An Open Letter to Tom McClintock Supporters

Men's News Daily ^ | 9/29/2003 | Jagrmeister

[jagrmeister]

"An Open Letter to Tom McClintock Supporters"

It seems like an eternity that we've been under the yoke of the Davis administration. Maybe you feel the same way too. When the recall petition began circulating, we responded. All told, 1.6 million of us said we were fed up with the entrenched politicians. Together, we showed how populism can work when we join forces. So here we are- a week till Election Day. And you, the supporters of Tom McClintock, hold in the balance the fate of California. Your choice determines whether we throw off the chains of the Davis-Bustamante regime or condemn ourselves to three more years of it. It's a substantial charge and I know that you won't take it lightly.

Tom McClintock is a fine statesman and has run a solid race. Undoubtedly, he's a rising star in the GOP. But this is not his time. From the Los Angeles Times poll conducted from September 6th to the PPIC poll released on September 17th, Tom lost 4% of his support and is polling at 14%. This is half the support level of Schwarzenegger and Bustamante. Because polls show he lacks momentum, Tom has no realistic chance of winning. Tom will be back for another statewide race, perhaps even running for US Senate next year against Barbara Boxer. We can count on that. But for now, Arnold Schwarzenegger is the one Republican who can win this race. The reason that conservatives such as Bill Simon and former California Republican Party chairman Shawn Steel have endorsed Arnold is that he alone can deliver us from the misery we've suffered under Davis-Bustamante rule. And these conservatives know that Arnold will uphold conservative principles in opposing driver's licenses for illegals, rescinding Davis's tripling of the car tax, and opposing partial birth abortion. It's essential to realize that Arnold shares your values, he's on your side, and he needs your support to remove Gray Davis from power and keep Cruz Bustamante from seizing Davis's throne.

A Bustamante victory on Election Day would be disastrous. The first thing Bustamante would do as governor is increase taxes on us by $8 billion. This is the promise he made under his infamous "tough love" program. And since Bustamante hasn't showed the slightest interest in curbing spending, we can expect one punitive tax increase after another. And let us not forget Bustamante's ties to the racist organization, MEChA, whose slogan is "For the race, everything. For everyone else, nothing." Bustamante's commitment to border enforcement will be zero. He backs the bill giving driver's licenses for illegals despite the fact that terrorists could slip through this security loophole and gain valid US identification. As bad as it's been under Gray Davis, Cruz Bustamante would be worse. We cannot risk electing him to office. Yet this will be the result if we split the vote between Arnold and McClintock. The time has come to unite as a party. Recently, the "father" of the recall, Darrel Issa, endorsed Schwarzenegger for governor. If it were not for Issa's heroic efforts, this recall may have not come about. At the endorsement event, Issa said, "I want to reach out directly to Senator McClintock's supporters and appeal to them to join me in voting for Arnold Schwarzenegger. We worked hard together to make this recall a reality. We must be united in these final days to ensure its ultimate success." Issa's message is simple: We can win but we must be united to do so. Democrats are united behind Bustamante; we must unite behind our strongest candidate. Voter anger at Davis and Bustamante gives Republicans a unique opportunity to prevail in this election, but unity is essential if we are to fulfill the recall's promise. When the Founding Fathers were debating about measures to confront the British, Benjamin Franklin said memorably, "We must all hang together or assuredly we shall all hang separately." Let's bear that in mind. The consequence of voting for McClintock at this stage is a three-year hangover that will be the Cruz Bustamante administration.

We the people have it in our ability to remove the Davis-Bustamante regime from power. But your support is needed. Arnold, and more importantly, California, needs you.

-------------------------------

Bob Chandra is a Bay Area Republican activist. He was involved as a strategist for Linda Rae Hermann's campaign against Mike Honda for California's 15th congressional district. His email address is bobchandra(at)comcast.net.

[tallhappy]

Put simply Schwarzenegger is worse than Bustamante.

[ambrose]

Oh no, not the BustaBoogeyman!

[ambrose]

Put simply Schwarzenegger is worse than Bustamante.

The biggest difference between Arnold and Bustamante is the following:

With Bustamante, you can be certain he'll drive this state down the poopshoot... with Arnold, you can at least hope he'll prove ya wrong...

[Warhead W-88]

I support Arnold, but I don't want Tom to actually drop out.

I fear that there is something big and bad in Arnold's past that could kill him as a candidate. If that happens, we want McClintock in the race and ready to take the mantle. We certainly don't want him to have already dropped out, Perot like, only to re-enter the race.

I like what McClintock is doing now-- he's making his points, he's giving us a savage critique of Bustamente/Davis, he's presenting himself as a reasonable and viable candidate for governor. And he's doing all this without attacking Schwarzenegger (at least not attacking him in a very deadly way). Perfect.

I just hope that if Schwarzenegger continues holding up, and continues as front-runner, that McClintock will... not drop out per se -- he's put his credibility on the line about that, and I wouldn't want him to hurt that credibility -- but to say something to the effect of, "Arnold would be a capable governor. I think I would be a better governor, but Arnold would be good as well. So, my supporters who simply cannot and would not ever vote for Arnold should vote for me. But for the rest-- those choosing between two good alternatives -- perhaps you should consider the best strategic vote. Because beating Davis and Bustamente is more important than me or Arnold."

Etc. Not so much dropping out of the race, but signalling that voters who may be undecided between him or Arnold, or who might find both acceptable but prefer McClintock, should perhaps go with Schwarzenegger.

I am chagrined at the high level of hatred between Arnold and McClintock supporters. I have to say that I find most of this hatred emanating from the McClintock camp. I never disliked McClintock, even though I found Arnold a bit more appealing. McClintock to me was a very appealing alternative, a strong second place. The electability issue had something to do with that, of course.

For me, then, were McClintock the front runner and Arnold playing the spoiler role, I'd have no hesitation at all about encouraging Arnold to get out. I'd gladly throw my weight behind McClintock. California is simply too important to be left in the hands of the Democrats.

And so I am a bit baffled, and a bit angered, by the hatred and hostility directed at Arnold. Yes, he's a bit liberal on many social issues. So effing what? Governors do not have the power to change our national, court-mandated abortion policy. Everyone here knows that -- indeed, when a pro-life candidate is running in a state, many pro-lifers will point out to liberals that it doesn't matter what the candidates abortion position is, since a state official has very little latitude to change the law -- but suddenly McClintock supporters are behaving as if Governor Arnold Schwarzengger is going to advance the pro-choice position in California.

And yes, there's the gun thing. But in California, being strongly pro-gun is a political loser. I'm afraid that being moderately pro-gun, or at least not kooky on the issue, is the best we can hope for.

But on most other issues Arnold is quite acceptable as a candidate. He's good on immigration. He's good on capitalism versus collectivism. Etc.

So I am disappointed that while I, and I think many Arnold Schwarzenegger supporters, would be more than willing -- enthusiastic, actually -- to throw our support to McClintock were he to become the front runner, most McClintock supporters say they would never, will never support Arnold, under any circumstances, even to prevent Governor (Save us all) Bustamente.

I don't get this. I think some people take a perverse pride in being spoilers, of "taking the ball and going home" if they can't get their way 100%. That's everyone's right, of course, but it does not make one the sort of political ally that one wants to do business with, and it's really piss-poor political strategy. Some people seem to have the idea that they're "principled" and "righteous" for vindictively throwing an election to an arch-leftist like Bustamente just to "teach the California RINO GOP establishment a lesson."

Well, lessons are important, yes. But more important that lessons & payback is actually winning elections, actually putting our candidates into office so that the public can see real conservative policies working-- successfully.

Libertarians -- members of the actual libertarian party I mean, not philosophical libertarians -- seem to take a similar perverse delight in imposing a 100% purity test on all would-be candidates. The Libertarian Party does not elect many officials to office. And the public never gets to see an effective libertarian office-holder, and never gets to see libertarian policies working.

Thus, the Libertarian Party is, in political terms, a joke.

I've got news for everyone here: In California, the GOP is nearly as hapless as the Libertarians at the state level. If you ever want to change the minds of Californians, you've got to elect a Republican as Governor (or Senator). Only then can the people begin to learn that conservative principles work. "Working in theory" or "working on paper" does not cut it with electorates. They need to see actual policies actually implemented, and actually working.

And to do that, you need to actually elect someone who is conservative. Or at least conservative on the biggest issues.

But some people, however, fancy themselves "idealists" who would rather consign themselves to the political wilderness for 40 years rather than bend on minor issues (and in this context, abortion IS a minor issue, because Governors have so little power to change the national, court-mandated policy). They call this "principles"; I call it stupidity and cowardice. Stupidity because it's guaranteed to result in failure; cowardice ALSO because it's guaranteed to result in failure.

And I wonder if that isn't the real agenda here: To keep conservative ideals blissfully uncontaminated by the dirty compromises of the real world, so we can all admire how wonderful they seem to work in the laboratory or in the think tanks or in position papers, never having to risk seeing them succeed or fail in the real world.

[tallhappy]

The first thing Bustamante would do as governor is increase taxes on us by $8 billion.

Schwarzenegger has promised to build hydrogen refueling stations every 20 miles -- despite the fact that there are hardly any hydrogen cars.

And if you think 8 billion is a lot, Schwarzenegger's hydrogen fueling network of dreams would cost a lot more than 8 billion.

[Jeff Gordon]

Question: As some of these eleven dozen or so candiates drop out, what happens to the votes cast for them?

Do the just go into vote wasteland?

Can a candidate drop and request that all votes for him or go to some other candidate? For example if Cruz were to drop out, could he designate all Cruz votes go to Gary Coleman?

[tallhappy]

You just aren't familiar with Schwarzenegger's positions.

Real issues that a governor does have impact on such as school vouchers and proposition 54 he opposes.

He then supports environmental policies which seriously harm business in California such as "greenhouse" legislation to limit carbon dioxide emission. His environmental positions directly contradict the Bush administration's positions.

He is touted as being able to bring back business and help Bush carry CA in 2004. But his environmental positions contrary to the Bush adminsitrations make the latter doubtful and his environmental positions are far left and are the same sort of thing that makes businesses leave.

[giotto]

I finally figured out what is keeping McClintock in the race: He has a chip on his shoulder the size of Ross Perot. Perot hated Bush, and set out to derail his presidency; McClintock has a vendetta against the "country club Republicans," who have spurned him in the past. He loves the feeling of power it gives him to have them twisting in the wind, begging him to drop out. A classic case of cutting off one's nose to spite his face, because no matter the outcome, his political career is finished.

[dpwiener]

From the Los Angeles Times poll conducted from September 6th to the PPIC poll released on September 17th, Tom lost 4% of his support and is polling at 14%. This is half the support level of Schwarzenegger and Bustamante. Because polls show he lacks momentum, Tom has no realistic chance of winning.

Comparing numbers from different polling firms is worthless. They each have their own weighting profiles, different questions, etc. At most you can glean some information from movement in the same company's polls over a period of time.

If you're going to compare the Los Angeles Times and the PPIC polls, why not also compare the latest CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll which shows Tom at 18%, only 7% behind Bustamante and closing the gap? As to which candidate lacks momentum, the answer to that is Bustamante (unless you want to count his falling numbers as downward momentum). I continue to maintain that the big story during the final week of the campaign may well be the race between McClintock and Bustamante for second place. I for one would thoroughly enjoy seeing Bustamante fall to third. That would pretty much end his political career.

[Bob]

Vote Arnold. He's not as bad as Bustamante!

What a great campaign slogan! That'll really rally the troops.

[Warhead W-88]

You just aren't familiar with Schwarzenegger's positions. Yes, that's it. You're right-- we disagree because you know more than me. If only I knew as much as you, I'd see things your way.
Ahem.
Whatever.
In a political party, there is give and take. People make common cause with other people they disagree with, just to advance the causes they DO agree on.
Some of you seem to think it's your way or the highway.
Fair enough. The rest of us can play the same game. You don't want to ever compromise to help us? Then we wil never compromise to help you.
Some of you people... whatever. If you're not in the party, you're not in the party. You can be as principled and whatnot as you like; don't expect any favors, though, from those for whom you have done no favors.

[Taiwan Bocks]

I must support Tom because he is against murdering babies for cash and against homosexuals adopting children.

No one should urge christians to step back from God's commandments.

[Lancey Howard]

A Bustamante victory on Election Day would be disastrous. The first thing Bustamante would do as governor is increase taxes on us by $8 billion.

How would Bustamante do this without the handful of Republicans that he would need to get a tax increase through the legislature?

An Arnold tax increase - - now that's a different story. Arnold would likely get that necessary handful of weak-kneed Republicans by giving them the cover they need.

[nickcarraway]

Do you mean that Bustamente can destroy the state, but Schwarzenegger can destroy the state and the Republican Party?

[nickcarraway]

Some good points. People who have expectations of 100%, are of course foolish. But aren't people who support a candidate below a certain percentage equally foolish? You can't get everything you want, but if you can't accept nothing either.

[Lancey Howard]

Bob Chandra is a Bay Area Republican activist

How could anybody trust a "Republican activist" who supports a pro-gun-control, pro-illegal alien, pro-enviro-nazi, pro-homosexual-adoption, pro-abortion candidate? I will never understand this. Most conservatives, and I believe most Freepers, will support a candidate who is a little soft on one or two important issues. But wrong on nearly everything? I don't think so.

[kingu]

I continue to maintain that the big story during the final week of the campaign may well be the race between McClintock and Bustamante for second place. I for one would thoroughly enjoy seeing Bustamante fall to third. That would pretty much end his political career.

Aside from making people feel really good about beating the Democrat not once, not twice, but three times (Recall, Arnold, Tom), would someone take the time to explain what this does for anyone? The legislature is still Democrat controlled, folks. The more percentage of the vote Arnold carries into office, the higher the pressure on those idiots to actually do their damn job. We have a budget to fix, folks... Tom's ego is a wonderful thing to stroke, but with 12 billion in bonds being thrown out, we need votes to get the budget cut.

[capitan_refugio]

The California Election Code provides that all votes cast for a candidate after 68 days prior to the election (i.e. names on absentee ballots, either for candidates whose names are printed on the ballot or as qualified write-in candidates) shall be tallied as cast. A candidate who dropped out or died after the 68 day period can legally win the election.

All these votes need to be canvassed and certified.

[ETERNAL WARMING]

And what exactly does it gain California and the Republican Party if we vote for the Non-Conservative Schwartzenegger? Do you understand the damage he'll do to the Republican Party if he is elected? Do you all understand that you're handing the Democrats a scathing platform for the '06 elections? Do you understand that you will be allowing them to shift the blame off of themselves and onto Republicans? Do you understand that Arnie is a RINO and will do nothing but support leftist policies which will make things worse?

We have a chance to turn things around. We have a chance for principles to shine. But no. Some would rather see a pretty boy in office than someone who looks "crosseyed." Isn't that sad? Isn't that a stellar reason to support Arnie?