*Poll says McClintock could win 1-0n-1 matchup*

National Review (The Corner) ^ | 9/22/03 | Peter Robinson

[TheBigB]

Brother Hugh, some news.

John Eastman, a professor of law at Chapman University and a frequent guest on your radio program, has just brought to my attention a poll that will interest you. Commissioned by the Lincoln Club of Orange County, the poll includes the following results:

If Arnold Schwarzenegger found himself in a head-to-head race against Cruz Bustamante--that is, in effect, if Tom McClintock dropped out of the race--then Schwarzenegger would win, 44 to 37 percent.

But if Tom McClintock found himself in a head-to-head race against Cruz Bustamante--that is, in effect, if Schwarzenegger dropped out of the race--then McClintock would win, 42 to 40 percent.

From the beginning, Hugh, you have made a single argument against McClintock, insisting that he cannot win.

But he can.

[pogo101]

I can't believe people are defending this stuff.

Why exactly is it a violation of conservative and/or (especially!) libertarian principles for Arnold to have posed as he did?

I would agree if he was doing something sexual in the shots, but it's my second-hand understanding (having only seen one, which was "just" nudity) that he wasn't. Or is this a Gay Thing (in that, I have read, one of his shoots, albeit not sexual, was reportedly known by him to be for a gay-oriented publication)?

[deport]

The last Survey USA poll had the CA conservative vote at 24% for McClintock and I believe at 51% or so for Schwarzenegger...

The Public Policy Institute of CA had the CA Conservative vote at 29% for McClintock if I remember correctly.... I don't remember the Schwarzenegger number in that one....

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

Yeah, me again. LOL (It's amazing. I said the same thing when all saw all your silly graphics. ; ))

[B Knotts]

What would have been said here if nude photos of Clinton had surfaced? Seriously. Think about that.

[pogo101]

At this point, is there anything Schwarzenegger could say or do (or to have said or done) that would cause you to rethink your support of him? Anything at all?

(What, you're not asking me, too? I'm hurt! So I'll answer your post to another:)

Sure, probably. I'm not sure what. At this point his sole real "conservative" selling point is fiscal, so if he were to say or do something that significantly moved him leftward in that respect, I'd have to think again.

That, or the sudden publication of Arnie Porn or the like.

I don't see that happening.

But perhaps it says something that I haven't yet mailed in (or marked) my absentee ballot ...

[Roscoe]

Schwarzenegger on gross sexual perversion: "It's all legitimate to me."

[PhiKapMom]

You have a lot of nerve talking about Arnold supporters when your hero takes money from the Indians. Maybe you would like to get an education about Indian gambling by following the link: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/988275/posts?page=158#158 As for me, I don't think much of someone that is called a "principled" conservative taking money from the Indian gambling interest. Here in my adopted State of Oklahoma, our "principled" conservatives are fighting against the gambling interest not taking campaign money. You see since moving to Oklahoma after being transferred I really do know what "principled" conservatives are -- they are my State Rep and State Senator who are fighting the Indian gambling and lottery which would lead to more Indian gambling and Class III casinos for Oklahoma -- McC couldn't carry their briefcases because his brand of "principled" conservative doesn't even come close to those two gentlemen or my Two Senators Inhofe and Nickles.

That is why I would never support McC -- he is a phoney and has a bunch of folks fooled. I will support a more moderate Republican everytime when I sense the "principled" conservative is nothing more than a shell! Even McC said that he would do nothing about abortion while Arnold wants parental notification. Now who is being "principled" then?

[onyx]

At this point, is there anything Schwarzenegger could say or do (or to have said or done) that would cause you to rethink your support of him? Anything at all?

I'm voting on October 7, 2003. "At this point," I plan to vote for Arnold.

[PeoplesRep_of_LA]

I said the same thing when all saw all your silly graphics

You did? Did the sentence make as little sense then as it did today?

[autoresponder]

The only way you win with McClintock is to go to the $2 window and bet on him to "place"

Check the Vegas odds

That should fix the California economy

[pogo101]

What would have been said here if nude photos of Clinton had surfaced? Seriously. Think about that.

This is so far-fetched that "I don't know" is the only answer I can muster.

The sole reason Arnold was approached to be in those photos is because he was a world-famous bodybuilder and was paid a nice sum of money for (what I understand to be) rather artsy, non-sexual images.

I suppose it would be worse for Clinton to have done it inasmuch as Clinton clearly DIDN'T have that aesthetic appeal, for, then, his doing so wouldn't have any non-weirdo rationale that I can fathom. (That is, if you weren't traditionally Adonis-like, and weren't being paid, why on Earth would you consent to a nude shoot that was destined for a national magazine? ... unless you "got off" on the idea ...??)

[JCEccles]

That should fix the California economy.

And another dose of social liberalism will?

Californians who choose Sschwarzenegger or Bustamante deserve their fate.

[B Knotts]

My wife and son are part Cherokee, so I don't have a big problem with Indians. I also have no problem with gaming. It's only fair that the Indians get to make some money after all this time.

You cannot seriously think that Schwarzenegger is going to be more conservative on abortion than McClintock, can you?

Ted Costa called Tom McClintock "the most decent man I know" on radio the other day.

[Roscoe]

CALIFORNIA STATE REPUBLICAN PARTY OVERWHELMINGLY ENDORSES PROP 1A - THE INDIAN SELF RELIANCE AMENDMENT

BURLINGAME, CA., February 6, 2000 -- The California Republican Party, at its state convention in Burlingame on Sunday, voted to support Proposition 1A - the Indian Self-Reliance Amendment. With more than 600 delegates in attendance, the membership voted overwhelming to endorse the ballot measure that will protect Indian gaming on Indian lands.

[JCEccles]

Schwarzenegger on gross sexual perversion: "It's all legitimate to me."

However, I'm sure pogo101 will place it in context for us. ;-)

[pogo101]

Schwarzenegger on gross sexual perversion: "It's all legitimate to me."

Depends on your definition of "gross sexual perversion." My memory of what Arnold actually said was that he didn't consider homosexuality morally wrong.

Why not just give the whole quote and let folks judge for themselves, instead of leaving part of it out and replacing "homosexuality" with "gross sexual perversion"?

Your way, one could infer that Schwarzenegger had blessed not just homosexuality but also pedophilia, etc.

[B Knotts]

If Clinton had taken nude photos, no matter the reason, the reaction here would have been nuclear. The double standard here is blatant.

I am gradually realizing that about 85% of the Schwarzenegger support is not much more than mindless star worship, and that there is absolutely nothing short of him being involved in some sort of murder-cannibalism scandal that will change the minds of most of his supporters.

[pogo101]

However, I'm sure pogo101 will place it in context for us. ;-)

Have I gotten that predictable?

Hmm. Apparently I have.

[pogo101]

It's not a double standard unless you accept that Clinton would be as likely to be approached to be in such photos as was Schwarzenegger. Why would some pasty flabby guy agree to do it? Interesting that you think Clinton somehow would or could have done so, though.

You're really, really reaching.

[PhiKapMom]

Was just told by a Freeper that is no longer the stance of the California Republican Party and am now checking for a link!

BTW, was McC for this or against this support for the Indians?

How can you say that any of the people supporting it are "principled" conservatives? I don't care if the Republicans did support it originally -- IMO it is not a "principled" conservative issue to support!