Replies

All good points, except that I think the anti-Simon sentiment expressed is a bit more emotional than logical. He failed not because he was a social conservative, but because as a political newbie he strayed off point during the off-the-cuff remarks to reporters about the "campaign funds" photo. He displayed his naiivete and willingness to believe an unproven conjecture and attempt to use it to his benefit, accusing Davis of doing something Davis easily proved was false. Remember? Or you think that had nothing to do with it at all? I thought you were a realist.

As to the demographic trend, I hear you there. In that sense, even Arnold (presuming he is some kind of conservative under the skin) at best only a finger in a dike holding off the inevitable flood. I thought Arnold has drifted towards illegal immigrant amnesty (round 2?) and does not seem to want to take on SB60 head-on, so again, why the fervent devotion to a guy who really doesn't seem to get it anyway, when it would count?

A finger is better than blowing up the dam. What are the Dems going to offer in 2006 to their special interests when taxes have been raised through the roof? The 55% rule will pass when it comes onto the ballot, because it will be pitched as if it were punishing legislators for not getting the budget done on time.

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 throughout his political career. RATs control the legislature, but that can change next year. A hard line Republican won't change that - the paralasys of this past summer will multiply if Tom possibly won. But if the voters believe that they have started a revolution, they'll look at their life long RATs and perhaps go with someone else.

I'm willing to give up a lot to remove the campaign slogan, "Send me to Sacramento to fight against Tom and his Right Wing cronnies," from the Democrat party.