Meg Whitman Supported Boxer in 2004
Meg Whitman, the 2010 GOP gubernatorial candidate already on the defensive for her embarrassingly poor voting record, once endorsed and actively supported Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer, one of the most proudly liberal politicians in California.
Whitman not only endorsed Boxer and donated the maximum $4,000 to the junior California senator’s 2004 re-election campaign, but the former eBay CEO also served on an exclusive committee of Technology Leaders for Boxer in her re-election battle against Republican California Secretary of State Bill Jones, according to election records obtained by The Chronicle.
Whitman, in a 2003 Boxer campaign statement, spoke strongly on Boxer’s half, calling her “a courageous leader and friend of California’s technology industry.” She also signed an “open letter” appealing to Silicon Valley executives, calling Boxer a leader on issues such as her opposition to an Internet sales tax.
While the Democrats’ values and principles totally suck, at least they have some. Can you envision the Dims pursuing a conservative candidate who supported Sarah Palin or Jim DeMint, with the realization that the candidate enjoys popularity and has name recognition but would move the party to the right?
At what point does it become counterproductive for a party to attempt to win elections by nominating people that don’t share its values and, if they gain enough strength, will turn the party into the exact oposite of what the majority of its members believe. It’s like the Catholic Church. It would be more popular if it dropped it opposition to abortion and other doctrine that makes it a somewhat rigid religion. If the Catholic Church decided to start adopting the policies of the Unitarians, it wouldn’t be the Catholic Church any more and what would be the point of its continued existence? If we want to be like the Democrats, why not just become Democrats?
Are we Republicans because we believe in certain principles or is it only about winning elections with no other objectives in mind?
When do we say, “Enough is enough?”
Hat tip: San Francisco Chronicle
Mega Barf Alert
Don’t know about you, but I just lost my Cheerios.
[1]
BC-I know you are a numbers cruncher. The latest AP poll has Obama approval at 56%.
Drum Roll—43% Dem. and 32% Rep. were polled. Mean while Gallop has a DEM +2 and Rasmussen has a Rep. +4.
Go figure.
[2]
MFG will be here to explain (in 37 posts or less) why the GOP will cease to exist if we don’t support Meg Whitman in 5 …. 4 … 3 …
[3]
MI Conservative -
Polls are being used more and more to create public opinion rather than to reflect it. A recent CBS poll sample gave the Dims a 15% advantage. Now, it’s pretty much polls determining what result they want to get and selecting a sample that will give them that result. MSM is doing everything it can to keep Obama propped up, and that isn’t easy.
Too bad about the Tigers last night, but they were out-played and out-managed. Good luck to the Twins. They have a lot of heart.
[4]
NEWSBUSTED
[5]
I really don’t know much about Meg Whitman. I thought ebay was controlled by a lot of Dems.
Kalifornia deserves her if what I hear is correct.
[6]
If Meg was really that smart, she would have sold a couple of her chins on eBay.
[7]
Meg Whitman support of Boxer is not good news. My growing interest in Whitman’s financial acumen was just stunted!
[8]
Again, we find a major promoter of people/ideas opposed to conservatives coming from……John McCain. How many headlines did we read this week that McCain is trying to reform/redirect/remake the GOP??? And yet, we still get the same response that he is not so bad. Well it appears to me that he is a major force in destroying the conservative platform. I see all over the place people saying PLEASE California, vote out Boxer for the good of the country. Well from CA, PLEEEEAAAASE AZ, can we get rid of McCain now?!? If we want to take back the GOP, let’s start with the top dogs.
[9]
Janzam -
John McCain seems intent in racheting up his program to
destroyremake the Republican Party.[10]
The Chronicle actually loves Meg Whitman (prior to the primaries), that much is obvious, so normally this article would show up closer to the general election.
The fact that they’ve had to show their hand early of pitting Republican against Republican is really telling. The Boxer people must be getting some poor numbers.
[11]
TLS -
Some people say he is not so bad. Others, like me, detest the man and everything he stands for.
Supposedly J.D. Hayworth is considering running against McCain in the GOP primary. Chris Simcox can’t beat McCain, but Hayworth is a possibility. If J.D. makes a run, conservatives across the country should support him financially.
[12]
Whitman is not seeking the Senate nomination. She is planning to run for governor with Jerry Brown looking like the Dim nominee.
[13]
From San Francisco Chronicle
GOP loyalists concerned
Jon Fleischman, a California Republican Party vice chairman and publisher of the influential Flashreport.org, a GOP Web site, said Whitman’s explanation for supporting Boxer – reviled by Republicans for her tireless support of liberal causes – will concern many GOP loyalists.
“What she really needs to say is there is no excuse. There’s no acceptable reason why any Republican should support a socialist like Barbara Boxer,” he said. “This woman is trying to raise every tax in America.”
Last weekend, at the state GOP convention, Whitman assured grassroots activists that her poor voting record didn’t detract from solid Republican credentials.
“I’m a Republican, and you’ll find I’m a darn good one,” she said. “I’ve committed myself to running for one of the toughest chief executive jobs on the planet because I believe Republican ideals, truly and consistently applied, will save this state.”
[14]
Just the first of many battles to come?
[15]
assuming Jerry Brown gets the nomination…which he almost certainly will…he will win no matter who the Republicans nominate. Therefore we might as well nominate someone who:
(a) has a record of actually VOTING
(b) isn’t on record kissing Barbara Boxer’s ASS, and John McCain’s MOUTH! (though the difference may not be all that great)
I would MUCH rather have Jerry Brown than Gavin Newsome as Governor, which is the other “choice” we’re likely to have.
Kalifornia, where you’re scrooed no matter what…so ya might as well enjoy it!
[16]
MI Conservative, thanks for the fisking of the A/P “Poll”…naturally THAT poll is dominating the news this morning, with CBS citing it as evidence that “the President has turned the corner”.
Dems +11…when Gallap has just released nationwide results showing the ACTUAL spread is Dems +2.
A/P…playing Gunga Din for the President because what are friends for?
[17]
MI Conservative -
Like I said, if we want to be like Democrats, we should just become Democrats.
[18]
Conservative radio station in Montana forced to shut down.
Funny, Wiki doesn’t mention anything about the property rights dispute
[19]
Which “Republican” is different (in more ways than one)?
- Sarah Palin
- Marsha Blackburn
- Meg Whitman
- Michele Bachmann
[20]
Bad News for Chris Christie
GOVERNOR – NEW JERSEY (Rasmussen)
Chris Christie (R) 47%
Jon Corzine (D-inc) 44%
Chris Daggett (I) 6%
GOVERNOR – NEW JERSEY (FDU)
Jon Corzine (D-inc) 44%
Chris Christie (R) 43%
Chris Daggett (I) 4%
FDU = Farleigh Dickinson University
Given a choice between a real Din and Dim Lite, Blue Staters almost always go with the real Dim.
[21]
Suggested ordinance for new home builders: All basements must include an already dug grave site 2′ by 6′ by 4′ to accommodate any potential “inspector” whatever their source. Ready mix concrete to be kept on site as an option, no home improvement permit needed.
[22]
JR
Every poll these Demwits attempt turns out to be wrong. We should encourage every one of them. There is no way they are even at a +2.
[23]
Bah! John McCain needs to go away already. Had to hold my nose up until Palin was on the ticket. That man is poison to the party, so if he is for someone, I am against them now. I believe he was against Palin, and I also believe he wanted to lose. Palin being on his ticket gave him a shot of winning, which is why Palin was ripped apart just as much from the McCain camp as she was from the dems.
McCain aside, anyone who likes Boxer automatically gets the side eye from me.
[24]
Support of Boxer at any time, at any level, shows a profound lack of good judgment – an absolute deal breaker.
[25]
BC
It’s going to be a real slap in the face to the RINO/McCain crowd in 2010 when Conservatives are swept in across the country, but people like Whitman & Christie are left with egg on their faces.
Knowing these people, they will come to the conclusion that they lost because they were too Conservative.
[26]
Guv. moonbeam will win anyway.Let him be the scapegoat when kalifornicate finally implodes. San andreas fault where are ye???
[27]
an absolute deal breaker.~~BOOSH
And a three bagger to boot.
[28]
#24 Agreed. It is hard to respect anyone who could support someone as vile as Boxer.
[29]
Vile people elect vile politicians.
[30]
CT -
The real slap in the face would be if we could “primary” McCain.
[31]
The LOTUS has spoken. How long until Obama reacts accordingly?
Via Newsmax.com
[32]
BC,
Another what-for? will be having the media push McCain hard during the AZ primaries then pulling the plug on him during the general. Then again, he should be used to that by now.
Question: What would be worse for McCain, losing to a Democrat or losing to a Republican?
[33]
I agree
Let’s nominate a straight 100% conservative for Governor in California
Someone who’ll get 28% of the vote
I wonder if someone like that would have a negative effect on down ticket races…???
[34]
Well, who cares what damage is caused
The most important thing is to be anti-RINO
[35]
Select a candidate to fit the political realities of the state in question…???
[36]
**** no!
[37]
Ivory tower tilting at windmills by supporting unelectable people out of touch with their state’s constituencies is the key
[38]
Who wants to be back in power anyway?
[39]
Better to just bitch 24/7 unproductively
[40]
MFG
There has never been a 100% Conservative–ever. I would just be happy with somebody who sides with Conservative prinicples on the most important issues of the day–taxes, spending, Constitution, etc….
[41]
We have a good conservative candidate, Steve Poizner.
http://stevepoizner.com/
[42]
CT -
At what point do you believe someone is useless as a Republican?
- Someone who votes with the party 50% of the time
- 40% of the time
- 30% of the time
- 20% of the time (like Susan Collins)
- 10% of the time (like Olympia Snowe)
[43]
At what point do you believe someone is useless as a Republican?–bc
BC, they can vote with the Democrats 90% of the time for all I care–on worthless issues like naming parks, commissioning ships, etc.
But on big ticket items I mentioned above (add immigration to the list) expect them to follow the Constituion 100% of the time and vote with general common sense.
[44]
“(b) isn’t on record kissing Barbara Boxer’s ASS, and John McCain’s MOUTH! (though the difference may not be all that great”
—
and saying they “love” van jones.
[45]
“Let’s nominate a straight 100% conservative for Governor in California”
—
What’s the harm, either will end up with the same result.
McCain losing to a Republican would send him off the deep end and straight to the airwaves in a tie-raid, the media would love it and he’d play right into there hands, and you can bet limpy from NC would go apechit along with him.
[46]
CT -
The figures I am citing are ACU ratings, which onbly cover major issues (not naming parks, etc.).
Important things like: the Stimulus, Sustein’s appointment and cap and trade in the House: none of these would have happened without Republican support.
[47]
MI conservative et al., the AP/GFK poll is far worse than that. It is actually only 21% republican. As I note in the top thread above.
http://surveys.ap.org/data/GfK/AP-GfK%20Poll%20political%20only%20topline%20100609.pdf
They can’t count “independents” as Republican…. no matter what.
[48]
You can’t expect 100% support from your caucus, it’s a ridiculous expectation
We need MORE REPUBLICANS in Congress
[49]
BC
I figured those were ACU ratings and I believe you and I are in agreement on what is needed. On every major issue the Democrats are trying to push, anything less than 100% opposition by any Republica tells me they should just go away.
[50]
TLS, my impression of Steve Poizner has been that of a country club RINO. I’m certainly willing to listen to alternative views if I misread the guy.
I live in Silicon Valley and Meg Whitman never impressed me much. Now that more is coming out about her I politics I don’t see myself pulling the lever for her. Living in California my throat will probably be slit in the end anyway, but God knows I’m not going to help the person who does it.
[51]
mp – he is conservative enough on the big issues: lower taxes, smaller gov’t, education (return education to local levels), water rights (delta smelt can go to hell) and drilling. He is even in favor of a part-time state legislature. He may not be that conservative on social issues, I don’t know, but everyone keeps saying that a social con can’t win in CA anyway. Personally I don’t think he is aggressive enough.
[52]
We need MORE REPUBLICANS in Congress
Generally true, but if they vote like Democrats, how does that help us?
Look at Arnold in CA as the example. What good would another of those do for CA? And the added bonus for dems is that Rs get the reputation for bad government.
You know this, you know bcb3 is right, you fight it way too much. How many McCains must we go thru before you admit it?
[53]
Admit what?
If Snowe and Collins were gone they would both be replaced by Communists and this Democratic plan would sail through Congress, right…???
What do you think you’re going to get in Maine…???
[54]
If the much despised Lincoln Chafee, Conrad Burns and Ted Stevens had all been re-elected, this health plan, which will kill tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of Americans, would have ZERO chance of passing
ZERO
This ridiculous RINO purge has brought us to the very edge of total catastrophe
[55]
We’re not talking about Snowe and Collins, for the hundredth time. We are talking about Whitman, and comparing her to Arnold, who everyone on the right supported and has been a disaster.
1 Chaffee would have voted for socialist med, easily, in a heartbeat. Don’t you remember he voted against the Iraq war? By the way, what party does Chafee belong to now?
2 Burns. I did not even know he was a rino, I knew almost nothing about him, I do know he was a reliable R vote, more than McCain was, for example, and regret his defeat by Tester.
3 Stevens was utterly corrupt. And an amnesty supporter. I know he was better than Begich. But it’s his own fault he got beaten. Behave honorably an crap like that will not happen to you.
The worst loss of the three is Burns, Chaffee is no loss at all, and Stevens did it to himself.
Look. Why do you keep making excuses for the worst of these? Look at what Specter did, what Chafee did. Look at what Snowe does. 90% Dem.
Why do you support these people, scream for us to support them too, then act shocked when someone like Specter or Chafee switch parties, or betray us on a huge vote?
Lay down with dogs, don’t be surprised when you get fleas.
We can elect conservatives in AK, AR, AZ, SC, MT. So we an get these seats back. We can elect Toomey.
We’re stuck with Snowe.
But this is about Whitman, and she is awful, and will do CA not one damn bit of good, and hurt the R party in the process, as Arnold has.
We should be indifferent. Whitman will not shove the dems back an inch. If she would, that’s another story.
[56]
MFG, you don’t even for a moment consider the fact that your support of clear and obvious liberal Rs does not do the party any good. The thought that they damage the party horribly because their dem-lite policies don’t work any better than the dems’ do, NEVER OCCURS TO YOU.
Look at what Bush did to the R party. It’s destroyed. He pissed away solid congressional majorities that took decades to put together, in TWO YEARS. For God’s bloody sake, look at McCain, the examples are RIGHT THERE IN FRONT OF YOU, and you are still popping off with “Oh you vote for anyone with an R that comes along. Hillary is an R now? Oh hell yeah, vote for her.”
[57]
Why go after Whitman?
California is a Communist state and will not, under any circumstances elect a conservative, so why get stunned when people try to field a candidate who could win in CA and give you SOME of what you want when the alternative is to get NONE of what you want…???
[58]
MFG, did you support Jim Jeffords? How did you feel when he switched? Did you write him an extra check with a thank-you note?
[59]
I don’t support Whitman, I don’t know a hell of a lot about her, but why go after her for something as puerile as her past support for Barbara Boxer?
Unless you’re willing to write off states like this forever you need to at least TRY to put forward candidates who could conceivably win in these states. And the profile of such a candidate will not be that of a true conservative, and that’s that
Now if you’re willing to write off states like this forever, then so be it, but the consequences of that are what we have now: psychopathic Communists running the country
[60]
I didn’t say go after her. I said ignore her.
She will not give us ANY of what we want. She will do as Arnold has done, she will KILL OFF the GOP FOR 20 YEARS IN THAT STATE.
ok?
Besides, I’m damn sick of this “get 20% of what you want as opposed to zero” crap. I’m sick of it.
MFG: We both know damn well that issues matter, and some are more important than others. What good is McCain’s stance on the war on terror, for example, when he will turn the country solid blue with amnesty and make his war policy UTTERLY IRRELEVANT.
What good does McCain’s stance on budget issues or pork, or corruption, matter when there are going to be 80 Democrats in the senate after amnesty passes.
WE DON’T GET 20% OF WHAT WE WANT WHEN RINOS WIN. WE CAN’T GET 20% OF WHAT WE WANT WHEN MORONS LIKE BUSH WIN.
Stop it with this “getting 20% is better than nothing, never mind that Democrats poll better than Rs on 9 of 10 issues because of the other 80% they voted with the dems on, that sunk the country.”
When RINOS run the country, they take away every damn reason people have to vote R, and torch it.
Bush,
daddy Bush
McCain
Ford
Dole
Powell
These people are losers, and hurt more than they help. Get it thru your head, man.
[61]
but why go after her for something as puerile as her past support for Barbara Boxer?
What? Say again? …… why go after her for supporting a …..communist? Oh sweet Jesus, I’m going to pretend you didn’t say that.
Now if you’re willing to write off states like this forever, then so be it, but the consequences of that are what we have now: psychopathic Communists running the country
ARGH! NO!!!!!!!!!!! NO, THE CONSEQUENCES OF PEOPLE LIKE BUSH AND OTHER INCOMPETENT LIBERAL RINOS ARE WHY WE GET PSYCHOTIC LIBERALS RUNNING THE COUNTRY!!!!!
AAAAAARRRRGHHH!
Who was POTUS the last 8 years? Who? Was it Reagan? Was it Thompson? Who?
And the profile of such a candidate will not be that of a true conservative, and that’s that
No, the collosal FAILURE OF THE LEFT, means that DIFFERENT policies are needed, NOT LESS INTENSE BUT SIMILAR POLICIES.
Conservatives have a GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY TO WIN when the left FAILS this badly.
This gets worse and worse the more we talk. Holy crap. It’s puerile to oppose Whitman because she supported Boxer? OMG…..
Ok, so we have 2 choices, far left or left. Is that correct? Good luck with that.
[62]
I apologize for screaming….
[63]
Went a little too far down scream street, sorry…..sorry…
[64]
It’s OK
We just disagree
No big deal
[65]
No more freaking RINOs. As I have posted before, its about expectations. We expect Republicans to be for or against key issues. Illegal immigration, taxes, protecting America, law and order are issues that shouldn’t even be considered.
Going AGAINST what is in the best interest of America and her citizens only helps Democrats. We’ve had enough of that. Time to take the country back.
[66]
“Why go after Whitman?”
—
Cause she’ll be just as useless as Arnold in the statehouse.