Okay, that's fair. So let's look deeper. What of the Senate seats and the state government seats? And the governor's mansion. Do those results also support your position that California is a majority conservative state that longs to see a conservative available to elect? Certainly not the Senate, since we all have only 2. Don't forget that if it wasn't for Arrinna Huffington having illegal immigrants work at her house revealed in the week of the election, Feinstein's razor sharp win (democrates would have screamed it was stolen, but we have class) over her then hetro husband would have been a sizeable defeat. Boxer also won by the most slim or margins in her last election, and is considered more than likely to lose in '04.
Tony Strickland, who is a good friend of Tom's and served in his staff if I remember correct, has already announced his candidacy.
As for the Gov's mansion, take a look at the modern political landscape. We've had 2 Democratic Govs since the mid 1960s. Jerry Brown, the son of a former Democrate from another age, who left office in scandal and disgrace, and Gray Davis, who is going to be recalled from office less than 12 months after his second term. All the others had an 'R', including unabashed conservative Ronald Reagan, who won during the 1960s and the Berkeley idiocy.
We aren't perfect, but we are a work in progress, if my fellow CA's had some optimism and confidence in the superiority of their ideas. CA has a long history of low turnout when a conservative isn't on the ballot.
Boxer also won by the most slim or margins in her last election, and is considered more than likely to lose in '04. I see you're still spreading your usual fertilizer around in FreeRepublic. Boxer won by a 10-point margin over Matt Fong in '98; hardly a "most slim or (sic) margins".
Got any other dubious "facts" to post?
Very well. And you neglected to address the state govt/legislature. So lets sum it up:
You assert California is a conservative state just yearning for a real conservative to vote for. As evidence of this you point at some ballot initiatives that you say are entirely conservative (though a later poster claimed they were worded in a manner that attracted attention from liberals too).
You choose to discount the evidence contrary to your position -- namely that the state has two Democrat senators, a predominantly Democrat US House delegation (and you use as evidence to discount that item the fact that TX has a majority Dem House delegation), a Dem governor and a majority Dem State legislature.
I think an impartial observer would weigh all this data and conclude a position in support of my original questions to McClintock supporters.
1. Is California a liberal state?
2. Is McClintock a conservative?
3. Given that 1 and 2 are true, how can he win?
Why is not half a loaf (Schwarzenegger could be relied on not to use the governor's prerogatives to aid the Dem presidential candidate next year) better than none?