|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Presidential job approval and other key measures
 Gallup Polls Gallup Poll of Baghdad
|
|
Tuesday, September 30, 2003
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Posted on 09/30/2003 3:43:00 PM PDT by evilsmoker
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Yeah, check the party platform and see what it means to "BE A REPUBLICAN." Feel free to disagree on one or two things, but if you disagree on darn near everything, maybe, like Arnold, you stumbled into the wrong party.
;-)
Warren Buffet knows every banker, bondsman, investment stud and financeer in the world. George Schultz knows all those guys ... and their older brothers.
If Arnold needs to know every lock that ain't locked when no-ones around ... he's got Roger Miller's cell phone number.
Restructuring all the diseased fiscal black holes is the first order of business. Kicking Mike Tyson out of state brings the community debt down $1.1 billion. Those are the kind of common sense actions Arnold is going to pursue.
Let the major leaguers do their work, let them use their experience and chits to professionalize and stabilize Californias debt structure, energy pacts, union contracts and pension liabilities. Vote Arnold out in '06. Newly relocated phenom/heartthrob Tom Tancredo should be sesoned perfectly for the latest California conservative to be drawn and quartered in 25% chunks of principle and true conservatism.
Ask your self, "Why are moderates moderate?" I would say it is because they have tended to reject the more extreme or devisive social policies of either the liberals or the conservatives. When it comes to fiscal policies, I sense that the majority of the moderates tend to lean conservative. (It was the political humourist, P. J. O'Roarke, who said that "a liberal was defined as a person who would give his neighbor's checking account to the poor."). I think it is the fiscally conservative moderates who are motivated to vote.
My sense is that the true liberals will stay home. Suppose on 1/3 of them vote (not unrealistic, because only about 1/2 of eligible voters overall will actually vote). About 2/5 of the moderates will turnout. About 3/4 of the conservatives will vote (they smell blood). Based on the 30-50-20 registration of political ideology, and recalculated, you get roughly 47-40-13.
Not withstanding your description of the types of voters you believe are motivated to vote in this recall election, most of the voters in this election will be those who tend to vote in election after election. I honestly don't see a great groundswell of "new" voters coming to the polls. I see this election turning on the relative abundance of the core voters in each of the demographic groupings.
ha ha ha !! ...
No I don't know Ray personally, but I have listened to him on occasion, I believe, on talk shows such as the Michael Reagan Show. (Do you?)
In the past, I recall I had been favorably impressed by his conservative values and his stands on issues.
It is a real pain to listen to people battle it out like this in public.
I would be very reluctant to do to any friend of mine what Ray did to Tom. Maybe Ray didn't sell out Tom personally, but at least he seems to have sold out politically (ok?).
I dunno, maybe I'm missing something...
[I went back to Ray's letter. Ray made some mistakes in judgement IMHO. First, he thinks Issa has good character and is electable. I don't, based on my experience as a voter and consumer of Issa's company's product. Ray thinks Tom ran just because he thought he could win and was better than Issa. I don't view that as controversial, and I think Issa dropped out because he was vulnerable, not just because others such as Tom ran against him. No one can get as far as Tom has gotten through all these days without something powerful to offer voters. I'm checking almost daily in my area and there is still strong support for Tom-- I could never sell Issa to anyone, friend or acquaintence. Ray ignores reasons for Tom staying in the race: Tom as a foil in the debate; Tom as insurance against an Arnold dirt-bomb; Tom sucking up support from Democrat crossover vote in a race where the frontrunner Republican has high negatives along with both Davis and Busta; etc. Ray missed a lot and maybe he's not as bright as I would normally expect a conservative in his situation to be.]
ElkGroveDan says (in so many words) that he's very close to "ground zero" on the entire Tom McClintock story. I do listen with my heart as well as my head, and I think ElkGroveDan is telling the truth here. So far, his predictions to me have been right on.
If you likewise have a close view of the situation, feel free to share thoughts or info, publicly or otherwise. I try not to be dogmatic.
Politics are politics, but friendship is another plane. Just my opinion, and you know what Dirty Harry says about those ;-).
Yes, I do know him personally.
Oh. I'm sorry, I did not know. Well, then...
I guess I think of him as someone with good intentions. I'll still try to keep that impression.
Sometimes it is difficult, especially in the current environment, to keep a dispassionate discourse.
I'll try to clean up a bit (maybe w/ admin help). My apologies to all. If you want, feel free to forward my quick take on his letter, since it didn't convince me the first time, and it doesn't convince me now (I really tried). Alternatively, feel free to instruct me where I went off in the weeds. Arnold will probably win anyway regardless of anything any of us do, and why not limit incidental damages in any case.
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.
