Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Steve Poizner or Meg Whitman
6/3/2010 | Randy Larsen

Posted on 06/03/2010 5:54:53 PM PDT by Randy Larsen

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-59 next last
To: Auntie Mame
I usually vote anti-incumbant.
21 posted on 06/03/2010 6:09:50 PM PDT by Randy Larsen ( BTW, If I offend you! Please let me know, I may want to offend you again!(FR #1690))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Auntie Mame
"Don’t forget, if you’re not sure or don’t know, LEAVE IT BLANK!"

There's a 50/50 chance I'll go to the polls, get a ballot, and leave EVERYTHING blank.

The candidates are worthless, and the propositions have been taken over by the special interests.

22 posted on 06/03/2010 6:10:10 PM PDT by who_would_fardels_bear (These fragments I have shored against my ruins)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Randy Larsen

Not much to chose from between those two. That being said I voted for Meg as the best chance to beat SEIU Brown. In the Senate race I voted for Chuck Devore. Absentee Ballot here.


23 posted on 06/03/2010 6:10:26 PM PDT by Parley Baer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rs1X1DYp7l0


24 posted on 06/03/2010 6:10:59 PM PDT by GOP_Lady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Randy Larsen
Here's my dilemma...

I think Whitman is a Democrat who is running on an open Republican ticket (because Brown has the Democrat spot locked up). I think Whitman is like Bloomberg in New York who ran as a Repubblican for expediency.

Poizner, on the other hand, ran for the California Assembly in 2004 as a liberal Republican. He's the only state candidate that I recall Schwarzenegger actually endorsing and stumping for. Schwarzeneegger didn't even endorse McClintock, who was running for Lt. Governor.

Poizner is now running to the right, as a conservative. I don't know if this is a true change of heart or also political expediency.

-PJ

25 posted on 06/03/2010 6:11:28 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too ("Comprehensive" reform bills only end up as incomprehensible messes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer
Mitt Romeny has said that Meg Whitman's questions to him while he was interviewing her for a position at Bain Capital were tough, tough and tough.
26 posted on 06/03/2010 6:12:29 PM PDT by GOP_Lady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Parley Baer
"In the Senate race I voted for Chuck Devore."

Do you think that Devore has a chance against Boxer? Or did you vote your conscience believing that Boxer is a shoe-in regardless of her opponent?

27 posted on 06/03/2010 6:12:51 PM PDT by who_would_fardels_bear (These fragments I have shored against my ruins)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: skeeter

agree.

Poizner is the part of the same on going problems.
Also Poizner supported Al Gore, that is enough right there
to count him out.


28 posted on 06/03/2010 6:14:48 PM PDT by SoCalPol (Reagan Republican for Palin 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Randy Larsen

They both suck.

I voted Poizner because McClintock, clearly knowing both candidates’ flaws, picked Poizner — and very vocally.

Although the Jarvis group’s endorsement of WHitman carries some weight, let’s not forget their last gubernatorial endorsement: Schwarzenegger.


29 posted on 06/03/2010 6:18:11 PM PDT by pogo101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Randy Larsen

Romney endorsed Whitman.
Tom McClintoc(sp) endorsed Poizner.
That might help you.


30 posted on 06/03/2010 6:19:12 PM PDT by svcw (Habakkuk 2:3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

That says it all EEE.

A herd of RINOs vying for position against the moonbat. We are so screwed.


31 posted on 06/03/2010 6:21:22 PM PDT by A message
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: who_would_fardels_bear

“The only downsides to Poizner is that he really isn’t all that conservative, but neither is Meg. Also, he didn’t always prostrate himself in front of Jarvis and Prop 13.

Prop 13 might have started out as a good idea, but the Democrats have so twisted the tax code at the state and local levels that Prop 13 is now doing almost the exact opposite of what was intended: it is not lowering the overall tax burden of Californians, and it is just making the tax code more complex and favorable to special interests.”

Prop. 13 does what it was intended to do. No more and no less.

Prop. 13 requires a 2/3 vote in the legislature, to raise taxes.

That fact alone has preented tax increases in recent years.

And Poizner is not strongly opposed to getting rid of that.

Your remarks reveal you don’t know much about history.

Jarvis KNEW governments will spend all the money they cn get, so you must try to restrict the amount they can get. Plain and simple.


32 posted on 06/03/2010 6:22:57 PM PDT by truth_seeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too

” I think Whitman is like Bloomberg in New York who ran as a Repubblican for expediency.”

Well said.


33 posted on 06/03/2010 6:23:01 PM PDT by Pelham (without Deporting 20 million illegals border control is meaningless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: who_would_fardels_bear

“Do you think that Devore has a chance against Boxer?”

I think Chuck is the best qualified candidate for the Senate in the race. That is why he has my support including donations and a lawn sign in my yard. I will support whoever is the Republican nominee but I will choke hard if it turns out to be Campbell.


34 posted on 06/03/2010 6:28:29 PM PDT by Parley Baer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Parley Baer

I will also but I’m never going to listen to pragmatic bull again!

This election is just ripping my heart out!


35 posted on 06/03/2010 6:35:52 PM PDT by Randy Larsen ( BTW, If I offend you! Please let me know, I may want to offend you again!(FR #1690))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: GOP_Lady

Explain to me how a person who fundamentally ignores her responsibility as a citizen all her life is cut out for as powerful a position as governor?

She apologizes, so we elect her? That’s a ridiculous reason to pick a candidate.

Make her take a civics class, not ‘government’ as the liberals have twisted it.

Let’s see her be an upstanding citizen and learn the process, not just come in with $150 million in campaign money and take over like Arnold the Austrian socialist did.

Have you looked at her financial disclosure? Being ‘partners’ with so many companies, and then having the governorship sounds like the standard recipe for corporatist fascism that both the democrats and republicans have been cultivating for the last 30 years.

California can NEVER recover with that kind of person in office, because you can bet her many many ‘psrtnerships’ will be advantaged by her powerful political office.

Meg Whitman is A BAD candidate!


36 posted on 06/03/2010 6:43:22 PM PDT by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

Dittos on both mutually suck


37 posted on 06/03/2010 6:46:20 PM PDT by Breto (never accept the premise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Randy Larsen
Poizner's mistake was doing things the old SOP way....run for an office (Ins Commish) as a resume padding for higher office. He would have been the nominee if Meg didn't decide to do things her way with her $60 million. His other mistake was running for Assembly in a Bay Area seat and having to say all those hard left things. He came close to stealing a Dem seat after spending $20 million on that race. He has been a completely mediocre Commissioner, just been running for Governor for the last 3 years. The Dept languished during that time, just so he could claim efficiency.


McClintock is right about Meg....she is GAS version 2.0. All the things she has said GAS has already tried and she won't have any of the political capitol he had and wasted. People will be so freaking tired of Meg by the time she spends $125 million they will vote against her just so they don't have to see her ugly mug on TV anymore.


I held my nose and voted for Poizner, but I believe it doesn't matter. We are getting Jerry Brown. The only way this bus ride is coming to an end is in a fiery crash. California is just another Greek myth.

38 posted on 06/03/2010 6:50:42 PM PDT by ScottinSacto (W.W.M.R.D.? - What Would Mitch Rapp Do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Parley Baer
I voted for Chuck as well. Too many friend work at HP when Carly ran a great company nearly into the ground by buying Compaq.


Another reason I didn't vote for Meg is she did not vote for 28 freaking years. She said she was too busy with her job and her husband's job and raising kids or what the freak ever reason she had. WTF does she think the rest of us do and we all manage to vote. And you know she has more household staff than a hotel.

39 posted on 06/03/2010 6:54:47 PM PDT by ScottinSacto (W.W.M.R.D.? - What Would Mitch Rapp Do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Randy Larsen

Ugh, neither one. I cannot wait until those ridiculous commercials stop.


40 posted on 06/03/2010 6:54:54 PM PDT by TruJess
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-59 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson