Posted on 09/29/2003 6:56:41 AM PDT by dead
Edited on 05/26/2004 5:16:55 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
LOS ANGELES - Arnold Schwarzenegger has muscled his way to a commanding lead in California's recall campaign, according to the results of a stunning poll released yesterday. A Gallup survey commission by CNN and USA Today showed Golden State voters poised to pink-slip Gov. Gray Davis and install political newcomer Schwarzenegger as their leader.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Yeah, well, you get your chance on October 7 to see if they need you more than you need them.
|
He did the conservative cause in California considerable harm by his stubbornness. He has emboldened the moderate forces in the party, merely to satiate his own ego. If he had stepped aside when the GOP believed they desperately needed his constituency, he would have been perceived as a king maker with considerable clout. From there, he could have run a campaign with the entire GOP behind him in the future.
|
DEAD ADDED: "The go-it-alone attitude is nice, but 18% is as good as 0% in a two party system. You can either compromise and form alliances with people who partially agree with you, or you can sit on the sidelines and boo."
I AM RESPONDING: "EXACTLY!!!!!"
I AM ADDING: "As a social/moral/economic/andEveryOtherWay conservative, I realize that Rome was NOT built in a day! As someone with MANY years of experience in Politics and Marketing, I realize that if you don't have a PLACE AT THE TABLE, you do not even have a VOICE!!!!!!
I AM ADDING: "If you want YOUR principles to be HEARD, but IF YOU HAVE NO VOICE, YOU CANNOT BE HEARD!!!"
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/990452/posts?page=546#546
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/990452/posts?page=547#547
I have reason to believe that USA Today cooked the books on this poll--because a Democrat in my neighborhood participated, and he was not asked that question.
All but the McClintock-Bustamante lineup mentioned; the wording of the questions was identical to the USA Today poll; he was polled on 9/26/2003 (during the poll in question); and he's the guy who IM'd me and told me something smells about the poll, because there was a question in there that he wasn't asked.
I live in the most heavily-surveyed part of San Diego (we also get test-marketed for every product you can name).
I find your remarks astounding. I embrace your desire to vote your consience but reject the result of this action. It is clear to me that Tom CAN NOT win at this juncture. So what is the point in voting your conscience. You must ask yourself the question, "Who gets me closer to where I want to be? Schwartzenegger or Bustamante?" Answer that question for yourself and you will be enlightened.
You're exactly right and I have never "underestimated" the power of these people to inflict their will on the American body politik.
There is simply no way that I can argue with this lack of logic. You've helped me to understand why the Republican Party is so often fragmented and marginalized and I think you for that.
It's a lot harder to argue with this lack of principle. Mind you, it's one thing to make the perfect the enemy of the good, but I have no qualms about making the perfect the enemy of the bad.
The polls show McClintock can beat BustaMEChA, so why should a conservative vote for liberal Arnold?
We'll know whether this is true or not on October 8th, wont we? As for a lack of principle, I feel that is unprincipled to give an election away to an obvious enemy when, by compromise and strategic planning, the election could have been won. I would agree with you that, if this were a perfect world, McClintock would be the better choice. But, it isn't a perfect world and that is precisely why a winning strategy has to be employed.
Lets give Arnold a year or two and see what happens. It is entirely possible that he won't be up to the task. But, if he is up to the task, let us be able to forget our ideological entrenchment and say that he was up to the task.
I believe that your dislike for Arnold probably has a lot to do with the abortion issue and I agree with you on that. As has been pointed out though, McClintock would not be able to reverse Roe v Wade anyway and neither would Arnold. That makes the whole thing a non-issue in my mind.
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.