Replies

Yes, you can make a prudential case for it. Arnold is pro-abortion, but so are the other candidates. And the pros have manipulated things so there really isn't much choice.

I have two reservations. First, it gives a victory to Karl Rove, Gerald Parsky, and the Republican operatives who are behind the Big Tent movement and would love to get the party out of the abortion quarrel somehow by dropping the prolife plank. Theyt couldn't win honestly through Riordan last year, so now they've done it through the back door.

Second, Arnold is virtually certain to go to New York and front for the pro-aborts in the party, demanding that the party drop the pro-life plank at the Republican convention. Hopefully they will resist, if not for moral reasons for practical reasons, since the majority of voters in most states are, mirabile dictu, pro-life. But it's a big risk, and if he were to succeed it would be a major disaster for all concerned: prolifers AND Republicans.

But a case certainly can be made that given the situation Arnold is the best choice. I'm glad I'm not voting in California, because I couldn't vote for the guy in these circumstances.

Second, Arnold is virtually certain to go to New York and front for the pro-aborts in the party, demanding that the party drop the pro-life plank at the Republican convention.

I have said nothing about this election previous to this post, but you have voiced my biggest concern. To what extent will Arnold pull the entire Republican Party to the left?

Arnold is virtually certain to go to New York, demanding that the party drop the pro-life plank at the Republican convention

Are you willing to put money on this? I'll bet a $50 donation to Free Republic that Governor Schwarzenegger will not do this, if you're willing to put up, too.