Posted on 06/17/2006 6:52:35 AM PDT by ncountylee
Tension between Antonio Villaraigosa and Democratic gubernatorial nominee Phil Angelides surfaced Friday as the Los Angeles mayor declined to say whether he backed his own party's candidate to unseat Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
The rift between two of California's top Democrats became clear just after they appeared with Magic Johnson to celebrate the opening of a Starbucks on Crenshaw Boulevard.
Minutes after Villaraigosa's tepid remarks on his candidacy, Angelides refused to take a stand on Villaraigosa's plan to take over the Los Angeles public schools.
The dual snubs were part of a broad conflict between the two Democrats.
Villaraigosa is torn between party loyalty and the potential rewards offered by his new alliance with the Republican governor. He plans to campaign with Schwarzenegger for bond measures on the November ballot that could offer Los Angeles billions of dollars for schools, housing and traffic relief. And the governor would decide where much of that bounty went.
There is also a matter of personal ambition: Villaraigosa is widely seen as a top Democratic candidate for governor in 2010 — provided that Angelides loses.
For Angelides, support from Villaraigosa, a major political star, is crucial, especially in Southern California. But the mayor's top priority is his school takeover plan. And it should come as no surprise that Angelides is distancing himself from that: The effort's No. 1 opponent, the California Teachers Assn., has spent more than $1 million promoting Angelides for governor.
With that backdrop, the mayor was less than enthusiastic when asked outside Starbucks whether he supported his party's nominee for governor.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Arnold has a tough race -- it isn't going to help the other R candidates, if Arnold gets defeated, then they will too. Their only chance is to be sept in on Arnold's coat tails.
You still are denying reality, that there are NO Republicans elected to statewide office, outside of Arnold.
Offering excuses already I see. Horse pucky. Arnold has his preferred opponent in Angeleides. It was Westley who would have been tougher.
-- it isn't going to help the other R candidates, if Arnold gets defeated, then they will too. Their only chance is to be sept in on Arnold's coat tails.
McClintock would be chucking his favorable ratings (which are FAR higher than Arnold's) were he to pander too much to Arnold's agenda. He would lose the trust of his base and gain nothing from anyone else. His best option is to stay true to his principles.
You are looking for any excuse and if there isn't one, you make them up, to bash Arnold, and HELP ANGELIDES.
Your message is all too obvious.
Conservatives aren't stupid, to swallow the propaganda of "let's get rid of Arnold, even if it gets us Angelides'.
NO REAL conservative falls for this.
Only the DICCs (Democrats In Conservatives Clothing)are spreading and pretending to buy this message, to try to con conservatives into staying home and making it easier for Angelides.
The DICCs have been and are continue to be unmasked.
The new 'Republicans vote on Wednesday' game (FR Mentioned) (article full text)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1613957/posts?page=87#87
"Or my favorite: “I’m a Reagan Republican, but I’m fed up and voting for John Kerry.” (Because that is what Reagan Republicans would do, vote for John Kerry.) At this point, the host usually asks a couple of questions and it becomes painfully obvious that the supposed Reagan Republican has probably never voted for anyone left of Michael Dukakis.
The intentions are clear: the caller hopes to make it appear as though there is already a large uprising of conservatives who are rebelling against GOP candidates, and thus, wishes to incite other Republicans to pick up the same attitude and pass it along, leading to the Democrat becoming more competitive. The successes of such a strategy on voting habits are unclear, especially given that the conservative radio host often refutes the caller’s talking points.
But the pretend-conservative act is being carried onto a whole new playing field, one that has become wildly influential over the past few years and one that does not stand to be instantly recognized as a fake. That playing field is the blogosphere, which is then used in conjunction with massive e-mailings to “spread the word” (as one e-mailer insisted I do to my readers/e-mail list) to other conservatives.
The concept is the same: the blog or e-mail claims, first, that the said writer has been a conservative for years and that they have “had it with Republicans.” They then point to an issue that conservatives would likely be upset about such as excessive spending, immigration, or the expansion of government. Their supposed rage over the issue has convinced them to either not show up to vote in 2006, or, in order to really show Republicans, vote for the Democrat instead. "
FairOpinion: "By not supporting Arnold today, you may either get us Angelides for the next 8 years, or Arnold wins despite your non-support, then in 2010 you can be pleased that you have only yourselves to blame if Villaraigosa defeats McClintock."
Record for RINO Governors handing off their offices to Conservative/GOP successors (since 1988):
AL: Not applicable
AK: Not applicable
AZ: Jane Dee Hull (RINO), succeeded by Janet Napolitano (D)
AR: Outcome unknown until November (Huckabee, RINO)
CA: Pete Wilson (RINO), succeeded by Grey Davis (D)
CO: Outcome unknown until November (Owens, RINO)
CT: Likely successful pass of office from RINO John Rowland to RINO incumbent Jodi Rell
DE: Mike Castle (RINO), succeeded by Tom Carper (D)
FL: Bob Martinez (RINO incumbent) defeated by Lawton Chiles (D)
GA: Not applicable
HI: Not applicable (possible outcome in November for incumbent)
ID: Not applicable
IL: Bill Thompson (RINO) to Jim Edgar (RINO) to George Ryan (RINO), succeeded by Rod Blagojevich (D)
IN: Not applicable
IA: Not applicable (though Branstad considered RINO by some, in which case successor, Tom Vilsack (D))
KS: Mike Hayden (RINO) defeated by Joan Finney (DINO) & Bill Graves (RINO) succeeded by Kathleen Gilligan Sebelius (D)
KY: Not applicable
LA: Not applicable (though Foster considered RINO by some, in which case successor Blanco (D))
ME: Jock McKernan (RINO), succeeded by liberal Angus King (I)
MD: Not applicable (possible outcome in November for incumbent)
MA: The RINO hegemony, Weld-Cellucci-Swift-Romney, will likely come to an end this fall
MI: Not applicable
MN: Arne Carlson (RINO), succeeded by liberal Jesse Ventura (I)
MS: Not applicable
MO: Not applicable
MT: Not applicable (though some consider Martz to be a RINO)
NE: Kay Orr (RINO), defeated by Ben Nelson (DINO)
NV: Outcome unknown until November (Guinn, RINO)
NH: Not applicable
NJ: Tom Kean (RINO) succeeded by Jim Florio (D); Christie Whitman/Donnie DiFrancesco (RINOs) succeeded by Jim McGreevey (D)
NM: Not applicable (though some considered Gary Johnson a RINO, he was a Libertarian)
NY: Outcome unknown (though likely D) until November (Pataki, RINO)
NC: Not applicable
ND: Not applicable
OH: Successful RINO handoff from Voinovich to Taft, but ultimate outcome in November
OK: Not applicable
OR: Not applicable
PA: Tom Ridge (RINO), temporary successor Schweiker a Conservative, but went to Rendell (D)
RI: Ed DiPrete (RINO) defeated by Bruce Sundlun (D), 1990; Successful RINO to Conservative handoff from Lincoln Almond to Don Carcieri ONLY successful move from Liberal RINO to Conservative in 20 years, not counting SD)
SC: Not applicable (but some argue David Beasley a RINO, I say he was an unsuccessful Conservative)
SD: William Janklow (RINO) to Mike Rounds (R), successful handoff
TN: Lamar Alexander (RINO) succeeded by Ned McWherter (D); Don Sundquist (RINO) succeeded by Phil Bredesen (D)
TX: Not applicable
UT: Not applicable (though Leavitt was a borderline RINO)
VT: Not applicable (not counting death of Richard Snelling (RINO), succeeded by Howard Dean (D)
VA: Not applicable
WA: Not applicable (have to go back to 1984 to the last RINO Governor)
WV: Not applicable
WI: Some consider Scott McCallum a RINO, which would count as a loss to Jim Doyle (D)
WY: Not applicable
In total, out of 50 states going back 18 years, you have:
Not applicable (meaning either no GOP Governor or Dem to Dem successions, or Conservative handing off to another Conservative, not counting Conservative to RINO, or Conservative being succeeded or defeated by a Dem): 18 (AL,AK,GA,ID,IN,KY,MI,MS,MO,NH,NC,ND,OK,OR,TX,VA,WA,WV,WY)
Clear loss of RINO to Democrat: 12 (AZ,CA,DE,FL,IL,KS,ME,MN,NE,NJ,PA,TN)
RINO to Democrat due to death: 1 (VT)
Unclear/Contested Appraisal of whether Governor a RINO with a Dem successor: 7 (IA,LA,MT,NM,SC,UT,WI)
Undetermined final outcome: 8 (CO,CT,HI,MD,MA,NV,NY,OH)
Previously Successful RINO to RINO: 3 (IL,MA,OH)
Successful RINO to Conservative: 2 (RI,SD)
In other words, in 18 years, you have only one election out of all 50 states (2002: Rhode Island) where a somewhat liberal Republican was succeeded by a Conservative Republican one (and that largely because the Democrat was viewed as an unpopular nut). In the case of SD (also 2002), the incumbent Janklow was a RINO not because of policy (which was fairly Conservative), but because of his personal conduct and selfishness that aided and abetted Democrat federal victories.
The chances that Ah-nold as a liberal RINO would hand off the Gubernatorial office to a Conservative (McClintock) at the next election has such a slim chance of happening as to be virtually impossible. Again, out of 225 individual elections nationwide since 1988, only 2 Conservatives succeeded RINOs. That means a 1 in 112 1/2 chance. That's a 0.88% chance that McClintock will be successful. Anyone seriously want to take those odds ?
Liar. I didn't have to make anything up. I found evidence that exactly supported what I said and provided a source. In response you put up your characteristic smokescreen and hurl baseless attacks.
Arnold is already using his power within the party to withdraw resources from down ticket candidates. Best you tell your minders that he'd better not do it again.
That is pretty impressive research, but how many "RINO" governors had "non RINO" Pubbie lieutenant governors? Will or will not McClintock being elected L. governor increase his chances of becoming governor?
Not that facts mean anything to you, BUT for those who are interested in facts:
No elected Republicans in CA in a statewide office, except Arnold.
And of course the voter demographics:
CALIFORNIA VOTER AND PARTY PROFILES
http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/JTF_VoterProfilesJTF.pdf
"The Democratic Party currently has an advantage of 1.4 million voters over the Republican Party (7.1 million to 5.7 million) or 9 percentage points (43% to 34%), according to the Secretary of State.
Among those most likely to vote in this year’s elections, Democrats outnumber Republicans by a 7-point margin (44% to 37%), while 15 percent of likely voters are registered as independents.
... the fact that independents are more likely to lean toward Democrats than Republicans (42% to 28%) tends to work to the disadvantage of the GOP in statewide elections."
I might add that McClintock's best chance would be to be elected L. Governor while Arnold goes down. That is not at all impossible if the election is close. But most of McClintock's vote will be a reflection of Arnold's vote. But not all. For those who want McClintock to become governor, voting for him and against Arnold is not irrational. It might just work. Will I do that? No, and McClintock is the shining light in a gold state desert.
The trick is to support Arnold publically, to help McClintock, but secretly vote against Arnold. I hope that helps.
You can try to twist and squirm all you want, that doesn't change the bottom line that in November either Arnold gets reelected, or Angelides will be the new governor.
Bashing Arnold HELPS ANGELIDES.
Your continued attacks on Arnold help Angelides. FACT. PERIOD.
"but secretly vote against Arnold. I hope that helps."
VOTING AGAINT ARNOLD IS A VOTE FOR ANGELIDES.
Doing it secretkly just proves that people who do that and claim to be conservatives are DICCs. (Democrats In Conservatives Clothing).
Just exaclty how much clout do you think McClintock will have in an Angelides administration?
Surely you are not that naive.
WI - Scott McCallum was not a RINO. He lost because Tommy's little brother, Ed Thompson, ran as a Libertarian and got 10% of the vote.
It also doesn't change the bottom line that McClintock supports Schwartzenegger.
Anyone claiming otherwise is no supporter of Tom.
Yes, he says he supports A.S. for re-election because the "Purple Party Leaders" eliminated all Primary competition, but he also freely and frankly states clearly where he disagrees with his worship, the overly bloviating fathead celebrity!!!
I will never vote for anyone of either major Party that has done as much to destroy the vision I have for my beloved adopted home state as A.S. has done!!! You and the rest of FReeperdom can do whatever you like, of course.
McClintock will have zero impact as L governor in either administration. Perhaps my point was too subtle, although I suspect most who read it will get the point.
Voting for Angeledis and McClintock would be best for McClintock. It would make him the leading Pubbie in the state. You might not like that, but that is just the way it is. As I said, I personally will not do that, and Arnold will have to run close to winning, for McClintock to win, so it is a tricky wicket.
Precisely.
Interesting info! Thanks!
"That is pretty impressive research, but how many "RINO" governors had "non RINO" Pubbie lieutenant governors? Will or will not McClintock being elected L. governor increase his chances of becoming governor?"
Nationally, I'm sure many RINO Governors had non-RINO Lieutenant-Governors, but it doesn't change the outcome of the above research.
But lets briefly take a look at California and its Governors/elections of the past 100 years:
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.