Meg disses Poizner
John Seiler:
Amateur Meg just keeps making mistake after mistake after mistake. Her latest: Attacking primary opponent Steve Poizner about putting employees on unpaid leave at his department. As Poizner quipped, she apparently hadn’t heard that she already had beaten him in the June primary.
Instead of attacking, she should be courting Poizner, saying stuff like, “Steve and I disagree on some things. But fundamentally we both want to restore Califronia to greatness. I’m sure I’ll be consulting him once I become governor.” Look how two pros, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, embraced their opponents after defeating them.
Meg’s catty attack on Poizner reminds me of how during the primary she attacked Tom McClintock, who wasn’t even running, but who had endorsed Poizner. I criticized her at the time here on CalWatchDog.com. As I pointed out, “Meg herself is an obvious amateur in California politics. Until she ran, she probably thought McClintock was a John Wayne movie.”
More than three months later, she still hasn’t learned.
Wait, there’s more!
Tom McClintock just announced that he’s “still not prepared” to endorse her. Why should he? She insulted him for no reason. And he stands for the opposite of what she does, beginning with her opposition to Prop. 23, which would repeal the jobs-killing AB 32.
Backing her would tarnish his sterling reputation in California politics. So I hope he doesn’t.
No comments
Write a commentRelated Articles
Know Your FPPC Target
Anthony Pignataro: Dan Schnur has only been chairman of the state Fair Political Practices Commission since June but he’s already
A helmet law for bicyclers?
No question wearing a helmet makes bicycle riding safer, much as for motorcycles. But how much of a Nanny State
Why do Dems nominate Pelosi, Feinstein, Boxer?
California is supposed to be a liberal state, with the most liberal Democratic Party in the country. Yet its top
Wow, she really blew this one. If she had just ran a few ads point out how crazy Brown is, she most likely would have coasted to a victory in November. Instead, she decides to turn her back on the people that were backing her, all so she could attempt to gain a small fraction of a small voting block. Did her handlers explain to her that she was going to lose tens of thousands of guarenteed votes by going after a very small amount of potential votes? Maybe she should have hired a Math teacher to help with her campaign strategy. I sure hope her political consultants are being very well compensated for this campaign because they will most likely not be hired by anyone else after this disaster.