“Tom Can’t Win”? Wrong – Do the Math – Silent Switch Makes McClintock Governor

9-22-03

[tallhappy]

Real Clear Politics elegantly presents all the polls concerning the California Recall election at this link

It seems that just about everyone pushing Schwarzenegger as the best chance for Republicans also feel McClintock would be preferable if he had a chance to win. McClintock is thought to most reflect their values and positions on issues. But “Tom can’t win.”

A simple perusal of the poll numbers, though, belies this conventional wisdom. Do the math. If only 60% of Schwarzenegger supports decided to vote for McClintock, McClintock take the lead.

Some examples:

The vilified LA Times Poll:

Schwarzenegger - 25
Bustamante - 30
McClintock - 18

With a switch of 60% Schwarzenegger to McClintock, McClintock is at 33 and wins by 3.

In polls with Schwarzenegger polling higher the effect is stronger, e.g. SurveyUSA.

Schwarzenegger - 39
Bustamante - 29
McClintock - 16

McClintock at 39.4, wins by more than 10.

Even the ureleased newst Field poll with Bustamante higher than Schwarzenegger plays out the same:

Schwarzenegger - 26
Bustamante - 28
McClintock - 14

McClintock at 29.6 with the silent 60 switch, over the top by 1.6%.

The reason for this effect is that Bustamante support has stayed consistently low, only about 30%. This is lower than the Democrat candidate would generally poll in a general election. The dynamics of this unique recall are different. Many dems won’t vote for a candidate for recall on principle. They feel the recall is wrong hence will only vote no and will not mark a replacement candidate. Others who normally would vote for a Democrat also may be voting for Huffington, Camejo or even Schwarzenegger. This effectively splits the left/liberal vote more than usual causing Bustamantes numbers to be low.

This dynamic allows a conservative a chance to win in this election compared to a regular general election where the numbers don’t quite add up.

Conservatives are playing defense by voting for Schwarzenegger. Defense doesn’t win. The offensive strategy is for conservatives to vote for McClintock in this election where a conservative actually could win. Conservatives shouldn’t be scared off by the media drumbeat and conventional wisdom. It doesn’t apply in this election. In a normal election a Democrat would pull near 50% and always beat the 40% conservative/Republican base. But this isn’t a normal election and Bustamante isn’t pulling the numbers.

Let the race play out as it is. Schwarzenegger doesn’t have to pull out for this to work. In fact, if he did pull out this scenario wouldn’t apply.

On election day there needs to be a silent surprise. If the polls on Bustamante’s support are right, only 60% of Schwarzenegger supporters need to quietly punch the McClintock chad rather than Schwarzenegger’s to shake the world with their silent surprise.

[William Tell]

William Tell said: "... $450 billion dollars of tax money for child care ..."

Oops. Sorry for the typo. That should have said $450 million.

[tallhappy]

This is strange math - asking for 60% to switch over is strictly fantasyland.

No argument. But, it is based on the fact that almost every Schwarzenegger supporter I've heard has said they'd vote for McClintock if he could win. It's not like he is some 3% third party fringer.

I just want to point out that if that is the opinion of 60% of Schwarzenegger supporters, their switch would put McClintock on top, according to the polls.

The silent switch. Just do it on election day.

[HitmanLV]

I bet the number is closer to 3% than 60%. It's hard getting 60% of any group to do something, I reckon.

[muleskinner]

Frankly, I'm surprised many McClintock voters haven't learned the lesson of Perot/Bush/Clinton.

I did. And that's why I will vote for Arnold, and not waste it on someone who cannot win.

I guess they enjoy bi#@$ing & moaning year after year.

"All sound and fury, signifying nothing.'

[tallhappy]

The point of this post is to point out that, contrary to the media drum beat, Bustamante's low poll numbers actually makes it mathematically possible for McClintock to win if conservatives drop the strategy of voting for who they are told can win.

It may be delusional, but only a little more so than thinking Schwarzenegger will win and much less delusional than thinking Maria Shriver and the Kennedy clan will not be the dominant force in a Schwarzenegger administration if he does win.

The same Republicans saying only Schwarzenegger can win also said Simon would win and Lundgren would win and Bush would win California.

[F16Fighter]

Why are so many "conservatives" perfectly willing to surrender their ideological sovereignty?

Would these same people so easily and so willingly surrender their national sovereignty?

What next?

[FairOpinion]

"Frankly, I'm surprised many McClintock voters haven't learned the lesson of Perot/Bush/Clinton."

---

Yes, just thinkk, if half the Bush voters and Half the CLinton voters had switched to Perot, he would have become president. (/sarcasm)

And of course, if people had enough sense to NOT vote for Perot, we would have been spared 8 years of Clinton.

But apparently McClintock voters are aching to get 7 years of Bustamante adn DEm control of CA for the 2004 elections.

How can they call themselves Republicans, that's what I would like to know.

[kingu]

...in contrast to being willing to listen, consult with, and gain the trust of his constituency in working towards reducing taxing and spending in state government?
Which should take precedence?

Whee, the people elect people in a representive government and those representives are who make and decide matters of law and policy. If you can't get anyone to go along with you on your issue, it doesn't matter how many of your home district are supportive, because your issues aren't going to get out of committee, if they even get that far.

Beyond, Tom's not a very good communicator. On most issues, he's not going to be able to convince the greater amount of the public to support his stand and put the pressure on the legislature. Yes, there are propositions, but if the bad laws aren't made in the first place, then it is a non-issue.

Let's look at the reality of our political process.. Tom doesn't negociate, he dictates, and dictating to a hostile legislature isn't going to do anyone any good.

[kingu]

Arnold has demonstrated that he's willing to listen, consult with, and trust Republican leadership. Tom has demonstrated that he's willing to go against the leadership
Who are you referring to as Republican leadership?

Jim Brulte, David Drieir, etc, the people whom Tom will have to work with if he wins. Rev. Lou Sheldon and the other outsiders can exert pressure, but they aren't elected leaders who can directly affect legislation.

[SteveH]

I think you have some good points but any vote takes a measure of courage and optimism to cast, even a vote for Arnold. For example, if we vote for Arnold, we need to convince ourselves that Arnold can grow significantly beyond the pandering, issue-ducking, leftward-moving, and foot-in-mouth disease that he has been displaying all these last weeks. Two can play the pessimistic outlook game, yes? And presuming you don't contest my pessimism, which would you rather have, a guy with a track record of conservatism and a communication problem (minor, fixable), or a relative unknown with a potential to be a Jeffordsian juggernaut or Ventura-style failure on the other side (major, significantly less fixable)? (If you then point me to the prospect of a Busta win, I'll point you to the prospect of a Davis win ;-)

[kingu]

I think you have some good points but any vote takes a measure of courage and optimism to cast, even a vote for Arnold. For example, if we vote for Arnold, we need to convince ourselves that Arnold can grow significantly beyond the pandering, issue-ducking, leftward-moving, and foot-in-mouth disease that he has been displaying all these last weeks. Two can play the pessimistic outlook game, yes? And presuming you don't contest my pessimism, which would you rather have, a guy with a track record of conservatism and a communication problem (minor, fixable), or a relative unknown with a potential to be a Jeffordsian juggernaut or Ventura-style failure on the other side (major, significantly less fixable)? (If you then point me to the prospect of a Busta win, I'll point you to the prospect of a Davis win ;-)

Could Arnold self destruct once he reaches Sacramento? Sure. Anyone can. One might even suggest that Tom would reach Sacramento and say he'll veto every piece of legislation until the Gay civil union legislation is repealed by the legislature, for example. Which is more likely? We've already seen many instances of Tom's anger, before and during this election cycle. Whereas Arnold is one of the more liked people in the entertainment industry, Democrat or Republican.

Arnold knows he doesn't know everything, or even close to. Within 24 hours of his announcement, he asked many industry and political leaders to give him a hand. I don't know how many refused when asked, but judging the range of people, I'd have to say he met with rather big success. Yes, I disagree with Buffet's view on the world, but his involvement gives the state breathing room when dealing with Wall Street. Pete Wilson's involved as well. I could cry that this is a sure sign of higher taxes, but why not just look to Bustamante and Davis - they already want to and are raising them.

Arnold has a reputation within the business community, as well as the social community, that when he says he's going to do something, it is done. They'll also tell you that he'll make you wait until the last second for his decision. When Arnold says he's not raising taxes, I have to take his word.

Besides, I have a sense of humor and I have to also look at the long term. Arnold dropping in on a RAT who is trying to protect their piece of pork in the budget.. There's a picture worth a thousand votes. And I have to take into account my rebel leanings. Hard core Democrats want Bustamante, hard core Republicans want Tom, and then this middle goes and picks effectively off the menu. Many people are going to start thinking about the insanity of the legislation feeding frenzy and really start to worry about their jobs.

Going outside the box in this case can lead to big benefits with little at risk (Alternatives being more RATs feeding on the budget vs dead lock with Tom v legislature.)

And beyond, the RATs can feel better about giving in on the budget to Arnold because they can say to themselves that he's not really a Republican. The State Employees, Teachers, Figherfighters and Police already have their hooks into everyone in Sacramento, but not yet into Arnold, so there is wiggle room there. Some contract concessions could come, just because Arnold's an unknown. And the press jaunt over to the chiropactor that has been getting the most money from the worker's compensation fund would be rather entertaining.

See, issues like the 2nd ammendment, abortion, and illegal immigration are important. But what is more important to me is to have a place to call home, to have my business survive, and to be able to afford insurance for my employees. The stalemate in Sacramento over the deficit has to end, and I believe the man who has the most chance to do it is Arnold. Tom's got a great plan - I hope he stays in the state senate and works with the Governor to get it passed. He's got some great beliefs. He's just not the man for the governor's seat.

[AmericaUnited]

I really do believe that if Tom gets all of the conservatives, independants, liberals, greens, demonrats, dead people, libertarians, CPUSA members, dogs, and illegals , to vote for him... HE CAN WIN AND WIN BIG!

[Fishrrman]

Cicero writes: The bone that sticks in our throats is Arnold's pro-abortion, pro-perversion position. These issues are simply too serious to be compromised. If necessary, I'd be willing to support a moderate RINO who was not committed to killing babies rather than elect someone like Bustamente. But I won't compromise on baby killing, and I'm sure there's a large conservative core in California that will never vote for Arnold.

No, Cicero.

The "bone" that is going to "stick in [y]our throats" October 8th is Governor BUSTAMANTE. Better get used to it.

I peruse the "recall threads" with nothing short of pessimistic amusement. The vitriol expressed here among Republicans grows, heaves and boils; it would be downright funny if it just wasn't so sad. Non-Californians are being treated to a textbook example of how to lose in the face of victory.

I'm reminded of a scene in Rod Serling's political thriller "Seven Days In May", in which a loyal Senator (trying to prevent a coup of the U.S. government), having been captured by renegade Army forces is confronted by a "neutral" officer who is unaware of the gravity of the situation. The Senator warns him, "right now the government of the United States is sitting on the tip of the Washington Monument, teetering back and forth, about to go over -- and you're one of the handful of people who can save it!"

At this point in history, California -- and perhaps our entire nation -- is in similar peril -- but no one seems able to save it from the coming, perhaps inevitable, crash.

Think the flood of anti-American, pro-illegal legislation coming from Gray Davis right now is bad enough? Then, heck -- wait to see what comes from the desk of [soon-to-be] governor Bustamante!

Think that state senator McClintock and the rest of the Republicans in state government are going to be able to stop him? Of course, the same way they stopped the illegal drivers' licenses. (laughing outloud)

With Bustamante holding the reins, California will gallop full speed towards becoming MEXIfornia. And from there, it's only a short trot to MEChAfornia, the prelude to Atzlan.

What to do? Is there any way out?

Of course, the preferable solution would be for either Tom McClintock or Arnold Swarzenengger to withdraw from the race, throwing support to the surviving candidate. That candidate _might_ have a chance at winning. But, short of a miracle, this isn't going to happen.

In that case, what will be the result?

Unless Davis' support rises above the 50% mark, Cruz Bustamante is the next governor of California. He will win with a [relatively] low plurality the same way that Clinton won (over Bush 1 and Perot) in 1992.

Is there _any_ way to STOP Bustamante from becoming governor?

Yes. Vote "no" on the recall. Then vote for the Republican candidate of your choice.

For stating this, I'm going to be labeled a Democratic disruptor. Say what you wish (I am no such thing).

Here is your OTHER choice:
Vote "yes" on the recall, then vote for the Republican candidate of your choice. Davis will be recalled, but Bustamante wins over a McClintock/Swarzenegger "split".

Who do you REALLY want as governor, given these two "choices": Davis, or Bustamante?

Cheers!
- John

[AmericaUnited]

Hello John! I do think it would be much, much better for Davis to stay in office than for Busty to win.

[nosofar]

If necessary, I'd be willing to support a moderate RINO who was not committed to killing babies rather than elect someone like Bustamente.

I'd be willing to support a liberal Republican if, for example, he was opposed to abortion in the 3rd trimester when it's proven that babies are viable outside the womb, though it would make more sense to be opposed in both 2nd and 3rd.

[nosofar]

What I don't understand is that if McClintock is so strong among conservatives why is it they don't support him above the 29% level? He's been in the CA political scene for most or all of his adult life. So he must be well known within the Party and especially among it's so called conservatives. Yet he draws less than 30% support. That says something about him...... Just what it says I'm not sure other than he can't win with that kind of base support....

Alternatively, how is 'conservative' defined here? I assume it's 'self-identified' conservatives. Another possibility is that many who identify themselves as conservatives aren't.

[calcowgirl]

I'm for Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger winning!

You and the rest of the leftests...

A Republican Hollywood liberals can accept.

On Thursday’s [August 7] Good Morning America, actress Jamie Lee Curtis declared of Arnold Schwarzenegger the morning after he announced he’s running in the recall election for Governor of California:
“I think he will make a fantastic Governor.”

She soon revealed her rationale:
"I actually believe he's really, at his heart,
even though he pretends to be a Republican,
I think he's a social Democrat at heart.”

[68 grunt]

How cool is that! I bet we gained 10,000 right there! Unity!

[Lady Heron]

Amen!

[CyberAnt]

Well .. that formula only works in TEXAS!!