Chuck DeVore should drop out of the Senate race in California and endorse Carly Fiorina
posted at 7:27 pm on May 17, 2010 by CK MacLeod
Chuck DeVore is a solid conservative, very well-qualified to be senator or to hold other important offices or positions, but he doesn’t seem to have a prayer of both overtaking Carly Fiorina and defeating Tom Campbell in the June 8 Republican senate primary. He should drop out and, following Sarah Palin’s lead, endorse Fiorina for the good of the conservative movement, the state, and the nation.
I’m not going to attempt to compare Fiorina to DeVore: That would have been a more worthwhile undertaking if Campbell, supposedly at the behest of gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman, hadn’t switched to the senate race at the beginning of the year. The real comparison should be between any-conservative and Campbell, who, in addition to being just the kind of bland establishment politician that Tea Party conservatives were invented to bring down, has an extremely dubious history of support for radical Islamist and anti-Israeli groups, ideologues, and activists that may give Barbara Boxer an opening she doesn’t deserve, and that in any event many conservatives will find difficult to forgive and forget.
California conservatives, who, to say the least, used to be a major positive factor in state and national politics, have a reputation gained since after Ronald Reagan’s time, and especially since the ’90s, of preferring ideological purity and self-defeating gestures over success and influence. Chuck DeVore has a chance to show that they’re now capable of mature calculation and team play. The chance of running against and defeating Barbara Boxer with a candidate pursuing an authentically conservative agenda is too important to sacrifice to anyone’s personal feelings or ambitions, or understandable desire to prove to himself and his dedicated supporters that he’s a fighter to the end.
Currently, Campbell appears to have a solid but not insurmountable plurality lead over Fiorina, with DeVore’s third-place vote more than making up the potential difference. That’s been the pattern in all or almost all polls since Cambell’s entry into the race. Often, the #3 candidacy in a struggle like this one collapses, as voters decide not to waste their votes. If that happens, there’s not a bad chance that DeVore and his ardent supporters will get the worst outcome: An embarrassing showing just strong enough to hand the race to the candidate with whom they have the least in common, while leaving division and recrimination behind among conservatives, reinforcing the perception that they’re too self-destructive to matter, at just the time that the state and the country need them.
Unless DeVore and his supporters can make a convincing case – based on real world numbers, including campaign cash on hand and credible polling – that he can win the primary, he should drop out, the sooner the better, offering an unqualified endorsement of Carly Fiorina, and looking forward to a bright future in state and national politics as a respected and significant player in a grown-up conservative movement – coming back, on the rise, unified, and ready to make a real difference in the Golden State and beyond.
cross-posted at Zombie Contentions
This post was promoted from GreenRoom to HotAir.com.
To see the comments on the original post, look here.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
Just to be clear, I am not saying that I want Chuck to lose.
Someone I greatly respect, Mark Levin has endorsed him strongly, and expressed disappointment that Palin did not.
That being said, what troubles me is the refusal to commit to defeating Boxer under all circumstances. Any possibility of voting for that woman over any Republican is very strange for a conservative.
I know for a fact if Chuck manages to win, Palin will congratulate him and fully support his election to the Senate helping any way she can. I will too.
If he can’t win, I would expect you would want to unite behind Carly, if she wins, and beat Boxer. That should be the priority, but it doesn’t sound like your thought process is trending in that direction.
Do what you must, but I find it discouraging that anyone would even think about voting that harpy back to the Senate when this historic opportunity to retire her is here.
Don’t throw that away, is all I am saying.
Brian1972 on May 18, 2010 at 12:11 AM
As far as I can tell, DeVore isn’t about the party. He’s not going to quit.
He’ll leverage whatever his measly percentaqe is into fundraising efforts in the future.
He isn’t committed to the state. He’s committed to himself.
That’s what really blew me away about the pundit criticism of Sarah’s decision to step away.
It was so obvious to me that this was a win-win. She was under a national microscope. So, go national. That would save her state as well as benefit her.
Win-win.
Devore has far less of a win-win. He goes back into a very nasty caudren of CA GOP types.
They really are insane.
AnninCA on May 18, 2010 at 12:25 AM
Looks like someone has been bit by the Palin bug. This is the kind of advice that will help elect the Republican version of Senator Boxer. With the vast resources at Hot Air, how about looking into Fiorina’s past at Hewlett Packard and find out if any money that went to Planned Parenthood?
Blue Collar Todd on May 18, 2010 at 12:41 AM
Dude, our views line up 100% on this issue. Everything you’ve said I’ve found myself nodding in agreement with.
Don’t expect the DeVore supporters to listen though.
Meanwhile, Tom Campbell’s playing them like a fiddle. He attacked Fiorina today for a book excerpt in which the author said that Carly had compared herself as a CEO to a fireman on 9/11. No proof she actually said it, just an excerpt in a book. Simple hearsay.
The FIRST person to jump on it was DeVore’s communications director, Joshua Trevino. Then the rest piled on.
A vote for DeVore is a vote for Campbell.
nickj116 on May 18, 2010 at 12:51 AM
He’s got three weeks. We’ll see how it shakes out in the end, and then we’ll know who was right, and who wasn’t.
Brian1972 on May 18, 2010 at 1:02 AM
Voting for DeVore, like so many others in this thread.
Why should he drop out when he’s trending upward?
Edouard on May 18, 2010 at 1:22 AM
My vote for DeVore is NOT a vote for Campbell. It is a vote for DeVore.
I don’t care how many lame excuses you come up with for a Fiorina vote. I don’t like her and won’t vote for her.
I’ll write in a candidate before voting for the lesser of two evils, if that’s the kind of choice I have.
Vote for the best candidate always, and support that candidate with finances, ground troop work, public advocacy, all of the above. Win hearts and minds by supporting the best candidate. Never, ever apologize for doing so.
Edouard on May 18, 2010 at 1:34 AM
The fact that AnninCA doesn’t like Devore should be a sure sign everyone here should support and/or vote for him.
Blake on May 18, 2010 at 1:43 AM
“Thank all of you reality challenged DeVore supporters in advance” ~Tom Campbell
Idiots!
gary4205 on May 18, 2010 at 3:08 AM
As the CEO of HP…and I have huge reservations about her “success” in that position…I can safely say that she didn’t know the minute details of their charity donations. That was up to other people…not her.
kakypat on May 18, 2010 at 3:11 AM
Yep…as much as I hate to agree with you, that is the final result.
This IS California, after all.
kakypat on May 18, 2010 at 3:13 AM
Agreed..as much as I hate to say it…
kakypat on May 18, 2010 at 3:15 AM
So, what you’re saying is the best way to unseat Babs is to support Mickey Kaus… primary her out while Republicans form a circular firing squad and can’t figure out that their own people will choose a decent candidate to represent THEM.
Yes there is politics and gamesmanship involved… on both sides. Anyone has got to be better than Boxer, including Kaus. In this case is not ‘better’ than the current Senator the objective? And the surest way to get ‘better’ is for her not to be on the ballot, and trust those in CA not to screw up the Republican primary too badly in who they choose so a better choice than Boxer can be had at the election ballot box. On both sides. Or is the objective to choose a weakling who can only defeat Boxer and not, say, a Kaus? If you want a good, hard candidate, let them compete and let the weak fall as they may and support getting something ‘better’ in the line-up of choices come NOV 2010.
ajacksonian on May 18, 2010 at 8:00 AM
I find the arguments that “a vote for Devore is a vote for Campbell” trite and unimaginative. If, after all the liberal stances Fiorina has taken, you are willing to pull the lever for her in June, I must assume you would also be willing to pull that lever for Campbell in November.
Furthermore, there is still 21 days left, and McClintock-Mark Levin endorsed Devore just started his formal ad campaigns. I sense he can prevail.
CHUCK DEVORE FOR SENATE.
Mutnodjmet on May 18, 2010 at 10:31 AM
People need to be realistic. California is not going to turn conservative overnight. Only a centrist, only a pro-choice candidate can win this November. The objective isn’t a reliable conservative vote in the Senate, but the sowing of fear among “conservative Democrats” so that they think twice about supporting the Pelosi-Obama agenda. A victory in California following one in Massachusetts will have a powerful effect.
Fiorina will have zero chance of winning the general if she doesn’t pivot back to the center. We might as well have the authentic centrist in there, who’s much more experienced politically, moreover. If Campbell wins as a result of Fiorina and DeVore splitting the conservative votes, he’ll be perceived as less conservative and more appealing to the apolitical center. So if you’re a DeVore supporter, you should stick with DeVore. There’s no point in voting strategically for a likely loser.
year_of_the_dingo on May 18, 2010 at 10:40 AM
Except for one thing: Fiorina is a loser. And, she can’t beat Boxer – not in California.
Listen people, especially those who don’t live in California, we have a once in a generation chance to knock off a useless senator. California is a messed up place. Fiorina can’t, and shouldn’t, win. You might not like Campbell, but at least he’s on our half of the spectrum – and can beat Boxer. And, as Reagan used to say – if I like 51% of any piece of legislation, I’ll vote for it every time!
So, stop screwing things up. You don’t live here. We need to win this. Campbell is our best chance.
And, as for “being just the kind of bland establishment politician that Tea Party conservatives were invented to bring down, has an extremely dubious history of support for radical Islamist and anti-Israeli groups, ideologues, and activists . . .” This is just fantasy. It bears no relation to reality.
This site should be above this. Campbell is a practical guy, a smart guy, in a messed up profession. He’s not a RINO.
Pablo Snooze on May 18, 2010 at 11:27 AM
Oh, and one more thing . . .
Democrats here don’t like Boxer either. They’re looking for a reason to vote against her. Maybe for the only time in their lives! Campbell is that reason. Fiorina isn’t. Can’t win without the Democrat defectors. Can’t do it.
So, who are the ideologues? You’ll ride that Fiorina train right into the waste heap of history. So, well done there!
Pablo Snooze on May 18, 2010 at 11:31 AM
The point of there being a debate between Tom and Chuck on KFI’s John & Ken’s show is worth repeating.
According to Arbitron this afternoon drive-time show attracts over a million conservative listeners daily in LA and SF on radio and more via their internet simulcast. John and Ken have activated their listener base repeatedly through their comments and endorsements – this will be no exception.
The debate could be a game changer as the broader conservative voter base hears Campbell and Devore directly with commentary from the hosts.
in_awe on May 18, 2010 at 12:31 PM
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=ZJQ&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&as_q=+tom+campbell&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&num=10&lr=&as_filetype=&ft=i&as_sitesearch=commentarymagazine.com&as_qdr=all&as_rights=&as_occt=any&cr=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&safe=off
CK MacLeod on May 18, 2010 at 12:32 PM
Are you kidding me? Chuck has the endorsement of more California Republicans, including influential ones. Carley has a citizen of Alaska’s endorsement. Do you even LIVE here anymore?
Go Chuck DeVore! I will be highly upset if you backed out and endorsed Carley.
Sultry Beauty on May 18, 2010 at 12:37 PM
Let’s face facts here. For those of you who are now saying a vote for DeVore is a vote for Campbell, whose FAULT is this? You come in with this Sarah Palin endorsement then tell US CALIFORNIA’S that we should back an OUTSIDERS choice because her endorsement confuses people on who is the “Conservative” candidate here. Let me point out that the Tea Party in CALIFORNIA backed DEVORE!
Again, you COME INTO THE THIS STATE WITH PALIN then turn around and tell US WE’RE THE ONES SPLITTING THE VOTE BY SUPPORT DEVORE. BS. I SAY CARLEY SUPPORTERS SHOULD TELL MS. FIORNA TO BACK OUT AND SUPPORT DEVORE!!!
Sultry Beauty on May 18, 2010 at 12:44 PM
Kinda feels like 2008 all over again? Mind bendingly awful middle of the road turd being desperately polished by a bunch of really annoying people. Don’t listen to them. Vote Devore. They were wrong in 2008 and they’re wrong now.
austinnelly on May 18, 2010 at 1:07 PM
Sultry Beauty on May 18, 2010 at 12:44 PM
I was wondering when you were going to show up on this thread – especially since it was your comment on the Poizner/Whitman thread yesterday that got me thinking about what might be best for the movement overall. I posed a question to you there about why, according to the reasoning were using about the “conservative vote,” it wouldn’t be better for DeVore to drop out. (Incidentally, if Fiorina was trailing DeVore, the same rationale would apply to her, and, as I state in the post, if DeVore can demonstrate a chance of winning, something he hasn’t come close to doing so far, then it’s a different story.)
Anyway, since you didn’t reply, perhaps to correct my errors, I had nothing left to do with my thoughts but write them up in a post.
What I’ve seen from DeVore supporters is a) DeVore’s the only TRUE CONSERVATIVE – an empty, merely parochial assertion that is hardly persuasive even at a rightwing polit-junkie site like HotAir, and b) but Col. Chuck True Conservative DeVore really can win. The most they’ve got on “b” are some comments by Erick Erickson referring to Chuck “surging” in polls. We’ll see if DeVore’s SURGE carries him even to 16%, which I believe would be his highest showing in any poll since Campbell entered the race.
Anyway, you’re entitled to your feelings, and even to your spellings. The logic of post remains valid, pending further developments. Unless things change very significantly – stranger things have happened – we have the storyline set: Tea Party split results in “mainstream” GOP candidate being picked over Palin-supported Fiorina and rock-ribbed down-with-the-ship Cali-Con in the McClintock mode.
It’s just as well, I suppose, if your view is that the Palin and Tea Party wing of the conservative movement needs to be suppressed for its lack of maturity and pragmatism. Certainly that’s why all of the establishment types are currently also shouting “Go Chuck Devore and take all of the… Tea Partyiers with you!”
CK MacLeod on May 18, 2010 at 1:22 PM
I apologize. I didn’t go back to the post and I never say what you wrote. I’m sorry if I don’t spell check or preview my comments. My thoughts come fast and furious and I type as best I can to keep up with the train of it. I understand I lose people in the process.
I’m glad you clarified this. When I saw this post, the first thought that came to my mind was that someone took my thought and ran with it. It seems my gut reaction was right.
As for DeVore being able to win against Campbell or Fiorna, maybe he won’t but I will STILL vote for him. It’s not like in the General I’m going to vote for Boxer. But I will be clear that this situation really upsets the crap out of me. Listen, if you don’t know who Chuck is and where he stands on issues, it’s not my job to spend time hear explaining to non-Californians pontificating on who can ‘win’ against Boxer why I think he’s the best candidate. If you are in California, you know. Unless you think another Huffington rich guy/gal is a better bet for California.
The biggest point I wanted to make is that this election isn’t about candidates. Look around. In the end it will be a referendum over a political ideological fight. Do you want Socialism or do you want Capitalism? Do you want Socialism or do you want Conservatism? If, as bad as California is right now and in THIS political climate, a Leftist Socialist like Boxer can beat a Conservative then we’re done. In no other time and in no other race will we have this kind of opportunity. Californians will NOT vote for Boxer unless they’re all about going back to European style governance. There just is a plurality of them in this state. When ONE candidate emerges, whoever it is, they will win. I simply don’t want another Graham, McCain, et al when we could have had better.
Sultry Beauty on May 18, 2010 at 1:36 PM
And BTW– In your statement
is not accurate. The Tea Party in California endorsed DeVore. Palin was the one who went AGAINST TEA PARTIERS to support a Sen. McCain aid. I think you have it backwards.
PLUS:
Based on your standards of polling percentages, I think Fiorina should drop out and endorse DeVore.
Sultry Beauty on May 18, 2010 at 1:51 PM
The example you picked may be hearsay, but that was only one of the many book excerpts Tom Campbell has compiled and distributed about Carly.
Read the rest of the book for many more reasons to vote AGAINST Carly here:
http://www.thebookoncarly.com/
Vote FOR Chuck DeVore!
wren on May 18, 2010 at 2:09 PM
Only if you believe that the Tea Party = Californians or even the Tea Party = Republicans or even the Tea Party = Conservatives. I don’t believe that some entity defined as “Tea Party members” should be empowered to make decisions for me or anyone else.
You seem to have misunderstood the “Go Chuck DeVore” statement: What I’m saying is that the establishment GOP, which you apparently consider as-good-as-socialists, will be quite happy to see the Tea Party threat snuff itself out amidst mutually destructive divisions and recriminations.
I have lived my entire life in California. Both of my parents were born in California. As I made it clear from the first sentence of my post, I respect and like Chuck DeVore from what I’ve seen of him. I think he’s probably not ready to win a high-profile statewide race, though anything is possible. I haven’t seen any evidence to suggest that he’s ready to break through even to win the GOP primary, even at this rightwing populist moment.
I recognize that primary races can be very fluid, and I don’t hold it against DeVore and supporters to put their chances to the real test. Even without Palin’s intervention, the outcome was looking like either a) most likely, Campbell wins because forces further to his right are split, b) still possible, Fiorina wins by uniting a significant portion of DeVore’s support with her own supporters and with others disaffected from Campbell, or c) least likely, DeVore overcomes both Campbell’s and Fiorina’s polling leads, financial advantages, and name recognition.
Palin’s intervention may have increased the chances of B, but did so at the cost of making A even more harmful to the conservative movement. She raised the stakes, for the movement as well as for herself. To the extent an observer believes DeVore unlikely to win a statewide election or even the GOP primary, but believes that the conservative wing of the party needs to be heard, and get its best shot, then the best outcome for the movement – statewide, nationally, short- and long-term – is to unify around Fiorina.
CK MacLeod on May 18, 2010 at 2:17 PM
Read the break down of what makes each candidate a bad candidate, even Boxer, from a Democrat perspective.
Notice that the ONLY thing they can come up with against DeVore is that he is TOO Conservative. I’m sorry, just like Mark Levin said when he endorsed Chuck, that’s not a good enough excuse NOT to vote for DeVore. Barbara Boxer is extremely vulnerable in this state. I just don’t understand why people don’t see that.
Sultry Beauty on May 18, 2010 at 2:21 PM
Fiornia is no Conservative. The only reason why I’d vote for her is if people with your viewpoint win out. I will hold my nose a vote for her because I won’t allow the Marxist back at the helm. But I will treat her like I treat Boxer and I WILL make sure that if in the two years after leading up to the Presidential election, every single Fiorina Senate vote be hung around Palin’s neck. She will pay dearly for her endorsement I am suspecting. And Fiornia with her horrible record and the multitude of stuff that Boxer, whose not advertising and can save up for the General Election, will drop like a nuclear bomb all over the California airwaves for every Independent to see is not a shoe-in either. She can very well go down in flames like many a “safe” candidate in California has.
Go Chuck DeVore!~
Sultry Beauty on May 18, 2010 at 2:29 PM
Let me put it to you this way: If the ONLY thing that Boxer can say about DeVore is that he’s WAY to the Right of me and a “hard-core” Conservative, she WILL lose.
Californians still adore Ronald Reagan. Even Democrats do. I’m not referring to Leftists. I’m talking your run-of-the-mill Democrats. They’ve voted for Conservatives. Now people say that Latinos are the deciding factor. I TOO have lived, and still live, in California and well has my family generationally. Gov. Deukmajian made my High School commencement speech at Long Beach Woodrow Wilson in 1987 when I graduated with his daughter. As a teenager I hung out with Lungren during campaigning for Ronald Reagan. I fully understand WHY he doesn’t win. Personally, as condescending as he was to me, I didn’t like him as a Conservative. I’ve hung out at the home of Dan Hollingsworth in Murrieta where I currently reside and meet with Rep. Mary Bono. I suspect she’s as intelligent as Barbara Boxer. It’s nice these folks can afford handlers and aides. I have personal contact with the Conservative politicians in my state. I have since BEFORE I could vote.
Again, I will say that Fiornia winning the Primary will be a missed opportunity. The only way Campbell wins is if there are Independents voting in the Republican Primary and in that case, it really doesn’t matter. We won’t get who we want anyway.
Sultry Beauty on May 18, 2010 at 2:41 PM
Oh, lost my train of thought again. Hahaha. Latinos. I have quite a few friends who are 2nd generation Mexican-American. A lot of them are not political and are knee-jerk liberals. I have many who have converted to Conservative. The economy in California is not conducive to a “illegal immigration” Democrat vote like most think. The Lakers/Suns game should prove that out. Phil Jackson refused to criticize it. KFI’s John & Ken made a big issue of it. Not in the way you think. They were laughing at the LA City Councilman Reyes getting face palmed for trying to make the NBA Western Conference Finals political and the LA Lakers refusing to go along with it. Reyes had to back track in his comments. There is no more revered team in California among Latinos as the LA Lakers. Not even the LA Dodgers or LA of Anahiem Angels get the kind of devotion the Lakers get. Believe me, the Lakers won’t be boycotting Arizona in Games 3 or 4.
Okay, enough said.
Sultry Beauty on May 18, 2010 at 2:50 PM
I certainly agree that Fiorina would hardly be a shoe-in against Boxer, even though Boxer is vulnerable. Being “too conservative” may or may not be enough of a liability to extinguish DeVore’s chances. More likely, he’d suffer because he’s virtually unknown statewide and can be made to look like too much of a wild card. He’s not a “conservative” choice in that respect, and would depend on an anyone-but-Boxer sentiment.
As for Reagan, unfortunately, even if what you say is true about remnant affection for him, it much be personal as much as it is ideological. Otherwise, Duncan Hunter would have been a major force statewide, Tom McClintock would easily have beaten that upstart movie star in the recall election, Barbara Boxer would never have beaten Bruce Herschensohn, Dianne Feinstein would not be viewed as a respected “mainstream” voice, Barack Obama and Obamacare wouldn’t still be popular in the state, and on and on.
CK MacLeod on May 18, 2010 at 2:59 PM
Sultry Beauty on May 18, 2010 at 2:50 PM
It’s also my position that the Suns should drop out and endorse the Lakers.
CK MacLeod on May 18, 2010 at 3:00 PM
(rolls eyes)
Wren, you just linked a Tom Campbell campaign site in making the case for DeVore.
Are you not aware of what you just did?
L.N. Smithee on May 18, 2010 at 3:03 PM
FINALLY! Something we can agree on.
And to the other point you made, the reason for that is the same reason people want Fiornia. Even Republicans believe the hype. McClintock was conveniently “Newt”-ed and the others did not have a good campaign and did not publicize well. Bruce Herschensohn should have but I don’t even recall hearing an campaign ad for him. Californians are more engaged than they were during the Recall. The reason Arnold won was because it was a “Recall” and Conservative opted for the “save” choice because they didn’t want to come across as trying to take over the state but just trying to clean up the budget mess. After what has happened with that, why we continue to choose that same path is beyond me. DeVore can get his message out and win.
Sultry Beauty on May 18, 2010 at 3:23 PM
For as long as DeVore is “in” the race until and unless his supporters believe that he has passed Fiorina, it will be as or more important to them to bring down Fiorina than to bring down Campbell. If they really believed they were surging and in a position to win it all, they would be attacking Campbell and Boxer.
CK MacLeod on May 18, 2010 at 3:54 PM
CK,
The google search offered above is just Jennier Rubin ranting. A lot of that is supposition. You’re not really suggesting Tom Campbell knowingly supports terrorists, are you? Really? How ’bout that 9/11 inside job?
Listen, my point is this is California we’re talking about. The rules for other states don’t necessarily apply.
I’d rather see Chuck DeVore win. He’s a good guy. But Tom Campbell is a good guy too. (Carly, on the other hand, is just awful. I know lots of people who have worked with her when she was at hp and Lucent. Everybody hates her, and nobody trusts her.)
The real issue is, are we trying to defeat Boxer, or what? If so, then the only one who has a ghost’s chance is Campbell.
Pablo Snooze on May 18, 2010 at 3:54 PM
While some were shocked by Palin’s endorsement of Fiorina, I was less so. More jolting to me than that was Tom McClintock’s hearty endorsement of Steve Poizner, saying in radio ads that Poizner was the only real conservative in the race (“It’s not even close”). Poizner has been portraying himself as a touchy-feely moderate Republican his entire political career, but in the past half-year, all of a sudden, he’s making like he’s a lean, mean, pro-life tax-slashing machine.
Fact is both Whitman and Poizner are high-tech tycoons (she, eBay; he, GPS) who think because they’ve run huge companies, they can manage government more efficiently than dyed-in-the-wool political animals. Some may think of it as Clash of the Titans, but I think of it as Clash of the RINOS. Not being part of the problem doesn’t necessarily mean you are part of the solution.
L.N. Smithee on May 18, 2010 at 4:21 PM
Pablo Snooze on May 18, 2010 at 3:54 PM
I obviously disagree that “just… ranting” is a fair description of Jennifer Rubin’s reporting on Campbell’s ties and positions, and can’t say I care what “lots of people” say about Fiorina’s past at HP and/or Lucent. If she were running for CEO of HP or any executive position, I might pay more attention, but I’d insist on examining her side as well. And I’m also not particularly interested in who’s a “good guy.”
Fiorina’s conservative credentials go back at least a generation to her father, have been affirmed by Palin, and have been embodied in the campaign she’s run. Campbell is clearly to the left of her in terms of his positioning, and I don’t find him to be a remotely compelling figure. He’d be 1 squishily conservative vote in the Senate, as far as I can tell, an improvement over Boxer, but that’s a very low bar. He’s poorly positioned to take advantage of the “wave,” if it runs all the way through November as most expect.
There’s a chance that Fiorina can make dent in California ideologically. I’m afraid DeVore would hardly be noticed, and that a big part of that “notice” would be “divided Republicans taken over by people whom even Sarah Palin had her doubts about.” Similar story for Campbell, except he’d be “moderate Republican lucky that fractious conservatives divided their disapproval.”
I don’t claim to know what the future holds, or to be able to anticipate all twists and turns. For all I know Rasmussen will put out a Cali LV poll tomorrow that shows DeVore in the lead. If, however, the state of the race remains more or less the same, the best thing for the conservative movement would be… what I said.
CK MacLeod on May 18, 2010 at 4:45 PM
From my site, from someone who isn’t registered on “Hot Air”
The best thing, in this environment, is to let the candidates act like candidates, and let the voters decide who they wish to represent them. We do not need to be herded like sheep, nor people willing who do real grassroots campaigning need to be told to step down for the possibility of what could happen in the future.
Mutnodjmet on May 18, 2010 at 6:35 PM
No one’s making any decisions or herding anyone. I have my opinion. You have yours. It’s a free country.
CK MacLeod on May 18, 2010 at 7:49 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2