I think that most of the Tomikazis that are left on FR simply hate Arnold. It has nothing to do with philosophy or ideology.
|
Posted on 09/26/2003 12:00:31 PM PDT by StoneColdGOP
There is no argument about the serious condition of our once golden state. Our debt is greater than all the other states combined, we are but a few million dollars away from bankruptcy. Our tax burden and over regulations are driving business out of the state at an unprecedented rate.
We are at a crucial point in our state’s history. The people themselves; Democrat, Republican and Independents, without the approval or help from any party have called for an election to recall this governor and replace him with another, one who will hopefully lead us out of this mess.
There appears to be a wide agreement on the first question; should we recall Governor Davis. The second part, choosing a new governor, will not be difficult for most Democrats: theirs is a party line vote with only one candidate, Lt. Gov. Bustamante. And even though he said he will raise taxes and further regulate and tax business, forcing more of them to leave, they will vote for him.
For Republicans however this election is about more than which Republican we should vote for. This election is more about the party itself; will we continue to be a party of principle, directed by the philosophy of Lincoln and Reagan or have we laid our principles aside? Do we want to win so badly that it doesn’t matter how or who, just so the next governor has an R behind his name?
The GOP has two candidates: Arnold Schwarzenegger, a celebrity of worldwide fame, with popularity and fame as the Terminator and recognized as a super star among movie idols. He is a good man. His celebrity status alone will attract a huge number of votes for the GOP from Independents, Democrats and especially young voters. Among the 18 to 30 year olds, he is Britney Spears with muscles. They wow over him. Most moderate Republicans and many regular Republicans, those who desperately want a Republican to win, will vote for him. They are prepared to look beyond his political beliefs and character; they just want to win.
Sen. McClintock, on the other hand, is an icon among Republicans. Since the first day he was elected to office, nearly twenty years ago, he has led the fight against the very forces and policies that have now badly tarnished this once golden state. He fought Governor Wilson’s huge tax increase, just as hard as he fought Willie Brown and Gray Davis. His credentials, as well as his character as a conservative Republican, are impeccable.
He has been our party’s leader and severest critic of fraud, corruption and waste in state government. From the very beginning of his career until today, he has warned that unless spending was brought under control, California would end up as it has today.
The knock on McClintock is that he can’t raise the money and so, can’t win this election. The knock on Schwarzenegger is that he is not a true Republican and carries a lot of baggage that the Democrats will probably throw at him just before the election.
Actually, Arnold is no higher in the polls than he was when he started, whereas McClintock has risen from an asterisk to double digits.
In the last election, McClintock was outspent 30 to 1, yet he received more votes than any other other Republican on election day. Had those moderates claiming Tom can’t win today contributed to his election, or given him his fair share of the money donated by the national party, he would have won. McClintock lost the Controller’s race by the slimmest margin in history. Had he been helped by the moderates controlling our state party, California would not now be in the awful mess in which we find ourselves today.
The moderates of the party and most of the GOP congressmen are just where they were prior to the last Governor’s race. On orders from the White House and Karl Rove, many "conservative" congressman support Schwarzenegger, just as they endorsed the moderate Richard Riordan.
The moderates in our party, including the New Majority and those in the Lincoln Club, are intensely interested in electing Schwarzenegger, a moderate. They believe the party’s future, especially in California, is to adopt the Karl Rove/Parsky plan; we must forgo the values of the liberals and accept the invasion of illegals, adopt the big tent, tax and spend and big government philosophy of the Democrats.
Conservatives know that our party’s losses in California, all during the past decade, are due to millions of illegals who have entered California, and – the continued split in our party between the moderate, "Country Club" Republicans and the conservatives.
While Arnold has a high rating in the polls, it has never risen above where it started. McClintock on the other hand has been continually rising, from as asterisk to double digits. There is a cry from moderate Republicans and "concern" from the media that McClintock should withdraw in favor of Arnold, else the GOP might not win and the dreadful Bustamante will become governor.
This dilemma among the GOP might not be so tragic or apocryphal if the contest was between two conservatives, say Simon and McClintock, one would drop out when just before the election the other was ahead. The same can be said if the two Republicans were Arnold and some equally famous, moderate movie star, but it isn’t.
It’s between our brightest Republican star, a conservative icon and a dazzling celebrity. Conservatives at the core of the party are incredulous at those moderates who don’t share those core values, yet are asking the conservative standard bearer to drop out. Conservatives want to win but they know that a win that asks us to repudiate our principles is not a victory, it’s a harbinger of the end.
Lieutenant Colonel Gil Ferguson, USMC (Ret.), served in the California State Assembly from 1984 to 1994.
Anything is possible in a 3-way race.... BustyMan is showing signs of a 4th quarter collapse... Likely? No... Possible? Yes. Look at Minnesota 1998...
Get REAL! 40% of California are NOT conservatives. This is the big error all you McSpoiler types buy into.
Anybody who thinks that the contribution of California conservatives will be worth >40% of the vote is simply delusional. Go ride on It's A Small World at Disneyland if you want to delude yourself into some happiness, but don't do it with moronic opinions like the idea that CA conservatives could push McSpoiler over the top. They're ALREADY voting for McSpoiler, for one, and for another, THERE ARE A MILLION MORE DEMOCRATS THAN REPUBLICANS IN CALIFORNIA. These are not moderate Democrats, and these are not conservative Republicans.
This is CALIFORNIA. If you think McSpoiler's 14% can become >40% if 'conservatives' vote for him, then your arithmetic skills are severely lacking.
There aren't that many conservatives in California, PERIOD.
You gain ground by inches.
So if two guys are for losing ground and one is for gaining ground, you're advocating not voting for the one who is for gaining ground?
Obligatory sheesh.
Good. Glad you don't vote in our state, though.
;-)
Living in the most heavily taxed state in the union, with a 6-8 percent unemployment rate as a result, tends to make a candidate -the ONLY candidate- who's willing to make a no-tax pledge mighty attractive, even to moderates.
Bears repeating.
Get real yourself.
From statewide results of the 2002 election here
Tom McClintock 3,136,333 votes 45.1%: Party: Republican
and that's with a primary.
Now McClintock doesn't need 50%, or 40%, he just needs more than Bustamante.
Some folks fall into believing the propaganda from their own side.
;-)
Yeah, 14% attractive. What % of that 14% are non-conservatives? Hate to tell you, but 'moderates' are voting for Arnold already. And you'd ask them to switch their vote FROM the front-runner, TO the also-ran, with less than 2 weeks to the election? That's ludicrous.
Arnold has said time and time again that our problems are not from a lack of income -- but from too much spending. He says it over and over. He's banked his candidacy on being business-friendly and tax-opposed. To waste your vote for McSpoiler because you're suspicous of Arnold, who, again, complains about our tax burden at every opportunity, seems to be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Again, where are these moderates that are allegedly voting for McSpoiler?
And how attractive is BoostMyTaxes' Tough Love plan?
You ought to vote for Arnold simply for the sake of the California GOP (I'm a Libertarian - I have no dog in this hunt), because if the CA GOP screws up this recall, they are simply toast. Simon couldn't beat Idiot Davis in the election -- an election that any Republican SHOULD have won, given Davis' mishandling of the energy crisis. But the CA GOP screwed that pooch. Now they get the chance again, and they're on the verge of screwing the pooch on this one as well. Who would have ANY confidence in the CA GOP if it can't win a recall against a governor with an approval rating below 25%?
When I vote Libertarian, I know my candidate won't win. But you McSpoiler types actually believe the guy has a chance. I honestly don't think you understand the nature of California voters.
Even with the tax burdens already upon us here, Bustamonte might STILL possibly be our next governor, EVEN THOUGH HE EXPLICITLY STATES HE'LL RAISE TAXES. Even THAT hasn't dissuaded California voters from liking Cruz Bustamonte. DOESN'T THAT TELL YOU ANYTHING ABOUT CALIFORNIA VOTERS?! Given any sanity in the California voting population inre taxes, Bustamonte would be a single-digit also-ran. But, despite his pledge for new taxes, he's still quite well in the hunt. What is so difficult to understand about this?
His 45% was with no other Republican in the race.
And, in case you didn't check, TOM LOST THAT ELECTION.
Now he's #2, AMONG REPUBLICANS, and you think he's got a snowball's chance? Again, get real.
I think that most of the Tomikazis that are left on FR simply hate Arnold. It has nothing to do with philosophy or ideology.
|
That's a total myth, if you're suggesting that California conservatives just don't vote if they don't have a real conservative in the race. That's no fact. Republicans had plenty of incentive to vote in 2002 - and Republicans did relatively well in overall numbers, due to Davis' relative lack of popularity... and Republicans won ZERO statewide elections. See Tom McClintock for an example.
Conservatives vote, if only because the perception is that Democrats are often too lazy to vote.
It still comes back to waking up and realizing the makeup of California voters. Doesn't it make anyone wonder for more than a second WHY Bustamonte has ANY tangible support, and WHY the only REAL candidate, McSpoiler, is hovering below 20%? I agree that Tom would be the best governor, but woulda, shoulda, coulda ain't gonna be worth a whole lot if Bustamonte creeps in.
Perhaps you are the type that would have told Howard Jarvis not to bother with trying to get enough signatures for the property tax initiative, either.
I can hear it now...
HOWARD LOST THAT INITIATIVE DRIVE.
AND THE ONE BEFORE IT.
AND THE ONE BEFORE THAT.
DOESN'T THAT TELL YOU ANYTHING ABOUT CALIFORNIA VOTERS?!
Do you have a short attention span by any chance?
And your caps key tends to get stuck, maybe you ought to have someone take a look at it.
;-)
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.