Hugh Hewitt Lays Down the Gauntlet to Tombots

Hugh Hewitt's Website ^ | September 12, 2003 | Hugh Hewitt

[annyokie]

Yes, it is an online poll. I am not certain about how it is conducted, but it was reported on FoxNews tonight along with the LA Times and Field polls.

I report, you decide. ; )

[AmericaUnited]

It is about time for people to get it, Tom can win...if we want him to...

DUH! Less than 30% of Republicans in Kalifornia support him. If, if, if, if, if elephants could fly...

Do you really think it is rational or prudent to live in a fantasy, make-believe world?

[truthkeeper]

What obnoxious and insulting rhetoric. Who does he think he is? The last time I looked this was still a free country - barely - and NOT the Soviet Union. Next he'll want to herd us to the polling places with jackbooted escorts. Well, I will vote for who I d**n well please, and not who Mr. Micromanager wants.

This guy needs to stop being such a control freak and lay off the Focus Factor. The "voice of reason?" Please.

[DiamondDon1]

Hi Fair!

Question for you, if you dare answer...

What is the percentage that Tom must get to that will make you believe?

DD

[BobS]

Keep dreaming. Practice saying "Governor Bustamonte", my friend.

If that becomes the case, McClintock will be retired from politics by people in his own district, even if it means another dem in the state senate. We are pissed. Principles are one thing, but if not elected, those principles are in the local sewer pipes.

Hugs, Anny,
Bob

[BobS]

"What is the percentage that Tom must get to that will make you believe?"

40%. Minimum.

[DiamondDon1]

No doubt the L.A. Times poll is flawed...

But as of yet, we do not have an answer, what percentage does Tom have to have before you believe, and in what poll?

Seems like a fair question, don't ya think?

DD

[halfdome]

I don't know why we're even bothering with the election. Why don't we just save the money and have Arnold crowned governor. I'm sure that's what he expects.

[SteveH]

It has been my observations that wiser politicians and commentators don't make statements starting with "If...".

Whenever I see and "if" statement which is speculative in nature about the political future, red flags go up immediately.

Sheesh, Arnold! is not signing a no-tax pledge because he doesn't know what the future may bring in terms of revenue shortfall. And Arnold! supporters don't seem to think that's important.

OK, then, but to be fair, one should cut the other side some slack, too.

If not, how's this:

"If Arnold! is elected and subsequently raises taxes, or flips to becoming a (D), then it is the fault of Arnold!'s supporters and advocates in the media, including Hugh Hewitt."

This election is so nuts that some talk show hosts would seem to want to cut off their noses to spite their own faces.

[Princeliberty]

No I looked it up this is the FIRST result of
the Stanford "poll."

It was taken form August 28 to Sept 8 making
it an older poll than the newest polls right off
the bat.

Further it was online poll form people who responded
to an emailing form them.

What was the email list they used to send out
the e-mails? How many responses and does
the responding group sampling come close to
representing the profile of California's voters.

Seem to be very bad poll. Really just a joke.

But even if not. Does not contradict the statements
that all the polls showing McClintock the only one
moving up. This poll has no previous showing.
But I predict its next showing will show McClintock
moving up since that is the general trend.

[DiamondDon1]

All polls agree McClintock is the only candidate going up.

No they don't. Check your facts.

Facts checked...

Survey-USA poll, increase.
Field poll, increase.
L.A. Times (worthless) poll, increase.

Do you want the numbers or is this good enough?

DD

[DiamondDon1]

Nice post and nice pictures as usual...

DD

[FairOpinion]

We keep going round and round on this.

Even if McClintock would be even or slightly higher that Arnold, he could NOT beat Bustamante. Visions of the last CA election, when Davis beat Simon didn't teach some people anything.

Some, probabaly half or so, of Arnold's support comes from new voters, who registered to be able to vote for him, from independents and some Dems, all of whom would either not vote or vote for Bustamante, if Arnold were not in the race.

The Dem machinery, on the other hand will turn out their voters in droves.

Net result on a two-way race betwenn Bustamante and Mcclintock, is Bustamante, by a mile.

On the other hand, if McClintock weren't in the race, most of his supporters SHOULD vote for the Repulican in the race, and Arnold would win.

[DiamondDon1]

Thanks Ambrose...I forgot the Iraqi Information Minister said all is lost...(tee hee)...

DD

[annyokie]

Maybe. Today was the first time I saw it reported. It can't be more off the wall than the LA Times "poll".

[truthkeeper]

On the other hand, if McClintock weren't in the race, most of his supporters SHOULD vote for the Repulican in the race, and Arnold would win.

Well, if I do vote for Arnold at the end, rest assured it is going to be DESPITE people like Hewitt, not BECAUSE of him. He is doing his candidate absolutely no favors. And if he doesn't get this, he is not very bright.

[CheneyChick]

You forgot this Stanford poll:

http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2003/09/08/daily47.html

Unlike conventional polls, which restrict respondents' choices to the top candidates and give them the option of selecting "undecided" as a response, the online survey gave participants the actual ballot that included the question about recalling Mr. Davis and listing the 135 replacement candidates. Mr. Fiorina says this scenario is closer to the actual situation voters will face on Oct. 7.

Cheers, CC

P.S. If you are going to use the phrase "all polls", then include ALL polls.

[DiamondDon1]

Thank you for the nice reply!

I look at being a "Tombot" as a badge of honor. Being for someone who shares my conservative principles and who (if people believe) can win...Even Hugh has said Tom is the best candidate, but keeps the mantra "but he can't win". Well if we can get to that magic number, perhaps Hugh and others with jump on board, so we can move on and win this...

DD

[SteveH]

And another thing, the Republican state hierarchy expressly took a stance of neutrality, thus avoiding an informal primary and avoiding the possibility of setting up a mandatory debate limited to major Republican candidates.

This resolution seems to be an egregious violation of that pre-arranged climate of neutrality.

So I for one have no idea what game Mr. Hewitt is playing. Perhaps there is an angle here that I've missed; an angle that would somehow redeem this proposition. What is it???

Also, as so kindly pointed out by an Arnold supporter, the use of the term "Tombot" does not exactly inspire loyalty to the party or leading candidate. Does Mr. Hewitt use that term, or is it just a term of convenience, with context limited to this base post? A less important issue, but still of some interest, in order to help understand where Mr. Hewitt is coming from...

[Princeliberty]

Again I do not embrace the LA times poll.

Now the times poll we know what they do
they add Hispanics and Democrats to their sample.
Admitted fact.

So you can look at their results and say they
overstate liberal Democrat views and results
and understate conservative Republican views
and results.

So Cruz should be viewed as being lower and McClintock
higher.

As for the Stanford Poll. We don't know exactly
how it is off. Liable to have massive errors such
as a larger number of nonvoters etc...