Totally disagree. If recall wins and then Bustamonte wins, it will be Arnie's fault, not McClintock's.
Arnie has had ample time and $14,000,000 to prepare a political campaign plan that would have appealed to the conservative Republicans of California. Arnie needed to prove he was a fiscal conservative, but to date that hasn't been achieved. Arnie hasn't convinced McClintock's supporters, those traditional conservatives and loyal Republicans, that he cares about their concerns on the issues of principle and conviction that matter to them.
While Arnie can't win merely by appealing to conservatives, he also can't win unless he does appeal to conservatives. The fault lies with Arnie.
"Arnie has had ample time and $14,000,000 to prepare a political campaign plan that would have appealed to the conservative Republicans of California. Arnie needed to prove he was a fiscal conservative, but to date that hasn't been achieved. Arnie hasn't convinced McClintock's supporters, those traditional conservatives and loyal Republicans, that he cares about their concerns on the issues of principle and conviction that matter to them.
"While Arnie can't win merely by appealing to conservatives, he also can't win unless he does appeal to conservatives. The fault lies with Arnie."
Wow -- I've read this several times now to see if I might have misunderstood. Are you saying that if Arnold doesn't do exactly what *you* want him to then he is somehow "not good enough" and because it in some way "bothers" you that he hasn't done or said exactly what you wanted him to -- he is therefore "100% responsible" for the outcome of the election? Are you saying that McClintock has no responsibility for his own impact?
I just can't get my mind to wrap around this. Are you saying that if a candidate does not "cater" to you -- then the very act of not catering to you makes them "100%" responsible for the outcome of the election? Are you saying that people in California should *get* who you are and how important you are and if they don't -- then to hell with everyone and everything? -- if people will not do and say what you have determined they must -- then everyone *deserves* to be punished and the candidate who was so remiss as to not cowtow to you, is totally to blame? McClintock has no "responsiblity" to make his candidacy appeal to the majority of Californians?
What "responsiblity" does McClintock have?
Guess what? He can, will and is.
Right on the money.
I've noticed an amazing lack of introspection on this site. If Arnold loses it simply can't be his fault - it must be McClintock's. When GHW Bush lost it was all due to Perot.
It's like listening to a few Penn State fans claim the refs cost us yesterday's game. The refs made one bad call, while our coaches made numerous foolish calls throughout the game. Anyone who can be honest with themselves can see that, but I suppose it's easier to shut your eyes real tight and pretend the world is against you.
Better check the polls my friend. He is appealing to far more than McClintock is. In fact it is more than double. It will be McClintock's fault. He can't win.
Exactly right!
And to the Arnie-bots, a question on the "split vote":
How many people have said, "Arnie's the better guy, but I'm voting for Tom"? I doubt Tom has ANY Arnold votes in his tally.
Now, how many people are saying, "I like Tom, but I'll vote for Arnie"?
Who split the vote again?
Arnie entered the race AFTER TOM, split the Republican vote, and has shown he is incapable of drawing the votes he needs.
Now the best his people can do is demonize Tom and Tom's voters, threaten them with the Bustaboogeyman, and scream it's all Tom's fault, not Arnie's.
Arnie split the vote, and now cannot pull it off. The blame lies with Arnold and the CA GOP, not the voters.
Hb