McClintock Says "he made a promise...he is in it until the end"...Live FNC

FNC LIVE | 09-25-03

[Brian S]

Tune in...

[AmericanInTokyo]

Face it, you are not a doctrinaire conservative, and you have hated that guy McClintock since day one, even though you feigned being as uncommitted for nearly three weeks.

[CheneyChick]

And you are full of crap.

[tallhappy]

Me:A Schwarzenegger win is the worst possible outcome.

You: You're delusional.

My response: If only it were so.

I wish I was. I hope I am.

[FairOpinion]

How does a Bustamante win promote conservative ideas?

[tallhappy]

How does a Bustamante win promote conservative ideas?

It doesn't. But he doesn't represent conservatives or a conservative party.

[No.6]

Not picking on FO but I had to pick one post to reply to :)

Creds: Grew up in CA, degreed from UCSB, moved to and presently living in MI; so I won't be voting in the recall (rats).

Let's see if we can agree on certain basic points:
- If either Tom or Arnie were out, the other would certainly win.
- Arnie is consistently polling higher than Tom
- Neither is polling consistently higher than Cruz by more than the MOE.
- Tom's issue positions are more consistent with conservative principles.
- With many absentee ballots coming in, if one candidate dropped, a lot of votes would be lost as invalid.
- Democrat supporters are happy to see and encourage division between Arnie and Tom in any form wherever possible; they know their own position is weak.

Ok? No flamebait there I hope.

There exist the following possibilities. I will attempt to state the two candidates' supporters' views on these possibilities as neutrally as I can.

1. Division among the two Republican candidates ends up electing Cruz. On the plus side, conservative integrity is intact, and we retain "we didn't vote for this mess" as a talking point. On the other hand, principle without power is still powerless to affect change, and Cruz is far to the left of even Davis.

2. One or the other Republican, most likely Arnie, wins even with two Republican candidates; this will almost certainly not be a plurality. On the plus side, Cruz doesn't win; either R will do more for CA than Davis or Cruz; and a R governor will be able to lend support for W in 2004; on the minus side, CA congressional RATs will be able to stonewall using the line that 'most voters didn't choose X' and later blame the Governor and Republicans for any CA woes.

3. One of the R candidates drops out (or a decisive number of endorsements are given or change to one candidate). The remaining R candidate wins, quite possibily with a plurality. Positively, we get the benefits of #2 plus the 'mandate' line the winner can use to get things done in Sacramento. However the likely name in scenario 3 to win is Arnie, not Tom; which means if you will 'settling' for incrementalism and the concern over watering down conservativism.

My own perspective is that since we have seen in CA, and in the 92-94 timeframe nationally, what happens when radical leftists run everything. CA is too big to lose, both on a political scale as a leading indicator into 2004 and an economic scale. I don't personally buy into the "watch them screw it up worse, then they'll really see how right we were all along" because frankly the end-road on that path is Zimbabwe, is North Korea.

Do I have a preference for Arnie or Tom? Yes. But IMO that preference is irrelevant next to making sure we don't all end up looking like the back-biting incompetant party. Let's leave that title for the Democratic presidential hopefuls.

[FairOpinion]

"My own perspective is that since we have seen in CA, and in the 92-94 timeframe nationally, what happens when radical leftists run everything. CA is too big to lose, both on a political scale as a leading indicator into 2004 and an economic scale."

===

Excellent analysis!

[No.6]

But now that I see your quote I see I left a horrible grammar mistake; imagine a comma, not a period, after 'everything' and before 'CA.' That way it'll only be a run-on sentence and not a fragment.

[tallhappy]

making sure we don't all end up looking like the back-biting incompetant party

Much much too late for that.

CA R leadership is and has been incompetent for a long time. 1994 is a prime example.

The same people who couldn't get their won speaker elected after wining a majority in 1994 now support and endorse Schwarzenegger.

It goes on and on.

[Hillary's Lovely Legs]

[Hildy]

If winning a debate was the key to an election, we'd be saying President Keyes now, wouldn't we?

[onyx]

Quote of the month, I mean day.

If winning a debate was the key to an election, we'd be saying President Keyes now, wouldn't we?

211 posted on 09/25/2003 11:18 AM PDT by Hildy (SUCKER: Short-sighted Uncompromising Conservative Kool-Aid-drinking Elitist Republican.)

[flaglady47]

"Bustamante? The bald guy with the nearly all the same positions as Arnold?"

If you think the fiscal policies of Arnold who will not raise taxes and will be pro-business, is the same as Bustamente who will instantly raise your taxes to the tune of $9 Billion, and will further run businesses out of California, then you are confirming my opinion of McClintock supporters that they are kool-aid true believers who react on emotion (just like the liberals) rather than on practicality and reality. Talking about being your own worst enemy.

[Roscoe]

"We want to make sure the mothers have affordable day care. We want to make sure the older folks have their care that they need. That everything has to be provided for the people." -- Arnold Schwarzenegger

TANSTAAFCL: There Ain't No Such Thing As A Fiscal Conservative Liberal

[novice2]

>>Obviously Darrly Issa was lying.<<

(when he quoted McClintock as promising to back out at this stage iof the campaign if it looked like he'd be a spoiler )

Yep. I guess Congressman Drier was too. They both must be RINOs.

[flaglady47]

You'll find out the difference between a Shwarzenegger and a Bustamente, when you find yourself with Bustamente as Governor. Then I'll talk to you in a year and see how you think. How wonderful California will be then. I'll be thankful I don't live in California, and that you do. Learn to live with it. Your about to get more of the Davis same old same old, only with a fat little bald man who dreams of having CA revert to Mexico instead.

[Roscoe]

You'll find out the difference between a Shwarzenegger and a Bustamente

If I buy a micrometer.

[SteveH]

If I buy a micrometer.

Better yet, an electron microscope, just to be on the safe side.

;-)

[A CA Guy]

Tom McClintock is now an ex Republican Party advocate who is all out for himself against the party.

I will not back him in any attempt against Boxer either. He is a proved traitor to his party and the people of California.

He is not fit to take the lead in walking my dog, much less being trusted with any office ever again.

He's not to be trusted.

[A CA Guy]

Guess she had great instincts because McClintock has showed himself a traitor to the Republican party in this race.
He is never to be trusted or backed in any office ever again.