Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

California recall: Does one man hold key? [McClintock]
Christian Science Monitor ^ | 9-25 | Christian Science Monitor

Posted on 09/25/2003 2:54:50 PM PDT by ambrose

The Christian Science Monitor - csmonitor.com

from the September 26, 2003 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0926/p01s03-uspo.html

California recall: Does one man hold key?

Tom McClintock, top GOP conservative, could tilt race for or against Arnold Schwarzenegger.

By Daniel B. Wood | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

BURBANK, CALIF. - Republican candidate Tom McClintock laughs from deep in the belly when asked if he will be the "spoiler" in the great populist revolution/experiment/circus of California's gubernatorial recall election.

"My opponents say I'm the Ross Perot of this campaign, possibly siphoning off enough votes to hand the election to Democrats," he says, settling onto a shady park bench for an interview. "I say, 'Wait a minute.... Ross Perot was an idle millionaire, with no public-policy experience who one day on a whim entered the presidential race.' That sounds like another candidate in this race ... not me," he says, referring to muscleman/millionaire Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Once a mere asterisk in the con- fused calculus of California's 135-candidate recall election, Mr. McClintock has gradually emerged as the strong, third-place vote getter in polls - rising (at 14-to-18 points) while the two leaders - fellow Republican Schwarzenegger (26 points) and Democratic Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante (28 points) - tread water.

As the race enters its final stretch, McClintock's motives and acts are becoming paramount for two reasons. One, splitting the Republican vote, he could cost the party its best chance in a decade of high, statewide office. Two, his candidacy could drag down the success of the recall itself by forcing Republican partisans to reconsider driving Gov. Gray Davis from office because of fear that they could hand the office to a more liberal Democrat, Mr. Bustamante.

Ever since McClintock leaped from 4 percent voter support to double-digits about three weeks ago, the pressure has risen for him to stop offering himself as an alternative to Arnold Schwarzen-egger that could hand the election to Democrats. But as more voters get to know him, his poll numbers have continued to rise, while Schwarzenegger's are flat.

More conservative than Schwarzenegger on social issues - abortion, gay marriage, gun control - he is also far more experienced in fiscal matters, with California's sagging economy the No. 1 issue.

"He is by far the most studied and experienced of all the candidates in fiscal issues and how to implement public policy," says Jack Pitney, political scientist at Claremont McKenna College. "If the election were a college SAT test, McClintock would be the next governor hands down."

Even though he is widely acknowledged as the more knowledgeable, the more articulate, and the more detailed idea-man, 25-year government veteran McClintock does not have the millions of dollars of his chief Republican rival, nor his name recognition. Therein lies one of the chief ironies of the recall: Does he/should he/will he step aside to allow the neophyte challenger - and the Republican party - to gain its best chance of victory?

"He is a man who stands on his word and his principles while claiming time and again that he is in this to the last," says Doug Jeffe, a longtime California political consultant. "If he did get out, it would be totally uncharacteristic of him."

Now, with Schwarzenegger and Bustamante in a near dead heat, one leading Republican, Darrell Issa, the millionaire who bankrolled the signature gathering to oust Davis, has said that if Schwarzenegger or McClintock don't back off, Republicans should vote "no" on the recall. Polls show that if Arnold backed out, McClintock could not win.

But McClintock rejects a widespread analysis that conservative candidates have brought Republican fortunes to their low ebb. He feels the current crisis is the perfect storm for their historic comeback.

"Great parties are built on great principles," says McClintock, referring to the pillars of conservative policy: holding down taxes, cutting waste, standing up for the unborn, and resisting government approval of gay unions. "This is not a time to change our principles."

While such comments win kudos from some for adherence to principle, they strike others as bullheaded.

"McClintock's constant megaphoning of conservative social agendas is presenting a real problem for Republicans who really like him for his fiscal experience," says William Schneider, a pollster and political analyst. "They know Tom has the smarts to get this state out of economic problems and they worry about Arnold's lack of experience and specificity. But they don't think Tom can win and can't resist the fact that Arnold could."

As a child, McClintock campaigned for Barry Goldwater at age 8. In high school he organized classmates into a statewide GOP group. A political-science graduate of UCLA, he became a syndicated columnist railing about former Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown, lauding the character of John Wayne. Hired by a former L.A. police chief-cum-state senator (Ed Davis), McClintock began a 25-year career in Sacramento, marked by opposition to Republican governors George Deukmejian and Pete Wilson over tax hikes and spending waste.

Despite his conservative stances, he was the top GOP vote-getter in the state, running for controller, in the 2002 election.

"I got very little from the state GOP and was outspent by my opponent by 5 to 1," says McClintock. "Despite all that, I lost by less than 1 percent of the vote."

A man who often quotes Reagan and Shakespeare, McClintock is considered a legislative loner with few legislative friends for his near two-decade pursuit of shrinking the state payroll.

In his favorite stump speech he tells why cutting is so important. As a child, he came home from school to find his mother crying over an unexpectedly high tax bill. The moment has lived in his imagination ever since that government takes too much from citizens and delivers too little.

Full HTML version of this story which may include photos, graphics, and related links


www.csmonitor.com | Copyright © 2003 The Christian Science Monitor. All rights reserved.
For permission to reprint/republish this article, please email copyright@csps.com



TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360 ... 501-517 next last
To: EternalVigilance
It gives us all some real context and puts a human face on the costs of liberal governance.

Thanks but you wouldn't want to use my face. I'm an ugly cuss.

321 posted on 09/25/2003 7:55:05 PM PDT by massadvj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 319 | View Replies]

To: NittanyLion
What did he say wrong?
322 posted on 09/25/2003 7:55:36 PM PDT by 68 grunt (3/1 India, 3rd, 0311, 68-69)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
Hey EVie, he's what we got and we like him!
323 posted on 09/25/2003 7:56:30 PM PDT by 68 grunt (3/1 India, 3rd, 0311, 68-69)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: massadvj
country club nor am I a socialist - but Arnold certainly qualifies on both counts.

Guy comes here with nothing and becomes a multi-millionaire. Yep, sounds like someone 'born of the manner' as the country club set would call it. And along the way, he rejected all the free-market principles that enabled his wealth-creation for the advantages of socialism which he saw/experienced first-hand in Europe.

The typical FR poster is too intelligent to post such unreasoned comments. Be gone please.

324 posted on 09/25/2003 7:57:19 PM PDT by Snerfling
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 313 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
"Warren Buffett is more than just a committed Democrat – although he is definitely that. He is a flaming liberal who is deeply involved in social engineering. His support for abortion on demand would have made Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger and her friends in the Eugenics Movement proud."

http://www.americandaily.com/item/2032
325 posted on 09/25/2003 7:57:30 PM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 320 | View Replies]

To: fqued
I don't listen to Rush anymore. Did he really come out against Arnie?
326 posted on 09/25/2003 7:58:32 PM PDT by 68 grunt (3/1 India, 3rd, 0311, 68-69)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: NittanyLion
JOHN GALT? Have you even read the book?
327 posted on 09/25/2003 8:03:06 PM PDT by 68 grunt (3/1 India, 3rd, 0311, 68-69)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
Yep.
328 posted on 09/25/2003 8:04:04 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (Call upon God to move on our behalf...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 325 | View Replies]

To: 68 grunt
My post was in response to #123, where that person listed some pro-Tom, anti-Arny sentiment.

to that I responded:

An amusing exercise is to line up the various conservative talk-show hosts and commentators pro or con Arny:

You mentioned a couple con: Coulter and Limbaugh

on the pro side, though: Hugh Hewitt, Hannity, and apparently also Medved and Ingraham.

Anyone want to add to the lists? Only nationally-knowns count.
329 posted on 09/25/2003 8:05:03 PM PDT by fqued (facts are nasty little things, but that doesn't mean we should squash them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 326 | View Replies]

To: Snerfling
Guy comes here with nothing and becomes a multi-millionaire.

People think differently after they become rich. Their primary motivation is to hang on to their wealth rather than to create opportunities for others. Ahnold supports an end to offshore drilling; affirmative action; social welfare for illegals; state-funded abortion; an expanded state role in education. As he says "all da programs for all da people." That qualifies him as a socialist country clubber in my book.

330 posted on 09/25/2003 8:09:21 PM PDT by massadvj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 324 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
That's you man, I dubbed you that last week! Speaker of lies and deceit, whose mission it is to sow discontent and morass.
331 posted on 09/25/2003 8:09:50 PM PDT by 68 grunt (3/1 India, 3rd, 0311, 68-69)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
According to your standards, neither was Goldwater.
332 posted on 09/25/2003 8:10:19 PM PDT by buwaya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 257 | View Replies]

To: fqued
One of the good things about conservatives is that they make up their own minds; being generally quite well-informed and led by core principles rather than other's opinions.

Endorsements probably make less of a difference to this group than any other.

But having said that, I have no doubt that this race would be a dead heat right now if everyone who claimed to be conservative had stayed on our side of the lines instead of defecting to a liberal.

Some of us won't soon forget who the defectors were, either.
333 posted on 09/25/2003 8:10:24 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (Call upon God to move on our behalf...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 329 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
It's been educational.
334 posted on 09/25/2003 8:11:37 PM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 333 | View Replies]

To: buwaya
Goldwater got progressively less conservative the older he got.

Must have been dementia. Most folks get more conservative the more maturity they attain.
335 posted on 09/25/2003 8:11:44 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (Call upon God to move on our behalf...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 332 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
Sure has.

Hope everyone is milking this for all the learnin' they can get. The more eyes that are wide open, the better.
336 posted on 09/25/2003 8:12:32 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (Call upon God to move on our behalf...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 334 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
You have a strange definition of "greatness of spirit."
A man "great in spirit" does not bend to political fashion and expediency when great principles are at stake.

I don't get it. Are you saying that it is better for a Dem to win?
Than for a Republican to bend on any principle?

I don't believe for one minute that all McClintock supporters won't bend a single conservative principle for political expediency.

McClintock is not the messiah.

IMHO those who are willing to throw the entire election to the Dems rather than vote for Arnold are hypocrites to their professed conservative principles.

337 posted on 09/25/2003 8:12:56 PM PDT by Jorge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 239 | View Replies]

To: Jorge
I don't believe for one minute that all McClintock supporters won't bend a single conservative principle for political expediency.

It appears that many of Arnold's supporters would readily engage in the wholesale abandonment of conservative principles for the sake of perceived political expediency.

338 posted on 09/25/2003 8:16:42 PM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 337 | View Replies]

To: Phyto Chems
Would you explain how you joined 12/98 and just started posting this month? I'm curious.
339 posted on 09/25/2003 8:18:03 PM PDT by 68 grunt (3/1 India, 3rd, 0311, 68-69)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
you wrote: "But having said that, I have no doubt that this race would be a dead heat right now if everyone who claimed to be conservative had stayed on our side of the lines instead of defecting to a liberal."


Assuming that by "liberal" you mean Arnold [and since he is not a liberal, but neither is he a conservative, those appellations are both incorrect in reference to Arnold],
you are incorrect.

The conservatives in California are greatly outnumbered. There is NO evidence that Tom could beat Busty straight up, and ALL the polls indicate exactly the opposite.

Thus, since Arnold has a fighting chance of winning, conservatives have a quandary: do they stick by their guns and vote for an un-electable, thus possibly ending up with Busty, or do they vote for the non-conservative/non-liberal Arnold and have at least a Republican in office, thus advancing some, but by no means all, conservative principles??
340 posted on 09/25/2003 8:18:42 PM PDT by fqued (facts are nasty little things, but that doesn't mean we should squash them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 333 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360 ... 501-517 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson