I took your words at face value. You are putting words into my mouth.
Arnold made no promise, remember? You are therefore assuming he won't raise taxes without proof.
Sorry, you don't get to assume that. You can doubt Arnold from here to Sunday, and I'm sure you do. But there's hardly a "virtual identity" (on taxes) between a candidate who PROMISES to raise taxes and one who promises NOT to, albeit with what you surely characterize as loopholes. This lack of "virtual identity" simply is not reasonably debatable, unless your view of "virtual" is different than mine.
I'm not assuming anything. As I have said, many times including this thread, one has to judge Arnold by what he does and what he puts in writing. He has taken on many of Pete Wilson's advisors, precisely the people who raised taxes under nearly identical circumstances. He has committed to enormous spending on costly environmental programs with arguable benefit that are also very destructive to the economic base of this State.
Because those observations have that support of fact, it is you who stands upon assertion that Arnold represents anything diffent.
Is it really so hard to say, "Okay, true, the two men are very different on their STATED tax policies, but I have every reason to believe that Arnold will break his promise and end up where Cruz promised to go." I understand your views. You're trying to say that their "positions on issues" -- which I must take to mean, as stated in the campaign -- can be conflated with their anticipated-to-be-different course once in office.
This is my last post on the subject. If you want to argue for argument's sake, consider sending me a PM, as we are cluttering the thread.