McClintock and his supporters have been saying that when election day comes, WE should do the right thing and vote our principles (i.e. vote for McClintock) even if McClintock has no chance of winning, and even if it might end up throwing the election to Bustamonte - because it's the right thing to do, and because it just might make the difference, and he might just win if everyone votes their conscience.
However, on this issue, although McClintock stated he was vehemently opposed to domestic partnership benefits, and although he had been elected and was getting paid to represent his constituents on this and other issues, he had "more important things to do" than vote against AB 205 - even if it was the right thing to do, and even if it might have made a difference.
Maybe it's just me, but it seems hypocritical to me.
You are complaining because he was campaigning against your non-officeholding candidate. People in both parties and of all persuasions make this silly complain in every election and others, similarly diverse, dismiss such complaints out of hand.
Hypocrisy is vastly overrated as an objection as well. It is usually used to claim moral equivalency when none exists.
Finally, it is relatively easy to "count" votes in advance in a forty-member state senate. It is far more difficult to "count" in advance the votes in the general electorate. Pollsters try and usually (including, I will admit, this recall and the election of a replacement) do a fairly good job of polling on the who will you vote for type of question once they have properly qualified the respondent as a probable voter which most do. Nonetheless, it is important that CONSERVATIVE voters vote in elections and vote as CONSERVATIVES and take nothing for granted.