Skip to comments.
California: Republican Party directors call emergency meeting
Dan Weintraub Weblog ^
| September 27, 2003
| Dan Weintraub
Posted on 09/28/2003 6:47:25 AM PDT by John Jorsett
Edited on 04/12/2004 5:58:07 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
The California Republican Party has scheduled an emergency board of directors meeting for Monday at 1 p.m. in Burbank to consider endorsing a candidate in the recall replacement election. It's clear that at least some of the directors want the party to go on record endorsing Arnold. Once again, this bullying of McClintock strikes me as futile. Unless he has sent a signal that he would withdraw if the pary directors endorse Arnold, I don't see how this will change anything, other than to give McClintock one more "backroom deal" to rail against and give his supporters one more reason to consider him a hero. Then again, with Arnold and Cruz running neck-and-neck, if Arnold can somehow take half or more of the 15 percent to 18 percent now backing McClintock, it might provide the margin of victory. I'm just not a fan of political parties, especially when they act this way, so I have a natural adverse reaction to this sort of thing. I still think Arnold gets those votes anyway on Election Day, but doing it this way further polarizes the race and makes it tougher for him to win crossover and independent votes.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: bustamante; bustamtne; calgov2002; california; davis; mcclintock; recall; schwarzenegger
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-50, 51-100, 101-150, 151-200 ... 251-278 next last
To: BibChr; onyx; PhiKapMom; Tamsey; redlipstick; habs4ever; My2Cents; South40; ...
Ping
2
posted on
09/28/2003 6:50:23 AM PDT
by
EggsAckley
(..........................I report......THEY decide.....................)
To: John Jorsett
Let Arnold contend for the 20-30 percent of the undecideds. He is neither owed nor deserving of the votes of conservatives he ridiculed and dismissed as "right wing crazies" in his cynical and arrogant run to the left.
If he can't or won't earn his support the old-fashioned way, let him lose and rot.
To: Kevin Curry
He is neither owed nor deserving of the votes of conservatives he ridiculed and dismissed as "right wing crazies" in his cynical and arrogant run to the left. If he can't or won't earn his support the old-fashioned way, let him lose and rot.
4
posted on
09/28/2003 6:55:43 AM PDT
by
KantianBurke
(Don't Tread on Me)
To: John Jorsett
I agree. I think Arnold has this thing won. It doesn't matter what the Republican party does at this point. It doesn't matter what McClintock does at this point.
Why is there such a lack of polls since last week?
5
posted on
09/28/2003 7:00:43 AM PDT
by
shempy
(dig it)
To: John Jorsett
Some of you Californians are not thinking.
Mac is not a choice. he has no prayer of winning. You get two choices in a row; first Gray or not Gray, and then Cruz or Arnold. Mac is not in the picture and will never be, and all your principled and emotional clinging to him will do is to put Cruz in the governor's seat.
6
posted on
09/28/2003 7:01:00 AM PDT
by
Steely Glint
("Communists are just Democrats in a big hurry.")
To: shempy
Because the democrat machine is in action (grease the wheels of the media)works EVERY time.Remember it's mexifornia.
7
posted on
09/28/2003 7:08:59 AM PDT
by
Vaduz
To: KantianBurke; Tamsey; Tempest; My2Cents; redlipstick; EggsAckley; FairOpinion; ...
He is neither owed nor deserving of the votes of conservatives he ridiculed and dismissed as "right wing crazies" in his cynical and arrogant run to the leftAs a sort of rationality test, I'm going to try one sober question on you.
Which do you think is more damaging to the conservative movement:
- Schwarzenegger, a loyal Republican from citizenship to this day, on one occasion calling some supporters of one proposition "right wing crazies," while working with actual, office-holding conservatives and pledging to put conservative think-tanks in charge of reform?
OR.... - McClintock acting like a right wing crazy, turning his scorched-earth supporters into right-wing crazies, by confirming every slander ever told by the Left that all conservatives are rigid, arrogant, reality-indifferent, authoritarian, humorless, uncompromising, team-fracturing, self-centered, Taliban-like dictators, thus cementing in the minds of all voters and observers that this is really the way all "real" conservatives will conduct themselves politically in a diverse culture?
Do you have a thoughtful answer on that one? Or just another one of the snipes, cliches, and diversions we've come to expect from many who STILL support McClintock?
Dan
8
posted on
09/28/2003 7:14:18 AM PDT
by
BibChr
("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
To: Steely Glint
The fact that not all will answer, "Well, yeah -- duh!!" to your common-sense post is both a sad commentary on conservative political thinking in California today, and an explanation of why Democrats win power while conservatives focus fire on each other.
Dan
9
posted on
09/28/2003 7:16:15 AM PDT
by
BibChr
("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
To: shempy
I agree. I think Arnold has this thing won. That's what Davis wants you to think. He hasn't cut loose with his nuclear powered slime cannon yet. Give it about five more days.
10
posted on
09/28/2003 7:16:21 AM PDT
by
Carry_Okie
(California! See how low WE can go!)
To: shempy
There has been a dearth of polls all along, most suspiciously.
Note that scorched-earthers, this time, actually anticipate with ill-concealed (or open) glee Democrat lies, slanders, and foul attacks.
Dan
11
posted on
09/28/2003 7:17:41 AM PDT
by
BibChr
("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
To: KantianBurke
let him lose and rot. Spoken like a true Soreloserman.
12
posted on
09/28/2003 7:17:41 AM PDT
by
Drango
(McClintock is the new Soreloserman.)
To: John Jorsett
Word is that the smear campaign will explode on Arnold over next weekend just prior to Tuesday.
Similar tactics were utilized in the Boxer-Hershenson California Senate race , and more currently in the Bush drunkeness charges against GW.Bush just before that election day.....
To: Kevin Curry
I second that! Arnold and his liberal ilk will never get my vote. If Mc wasn't in this, the ONLY vote I would cast is FOR recall and nothing else.
14
posted on
09/28/2003 7:19:24 AM PDT
by
poet
To: Drango
"Spoken like a true Soreloserman."
Insults, always insults. clinton will be proud of you.
15
posted on
09/28/2003 7:21:04 AM PDT
by
poet
To: John Jorsett
I'm just not a fan of political parties, especially when they act this way, - - .I understand and agree with the standard practice of a party organization not endorsing a particular candidate in a primary election, but this is not a primary. There is no general election to follow, in which it would be standard practice to endorse the candidate that won the primary. I don't think it would be such a bad thing for the party to endorse in this case.
To: prognostigaator
When are Republicans going to learn to play hardball? I don't mean lying about Democrats, I simply mean telling the truth about them.
Republicans won't even guard for voter fraud. We're a bunch of weenies.
Bush wouldn't even hold the Clintonites accountable for vandalism.
Republicans allow Dems to lie about what really happened in FL.
To: BibChr
It's a waste of time to expect the McClintock crazies to look at this rationally. My guess is that most of the die-hards are fringy, libertarian types anyway. McClintock in the end will be in single digits and that will be low enough to beat Bustamante. The fringies will brag that they never compromised, McClintock will be finished in California politics, and Arnold can work on fixing the mess we are in.
18
posted on
09/28/2003 7:23:17 AM PDT
by
2iron
To: Drango
In response to your tagline: Schwarzenegger is the new Clinton.
But he's our Clinton, so it's all OK, isn't it?
19
posted on
09/28/2003 7:24:48 AM PDT
by
B Knotts
(<== Just Another 'Right-Wing Crazy')
To: poet
Insults, always insults Not always. The insults come when so called conservatives log on and try to elect Bustomonte...
20
posted on
09/28/2003 7:25:35 AM PDT
by
Drango
(McClintock is the new Soreloserman.)
To: 2iron
It is indeed a personal failing of mine that, in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, I look for, hope for, and even expect rational responses from people who enter a discussion. So you're doubtless nearer to the truth than I wish you were; certainly, the level of discussion from the scorched-earth side bears you out.
And you're doubtless right that many of the ones who aren't actually on the payroll of someone who has an interest in the GOP losing are themselves NEINO's.
Dan
21
posted on
09/28/2003 7:25:54 AM PDT
by
BibChr
("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
To: 2iron
If Schwarzenegger really is ahead of Bustamante, as he appears to be in most polls, then he is better served by McClintock remaining in the race, as McClintock acts as immunization against the last-minute slime drop strategy.
What good is it for Mullholland to destroy Schwarzenegger, when McClintock is waiting in the wings and can pick up most of his votes?
22
posted on
09/28/2003 7:28:29 AM PDT
by
B Knotts
(<== Just Another 'Right-Wing Crazy')
To: BibChr
"conservative political thinking in California today, and an explanation of why Democrats win power while conservatives focus fire on each other."
Do you really believe that people who backed Riordan and now Arnold are conservatives? Hogwash! Conservatives are NOT focusing fire upon each other, rather, we focusing fire on PRETEND conservatives who are really liberal, but, like all liberals, they consider that a swear word and would never reveal themselves as liberals. Why else would every politician (r & d) run as fiscal conservatives?
That's the major problem on this forum, some of you actually think we are firing upon other conservatives which could not be further from the truth.
23
posted on
09/28/2003 7:28:33 AM PDT
by
poet
To: poet
We got a clear peek into Schwarzenegger's ugly soul with his remark about "right wing crazies" opposed to the collection of racial data in a supposedly colorblind society. In his black heart of hearts he despises conservatives, but had managed to keep his lips zipped until that unscripted moment.
Now Schwarzeneger has let loose a Clinton-style "deny with a lie and attack the messenger" machine in an attempt to destroy the character of the conservative who reported it. He has completed his metamorphosis into the Republican Party's Bubba.
Schwarzenegger deserves contempt--nothing less.
To: BibChr
"Taliban-like dictators"While I completely agree with your sentiment about Arnold being the only real choice for Republicans here, if McClintock were in power, women would not be running around in burqas, people would not be tortured/killed for opposing Christianity, he wouldn't associate with terrorists, and he wouldn't begin to destroy historical artifacts. Therefore, it is asinine for you to use that phrase (like the liberal scumbags who refer to Bush as a Nazi).
25
posted on
09/28/2003 7:33:53 AM PDT
by
GreatOne
(You will bow down before me, Son of Jor-el!)
To: BibChr
But Dan, You must learn that your expectations for intelligent discourse are beyond reason, when ScorchedEarther Kevin Curry points out what the Arnold camp REALLY is:
"Most of them are cow-eyed wimmen. With a few Mapplethorpe metrosexuals thrown in for an ambiguous trace of testosterone leaven."
How can you expect intelligent discussions from people who would post THAT? And it WAS posted, and it was NOT removed. 2 = 2 still equals 4 in my world, even if it does NOT on the planet Fresno.
26
posted on
09/28/2003 7:34:27 AM PDT
by
EggsAckley
(..........................I report......THEY decide.....................)
To: Drango
"The insults come when so called conservatives log on and try to elect Bustomonte"
There's that weak mantra again. It's old and won't work.
We are voting FOR someone and not AGAINST as you Arnold "supporters" are doing. Your ENTIRE message is to defeat Bustamonte where ours is to elect Mc.
Yours is a vote of fear while ours is a vote of hope.
27
posted on
09/28/2003 7:37:27 AM PDT
by
poet
To: Kevin Curry
Kevin, To show how lame your stance is, you are going to vote for McClintock, who is a "sellout' and "traitor" to "true conservatism", according to your definition.
Yes, thats right. Tom has basically said it would be "ok" for his TomBots to vote for Arnold on election day if he(Tom), was still way behind in the polls. So, he's a sellout.
To: Kevin Curry
Pretty self-righteous for someone who would make this statement about Arnold supporters:
"Most of them are cow-eyed wimmen. With a few Mapplethorpe metrosexuals thrown in for an ambiguous trace of testosterone leaven."
29
posted on
09/28/2003 7:39:10 AM PDT
by
EggsAckley
(..........................I report......THEY decide.....................)
To: Kevin Curry
You are totally right about Schwarzenegger being the republican version of Bill Clinton. The same people that rail against Bill and Hillary suddenly go blind with Schwarzenegger, because of the magic "R" beside his name.
What does it say about the leadership and members of the republican party that they rollover for a far-left liar like Arnie?
You hear on this board all the time that the Rat party stands for nothing but raw political power. Any and all moral beliefs or standards are expendable on the altar of winning office.
It seems to me that the republican party has joined the Rat party in jettisoning all that is right and decent in its own lust for power in California.
To: BibChr
There has been a dearth of polls all along, most suspiciously. There is a CNN/Gallup poll coming out today. It was announced on CNN yesterday afternoon.
31
posted on
09/28/2003 7:41:27 AM PDT
by
Dave S
To: EggsAckley
What's inaccurate about it?
To: Kevin Curry
Please give a direct answer of why Tom is not a sellout according to you, and not just more of the same mindless, irrational blather.
I do feel for you... It must be a tremendous burden being the only ringbearer of "true, pure" conservatism. Oh the weight...
To: poet
Is that what I said?
So you think no conservatives support Schwarzenegger?
And you are saying that you have never attacked or impugned the bona fides of a FReeper who does?
Dan
34
posted on
09/28/2003 7:44:12 AM PDT
by
BibChr
("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
To: Kevin Curry; BibChr; onyx; PhiKapMom; Tamsey; redlipstick; habs4ever; My2Cents; South40; ...
Has kind of a nice ring to it, doesn't it?
"Most of them are cow-eyed wimmen. With a few Mapplethorpe metrosexuals thrown in for an ambiguous trace of testosterone leaven."
"Most of them are cow-eyed wimmen. With a few Mapplethorpe metrosexuals thrown in for an ambiguous trace of testosterone leaven."
"Most of them are cow-eyed wimmen. With a few Mapplethorpe metrosexuals thrown in for an ambiguous trace of testosterone leaven."
35
posted on
09/28/2003 7:44:21 AM PDT
by
EggsAckley
(..........................I report......THEY decide.....................)
To: John Jorsett
The desperation of the Republican Party in California is (understandably) palpable. It's so bad that the Party leaders believe their only chance for victory is on the back of a "moderate" action movie star. I sure hope that this frantic desperation does not lead them to do anything stupid.
To: Walkin Man
The same people that rail against Bill and Hillary suddenly go blind with Schwarzenegger, because of the magic "R" beside his name. Yup, your're right. We all think Arnold is a hard core conservative to the right of Jesse Helms. Yup...
To: GreatOne
Sorry you don't get my point in using the term; perhaps you didn't read the entire posting?
At any rate, I've learned that there's not much percentage in trying to enlighten someone who begins a discussion by calling me "asinine" on the basis of his untested misunderstanding of what I've written.
Dan
38
posted on
09/28/2003 7:45:51 AM PDT
by
BibChr
("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
Comment #39 Removed by Moderator
To: EggsAckley
Kevin Curry said that?
Yeah; not a hopeful sign.
Dan
40
posted on
09/28/2003 7:46:37 AM PDT
by
BibChr
("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
Comment #41 Removed by Moderator
To: Dave S
Hm; sure to be discussion-fodder at least.
(c8
42
posted on
09/28/2003 7:47:12 AM PDT
by
BibChr
("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
To: Kevin Curry
<< Post 39 is about you. >>
How so?
43
posted on
09/28/2003 7:50:15 AM PDT
by
BibChr
("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
To: BibChr; Kevin Curry
Yeah, Kevin posted that last night. Pretty classy, no? But of course
we are the name callers, or so they say. Do you find it a little strange that it wasn't deleted, or is it just me? I even received a couple of freepmails from TomBots APOLOGIZING for Kevin! Hah!
I just HAVE to see it again:
"Most of them are cow-eyed wimmen. With a few Mapplethorpe metrosexuals thrown in for an ambiguous trace of testosterone leaven."
"Most of them are cow-eyed wimmen. With a few Mapplethorpe metrosexuals thrown in for an ambiguous trace of testosterone leaven."
"Most of them are cow-eyed wimmen. With a few Mapplethorpe metrosexuals thrown in for an ambiguous trace of testosterone leaven."
You're a real class act, Kevin.
44
posted on
09/28/2003 7:52:23 AM PDT
by
EggsAckley
(..........................I report......THEY decide.....................)
To: BibChr
"And you are saying that you have never attacked or impugned the bona fides of a FReeper who does?"
I most certantly have questioned their conservative bonafides when the ONLY argument/reason to vote for Arnold is to defeat Bustamonte! Man, that is a weak argument and shows fear.
John
45
posted on
09/28/2003 7:52:43 AM PDT
by
poet
To: poet
I most certantly have questioned their conservative bonafides when the ONLY argument/reason to vote for Arnold is to defeat Bustamonte! Man, that is a weak argument and shows fearAre you saying that you have never seen detailed, fact-oriented, reality-based rationales for supporting Schwarzenegger?
Are you also saying that a Bustamante administration is not something to fear?
Dan
46
posted on
09/28/2003 7:54:27 AM PDT
by
BibChr
("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
To: All
Stop it. Stop this labeling of people to be something they are not. Evaluate the distance left and right by the standards of what counts, namely California. In California, Arnold is not a leftist. Davis and Bustamunte are. In California, McClintock is not a moderate. He's somewhat extreme to the right. It's an unfortunate reality that the McClintock supporters have to accept. California in 2003 won't have him.
And it doesn't matter particularly what any of them are. Their staffs tell the tale. Arnold is not going to make leftist decisions because as is true of all executives, the staff present the options. They have an enormous say in what is decided by phrasing options as they do. Arnold's administration will be made up of Republicans.
47
posted on
09/28/2003 7:55:12 AM PDT
by
Owen
To: EggsAckley
If it isn't the mother of all revealingly stupid remarks, it's her sister.
Dan
48
posted on
09/28/2003 7:55:14 AM PDT
by
BibChr
("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
To: BibChr
Dan,
Why do you ask for a thoughtful answer after you launch a toxic attack on McClintock supporters?
I am still looking for your website. I still want to find out your justification as a Christian for voting for a candidate who supports something God hates (abortion) and supporting someone who works to undermine marriage. The lesser of two evils IS STILL EVIL. You would do better to listen to Alan Keyes.
49
posted on
09/28/2003 7:56:36 AM PDT
by
sruleoflaw
((FOR TOM MCCLINTOCK: Arnold will get my vote when hell freezes over and pigs fly))
To: EggsAckley
Lt. Col. Gil Ferguson (USMC, Retired) described Arnold's support this way:
"His celebrity status alone will attract a huge number of votes for the GOP from Independents, Democrats and especially young voters. Among the 18 to 30 year olds, he is Britney Spears with muscles."
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-50, 51-100, 101-150, 151-200 ... 251-278 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson