen? That Demospeak for "level playing field", no dodgeball because it is detrimental to their self-esteem", etc

What alot of crap! Politics is palyed to WIN!!! California Republicans, the name of the game is to win!!!

[Those_Crazy_Liberals]

LOL you're sending me to a vanity? A vanity you wrote? Talk about being vain!

[Beachcomber]

Let McClintock debate Arnold in September. If he falls on his face then, he can withdraw.

If Arnold falls on his face, he can withdraw.

[Recourse]

Wow, you're wrong on every count. Just pull out your World Almanac and look at the 1992, 1996, and 2000 elections by candidate. You can see that where Perot was a factor, he took almost all Republican votes.

And as for NAFTA, I hate to say this, but the Republican Party always put free trade high in its platform. Why? Because it is good for the US. Yes, we export low-wage jobs. Good. We would do it whether we had NAFTA or not. When we export those jobs, investment is driven to more profitable, high-wage industries.