Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 9/24/2003 5:48:15 PM EDT

... Support behind Tom McClintock for Governor. I'm afraid Ahnold is taking too much attention from a real possibility for new and good blood for California. He seems fairly knowledgeable in fixing the ails of the State.
Link Posted: 9/24/2003 6:41:31 PM EDT
McClintock is the conservative - Arnold is appealing to the casual voters - the middle 40% of voters.
Link Posted: 9/24/2003 7:24:38 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/24/2003 7:25:32 PM EDT by hawk1]
McClintock stepped on too many republican toes, especially during Wilsons term. They hardly even backed him during his last try at controller. I think he'll stay in the race till the end. One because of his principals and promise not to drop out, and two, to stick his finger in the eye of those party leaders who blew him off.

Edited to add that I'm voting for him and not Arnold
Link Posted: 9/24/2003 7:38:04 PM EDT
I just heard, when McClintock was running for Controller(?) the repubs gave him $0.00, but support two other loosers with millions. Tom lost the race by 17,000 votes, basically a win, but lost due to lack of advertising money.
Link Posted: 9/24/2003 8:30:15 PM EDT
Arnold!!!!!
Link Posted: 9/25/2003 3:00:29 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Chaingun:
I just heard, when McClintock was running for Controller(?) the repubs gave him $0.00, but support two other loosers with millions. Tom lost the race by 17,000 votes, basically a win, but lost due to lack of advertising money.



Yep, he was outspent 5-1 by Steve Wesley... who basically bought the election.
Link Posted: 9/25/2003 3:35:13 PM EDT

Originally Posted By origbadbob:
Arnold!!!!!




Yeah, he's the best candidate out there....
Link Posted: 9/25/2003 5:44:07 PM EDT
This is the first time that I can recall a truly pro-gun candidate being on the ballot with more than single digit percentage numbers in the polls.
The fact that McClintock will not get EVERY LAST "gun" vote in CA is absolutely beyond me. This is what we've been waiting for!!!
Tom has had to endure campaigning against Schwarzennegger (who said he wouldn't run), the so-called conservative media (talk radio), a whole list of extremely right wing politicians (who urge him to quit) and now the gun-owning hypocrites that won't vote pro-gun when it gets down to the brass tacks.
Mind boggling indeed.
Link Posted: 9/26/2003 1:10:52 AM EDT
The race is between Bustamente & Schwarzenegger. If every "gun vote" is for McClintock then Bustamente is sure to win. Many "on the fence post" voters will be turned off by McClintock's religious views and his pro-life stance.

Link Posted: 9/26/2003 8:01:42 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/26/2003 8:05:51 AM EDT by California_Kid]
In my heart I wish McClintock had a chance.

I strongly agree with him on MOST issues and am willing to let the few on which we disagree slide because I know he is an honest and honorable man who will follow the law. He's head-and-shoulders over any of the other candidates in terms of proven competence to do the job.

Bustamante knows the ropes but he'd be a continuation of the special interest pandering that is one of the strongest legs the recall effort stands on and even worse on taxes than Grayout. As far as gun rights and other civil liberties he's a complete washout.

I could change my mind, but at the moment it looks like I'm going to have to vote for Arnold. My mom agrees BTW, and she's almost always right.
Link Posted: 9/26/2003 11:31:39 AM EDT
I'm for McClintock, but I can not vote for him cimply because a vote for him is a vote for Bust-a-nut, and he simply has NO CHANCE of getting into office. The only two candidates with a chance are Arnold and Bust-a-nut.

Though I do not agree with all of what arnold stands for, I can not allow a continuation of the current administration, especially by a racist motherfuck like Bust-a-nut. My vote must go for Arnold, even though I'd rather have McClintock in office.

All of you hard-core McClintock voters must realize that 1. McClintock has no chance of getting into office, 2. Your vote for McClintock splinters the vote and gives better chances for Bust-a-nut, 3. This election is no longer for the best candidate, it is to pick the lesser of two evils. Simple numbers - regardless of what some passionate people are saying, McClintock has no chance and the only real candidates here are Arnold and Bust-a-nut.
Link Posted: 9/26/2003 12:24:23 PM EDT
Ejecting Gumby-Dumby and replacing him with either McClintock or Arnold is a major defeat for the Democrats. This must happen.

I am holding off until election day to determine who to vote for. If BustaMeCHA still leads the polls, my vote goes to who ever is leading between the Repubs. If McClintock or Arnold is leading, my vote goes to McClintock. We can't loose this election.

Vote smart, BustaMeCHA will destroy this state, and I still have to live here.
Link Posted: 9/26/2003 12:49:45 PM EDT
Was I the only one who notived that Bust-a-nut was the only person to NOT mention cutting Gov spending to help with the defecit? He mentioned generating revenues (taxes) but not cutting spending.. There is something wrong here, especially right after he admitted that the Administration KNEW that they were spending more money than they had.
Link Posted: 9/26/2003 1:41:03 PM EDT
Ok you guys voting for Arnold read this;
releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=151-09252003

Better yet for those that are too lazy or want to cover their eyes;

To: National Desk

Contact: Kevin Watson of the Law Enforcement Alliance of America, 703-847-2677

WASHINGTON, Sept. 25 /U.S. Newswire/ -- In a move signaling the sheer desperation of the final days of his administration, California Gov. Gray Davis yesterday signed into law one of the nation's most expansive handgun bans, outlawing new sales of nearly all handguns in common use for law enforcement and self defense.

The bill masqueraded as a so-called safety measure, by requiring all handguns sold in California to be equipped with magazine disconnects and chamber indicators. Organizations seeking to promote gun control and ban handguns deem these 'safety' devices, while firearm safety experts contend otherwise. The law enforcement community expressly rejects the "magazine disconnect" feature, as it seeks to disable the firearm during a magazine change, a potentially life-threatening result for an officer in a shoot-out.

Gov. Davis' bill also exposes California law enforcement and taxpayers to additional liability risk. The law officially defines guns lacking these features as "unsafe guns." As a result, nearly every single handgun used by California law enforcement officers will be officially defined as an "unsafe handgun," a notion certain to be exploited in lawsuits involving police use of firearms.

Noted firearms safety expert, and developer of the acclaimed "Safety On" multimedia firearms safety program, Michael Marks criticized those billing the gun ban as a safety measure; "This law does not provide one cent for safety education and training, and its requirements for mechanical devices whose value are greatly disputed, actually runs contradictory to the generally accepted principles of firearms safety." Marks added, "Even the antigun, Americans for Gun Safety Foundation, in its Universal Firearms Safety Rules, state that people should, 'never rely on a mechanical safety."

LEAA urges Gov. Davis' soon to be decided replacement to reconsider this ill-advised and misleadingly promoted law.

------

With over 75,000 members and supporters nation-wide, the Law Enforcement Alliance of America (LEAA) is the nation's largest coalition of law enforcement professionals, crime victims, and concerned citizens dedicated to making America safer. Visit our Web site at http://www.LEAA.org


Now tell me you're voting for Arnold? If you keep voting for these sum bitches we're going to keep getting in the ass. Time to stand up and take these assholes to the woodshed. Arnold will not do anything to reverse this law. Arnold still says he wants to close the "gunshow loophole" What fuckin loophole? He's being fed by anti-gun advisors and spouting shit he knows nothing about. He does know that he's for "responsible gun control". His words, not mine. This state is a fuckin mess. If Bustamonte gets in thats fine with me. It'll go down in flames much faster and we'll be that much sooner to rebuilding it. If McClintock loses that will be your worst nightmare...

Link Posted: 9/26/2003 4:25:46 PM EDT
the faster the state goes down hill the sooner we can rebuild?

rebuild? THATS EXTREMELY OPTIMISTIC
i sure as hell would not expect ANY rebuild.

arnold aint saying anything that GW bush hasnt said, he has to kill the gun issue because of his violent movie carreer.

until the kali GOP, and conservatives start seriously supporting the repubs here and END the pro-life crap we will CONTINUE to be on the losing end and dealing with RINOs and demonCRAPs.

even if McClintock was to get into office, there is prolly very little to nothing he can do about the BS gun laws that bastard-davis has signed.
Link Posted: 9/26/2003 4:55:24 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Garand1911:
the faster the state goes down hill the sooner we can rebuild?



Thats not what I wrote. I said "It'll go down in flames much faster and we'll be that much sooner to rebuilding it"
Meaning when people are fed up with being over taxed and over regulated they will stand up and take notice. In the last debate bustamonte agreed they had a "spending problem". His answer to resovling it was MORE TAXES. He never got close to anything about CUTTING SPENDING. He specifically said they needed more revenue to make up for the over spending.


rebuild? THATS EXTREMELY OPTIMISTIC
i sure as hell would not expect ANY rebuild.


What? You make no sense here. My idea of rebuilding is changing the legislature. Getting rid of the Carillo's that pander to the Mexicans, the fat ass Goldberg who panders to anything as far left and queer as possible. Special interest has to go.


arnold aint saying anything that GW bush hasnt said, he has to kill the gun issue because of his violent movie carreer.


Cop out. His problem, don't sign laws against me to cover for his movie "problem". How did he kill the abortion issue? Did he say they needed to close those loopholes as well? Did he call for a ban on partial birth abortion?



until the kali GOP, and conservatives start seriously supporting the repubs here and END the pro-life crap we will CONTINUE to be on the losing end and dealing with RINOs and demonCRAPs.

even if McClintock was to get into office, there is prolly very little to nothing he can do about the BS gun laws that bastard-davis has signed.



Yeah, I guess we should give up and not vote any longer...
Don't get me wrong, I'm not pissed at "you" just that way of thinking.
Link Posted: 9/26/2003 5:35:06 PM EDT


Ok you guys voting for Arnold read this;

<snip>

Now tell me you're voting for Arnold? If you keep voting for these sum bitches we're going to keep getting in the ass. Time to stand up and take these assholes to the woodshed. Arnold will not do anything to reverse this law. Arnold still says he wants to close the "gunshow loophole" What fuckin loophole? He's being fed by anti-gun advisors and spouting shit he knows nothing about. He does know that he's for "responsible gun control". His words, not mine. This state is a fuckin mess. If Bustamonte gets in thats fine with me. It'll go down in flames much faster and we'll be that much sooner to rebuilding it. If McClintock loses that will be your worst nightmare...



Hawk1:

Where in the article that you posted does it mention Arnold?

What the hell does it have to do specificly with Arnold, as everything you wrote would lead any reader to believe?

So Davis signed that POS into law.... how does that correlate to Arnold?

Seriously, where are you getting your reasoning from?
Link Posted: 9/26/2003 5:39:50 PM EDT

Originally Posted By hawk1:


arnold aint saying anything that GW bush hasnt said, he has to kill the gun issue because of his violent movie carreer.


Cop out. His problem, don't sign laws against me to cover for his movie "problem". How did he kill the abortion issue? Did he say they needed to close those loopholes as well? Did he call for a ban on partial birth abortion?



Gun legislation to abortions, and not only abortions but partial birth abortions....

Can we say "comparing apples to oranges" here?
Link Posted: 9/26/2003 6:10:38 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/26/2003 6:20:47 PM EDT by hawk1]

Originally Posted By leelaw:


Hawk1:

Where in the article that you posted does it mention Arnold?

What the hell does it have to do specificly with Arnold, as everything you wrote would lead any reader to believe?

So Davis signed that POS into law.... how does that correlate to Arnold?

Seriously, where are you getting your reasoning from?



From the very last line of that article. Let me quote it here for you;

LEAA urges Gov. Davis' soon to be decided replacement to reconsider this ill-advised and misleadingly promoted law.

Enough said? If he is elected he'll do nothing to reverse it. Or attempt to influence anyone to do anything about this or any other gun law. You may not want to admit it or face it, but you know it's true. Yeah, I'm a "one issue" voter. When they pass laws to take away or "restrict" our god given right to protect ourselves or to have any "checks and balances" on a run away government the rest of the admendments are worthless...

Edited to fix spelling

Link Posted: 9/26/2003 6:18:51 PM EDT

Originally Posted By leelaw:
Gun legislation to abortions, and not only abortions but partial birth abortions....

Can we say "comparing apples to oranges" here?



I only brought that issue up as I understand Arnold is against abortion. You do not see him saying anything about it to "kill the issue" as Garand1911 said he did to kill the gun issue "because of his violent movie carreer"

Link Posted: 9/26/2003 6:34:42 PM EDT

Originally Posted By hawk1:

Originally Posted By leelaw:
Gun legislation to abortions, and not only abortions but partial birth abortions....

Can we say "comparing apples to oranges" here?



I only brought that issue up as I understand Arnold is against abortion. You do not see him saying anything about it to "kill the issue" as Garand1911 said he did to kill the gun issue "because of his violent movie carreer"




Do me a favor and show me a movie he has been in where partial birth abortions were as rampant as violent killings.
Link Posted: 9/26/2003 6:54:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By leelaw:

Do me a favor and show me a movie he has been in where partial birth abortions were as rampant as violent killings.



My bad for bringing up the abortion thing. Why don't you address his anti-gun views and not the abortion thing? Some people vote to take a stand, and some people vote just for a winner. Make you all warm and fuzzy to vote for an "image"?

Link Posted: 9/26/2003 7:00:01 PM EDT
Forget the abortion issue, tax increases, etc. Those issues effect a HUGE percentage of the population and it is much easier to gather uniform support from ALL Californians for beating those issues no matter who holds the seat of Governor.
OTOH, think guns... We are in the minority whether anyone likes to believe it or not. Lot's of gun-folk STILL don't vote or get involved. We need the to elect the absolute strongest pro-gun candidates we can get into office or die trying. That means voting for McClintock and risking that Cruz beats both gun-hating Ahnold and/or Tom too. That's the risk that I'm going to take because the other issues will be dealt with by a greater percentage of the population. Just look at the recall itself! In spite of what the lefty media says, it is a bi-partisan effort to remove Davis. An attack on Prop. 13 would get the same effect. The tripling of the VLF is in the process of getting the same effect. Abortion is a federal matter, so it's irrelevant in this discussion. Adding more guns to the list of so-called AWs will NOT generate negative support from the whole of the population because it won't effect everyone in the state and Ahnold will sign away our rights in an instance like all the others have before. So why the fuck would any gun owner vote for him?
Link Posted: 10/5/2003 5:21:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By BKinzey:
The race is between Bustamente & Schwarzenegger.



No, it is not. Bustamonte is a leftist.

Arnold is from the centrist, Bill Clinton, mold. Even inner city welfare blacks and first generationmexican americans Arnold.

MClintock has the support of conservative christians, and he should have the support of all fiscal conservatives and gun owners.

It would be a close 3-way race if gun owners backed McClintock.

Link Posted: 10/5/2003 5:22:58 PM EDT
My prediction is:

Arnold 39%
McClintock 30%
Bustamonte 29%
Carmejo 2%
Link Posted: 10/6/2003 10:38:01 AM EDT
The race is between Bustamonte & Arnold.

My prediction:

Arnold
Cruz
Tom
the rest.

Tom isn't going to get over 20% of the vote, if he does, Bustamonte will win.

Don't take it as an endorsement, just how I think it will go.
Link Posted: 10/6/2003 9:46:07 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AR15fan:
My prediction is:

Arnold 39%
McClintock 30%
Bustamonte 29%
Carmejo 2%




30% for McClintock? Not a chance. The Republicans finally woke up and realizied that they are never going to win at least at this time with ultra-conservative Republicans like McClintock in California.
For the record, McClintock pissed me off when he sucked up the Indian money just like Bustamonte and sat there comatose during the debate instead of attacking Arnold.
Link Posted: 10/7/2003 3:40:05 PM EDT
... EARLY AFTERNOON EXIT POLLS SHOW 57% VOTE 'YES' FOR RECALL, CAMPAIGN SOURCES TELL DRUDGE REPORT, 47% FOR SCHWARZENEGGER, 34% FOR BUSTAMANTE, 12% MCCLINTOCK
Link Posted: 10/7/2003 10:09:42 PM EDT
So far it's:
Schwartzy
Bustie
Clinty

Wher­e did I hear that before?
Top Top