-—”I like Tom, but Poizner? Absolutely not. He should just run himself.”-—
Great, now McClintock is a RINO.
Sigh.
No, he’s not a RINO. Steve Poizner and Meg Whitman are, though.
Sigh, indeed. You just don't get it, do you Titan?
It seems you think ANY criticism of a Republican official on this forum means the freeper is automatically calling them a "RINO". Not so. McClintock is a fine conservative. His endorsement of Poisoner is wrong. McClintock is human and is not perfect 100% of the time. The same is true of any other conservative politician. Ronald Reagan was the greatest President in my lifetime. But I certainly won't defend or support his endorsement of Richard Schweicker for VP in 1976. Sarah Palin is a solid conservative but has made some endorsements I don't like. And so on, and so on.
In fact, the only person on this forum who seems to bring up the word "RINO" on these threads is you. I think you're projecting. You seem desperate to "prove" that any ounce of criticism posted on FR is proof that we hate someone and we're out to "get" them and purify the GOP. Very thin-skinned. Only you seem to think a freeper is claiming so-and-so is a RINO scumbag if the poster offers anything less than gushing praise for everything that person does.
There are ramifications of using the ‘If you endorse a RINO, you’re guilty by association’ rule.
Tom’s no RINO. He knows Poizner and his record. He also knows of Whitman and her policies. Tom’s simply picking someone the Republicans can swing to there side on critical choices. Poizner is not the best choice for CA gov, but Whitman is worse.