Free Republic Founder Supports Tom McClintock!

Jim Robinson ^

[Quix]

Fascinating,

At least!

I'd hope McClintock had a reaslitic chance to take Boxer's seat. But I fear that's too far fetched, too.

But perhaps with Arnold in office etc. Maybe there'd be more of a chance.

[Quix]

For sure.

[Quix]

Dream on.

I don't know where you buy your fantasies, but I think you'd best return them for a full return of your money

--they are obviously neutered of any potency.

[Mo1]

How do you propose to get McClintock elected in this state, without any money, and with only five weeks of campaigning left?

He won't be .. and if what I've been seeing here on FR is any example of what is going on in CA .. Bustamante will win

Voters in CA need to figure out real fast one who they are going to back

[william clark]

Which aspect of Arnold's vast demographic appeal, psychological appeal, emotionally intense appeal do you have the hardest time wrapping your awareness, perceptions, thinking around?

First you tell me which of those traits makes him any different than Bill Clinton? I'm not saying Arnold isn't a vastly superior human being to Clinton, but none of those make him qualified to be governor. See, I take things into account like political philosophy, statements of intent and experience. But then, I'm funny that way.

[william clark]

Would you mind telling me what planet you live on?

Okay, I'm convinced. You're really a Democrat. You've demonstrated in spades an inability to grasp a simple point, combined with a tendency to spout irrelevancies when challenged with a question.

That's because he doesn't have to raise a lot of money in a short amount of time.

Try to stay with me this time. Your point that I was addressing was that there wasn't time for the ads to be effective. If that's the case, why is Arnold throwing his money away on ads?

I don't control the clock. I don't control McClintock's bank account. I have yet to hear a practical plan for getting McClintock a plurality of the vote in less than five weeks.

Yeah, that stuff I said about letting him get his message out, the fact that he's climbed considerably in the polls in a short time already, making a lot of media appearances for exposure... that was just silly.

Instead, I hear complaints of how I'm controlling the clock and McClintock's bank account.

You really should try and shut out those voices in your head.

I actually asked one vanity candidate to step aside for a guy he agreed with, rather than split the vote and make the November election a race between a true RINO (who only put an "R" after his name because he couldn't spell "D") and a leftist extremist who made Ho Chi Minh look like Barry Goldwater.

His response: "Look, I don't care if (prominent leftist nutball) wins the general election. This primary is all about me and my self-discovery, not about winning an election six months from now."

So you got to talk with a jerk running for office. So what? Here's a news flash. McClintock isn't the same guy, and it's still self-righteous stupidity to label someone a "vanity candidate" who's as qualified as McClintock, and already fighting the fight. That case could far more easily be made for Arnold, although I don't consider him such.

Yes, even conservatives can drink the nutball "human potential movement" Kool-Aid out here.

Whatever that's supposed to mean.

Unlike you, I've had some experience dealing

Well, you should stop consuming your own product, then.

You realize that you just described Ronald Reagan circa 1966 to a tee?

No, if I described Reagan to a tee, I'd have included the fact that he was a true conservative. You might want to go back and take note of two things. First, I've never used Arnold's inexperience as a reason not to support him, EXCEPT to the degree that McClintock's experience is relevant. If Arnold were a true conservative, I'd be on the bandwagon very easily. The other point is that I've not said I won't shift my support to him if, as the election draws near, it appears that McClintock hasn't made up the ground. Unlike you, I'm willing to let McClintock give it his best shot before I wave the white flag. To do otherwise is cowardly and a total sell-out of conservatism. In other venues, it would qualify as "appeasement."

Considering how much McClintock's actually accomplished (not much)...

Well, like I said, I didn't expect you to be impressed by momentum and a significant increase in poll numbers in a short span of time.

You're the one saying that a no money, no name, no win (well then someone should tell the other state Senators that there's a ringer among them) candidate (when he brags about having lost by the narrowest margin in 2002, that's damning himself with faint praise) has a better chance of winning.

Do you realize that you almost described Bill Clinton in 1992 to a tee? And he was actually referred to as a "political corpse" in the national media.

[lainie]

Don't forget Larry Flynt. He has some good revenue-building schemes.

[PeoplesRep_of_LA]

McClintock supporters are very abrasive. Everything is Anti-Arnold

I haven't seen ANYONE call me a Bustamante supporter...LOL

[PeoplesRep_of_LA]

If McClintock and Schwarzenegger run as a ticket -- McClintock for Lt. Gov. -- with a demand that Bustamante resign if he loses the election, would that satisfy your interests? (If Bustamante refuses to resign, he could be assigned an office in the executive washroom, and McClintock would take his office as Lt. Gov. ad hoc. Remember, you heard this here, first

Wow, the ego...First, and last. That is illegal, plus Lt Gov has no power.

[PeoplesRep_of_LA]

Sort of sums up your thread. What did you expect?

When the founder of the site you are posting on supports a guy, and others do too, why do you feel so compelled to flame them?

[sittnick]

First of all, no one, no one, no one, can give you any kind of idea what the margin of error in any of these polls is, which is why they vary so widely.

Polling relies largely on past history, but there is no past history for a recall election not held on the regular election day. Nobody has a reliable way of knowing who is going to show up, and who is not.

California is a bif statre. It is big enough for Ronald Reagan and Jerry Brown. It is big enough for Deukmajian, Pete Wilson and Gray Davis.

The simpletons are the ones who say that there are simply left and right voters.

What we have is a certain percentage of committed Democrats and Latinos who will vote for Bustamante. Most of them would vote for Bustamante if he had the politics of Zell Miller, because he is a Democrat and/or a Hispanic.

Another percentage will vote for Schwarzenegger because they think it would be "cool" to have him as gov., or they like his persona. His politics has less to do with it.

What's more, the talking heads are happy to cast the election in this light. No wonder 1/3 roughly are undecided with 135 candidates!

Anybody who follows the party primaries, including those in open primary states, knows that the polls are often way off. They have gotten better in recent years, but they did not see Buchanan taking New Hampshire in '96, Jerry Brown in CT in '92, Wallace's strong showing in Massachusetts whenever he ran, or the surge of Gary Hartpence in 1984 (pre-scandal). Even outside of primaries, no one predicted the Republican landslide of '94 or even Ventura's win in MN in '98.

Let me ask you, as far as real voters are concerned. Who has the ground forces, Ah-nold, or McClintock? Who would actually be drawing conservative financial suport nationwide if it weren't for the sideshow ... Ah-nold? or McClintock?

Personally, I want Ah-nold to stay in the race and stay at in the low 20's or so. This keeps the socially left-leaning libertarian types away from Cruz.

Who here really thinks the one-third of undecideds are really considering Ah-nold. They already know who he is, and they are NOT flocking to him!

Now, what if Cruz wins? I would rather that Cruz win than Schwarzenegger.

Chicago had a three way primary in '82 where the incumbent (Jane Byrne) and Richie Daley Jr. split the vote, and Harold Washington won the primary as a result. He was more liberal than the other two, by far, and did not do well by the city. The next black mayor Chicago elects will be a conservative. It also pays to note that Daley's splitting the vote and losing did not cost him a successful run later on. Similar things happened in New York with Dinkins. Both were pyrrhic victories for the Dems. In California, Wilson was a pyrrhic victory for the GOP.

It would be better if Cruz won than Schwarzenegger, because he would be their Dinkins, Washington, Glendenning, Cuomo (last term), Weicker. He would be Gray Davis writ large. The good news is that the race is not over yet, and that with a large undecided base (that is leaning neither towards Cruz nor Schwarz.) McClintock could be the winner.

[PeoplesRep_of_LA]

it does need updating as today's poll has him at...what...11% to Arnold's 40 something?

Really? Links please?

The only thing I've seen (R)nold getting 40% at is the latest Field Poll showing his disapproval numbers, FYI.

[Sloth]

For everyone who states as axiomatic that a conservative CANNOT be elected in California, can you explain how Bill Simon, a drooling moron, portrayed by the media as a right-wing extremist who ran the worst campaign in modern history, came within a few percent of beating Davis last year?

[fortaydoos]

Then ahnold the RINO can drop out.

[Sloth]

For everyone who states as axiomatic that a conservative CANNOT be elected in California, can you explain how Bill Simon, a drooling moron, portrayed by the media as a right-wing extremist, who ran the worst campaign in modern history, came within a few percent of beating Davis last year?

[NeoCaveman]

Why are liberals trying to pump up McClintock so much ... I have seen Art Torres do this twice in the last week.

Divide and conquer tactic by Torres, Brown, et al.

[Bluntpoint]

Are you calling JimRob a troll?

Are you still sending out all those Freeper Mails talking about ousting JimRob and replacing him with TLBSHOW?