Replies

Gosh - the CA. G.O.P. never wanted the recall to begin with - felt it would be much better to have a Dem in there for the 2004 elections.

I wouldn't go down the "colluding with the enemy road" - specially the way Arnold's camp is peppered with Kennedys, special interest money, Nevado casino connections, etc.

But your article does bring up a good point - it questions Tom's loyalty to the G.O.P.

What about the G.O.P.'s loyalty to its planks and its constituency?

Gosh - the CA. G.O.P. never wanted the recall to begin with - felt it would be much better to have a Dem in there for the 2004 elections.

Not that my opinion matters since I'm in TX, but the CA Pubs may have been right in opposing this recall.

Face it. Davis has led The Golden State to hell with a first-class ticket. His popularity is below snail waste, and he could not blame his failed governorship on anyone. The blame is solely his. What's more, CA voters know it! Stevie Wonder can see it.

With this much baggage, Davis' goose was cooked in '04. Also, a full Pub primary may have convinced the CA Pubs that McClintock was the better choice, all things being equal to today. A recall does not allow time for a primary, so it appears to me that the Pubs are in "panic" mode. Besides, after the Davis debacle, it's only natural that conservatives there would want anyone "with an (R) after his name." I can't blame them for that.

Now that the die has been cast, a GOP win with either candidate had better produce results and fast. If it doesn't, the CA GOP will be in a knight-fork on the political chessboard, and Bust-a-fatty could rear his head again strongly in the next election. It's not a given that the voters will give the Pubs another shot.

I wish California all the best. But keep in mind two key words: unintended consequences.

101 things that the Mozilla browser can do that Internet Explorer cannot.