Replies

Simon is elected...

Ain't gonna happened. I told you Simon would lose the day after Simon won the nomination. People thought I was lying then. They think I am lying now.

For months I have said the inept pig-headedness of Simple Simon would elect the unelectable Davis.

In a very short time you will not be able to say Davis will not win. Davis will have won. You will be reduced to saying I was wrong about how Davis won... but not that Davis won.

The question is, will those that have followed Simon down that well worn road to defeat learn anything from the loss or are they doomed to repeat their mistakes for generations yet to come.

It is hard for Democrats to lose when they picked both parties candidates. When people like you fail to see that Davis picked the Repubican canidiate, there is little hope.

Most likely to win, the Repubican party will do what it has done in New York. Republicans will move to the left with candidates like Pataki and Bloomberg.

Members of parties are about ideology. But the party is always about winning. After this debacle, the majority of California Repubicans would nominate Karl Marx if they could get him to run and win. But they will settle for someone just to the left of Bloomberg. A Goldwater style defeat never brings about a Reagan next. It brings about a Nixon.

Have a nice Trickey Dick in 2006.

Your comments imply this race has to do with Simon's stance on the issues, i.e. that he is too conservative. That is not why his numbers are down. That is because of $45 million in negative ads defining him by Grayout, albeit fraudulent definitions. On that point, I find some of your earlier comments to be spot on. This is especially with respect to the large numbers of "undecideds" (Davis can hardly break 40%) who may just not vote. Those that do will not vote for Davis.

You fail, however, to understand what is happening below the radar here in California. The people, rats included, loathe Davis. Absolutely. Simon has believers. Motivated believers. Believers that are working their tails off. Simon can't battle the presstitutes so he is all over talk radio and in the streets. Conventional wisdom which you have a lot of is not going to bear out.

As to Riordan, you are right that Davis' $10 million helped defeat him--but not the 60% swing from the beginning polls where Simon was down to Dickie by 40 points and whooped his liberal, wrinkeled ass by 20 points. That was due in large part to Simon and his supporters. Indeed, accepting your contention as true, what do you think Davis would have done to Riordan if he could do that to Dickie in the Republican primary?

As experienced as you appear to be in matters political, methinks you will be surprised (hopefully, pleasantly) when Simon pulls this one off.

Putting money where my less experienced and perhaps irrationally optimistic mouth is, $20 to FreeRepublic says you're going to be eating crow on this race come November....

As a general rule, it's a good idea not to write the post mortem until the cause is officially dead. What do you hope to gain from that, anyway?

Your bleak line of thought has a seductive appeal, of course. People are suspicious of polyanna-like optimism nowadays, in a world where the only consistency is the prevailance of Murphy's Law. And, of course, it's the perfect excuse for apathy, for not doing anything, for not bothering to go to the polls.

I know plenty of people, including myself, who are working very hard to try and turn this perception around and to help elect Bill Simon in November. If you're right, this is a completely futile effort and we should stay at home and knit or do something otherwise productive.

So let me tell you something: I've been having one heck of a lot of fun. I've gone places I've never been to before, I've staked out a governor as he exits his lair, I've talked to a lot of wonderful people and made some great contacts for the future. And I have tons of great videotape that's produced some very entertaining productions that have given a lot of people a laugh or two to relieve the stress of their days.

So no, even if the worst happens and Simon loses, I will have enjoyed one of my life's more entertaining interludes. And if we can pull this off, well, I will feel an enormous amount of pride in what I've helped accomplish.

If trying to convince people this election was a simple formality, a coronation of King Davis for continued rule, I wouldn't care one whit about your views; after all, you have them just as I have mine.

But it seems to me that you, in your Murphy-style pessimism, are undermining Simon's chances by posting these bleak diatribes.

Is there any reason not to hold them until after the election? If Bill Simon loses, I will cheerfully accept your "I told you sos". If he wins, what will you do?

D

PS For an election that will be decided by turnout, the left seems awfully apathetic and the right charged up. A Simon victory scenerio where the left doesn't vote and the right does strikes me as completely doable with the right management. That's why grass roots politics exists in the first place, after all.

"The question is, will those that have followed Simon down that well worn road to defeat learn anything from the loss or are they doomed to repeat their mistakes for generations yet to come."

Lemme see if I have this:

1. Conservatives should abandon someone in a primary that is more in line with their view, in favor of someone that can win.

2. They can then rejoice in the fact that, although they've helped elect a liberal (maybe someone even more liberal that the democreep), by gosh he's got that "R" after his name so he's a-ok.

We did exactly that in NY - in '94 when Pataki first ran.
And taxes have continued to rise . . .
And companies have continued to flee the state . . .
And freedoms have continued to erode away . . .

And conservatives benefitted . . . how?

You know, I used to think you had a valid opinion. Now I know that all you are is a pontificator and you will join my own private ignore list of your type.

Pontificators are easy to spot. Ever word they write is dripping with their own cleverness and self view that they and they alone have a valid opinion on whatever thread they've graced by their appearance. In fact, most pontificators would probably lock each thread they posted to if they could. After all, in their mind, everything that needed to be said was said. By them. In the pontificator's mind, there's no other reason to continue the thread unless the lesser posters limit their responses to telling the pontificator how brilliant they are. That is acceptable to them. One clear hallmark of a pontificator is that they never take a controversial stance.

If you were saying that you thought Simon was winning, I might at least give you credit for taking a risky stand, but with Simon down, how much risk are you taking? None, it's just a little vehicle for you to dazzle us with your cleverness.