Steve Poizner is in it to win it and good for him.

Yesterday in the Bay Area, Poizner wound up the audience and took to convincing his supporters that he has only just begun to fight in this primary election.

Today, SF Chronicle’s Carla Marinucci reports the energy behind Poizner’s push. 

Poizner doesn’t sound like a guy who’s done, down and out in the governor’s race. And in an energetic speech before the Layfayette audience, and in an interview with the Chronicle, he appeared charged and ready to kick up some trouble when he insisted that Californians will soon know in a big way about his record — and that of the former eBay CEO.

“If voters are looking for a third term of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger who will make small, incremental changes, they’ll vote for Meg Whitman,” he says. “If they want to take the state in a different direction, with bold sweeping change, they’ll vote for me.”

After all, he says with a smile, Whitman was not too long ago “a senior level marketing executive in charge of Mr. Potato Head,” who didn’t until recently show much interest in public service, community service, politics or even voting.

Can Steve Poizner reduce the 49-point deficit he now faces – yes.

I predict that he will reduce it to 15 to 18-points by May 10th; if he doesn’t he is toast. But in order to gain the momentum and strike fear into the heart of eMeg’s conglomerate I offer some ‘points to ponder’ for Team Poizner. 

1. The trick to any campaign is to distinguish yourself from your opponent. Is Steve Poizner really (messaging) that different than Meg Whitman; so different that he can make up the 49-point voter differential?

Other than government funding for abortion and his desire to place Schwarzenegger’s AB32 on ice until the unemployment numbers reach 5.5%, and his clever across the board tax cuts, can Steve Poizner prove that he has a ’49-point distinguishable difference’ than Meg Whitman? Voters might see Meg as the consistent choice versus a choice of opportunistic conversation. Plus, the first debate featured them “agreeing” nearly 90-percent of the time. If Poizner is a better choice, he needs to be a greatly different choice.

2. Poizner is trying to convince the core voters of the Republican Party that he is the real conservative candidate in the primary. He is communicating that he is ‘born again’ as a conservative. Are the voters really convinced of this change?

Some history here – it took President Ronald Reagan a Republican loss before the party embrace his ‘changes’ and the same happened with Governor Mitt Romney in the recent Presidential race. The GOP is forgiving bunch, but when your shift is as radical as Poizner’s it usually takes an election cycle to run from the “flip-flop” evidence that becomes low hanging fruit for the opponent.

3. Poizner has turned to illegal immigration as  new evidence of his conservative leanings. This content will help him greatly in the Republican primary. It was a stroke of genius by his consultants to capture this wedge issue.

The risk is it will seal him as an ‘extreme option’ for the independents in the primary. Immigration reform is fine, but ending educational and medical benefits for children doesn’t play well in California as a whole – especially inside of the very conservative Latino communities.

Team Poizner, how do you put this rhetoric back into the bottle come June 9th versus Jerry Brown and the statewide Latino voting block? The reslt: you win a fight, but ‘we’ lose the war. 

4.  I don’t want this to come across as a mean-spirited attack. Steve Poizner is a very bright and nice man, but his personality comes across very ‘wonkish’ to the average citizen.

Someone needs to slow him down, and please, take his coffee away from him before he speaks. Steve is always in a hurry to prove his numbers, explain (convince) his well reasoned math and when he does his personality gets lost in transition. There’s a real guy in there somewhere, and the campaign needs to find him and tell him to say a few words.

5. The ‘rope-a-dope theory’ has a caveat. This strategy has me wondering if Team Poizner is simply hoping (waiting) for the union’s independent expenditures to do his bidding for him. Is this 2002 once again, where an uncontested Gray Davis pumped over $10 million into the Republican primary to select Bill Simon as his competition?

Sure, all is fair in love, war and campaigning … but every time I see Poizner in a Gray Davis styled, blue open-collar dress shirt it makes me wonder if Poizner is banking his cash while he hopes that the union cash does his dirty work for him. I’ve had a few conversations where Poizner supporters have said, “Hogue, wait until that union money exposes Meg for who she really is.” If this is the Poizner strategy – I don’t like it. 

(Yes, Bill Simon gave Gray Davis all he wanted in 2002. Two things: (1) Bill Simon has endorsed Whitman, not Poizner, and (2) Bill Simon was not running as a reformed moderate/social liberal in 2002 as Poizner is today. Bill Simon was much more creditable standing with Republican conservatives; Poizner does not!)  

6. Now, if Steve Poizner pulls off the most amazing comeback in political history does he have enough fuel for the general election against Jerry Brown?

I disagree with the theory that an aggressive primary fight makes for a stronger Republican nominee in all cases; a bloody battle here hands Brown a weakened opponent. If the Democrats were offering an unknown, novice in opposition I might agree with the primary theory, but not here.

7. And again – Poizner will reduce his campaign deficit. A 49-point hole is impossible to maintain. Whitman’s lead will fall to 15 to 18 points within a month. The problem will be the final stretch run. After Poizner unleashed his millions and he has Meg’s lead down to a workable region, can he finish her off?

Just a few points to ponder for Team Poizner, free of charge.