[Those_Crazy_Liberals]

My turn to ask the questions. Why did he lose the election last year?

[Cathryn Crawford]

I have no clue whatsoever. That's why I asked you.

[Cathryn Crawford]

BTW - does this mean that you have no examples of his ineptness? Hmmm...

[LdSentinal]

My turn to ask the questions. Why did he lose the election last year?

Bill Simon. And getting outspent 5-1 in the race. Bill Simon. Did I mention Bill Simon?

[Torie]

Let me help you with some of this. McClintock showed no ineptness in his campaign for Controller in 2002. Indeed, he got more votes than any other Pubbie, and lost by may on third of one percent, or 20,000 votes, despite being underfunded. Lower ballot statewide candidates that are not incumbents, or running against an incumbent, typically follow the vote patterns of the governor's race quite tightly in Califonia, and have since rocks cooled, because few know who they are.

The fact that McClintock ran even, while Simon lost 5%, says a lot about Tom. Indeed, the liberal San Francisco Chronicle supported him. Why? Because he was clearly the superior candidate on fiscal issues as compared to his Dem opponent, who kept yammering about social issues, and that is what the Controller's job is about. And that is what the governor's job is about in California at the present time. It isn't about gay rights, it isn't about transgendered males wearing dresses to work, it isn't about abortion, it isn't about drugs, it isn't about crime, it isn't even about driver's licenses for illegals. It is about SSSSSSSSSSSS.