Another Time for Choosing (McClintock for Governor)

With Election Day voting just hours away, conservative voters need to take a hard look at their choices in the recall election. Voting "Yes" on the recall itself to oust Gray Davis is a no-brainer, as voters of all parties and ideologies up and down the state have signed the petitions and are responsible for successfully qualifying the historic ballot question.

But while the recall itself seems headed for a decisive victory, the matter of our failed governor's successor is one that should be causing conservative voters concern. Democrats, at least those willing to recognize Davis will not survive, logically gravitate to left-wing race-baiter and Mechista Cruz Bustamante, or unabashedly embrace their socialist colors by backing the Greens' Peter Camejo. And some of course refuse to acknowledge question two, insisting on a "No on Recall" line alone.

That of course leaves us with two candidates who are contenders for the votes of California's largely conservative Republicans. Oddly enough, only one of the two is himself a conservative, Senator Tom McClintock. The other is Arnold Schwarzenegger, an actor with moderate to liberal view on "troublesome" social issues, which some complain year in and year out are the reasons more traditional Republicans are unelectable to statewide office in California. And so, in the name of pragmatism, many solid conservatives have joined their more centrist colleagues in endorsing and supporting Schwarzenegger, many within days or hours of his entrance to the race and to the shock of many supporting the long-time and proven standard bearer of conservatism, Senator McClintock.

Mr. Schwarzenegger can boast the endorsement of most of California's Republican congressmen, senators and assemblymen, including many stalwart conservatives, as well as Lincoln Clubs up and down the state, the majority of the California Republican County Chairmen, and the Board of Directors (but not the full general membership, it should be noted) of the California Republican Party. McClintock's supporters include a handful of unwavering Republican legislators, Reagan advisor Lyn Nofziger, commentator Bruce Herschensohn, and the endorsement of the preeminent Republican volunteer organization in the state, the California Republican Assembly.

The common knock on Sen. McClintock, and thus the reason many say they won't vote for him, is that he just cannot win. This argument of course, is a self-fulfilling prophecy, if they all refuse to vote for him on the grounds he can't win, then obviously he won't. On the other hand, if voters who regard McClintock as their #1 choice (but settle pragmatically for someone else "electable") do vote their conscience and cast their ballot for McClintock, he CAN win. That however requires conservatives to unite, and ignore the pressure and tactics of Republican Party "leaders".

Enter the campaign to discredit Tom McClintock and discourage his legions of dedicated volunteers. The Republican Establishment is almost totally united against him, as they've never really been that fond of him. The past few weeks have seen not the kind of typically vicious attacks on McClintock from the liberal left we expect, they have instead come, sometimes openly and sometimes whispered, from other Republicans and conservatives. Some like Hugh Hewitt have continually talked down McClintock and his supporters, most recently equating a vote for McClintock to a vote for just about every despised leftist sort from Bill Clinton to the L.A. Times. One particularly poisonous opinion piece compared Sen. McClintock to Gray Davis, with "marginally better hair" (how charitable). Then came the arguments that McClintock's tenacity and stubborn refusal to drop out and hand the race to Mr. Schwarzenegger were the result of his blinding, personal and selfish ambition. Right, the same ambition led him to seek the all-powerful and celebrated job ofâ€? state controller. Twice. Especially when he could have easily been a serious contender for governor in 2002, eh? Then there were the charges of McClintock being tainted by taking EEEVIL Indian gaming money and being the beneficiary of Indian independent expenditures. I don't know that this one had much effect. I don't mind Indians. I don't mind gambling. And I don't mind Indians gambling, or offering the Pale Faces a way to gamble on their lands without taking the trip to Vegas. Besides, McClintock was on their side of the Indian sovereignty issue long before they were ever in a position to benefit him politically.

Finally there are the not too veiled threats to McClintock and his supporters of political irrelevance if he were to remain the race and cost the actor a win. There's also talk of recruiting a liberal Republican to run against and defeat Sen. McClintock in the primary next year for his re-election to the 19th Senate district seat if, as they expect, he loses the race for governor.

All this for a Republican who has steadfastly and resolutely stood for conservative values, fiscal responsibility, smaller government and lower taxes in the Legislature and never backed down. And he's never gone on record saying he's "embarrassed to be a Republican", either.

It's funny, because the voters I ran into this weekend while walking precincts DO remember and know what Tom has done for them and DO NOT share sentiments of retaliation and strong-arm tactics to force him from the race. Talk about a disconnect! Seems a rather large one exists between the Republican Establishment and the Republican grassroots and voters. In fact I found quite a few Republican voters quite adamant about supporting McClintock, no matter what the polls say. They were elated to know people were out campaigning for him and made it clear they'd help and try to get as many people as they could to support Tom. And I managed to convince some marginally Schwarzenegger voters to follow the prompting of their conscience and vote for Senator McClintock. They're all glad he stuck to his guns and stood his ground, no one I found wanted him to drop out.

Neither should anyone else. They should want him in the race and want him in to win, and not just keep his supporters' "Yes on Recall" votes in the equation. And yes, HE CAN WIN. All it takes is for every voter who believes Tom to best candidate to vote for him. All that is required for victory is for every voter who says Tom is his or her first choice to go ahead and support him.

That way, conservatives can stay true to their principles, Republican and other voters will know they have sided with the best man for the job, and with Tom McClintock as governor, the Republican Party will not suffer a leftward tilt that would ensure its eventual demise.

It's funny reading the comments of the out of staters and other matter of fact "conservatives" intoning that there is no way a real conservative (as they admit) like McClintock can win.

Gee...that's interesting. Mr Davis barely got by last time, against a nice guy lightweight who didn't realize how ferocious the attacks on him were going to be, or how Davis was lying about the budget, and failed to make that an issue.

If y'all 'member, on election night, there was even a point at which Simon was winning - before the L.A. vote came in.

The recall could have been the election that turned that around - all that had to happen was if the numbers for Davis and McClintock were reversed from the Davis vs. Simon go round. Not a difficult proposition given the intensity of anger towards Davis.

So the last election showed us that a relatively unknown Conservative could win against Davis, if he a) ran a real campaign, b) could avoid being nailed by the Mulholland-South-Lehane Slime Machine, and c) Could capitalize on Davis' real disasters - the budget, taxes, 187, and the corruption.

Which is the real reason the Recall was started - we smelled blood! Davis had little support - the low turnout. Therefore, lowered threshold for the recall. Barely won - Therefore, a well run campaign by a clean guy could make his case and win.

All the BS here about "McC can't win" is just that. The only thing that changed was that late in the game, Mr. Hollywood RINO Star jumped in. And everyone jumped on board, because they have all started chanting the mantra that the good guy can't win.

Sorry, but I don't buy the BS. And by the way - who replaced RINO Richard Riordan in the aftermath of his term as L.A. mayor? Right - James "Los Angeles is a Mexican City" Hahn. Most people figured why have a RINO when you can have a real Democrat. And that's what will happen again at the end of Arnold's term.

Good piece.

I've seen several elections were the people who couldn't win, won. Polls(many of which run by the MEDIA) have been wrong. Some flat out lie. At their best, they do not measure turnout.

The only poll that matters is election time. Good luck to McClintock, the only FISCAL conservative running, as well as social conservative.

First of all, these pressure tactics used by some so called republicans are despicable. It's irked me to the point of almost rather having Cruz than Arnold in there just as a middle finger to the elitist establishment who has been using them. Luckily for them, the LA Slimes saved Arnold with a backfiring hit piece to make Arnold look more like the "Underdog" than "McClintock". It took away last minute facetime for McClintock as well. Best thing that could have happened to him.

The 'Moderate Establishment' talks about conservatives always needing to take one for the team. They always use the "80%" arguement. If an Arnold governorship would mean 80% of what I wanted, I'd back him in a minute. 20% isn't good enough. The "moderates" say a conservative can't win. Yet the 'moderates'(who are almost ALWAYS the ones to defect to the dems - RIORDAN) have as poor of track record, if not more so, than the conservatives in California. Apart from Pete Wilson, who has won? Bill Jones, who was somewhat conservative. Who lost? Anti-gun Dan Lungren. HCI's man of the year Tom Campbell? Matt Fong? Conservative Bill Simon(who has no establishment help whatsoever from Parsky, although it wasn't just his fault).

It's not about right/left on winning as much as a message, its delivery, organization, a good team, the activists, hard work, getting people a reason to vote for them, the opponent, and a little bit of luck(media).

How often do you hear about great moderates? Not very often. That's because they have no ideas. Why does Arnold, who during his career in Hollywood and bodybuilding always was a go getter and a leader, need these advisors babying them around? He's been the epidomy of a follower during this campaign. I hope if he wins that he suprises me, dumps the Parsky/Wilsonites and becomes himself, instead of an empty suit. As best though, I expect a status quo if Arnold wins. That's the best the 'middle' can offer. That's why I haven;t seen any reason give here to vote FOR Arnold(who unfortunatly reminds me of Jenny Granholm - also from Hollywood). It's always vote AGAINST Cruz, and Tom 'can't win'. Well, there hasn't been the election yet, so we don't know. Tom may be a somewhat of a lone wolf at times, but I'll take a lone wolf over a follower. I know where he stands.

Conservatives(and hard core liberals) have ideas. Major changes come from the right or the left, never the 'middle.' I can begrudgingly respect a hard leftist with ideas(if they are backed up). I'll never agree, but respect. Those with no ideas, they are a dime a dozen. They aren't change, but the same ole song and dance.

Michigan in the late 70's and 80's was the epidomy of a down and out rust belt state.(and unions were more powerful then) There's a saying here. "Last one to leave, please turn out the lights". Back in 82, a leftist Rat governor was elected and promised to raise taxes as a last resort. Well, as expect, it was a last resort, and taxes went up 38%. A Recall was successful against some state senators, and a young guy named John Engler(Who was first elected to state house at 21) helped led the charge and was state senate majority leader. 1 down in 84.

In 86, unfortunatly the GOP had a weak candidate and lost big(hung on to the st. senate). But that didn't dampen the conservatives. In 90, they had another chance. John Engler couldn't win though. The polls said so. 38% the weekend before the election. As we know polls never lie and are Gospel. Well, thanks to turnout, a little help from a spat between Blanchard and Coleman Young in Detroit, and the fact that Engler won all but 4 counties, Jim Blanchard the taxman went down to defeat.

Engler saw that illegally, Blanchard and the legislature were running a defecit. So he pushed through lots of cuts to balance the budget. But the two most historic things he led on were "Proposal A" and Term Limits. He placed both of those on the ballot for voters to decide. First, he banned the school tax as it was then. Property taxes were used to fund schools. It was unfair and severely hurt the rural and inner city districts. In fact, Kalkaska schools during one year shut down early. March I think.

Prop A funded schools with a 2 cent increase in sales tax, and capped millages and assessments on property taxes to the rate of inflation. Only building bonds and construction projects in schools are subject to millages. In 94, Engler won re-election with over 60%, and the state house went to GOP control. It was tied in 96, and in 98(Engler won again), the state house went to the GOP for good. The two slogans. "TOUGH ENOUGH to bring Michigan back". "Promises Made, Promises Kept"

Today, unfortunatly we lost the governor's office, but we'll survive Granholm. She'll be kept in check by the GOP house and Senate.

I see a 5 way choice here:
1. Davis. Obviously an unacceptable choice.
2. Cruz - Grayout's VP. Reminds me of Al Gore.
3. Third Party - The classic protest vote.
4. Arnold - IMO, almost status quo beneth all the hype. Some minor changes, but not much.
5. McClintock. Real change. And while some here say that he can't work well with others, remember that he has the all important veto pen. The DEMS and the liberal GOP wing will have to compromise with him as well, or THEY don't get anything through.

It's time for a new "Proposal A". I wish you all the best.

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.