President Bush stumps for Bill Simon (PHOTOS)

AP Yahoo ^

[Moonmad27]

Thank you for posting those pix! The afternoon GWB was to arrive in LA, I was driving on Highway 101 up to Ventura. There was a very large, very slow moving plane flying low over the freeway headed toward the navy base. My first thought was it was not a gray-painted military aircraft, but a commercial jet. Then looking closely, it dawned on me that it was Air Force One! It gave me a real sense of pride, and I'm glad to hear that his visit to LA was such a success.

[Coop]

Simon has slipped in the polls recently

You mean poll, of course. You believe the Field Poll, while ignoring four other polls showing Simon leading. Very convenient for the point you're desperately trying to make.

[exmarine]

Bush is backing him now, but 2 months ago, he was backing the pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, ultra-liberal RIORDAN! Bush's behavior is quite strange for a conservative and his convictions appear to be quite shallow. I do not trust a man who contradicts his stated moral principles.

[Coop]

Here are the polls I've seen on this race:

Probolsky & Associates; Apr 2-4 02; 825 RV; Simon 44%, Davis 38%, 53% view Gray-out unfavorably; Link 1

Field Poll; Apr 19-25 02; 546 Adults; Davis 44%, Simon 29%, 47% said they will not vote for Davis' re-election; Link 2

Unknown firm for labor union; Mar/Apr 02; Simon 41%, Davis 37%; Link 3

Public Opinion Strategies for Simon Camp; Mar 6-10 02; 800 LV; Simon 48%, Davis 41%; Davis with 50% disapproval rating; Simon led among women 46-43% Link 4

Field Poll; late Feb 02; Simon 44%, Davis 42%; Link 5

No matter how you slice it, the very well-funded Davis has miserable re-elect numbers for an incumbent.

[Coop]

Bush is backing him now, but 2 months ago, he was backing the pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, ultra-liberal RIORDAN!

[sigh] President Bush NEVER backed Riordan, though the White House powers-that-be (read: Rove and friends) obviously wanted Riordan to win. Foolish move. Once Simon won, President Bush immediately promised support to Simon. He just made good on that promise.

I do not trust a man who contradicts his stated moral principles.

Well, I don't trust a poster who makes unsubstantiated accusations. Devil Dog!

[exmarine]

I live in California pal and there is no question in my mind that Bush backed Riordan. Simon is the clear choice for a man of true principle but Bush didn't come out in support until Simon TROUNCED Riordan. Bush also has backed other liberal gubernatorial candidates around the country - Riordan wasn't the only one. It's common knowledge - what world do you live in? Want the names of the pro-abort TX supreme court judges he nominated while guv in Texas? Bush is not a true conservative. Not only is he a globalist who wants to grant amnesty to law breakers, but he doesn't have the guts (nor does his wimpy AG) to fire Clinton cronies in the DOJ, CIA, FBI, etc., or to get to the bottom of the numerous Clinton scandals that damaged our nation so greatly. He's an establishment player - he goes with the flow. Not only that, but he is blowing the war on terrorism by making exceptions for Arafat and Saudi Arabia, while telling Israel that they should hold back (the U.S. ONLY is allowed to eradicate terrorists with impunity).

[Coop]

Nice rant. But there is a question in my mind. So why don't you provide a bit of proof?

[exmarine]

Do you want me to dig up the newspaper articles for you? Anyone who reads the news knows that what I say is true. In fact, the burden of proof is on you! Why hasn't Bush sought justice and truth on the Clinton scandals - Chinagate, Pardongate, Vandalgate? Why hasn't Bush fired the corrupt Clinton cronies who are still mucking things up in the DOJ, FBI, CIA? Why is Bush seeking amnesty for illegal aliens (is that a secret that needs me to post proof?) Why is Bush so szchizoid on his terrorism policy, e.g. okay for U.S. to kill terrorists, but not Israel? Why does Bush treat terrorist Saudis as allies (could it be due to O-I-L?) It is no secret that Bush nominated liberal judges in Texas pal - it came up repeatedly in the presidential campaign -Gary Bauer brought it up more than once. You Bushies chose to ignore it. What kind of "proof" are you looking for? You seem to be one of those guys with his hands over his hears, saying "La La La La La." Let me tell you - I am a TRUE CONSERVATIVE - a Constitutionalist - and I can say unequivocally - Bush is not a a true conservative.

[Coop]

I have no burden whatsoever. I don't care about you or your rants. I just asked for you to show me some proof of Bush supporting Simon.

[Rockitz]

Ahead by 4-5 and Simon hasn't even said anything yet. Love it!

Gray Davis, you are the weakest link, Good-bye!

[Gophack]

We know Davis flip-flops on important issues (like first doing nothing about energy, and then rushing to stem the disaster)

Actually Davis doesn't flip-flop, he IGNORES important issues and problems facing our great state because he spends so much time fundraising and shaking down businesses in exchange for his influence (signature/veto? Oh, what to do? How much?)

Davis is corrupt. When problems reach crisis level, he uses the heavy hand of government to "solve" the problem, blame the Republicans (or Bush, or the Free Market, or the right wing conspiracy), then goes back to raising money, giving huge pay raises and benefits to his union buddies, and ignores the fact that his makeshift, panic-driven so-called "solutions" are worse than the problem in the first place.

Gray Davis ... the man who turned a $13 billion surplus into a $22 billion deficit.

Dump Davis!

[My2Cents]

As a California Republican who voted for Simon in the primary, I have to say that I still think he's untested in electoral politics. It's one thing to beat Richard Riordan, who essentially self-destructed due to a horribly run campaign, and another to prove yourself against a veteran and vicious incumbent. My lingering doubt about Simon going into the March primary was whether he has the "killer instinct" to do to Gray Davis what is necessary to get elected. Rather than be victimized by bad PR over the tax return flap, Simon should be putting it all into perspective by raising the issue of the $20+ billion deficit that Davis has "led" the state into.

[My2Cents]

...and the money Davis raises is tantamount to a "protection racket"...No one dares NOT to support Davis financially unless they're prepared for unfavorable treatment and policies from the state in regard to their business or industry. From the polls, it looks like about half of Californians have woken up to Davis' corruption (47% say they will not vote for him...I don't understand why it isn't more like 66%). The fact that Simon is placed much lower than the number of those who say they will under no circumstances vote for Davis is that there could be a lot of voters who will sit on their hands in November -- wanting neither Davis, nor Simon. Generally, I trust that the vast majority of these will be Democrats -- part of Davis' base. This may be the key to victory for Simon: solidify the Republicans, while keeping disgruntled Democrats at home in November. There aren't enough conservatives or Republicans in California to pull off a statewide victory, but if the turnout is low (because Dems stay home), Simon's base should be enough to win.

The budget situation in California is only going to get worse. There's a likelihood that there will be no budget by July 1 (the constitutionally mandated deadline), and that the Legislature will be wangling over it well into the summer. The best thing for Simon is for the Dems and the Reps in the legislature to agree quickly to a budget, and then lay the blame on Davis if it's not signed. So far, Davis has left all of the hard decisions with the Legislature. If there isn't a budget in place by July 1st, Davis will blame the Legislature for this failure. And many in the press will buy it.

[TheErnFormerlyKnownAsBig]

I cannot, for the life of me, imagine how any sane person could actually vote for Gray Davis. Based on what?

Well we are talking about California. Not being sane, not being a citizen, or even not being a person is usually no barrier to voting.