Replies

Why are some Conservatives so thick when it comes to this point?

I think they think that if they had all the conservatives support that their candidate would win somehow. They don';t seem to understand that even if they had 100% GOP support they will still lose in CA.

In a state like Texas they would be correct. The average consrevative should be electable and it would be nonsense to elect someone with Arnolds bonafides but thats not the case in CA.

I also think they believe that if the rest of the conservatives would just go along with them and support McClintock that somehow the momentum of that would cause the mushy middle to run over and vote for him also. I don' think they see how that dynamic would energize the left more and make their turnout become higher in fear that a dyed-in-the-wool conservative would be elected.

I will speak for Oklahoma since I have lived here a few years and used to live in CA!

Tom McClintock would not get elected in my Congressional district which is conservative. We had someone like McC run in the primary for J.C.'s seat against another conservative in the primary. The reason the "true" or "principled" conservative (take your pick) lost was because he was an unbending, I am the "Only" conservative in the race, arrogant far right conservative who I had supported at the beginning but not for long. It was a nasty campaign with the "only" conservative as he called himself attacking the other conservative and the day of the election I received the nastiest bunch of garbage from the "true" conservative. Long before that I had gone over to the other campaign of the just regular conservative.

That "true" conservative, former Buchanan campaign manager in 1988, lost in a conservative district. He got mad along with some of his supporters and didn't lift a finger to help the nominee and some stayed home on election day which could have cost the Republicans a seat!

The "principled" conservatives helped cost Largent the Governor's office and gave us a RAT. As you can guess I have had my fill of the folks with their unbending "if I or my candidate cannot win I want the RAT in office to teach Republicans a lesson crowd."

Well this Republican conservative doesn't need any more lessons -- 8 years of clinton was enough for me. What I see here is more of the 1992 campaign that gave us Clinton. The mantra of it is better to have a RAT who you agree with none of the time then a Republican your agree with part of the time is not working on the vast number of Lifelong Republicans.

Now I see some of the same folks saying they won't vote for Bush again -- would bet he didn't have their vote the first time! Guess they prefer Dean?

Unbelieveable!