Given the choices, do Cali THR members want Arnold?

[greyhound]

that cigarette seller

I almost choked on my Diet Coke reading that!

I think the leftists would rather have a pro-gunner in office than a "cigarette seller", though it might be a close call.

(I don't smoke, but I think smokers are right up there with middle class white males as groups its "OK to bash").

 

[Gary H]

WHY VOTE??? The POLLS have already made your choice

You folks really make me want to beat my mouse. I also went through the "don't want rolly polly man" and McClintock can't win so vote for Arnold. I now realize that I'm letting the polls make my choice and frankly, many of the polls have an agenda. I'm going to vote for who I want and that is Tom. Well, we now know how to control your vote ...don't we? Yupp:banghead:

 

[2dogs]

The Democrat slander machine is in full offensive mode. Street demonstrations by outraged women! Oh the horrors- a "REPUBLICAN" who "abuses" women. What could be worse?

They've tried the "woman" angle, the "Nazi" angle, the "violence" angle- they need to come up with some disabled folks, African Americans and gays who say that Arnold did something horrible to them. That will pretty well cover it.

However, since I believe McClintock is the best man for the job, if I were a Californian I'd be looking for Arnold to bow out and throw all of his support to McClintock, but I doubt that will happen.

 

[EWTHeckman]

To those voting for someone other than who they think is best:

How do you expect to ever get the best man into office if you don't vote for him? How are the parties to put forth quality candidates if you vote against your own self interests?

And think about this: Would it really be so bad if Bustamente wins because Arnold (NOT Tom) split the vote? If Bustamente wins, we can be guaranteed that he will continue the same type of actions that led to this crisis in the first place. The result will be the complete failure of the California Government. While that is a bad thing in and of itself, it would clearly demonstrate just how unworkable liberal policies really are.

I think that if Arnold wins, he is liberal enough that the California Government will still fail. However, because Arnold wears the label of "Republican" (I would not call him one.) the Democrats will be able to scream that Republican policies didn't work either, while conveniently ignoring the fact that Arnold's policies are almost identical to their own.

Only McClintock seems to have the strength of character to make the hard choices necessary to avoid a failure. And even if he is successful, it can almost be guaranteed that he will be unpopular for necessarily cutting a lot of pet programs.

In other words, I think Arnold would be the worst possible choice for governor. His policies most likely will not stop a failure, but his label will allow liberals to escape their well deserved blame.

 

[hansolo]

I already voted for McClintock via absentee ballot......I think Arnold makes great action films, but don't think that is enough of a resume to be Governor

Hasta la Vista, Baby!

 

[pittspilot]

Californian gun rights voters are caught between a rock and a hard place.

Arnold seems to be far from the dream candidate, but appears to have the game in hand, unless this smear take hold. (I doubt it)

Tom is the dream candidate, but I don't think he would be good governor material. He could also throw the race to Cruz.

Cruz is the nightmare. If Cruz wins, the parade of horribles will be breathtaking to behold. And with all due respect to EWHeckman, I don't have the time or the inclination to ride the rollercoaster to the bottom of the dip.

So, unfortunately, it appears that I will be voting for Arnold. The good news is that is he wins, I will have his autograph on my law diploma.

 

[longeyes]

Politics has been called The Art of the Possible for good reason.
I like McClintock but this is not an election for Philosopher-King but
for Governor. McClintock can't beat Bustamante and there is no way
we can allow Cruz B. to take office in this State. That would be
utterly ruinous for California--and, frankly, for the America as a whole.

Schwarzenegger has the star power to break up the Democratic majority
in this state. Better something rather than nothing. If McClintock is
smart he'll endorse Schwarz'r while he can still get something for
his support.

 

[Grey54956]

No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No...

No compromises. Not ever. Not even when everything is going to hell. People are always complaining that the NRA is selling them out, which it is. It does so by compromising with politicians. I notice that a lot of people yelp about S&W compromising with Klinton the Klintonian and the gubbmint. And then a bunch of folks say that they will vote for Ahnold because McFlintlock (actually, couldn't resist poking at his name, no disrespect though...) can't win. Shame on all of you, you know who you are, for compromising yourselves.

Arnold is a terrible choice. Terrible. Better to let Bastardmonkey win, screw Kali up even more, and let the inhabitants of that state go down the crapper. Sooner or later, they will smarten up.

If McClintock spoils the race for Arnold over gun control, then the party leadership will learn that a significant portion of Kalifornians truly care about the issue, enough that they need those people to ever have a chance of winning there. Don't vote for someone you can't in good concience see eye to eye with. That's how we got so far down the slippery slope. That's how the NRA has failed us. That's how we failed ourselves and our countrymen.

 

[Dan from MI]

I'm a Republican, but I wouldn't be voting for Arnold. I don't vote for gun grabbers and Pete Wilsonites(Tax raisers).

<A href="http://www.helptom.com">Tom McClintock would get my vote</a>

 

[banzaijohn]

I voted for McClintock too. People ask me why I threw away my vote. In my humble opinion I didn't; I voted based upon principles. McClintock is certainly the most qualified and forthright candidate. If Bustamante or even if Davis were to remain in office, so be it...at least I know where they stand. Arnold talks a good game about being a Republican, but he walks and talks like a liberal and plays to the issues of the day like a spineless jellyfish. I think the only way the State of California can right itself is through the referendum process. We will have to put to a vote polarized issues like driver's licenses for illegals and other liberal causes. Of course even then, these issues are unsurped by the infamous 9th Circuit Court of Appeals or their ilk, (remember prop 187).

 

[hvengel]

If everyone that says "I think McClintock is the best man but he can't win so I will vote for Arnold" voted for McClintock he would win. Almost everyone I have talked to who says they are voting for Arnold has told me they prefer McClintock. Sad story that we are so blinded by the leftist media that they can twist us into voting for "the lesser evil" Alen Keyes said the voting for the lesser evil is still a vote for evil and I for one beleive he is correct.

 

[longeyes]

"And think about this: Would it really be so bad if Bustamente wins because Arnold
(NOT Tom) split the vote? If Bustamente wins, we can be guaranteed that he will
continue the same type of actions that led to this crisis in the first place. The
result will be the complete failure of the California Government. While that is a
bad thing in and of itself, it would clearly demonstrate just how unworkable liberal
policies really are."

This might surprise you but those of us who now live in California
don't require further demonstration of how unworkable liberal policies
really are. We know, better than you. And, yes, it will "really be so
bad" and not just for us, but for you too, though way too many of the
posters on THR seem to live in a cocoon that encourages them to believe
that California is a far-away alien nation that does not reflect wider
trends.

If you think Bush's policies are that different from Bustamante's, look
more closely, you might be surprised. Yeah, in most ways, Bush is
a flaming liberal on almost everything that matters.

 

[4v50 Gary]

Absentee ballot casted for McClintock. He won't win, but he'll know there's supporters out there.

 

[joe4702]

Voting for Tom. Only major candidate that would certainly veto the .50 cal ban and ammo tax bills that will likely end up on the governors desk next year.

 

[ambidextrous1]

I havealready voted via absentee ballot, for McClintock. I do not find it possible to do anything else.

It's a lot better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.

 

[Desertdog]

Vote for who you like!!!

Not who in your party the "polls" says might win.
Remember, it is the VOTES that count, not the polls.
How many times has the polls been right in the past 10 years?
The pollsters have been so far off that their "winner" lost by a wide margin.
If there is enough true republicans who vote their conscience, McClintock will win.

 

[Sergeant Bob]

The mudslinging against Arnold has only just begun!

Arnold's Love Child

TV presenter 'groped' by Schwarzenegger may sue

 

[Bill Hook]

I'm afraid that if California is headed down the great sewer of Socialism, it may as well do so under Bustamante as under Arnold - neither will be able to stop the rot.

Two points:

A) Cruz doesn't want to stop the rot, as the rot creates greater "need" for the leftist agenda (even though it will ultimately burn itself out as it utilizes the resources of an ever shrinking number of producers). These are the same folks who think that anschluss with an impoverished corrupt third world country and/or the adoption of its political and legal practices will somehow lead to prosperity and economic gain for those who are immigrants, or their descendants, from this same country.

B) Arnold will, by association, make the Republican Party take the fall with him WHEN (notice not "if") he fails to implement spin-recovery for California.
When this happens, the leftists will get a new lease on life and get 2-3 elections worth of blame for the worsening situation to dump upon the Republicans and beg for a little more time to get things recovered from the "Republican mess."

 

[gunsmith]

Tom is the only choice!

now do the right thing!
like DR Laura said!

 

[gunsmith]

I vote Tom!

and if boostyourtaxes wins I don't care anymore!
I hope he makes it so damm unlivable my girlfriend will
want to move home to AZ!
It's allready so bad we really need a 2nd American Revolution!
To bad the troops are occupied in Iraq,the USA needs to invade DC and
allmost every State Capital and hang the treason mongers by the neck
untill they stop spreading STD's (socialist transmitted disease)

 

[EWTHeckman]

longeyes wrore:

This might surprise you but those of us who now live in California don't require further demonstration of how unworkable liberal policies really are. We know, better than you.

It's pretty clear from what you wrote that you are well aware of just how bankrupt liberal policies are. Unfortunately, the fact that Cruz has a good chance of winning proves that there are far, far too many people who still haven't gotten that idea through their thick skulls. What is it going to take for them to see the light? Maybe nothing more than a full blown spectacular failure will do the job.

Because you are aware of where things are headed, you have an advantage over the blind ones who refuse to see the truth. You can make plans to survive or escape while the willfully blind are "surprised" by the devastation caused by their ill-conceived short-sighted policies.

 

[longeyes]

What is wrong with this recall Election is that it is not a
Hydra-headed recall of the key radicals in the CA legislature.
THEY are the real problem. To the recall we need to add impeachment
of various and sundry Federal judges who block the will of the people.

The best Arnold or Tom could do is use the veto power. We all know
that by itself can't stop this Titanic from going to the bottom.

I have said before and still believe that it will get worse before
it gets better and that Warren Buffett will buy the joint back at
five cents on the dollar in ten years.

And, yes, I do have an escape plan.

 

[JeffS]

One thing I've learned is to stick to my values and principles when faced with making decisions in a murky situation. Politics and politicians are generally as clear as mud.

Since my political values are: small government, less taxes, and freedom; I have no choice but to vote for McClintock which is what I will do. However, the first question of whether to recall Davis depends upon whether McClintock can win. I will vote NO if not. The why is simple. If Davis stays, he will have a tough time in the next election cycle. The advantage is we will not be voting for one office but several other state-wide offices as well. There is a much better chance to recall more than one at that time.

 

[GW]

There's aflaw in your reasoning, Jeffs
First of all, Davis will be term-limited out of office at the end of this term--his second as governor, The other reason to vote yes on the recall is to destroy his political career--to keep him from running for any office again.
If he survives the recall, he'll run for senator to replace Difi If he loses the recall, no one will touch him with a 10 ft pole.
YES ON RECALL
VOTE FOR McCLINTOCK

 

[DnPRK]

longeyes has it right. The only weapon any Republican Governor has is the veto. He will not get any legislation through the wacky left Democrat-controlled Senate and Assembly.

Those individuals with "principles" who vote for Tom Mc. are probably the same ones who voted for Perot in 1992 due to those same "principles". The result was 8 years of Clinton.