A rather peculiar email attempts to address the question: “Where is Steve Poizner’s Campaign for Governor?”

It’s a good question; where is the heartbeat, the pulse of media advertisements that cast mass messaging and marketing appeal?

As we spill November into December, preparing to leave 2009 behind, there has been nothing from the self-made millionaire, and some people are beginning to ask pointed questions.

Here is the only statewide incumbent candidate running inside of a heated Republican gubernatorial race, and Steve Poizner has yet to utilize one radio, television or major marketing tool since his announcement earlier in 2009.

Today, the campaign felt they had to explain there reasoning.

Poizner’s main primary opponent is Meg Whitman, who continues to toss her millions into Internet, television and radio announcements across California - Whitman has gone as far as changing her radio ads four times in the last three months, evaluating reach, impact and presentation.

Steve Poizner is simply refusing to engage in the early campaign spending.

The last few gubernatorial polls have reported that Whitman as the GOP leader heading into 2010, and surveys reveal that her media has been solidifying her position month-by-month. Willing to spend whatever it takes to win the primary and win the general election, eMeg is rolling the dice now to build her lead for 2010.

Thus far the GOP race has featured a closer contest between eMeg and the party’s social liberal, former Governor Schwarzenegger Finance Director, Tom Campbell. With Whitman gathering an average of 28-percent of the GOP’s would-be voters come June, Campbell has finished a close second in every poll; Poizner always finishing a distant third.

The most surprising results have been Steve Poizner’s inability to gain more than 9-percent of the would-by voters early support. These results do convey a concerning trend for Poizner, he is the current Insurance Commissioner but his name recognition is very low within his own party. 

If anyone would benefit from some early name branding it might be Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner. But his campaign continues to push the start of the “real campaign” into the early part of 2010, casuing a few political insiders to ask: “Where is Steve Poizner’s campaign?”

In an attempt to answer these growing concerns, Team Poizner decided to release an email addressing Poizner’s absence in spending. Manager Jim Bognet’s campaign email highlighted the consultants strategy surrounding Poizner’s relunctance to launch in 2009.

Bognet’s missive states, “As of today, we are on target.  We have the right candidate, messages, and issues for the California electorate. We continue to develop our infrastructure as planned and are fine-tuning additional policy proposals which we will continue to roll out.  We have done – and continue to do – extensive research on both the market and our competition.”

A peculiar admission, the only statewide office holder for the GOP is “on target” with polls numbers in the single-digits, and nothing more than a promise of a future campaign focusing on Poizner’s opponents high negatives is the saving salvo for success come 2010?

For the Poizner supporters, the end-of-year message seems to be “hang tight, Steve will start his campaign in due time, after the holidays and after the turn of the year.”

The communication goes on to say,  “Proper timing is a central tenet of our plan. We understand that the general public is not paying attention to the 2010 governor’s race – and won’t be until a few months into next year. Californians are focused on raising their families and making ends meet in a difficult economy. While there are a few thousand insiders intently paying attention, the Poizner campaign is quietly progressing while keeping its focus, rather than expending excessive time, energy, and money on inside baseball.”

Then why did we have all of the accusations that Meg Whitman was avoiding early debates?

If Poizner’s camp believes there is nobody paying attention until 2010, how can he claim that Whitman is dodging important, vital debates? You can’t have it both ways, either these days are important – or not – which is it?

Additional the email announced the arrival of chief consultants Stuart Stevens and Russ Schriefer, the wizards behind Governor Chris Christie’s victory in New Jersey. Bognet directly compares Steve Poizner’s situation to Christie’s battle against Democrat incumbent Jon Corzine.

“Stuart Stevens and Russ Schriefer, the Poizner campaign’s chief strategists, were the architects of Chris Christie’s victorious gubernatorial campaign over incumbent New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine. The New Jersey raced proved once again that money is no substitute for a solid candidate and message. Despite being outspent more than two to one, Christie beat Corzine – and his success was in large part due to Stevens and Schriefer’s understanding that a successful campaign promotes the right candidate and the right message at the right time.”

There is one inherent problem with this comparison, Chris Christie had a “20-point” lead during the summer of 2009 and he was buying marketing time, offering his name in television, radio and Internet ads. Compare that fact with Steve Poizner dilemma that he doesn’t seem to have any name recognition to speak of, and he has never had a single percentage point lead in any poll thus far – as a matter of fact, he has finished behind moderate Tom Campbell in each and every poll.

The Christie comparison may not pass the face-value test.

Then Poizner email makes the charge that Whitman has done nothing but spend money to gain her early lead in the polls, “Early and excessive spending by the Whitman campaign has had an impact on the polls. While this is to be expected, it is largely meaningless. With the primary still more than seven months away, multiple surveys confirm that the electorate hasn’t engaged and the overwhelming majority of voters are undecided. Whitman’s poll numbers ultimately reflect an increase in name identification, not lasting support. At this point in the race, Name ID means little.”

The charge; Whitman is spending money to win early polls with a limited amount of decided voters.

The email then goes on to compare Steve Poizner’s plot to two former California gubernatorial primary races: Richard Riordan versus Bill Simon in the Republican fight of 2002, and Steve Westly versus Phil Angelidies in the Democrats tussle four years back.

“It is worth remembering that Mayor Richard Riordan was 30 points ahead in the last Republican gubernatorial primary just 4 weeks out from the election. He lost by 18 points. The history of primaries in California consistently demonstrates that voters focus on the candidates at the last minute. Early spending has never proved to be a road map to success. The last eBay candidate, Steve Westly, spent a fortune early in the race and took a large early lead. He lost in part due to his early spending and in part due to the fact that voters did not find his experience as an eBay executive to be persuasive.”

Again, if Poizner is comparing Whitman to Riordan and Westly, the comparison must be comparable.

History recalls that Gray Davis spent over $10 million tarnishing Richard Riordan in 2002, so to face the likes of Bill Simon – who almost pull off the upset. Is Poizner suggessting that Jerry Brown will slide millions into the GOP primary, all to benefit himself? That’s the only way that this comparison holds up under analysis.

And Steven Westly comparison presents the same dilemma; the Republican incumbent, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, used millions of his own campaign money to tarnish the wealthy Steve Westly in the Democrat primary so to face the Democrat wall-flower in Phil Angelidies.

This brings up an interesting thought; does Steve Poizner believe that Democrat Jerry Brown to toss millions of his “unannounced” campaigns dollars into the Republican primary to benefit him? Is there something that Poizner knows that we don’t?

It’s not realistic, there will be no Democrat money flowing into the Republican primary this time around.

Attorney General Jerry Brown will be content to store as much as he can for the general election in November, knowing that he has the likelihood of facing either a millionaire in Poizner, or a billionaire in Whitman. This GOP primary is a stand-alone; to win it, you must win it without help from any other source but your own effort.

The last argument in the Poizner email is either revealing, or a very poor choice of words.

“While much can and has been said about funding, the bottom line is this: Steve Poizner’s campaign will be fully funded. As was the case with the campaigns for Insurance Commissioner and Proposition 93, Poizner’s message will get out. The overwhelming majority of resources will be spent in 2010 when voters are engaged and begin making decisions.”

What does “will be fully funded” mean?

Reports that Steve Poizner’s campaign hasn’t had a major endorsement since last summer, and that he is not gathering large amounts of campaign contributions, combined with flat results within numbers polls has some growing skeptical.

One starts to wonder if the Poizner Campaign has hit a wall or become stagnate.

What a peculiar email to say the least. A tad bit schizophrenic in parts and optimistically persuasive in others. The whole “we’ll start our campaign after the first of the year” has a sophomoric feel to it, leaving many. to ask, “If you’re a millionaire, what’s the harm in running  a few ads now versus some 60-days down the road?”

The best reason agianst such a move might be money. If you’re short on funding you save all you can until the very last minute. And if that is the case, how is it that a millionaire is delaying his campaign due to a lack of campaign funding?

It sure doesn’t bode well for the primary, let alone the general election, especially when you’re matched against billionaire eMeg and unionized Mr, Brown – both willing to spend whatever it takes to win next year.

With record breaking unemployment, government regulations that are chasing business owners from California into Nevada, and the state facing another $35 billion deficit come May of 2010, this is a serious campaign. While the Democrats have hitched their wagon to a 70′s thowback machine, a major Republican candidate (some saying the only conservative in the race) has decided to refuse the stage and captive audience while work feverishly to compete for the prize.

There may not be a better time than the present to make a move.

What conservatives want is a real campaign, a real fight on issues, resumes and future plans – not a strategy of “rope-a-dope” by a candidate who showing single digits on his scorecard. Spend some equity, drop a few bucks, stir the economy and start branding your message.

You can’t fight the rounds that have passed by while; someone in Poizner’s corner needs to instruct him to engage and throw a few punches before it’s too late.