Question of the Day: Will Gun Guys Vote Anti-Gunners Out of Office?

The upcoming 2014 mid-term elections aren’t the first time pro-gun voters have had a chance to make their voices heard at the ballot box, post-Newtown knee-jerk gun control legislation. You may recall Colorado’s 2013 recall election. Voters punted State Senate President John Morse and State Senator Angela Giron, two Democratic pols who supported the Rocky Mountain State’s post-Newtown “high capacity” ammunition magazine ban and “universal background checks” (and new fees for same). Bills Governor Hickenlooper signed. And then regretted signing. Or not. And now the Hickster’s in the frame, staring down the barrel of unemployment . . .

As are a number of anti-gun pols throughout the country, despite being bolstered by Mayor Bloomberg’s $25m ad spend. It’s not all about the guns, but will the firearms freedom vote be the key element in the mid-terms? And if it is, will ant-gun pols get the message?

comments

  1. avatar Shire-man says:

    I have the unfortunate privilege of choosing between an AWB renewing (R) and an AWB renewing (D).
    My gut is telling me to leave that one blank so as not to encourage AWB renewers of any stripe. If I go (R) as so many suggest being the lesser evil and he takes any action no matter how insignificant against the 2nd I’ll know I contributed and it’d make me quite sick.

    1. avatar John Thomas says:

      i sympathize. remember that when you choose the lesser of two evils, you choose an evil.

      1. avatar Scot says:

        If your only viable choice is between two evils you WILL get evil either way, so if you don’t want the greater evil it is wise to vote for the lesser

        1. avatar Publius says:

          Except it’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. You refuse to consider anyone but a Republican or Democrat, then complain that a Republican or Democrat wins and you are “choosing the lesser of two evils”. That will NEVER change until a significant number of people decide that they want it to change.

        2. avatar Scot says:

          It’s not that *I* consider fringe party candidates to not be viable, history shows that they are not.

          The extremes on both end of the political spectrum seem to believe that there are masses of voters just waiting to vote with them. There aren’t. There are 50 state legislatures and Congress, even in the most libertarian states the Libertarian Party controls nothing at the state level

          There are only two ways for the ‘pox on both your houses’ types to get enough people in office to make a difference: 1) Take over one of the major parties by consistently getting candidates nominated in primaries that hold their views; or 2) Having one of the major parties implode.

          Method one takes a long time and a lot of work, but method 2 isn’t likely to happen.

        3. avatar John M. says:

          You don’t want less evil? I do.

        4. avatar Scot says:

          If you don’t vote for the lesser evil, you won’t get less evil

        5. avatar Robert W. says:

          You must continually vote for the lesser of the two evils. Eventually you will get to the “Least Evil” by process of elimination. I don’t like either of my two choices for governor here in California. I have Jerry Brown entering his last term as governor, possibly as any public official depending on what he decides to do later, and Neil Kashkari, the RINO whom public stated that he would not help gun owners. No matter what he says now for the press, it is obvious that he is no helper of the 2A.

          However, if Kashkari can get the economic model of California moving in the, no pun intended, right direction, and do no more damage to our 2A rights under penalty of never being voted for again, I can wait another 4 years to vote in a candidate that will completely support the 2A. We have to stop the leftward spiral of doom somewhere, why not try with something less than ideal and work up from there. You can’t expect the polished turd to come that way, you have to start with a pile of regular old crap first.

      2. avatar pwrserge says:

        Refusing to choose is not a plan. Get involved in your party’s primary process if it upsets you that much. Handing elections to greater evils because of panicked sheeple is not a good tactic.

      3. avatar Bob101 says:

        Whoa!!! This is about numbers. I do not like the Republicans any more that most, but if we do not put enough Republicans in office this election, we will lose the 2nd amendment. All the president needs to completely redefine the 2nd Amendment for all time is for the Democrats to keep the Senate, and one of the conservative Supreme Court Justices to die. It is mathematically impossible for any party other than the Republicans or the Democrats to win, and if you do not vote or vote for a 3rd party, that is essentially a vote for the Democrats. Again, I do not like it, but it is reality.

        1. I live in Texas. I can vote libertarian and not worry about Wendy Davis being governor. My libertarian vote will let my local republicans and democrats know that if they want my vote ( along with 2-3%! Or more of the voters who vote libertarian) they can get it by running more rand or Ron Paul and less rhino or whatever the democrats run. This is esp effective to republicans who are more likely to appeal to libertarians by simply dropping silly anti freedom positions( drug war gays etc) and supporting smaller government. That 1-2 % can easily be the MARGIN in a close race.

        2. avatar Scot says:

          @cuteandfuzzybunnies

          You act as if there is no down side to “dropping silly anti freedom positions.”

          Do you think that there are more socially liberal or anti-national defense ‘libertarians’ than socially conservative or pro-national defense GOP voters who might decide that if the GOP is going to abandon them they might as well stay home or vote for a more socially conservative candidate from some other fringe party?

    2. avatar Scot says:

      In that case you need to go with the party that is better. Parties decide what bills get voted on.

    3. avatar Tex300BLK says:

      I would suggest the lesser of two evils. There is a whole lot more at stake than just gun rights. What good is the right to keep and bear arms if you cant even keep food on your table due to harmful “progressive” economic and social policy? Even if you are spared that, why not vote against someone who continually supports the caustic rhetoric in Washington the paints a bright orange target on the backs of all of us who work hard and have something to show for it? Make no mistake, a lot of the crime and violence in evidence today is a product of both the extremely tight economic times perpetuated by our current government as well as the toxic rehtoric and hatred spewed by those in power. Dont believe me? Look at countries in Latin America, thats the direction our politics are taking us, the whole idea of “that rich guy got rich taking advantage of you poor people so no one will care when you go and take what it really ‘yours’ from him”. Like all the politcal ads here in Texas are hammering over and over again with the Obama quote “I may not be on the ballot this year, but make no mistake, my policies are on the ballot.” In a perfect world we could be single issue voters and only vote for polls who support 2A, but it isnt that simple. Its a societal issue as much as anything else. If the pro AWB republican wins in your area it opens the door for a Pro 2A Republican, or Democrat for that matter, to run against him/her in the future. Change sometimes comes in baby-steps.

      1. avatar anonymous says:

        you cant even keep food on your table due to harmful “progressive” Republican Party economic and social policy? Even if you are spared that, why not vote against someone who continually supports the caustic rhetoric in Washington the paints a bright orange target on the backs of all of us who work hard

        Which is exactly what the Repblican Party does.

        The only nice thing I have to say about the Republican Party is that they are not anti-gun owner.

        Not that they’re actively pro-gun owner, either, but at least they don’t hate us for owning guns.

      2. avatar Dennis Davis says:

        Sounds like a democrat beating around the bush.

    4. avatar Calvin says:

      Vote (L). If the (R) has any sense he’ll look at all those (L) tallies and wonder what he can do to get those for himself next time.

      1. avatar AndrewinDC says:

        Voting (L) to get the (R)s to take notice has been my personal strategy in part for over 20 years. It’s been a slow process, but I think progress is being made. I think widespread internet access has sped up the process. 15 years ago you had to actively seek out information about the Libertarian Party or libertarianism in general, now there are many easily accessibly resources to learn that are just a click away.

        1. avatar Scot says:

          Voting (L) to get a (D) elected won’t get the (R) to pay any attention, and will just get more big gov’t anti-gun laws passed.

          Push the more (small ‘l’) libertarian candidate in the primary, but if you can’t influence the primary there aren’t enough of you to make a difference.

      2. avatar SteveInCO says:

        It was my experience that the Rs simply complained that the Libertarians were stealing “their” votes and that the Rs simply vowed to deny them ballot access as soon as possible.

      3. avatar Publius says:

        Not just the R, but the D’s will also say “Wow, X% of the people voted for L….I need to start adopting L’s views if I want to gain any votes from them”. Even if they don’t win, every vote for a Libertarian candidate pushes both Republicans and Democrats to move in the Libertarian direction.

        The problem for us though, is that the majority of gun owners are extremely religious and thus will always vote for the Republicans due to the Republican Party’s desire to legislate the Bible. In the end, religion will be what kills the Second Amendment in the United States.

        1. avatar Rob Eide says:

          You sir, are absolutely wrong.

        2. avatar Scot says:

          More likely is that rather than lose their base both parties will write off the Libertarian Party voters. When you take yourself out of the candidate selection process (the primary), you leave the selection to those who vote in the primaries.

        3. avatar Publius says:

          A brilliant counter argument, Robbie.

        4. avatar Publius says:

          Scot – They got away with that in the past, but the libertarian group is growing much faster in the post-9/11 power grab and even more so after Obama’s “Hope and Change” was shown to be “More of the Same”. When you have elections where someone is only winning by 2-3% of the vote, you’re an idiot to write off even 1% of voters, let alone 5%. The only ones who can continue to ignore those outside of the R and D camps are people like Pelosi who get elected by obscene margins because the voters don’t even think before voting for whoever has a D or R after their name.

        5. avatar Scot says:

          I have yet to meet a ‘true believer’ Libertarian Party voter who would vote for a ‘slightly’ more libertarian candidate in one of the major parties. To the extent that a candidate moves away from his/her base there’ll be a loss of votes as well.

          The voters that can be attracted are probably already working in one party or another to pull that party in their direction.

          Voters who would vote for a candidate who has no chance to win probably wouldn’t vote for anyone other than a ‘perfect’ candidate, which is why, while libertarian (small ‘l’) values seem to be increasing the Libertarian Party isn’t going anywhere.

      4. avatar John M. says:

        If the prior 40 years of evidence aren’t enough to convince you that the Libertarian Party is ineffective, what evidence would convince you of this? This is a serious question and not intended to be snarky.

        1. avatar Publius says:

          Apparently you’ve missed the massive increase in support for the Libertarian party over the last six to ten years.

        2. avatar Scot says:

          “massive”?

          Where has this ‘massive’ support resulted in the LP taking control of a legislative body, or even having major influence on a legislative body.

        3. avatar SteveInCO says:

          I’ve missed it too.

          I’ve seen a few people call themselves libertarian, but by that they almost always mean they legalized pot AND all the government programs like “free” healthcare and college educations.

          Their desire for the government programs means they have no fvcking idea what libertarianism is actually about.

        4. avatar Sean in MT says:

          @Steve in CO: Har!!! I’ve seen that all too often myself! I call them “Liberaltarians.” Their platform: Legalize dope, no participation in foreign wars, total government control of our lives and economy. They are your basic #occupy clowns.

    5. avatar Tony F. says:

      Go with the lesser of evils that believe in civil rights for gays, for poor voters, and for women not being forced to have their rapist’s baby.
      Go with the Democrats.

      1. avatar Publius says:

        Hey, you were close on that list! Except that their “caring” for poor voters means that I have to work harder to subsidize people who don’t want to put out any effort or suffer negative consequences for their bad choices.

        I switched to being a libertarian after I fully realized that both the Republicans and Democrats want complete control of your life. Democrats want to do it by controlling your finances, while Republicans want to do it by controlling your personal interactions and religious views.

        1. avatar AllAmerican says:

          Plubius, “I live in a mostly republican state”- So? What does that prove, most of us do, because most of the country is red. I live in one of the reddest states in the union and I’m not religious by any means and the only people ever pushing religion on people are the Jehovas. No member of the Republican Party is trying to push religion on you- you just think they are, because the left tells you so, and more than likley have several family members that do it. Don’t let your personal experience get in the way of the facts- no member of the GOP is pushing any legislation anywhere that would force you to participate in any religious practice or “ram religion down your throat”. It’s absolute nonsense.

      2. avatar AllAmerican says:

        I want you to think about what you just said when you find yourself standing in a long line at your local police station to turn all your guns in. The GOP is grossly over exaggerated by the Democrats and what you’ve just said is proof your only drinking the liberal kool aid. The vast majority of republicans do not care about gay marriage or abortion, but the party as a whole still has them on the platform because of the religious base. In other words, it’s simply poor politicking left over from the conservative revolution of the 1990s. This idea that the GOP wants to ram religion down your throat is pure fantasy and fear mongering from the left. Parties and politics change, remember, the democrats used to be the party of segregation and Jim Crowe. Though there is evidence that points to those ideals really never having gone away. I mean, they did enslave the black population to welfare and government subsidies.

        1. avatar Publius says:

          This idea that the GOP wants to ram religion down your throat is pure fantasy and fear mongering from the left.

          Sounds like you’re the one living in a fantasy land. I live in a mostly Republican state and can tell you that the GOP definitely wants the Bible to be law and any “heathens” who don’t believe in Jesus should not have any rights.

        2. avatar Scot says:

          You can of course provide bill numbers?

      3. avatar Dave357 says:

        When some of your cherished civil rights are protected by one party, and the rest of them by another, it makes sense to choose the party that protects the rights that the courts don’t care to protect.

      4. I’m
        Sorry I’m not sure if I’m pro life or not. In fact I think abortion early in the pregnancy is prolly not murder. BUT I can’t prove it and nobody else can either !! Now if a person DOES believe all abortion to be murder then how could that person believe that rape should justify that murder? I mean I’m 41 if my father goes and rapes a woman tomorrow would it be ok to kill me? My parents are divorced if dad rapes my mom tomorrow then would it be moral to kill me? Oh but if I’m a small baby somehow that makes it ok? I just don’t see the logic.
        Now if one does not believe an unborn baby is a human life the any restriction on abortion is much harder to justify.

    6. avatar MoreFreedomLessFreeloaders says:

      Don’t leave anything blank. At least vote for a third party or write in someone. If you leave it blank they can and will fill it in for you, and then you’ll be voting for someone without even knowing it.

    7. avatar Red Sox says:

      Vote for Scott Brown, Shaheen is just a shill for Barack Ebola

  2. avatar Tsn4 says:

    Has he done anything to repeal the laws he supposedly regrets supporting? Anyone know the status of those new CO gun laws?

    1. avatar anonymous says:

      Anyone know the status of those new CO gun laws?

      The laws are still in effect, and I am tangibly less free than I was two years ago.

      There are things I can no longer do in the privacy of my home with my friends — such as exchange a box with a spring in it, or trade guns, or give guns as Christmas and birthday presents — because the Democrat Party views gun owners the same way that the Republican Party view homosexuals: as people who practice a deviant activity that must be discouraged if it can’t be outright banned.

      Claire Levy (Democrat-Boulder): “I don’t know how on Earth they can draw a causal relationship. I make no assertion that this bill either increase or reduce violent crime. That is not the premise of the bill.”

      Democrats even admit that laws requiring a photo I.D. to exercise a right — which is what background checks are — are intended to disenfranchise the law abiding. Make no mistake : what the Democrats did in Colorado had nothing to do with concern for public safety. It was the result of their pure, raw, unfiltered hate for us.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        You have no obligation to comply with an inherently unenforceable and unjust law. The magazine ban is particularly hilarious as I would just drive across state lines, buy a case of 30 rounders and dare them to prove that I didn’t have them when the law went into effect.

        1. avatar anonymous says:

          dare them to prove that I didn’t have them when the law went into effect

          AR-15 magazines are date coded.

          I think even the most dim-witted anti-gun-owner D.A. could figure out that if a magazine was produced after July 1st, 2013, the magazine was obtained after the ban went into effect.

        2. avatar MoreFreedomLessFreeloaders says:

          @Anonymous that is what dremel tools are for.

      2. avatar Delmarva Chip says:

        Thanks for posting that video … not surprising that they believe that, but am a bit surprised that someone actually admitted it.

    2. avatar Howdy says:

      I have already voted against anti-2A candidates in Colorado. These are the same people who voted to give illegal aliens drivers licenses and in state tuition.

      Also, Hickenlooper, volunteered our state to take part of the 75,000 illegal aliens that crossed the border in summer of this year. Just one of many other reasons to vote him out, not to mention he claims he would grant clemency to the Chucky Cheese murderer if he wasn’t re-elected.

      If we get sanity back in our state government, I hope we are able to clean up this mess and send another strong message to our congress critters.

      1. avatar MoreFreedomLessFreeloaders says:

        We have a huge battle with voter fraud ahead.

  3. avatar Rob Eide says:

    I will do my part to get rid of the anti 2A pols!

  4. avatar dracon1201 says:

    One of the largest group of single issue voters in the US is being picked on. You bet your rear that it will be a factor.

    1. Well it looks like chickenpooper is down in the polls going into the election. If he does lose, and I think he may, it will be a long time before another governor of a western purple state even THINKS twice about trying to pass any sort of anti gun laws. They will get treated like they are bills supporting cancer and pedeophiles

  5. avatar Rokurota says:

    I’ll vote for the pro-gun candidate as many times as it takes the machine to stop changing my vote.

  6. avatar anonymous says:

    Question of the Day: Will Gun Guys Vote Anti-Gunners Out of Office?

    I hope so, but I doubt it.

    And can we stop saying “anti-gun” and start saying “anti-gun owner”?

    Or start using the phrase “gun owner control” instead of “gun control”?, etc.

    We really suck at P.R.

    1. avatar DrewR55 says:

      I vote we call them the “anti-rights” crowd. They don’t just want our guns, they want to limit our privacy, our religion, our free speech, the press, and any political descent.

      1. avatar anonymous says:

        they want to limit our privacy, our religion, our free speech, the press, and any political descent

        There are plenty of folks in the gun-owner-rights movement who want the same thing.

        Believing that you are “pro rights” because of one issue, even if you’re anti-rights on all of the others, is like believing that youare “pro-choice” because of one issue, even if youa re anti-choice on all of the others.

  7. avatar dph says:

    Unfortunately in Washington state we may get rid of few anti-gun pols, but the “tyranny of the majority” that is I-594 will probably pass. VOTE NO ON I-594.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      And then get struck down as unconstitutional by the first appellate court to hear a challenge.

  8. avatar Dave357 says:

    “And if it is, will ant-gun pols get the message?”

    Only if the message is very loud and clear, which doesn’t appear very likely. After all, no restrictive new federal laws got passed, they only got “discussed”, so it is not quite 1994. The lay of the land is different from 1994 in other ways – there’s a lot more money on the anti-gun side these days, and they are more organized than back then. We haven’t lost the culture war on guns yet, but we better fight it hard unless we don’t mind losing it.

  9. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    I’ve done my best to get rid of merkley and kitzhaber.
    The family is on board with it too.

    1. avatar J in OR says:

      Same here but, as much as I want it to, I don’t think it will happen.

    2. avatar Sean says:

      Yep and fingers crossed that we don’t lose any pro 2A seats in the Oregon Senate this year

  10. avatar Pascal says:

    It is 50/50 chance because on one hand you have the “it’s complicated” crowd who may not vote for their gun rights and then you have in CT people who still come in and scream because they have just figured out that you can no longer purchase ammo without a certificate. I have no idea where Fudd’s stand. I shooting sporting clays in NY and there where clay shooters there who were perfectly happy with the NY SAFE Act. They also the ones who get a pat on the head by the anti-gun crowd.

    All the races will be tight. I suspect when we wake up on Nov 5th we may still not know the results of all the races.

    If the R’s take the house, we can least not worry about another gun ban for two years. Other than that, on a state by state basis, who the hell knows, many gun owners do not vote simply on some unexplainable principle.

    1. avatar Pascal says:

      Hmm, not allowed to edit my own comment.

  11. avatar Jim S. says:

    With any luck, yes. No mo’ Cuomo!

    1. avatar Dave357 says:

      Lady Luck left NY State a while ago, at least when it comes to statewide races.

  12. avatar Jim R says:

    Neither PA Senator is up for re-election this year, so I don’t have a horse in that particular race. However our Governor, a lot of in-state reps and all our US reps are up, and I intend to keep the good ones there (what few are under my control).

    1. avatar Stinkeye says:

      There are no “good ones”, only “slightly less awful ones”.

  13. avatar SteveInCO says:

    I got the joy of marking my ballot for Hickeypooper’s opponent today. (Local level races are all uniformly Red around here, the dems rarely bother to even run someone.)

    RealClearPolitics (which, when you put it into “no tossups mode” called every single state exept for Florida correctly in the 2012 elections, shows Chickenhumper narrowly losing the race as of today. But it flips back and forth. It’s going to be close which means the Ds will just ramp up the voter fraud.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      the Ds will just ramp up the voter fraud.

      Yes, they will — and they do it sooooo well. And not too many Republicans win recounts either, even when they start out ahead.

      I think that’s why SCOTUS stopped the recount in Bush v. Gore — they couldn’t stand to see another Presidential election being stolen.

  14. avatar Accur81 says:

    One of the things that I find maddening is that people talk about Republicans “banning homosexuality.” That’s idiotic. Has there ever, even once, been a SWAT team raid against a gay couple? Knock, knock, were here to dictate what happens in your bedroom. Definitely not going to happen in today’s climate. The ACLU would have a conniption. Gay marriage and gay rights will happen regardless of who is in office. Democrats, by and large, are perfectly fine to have SWAT raids of your home to catch you and your evil guns. The IRS will happily target conservatives.

    Of course some Republicans are worthless, like Chris Christie. Others like Mittens are simply mediocre. Some have Democrat in the title, such as highly pro-gun Sheriff David Clarke of Milwaukee County. I simply don’t consider him to be a Democrat due to his pro-gun stance.

    With that being said, I’ve contributed lots of cash to Scott Walker, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Steve Stockman, Rick Perry, and others. I don’t consider gun owners who vote for Democrats (other than Clarke) to be gun rights advocates. A 2012 vote for Obama demonstrates a clear lack of political intelligence, especially given the disastrous roll out of Obamacare. Not to worry, those costs will get even worse.

    Let’s face it, the only realistic way that Obama, Holder and company face any chance of being held accountable is by a Republican House and Senate. Even if we can’t hold those scumbags accountable, the only realistic way to have less government, lower taxes, and more freedom is via Republicans and Independents. Today’s Democratic party has swung hard left. If you like that stuff move to Europe, where you can pay taxes to your hearts content – like France’s 75% millionaire tax, drive a tiny car, pay 8$ / gallon for gas, and have virtually zero freedom to own a gun. At least the pastries are nice.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      There’s an openly gay Republican running in MA’s Sixth Congressional District. Richard Tisei is the current House Minority Leader and he has a big chance to win in deep blue MA. Not a gun guy — he’s a “D” compared to the Democrat’s “F.” Boehner has raised a lot of money for Tisei and other gay Republicans, but the gay “community” has turned its back on gay Republicans.

      Gays live on the same Democrat plantation as black people do.

    2. avatar Dave357 says:

      I tell people who are, for example, pro-choice and pro-gun, to ask themselves which of the two rights is better protected by the courts at the moment and vote for the legislative branch accordingly.

  15. avatar Daniel Silverman says:

    In California it seems to be same as it ever was…

  16. avatar Avid Reader says:

    The latest Quinnipiac poll shows Hickenlooper down by five. Another major poll shows him down by two, within the margin of error. Unfortunately, winning by a point or two isn’t enough-as pointed out repeatedly on Instapundit, it needs to be more than the margin of fraud.

    For example, there are allegations that Democrats are posing as Republicans in order to serve as election judges:

    http://www.dailycamera.com/boulder-county-news/ci_26819054/gop-allegations-surface-over-boulder-county-election-judges

  17. avatar Mark N. says:

    In California, not much will change. The Democrats will retain their approximate 2/3 majority in both houses, since black anger against the democratic status quo prevalent in the Midwest has not reached here. Governor Brown will be re-elected, and life will go on as before. Kamala Harris is running for re-election as Attorney General, and since I haven’t heard of any opponent I suspect she will be (unfortunately) re-elected. The biggest race being watched is for the Sheriff of LA County, where there has been scandal after scandal tainting the Department and its leadership. The last sheriff was forced out, and his handpicked successor is from out of county. Both of the leading candidates are expected to continue the departments virtual no issue policies on CCW, with only one other candidate saying he will follow the dictates of the Ninth Circuit Peruta decision.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      Brown is on his way to losing the white vote, but he dominates the Mexican vote.

  18. avatar jwm says:

    Now, this cycle we need, as POTG, to stand together and vote straight R.

    I know the MDA and MAIG shills will show up here like last time and try to weaken our clout with all that “dribble of lesser of 2 evils still being evil” and make a real change and vote for libertarians and independents. Hogwash. Vote for any other than an R in this election and we are pissing away the best chance we’ve had in many years to make gun control the true 3rd rail of politics. We may even have a chance to bash the dems so hard this time that they’ll see the light and move away from gun control.

  19. avatar Royal Tony says:

    Wish I could do more. Voting the bums out of California would be Quixotic to say the least.

  20. avatar former water walker says:

    VotewhMY vote doesn’t count a edamn bit in southern Cook County,Illinois. Only for really local races. My town is one of the( relatively) pro2A ones. Statewide the RINO are running as dumbocrats. Rauner for governor is a loose cannon. I hope he’d be better than the worst governor in America. Vote for the lesser evil where it matters.

  21. avatar Fed Up says:

    Here in MI, we have a Bloomberg supported RINO incumbent vs a Communist/Democrat challenger. Both ran unopposed in the primaries. The Dem is pretty much the last person in the state I’d want to see win, but that isn’t enough to make me vote for a Bloomberg crony, so I’m voting Libertarian.

    If it weren’t for my Congressman I’d consider voting a L straight ticket to show the MIGOP what I think of them.

  22. avatar Frank says:

    I identify with the Libertarians on most issues. I want as little government interference as possible. With this said, I have no choice but to vote R since L does not have a big enough following at this time to be elected and every non R vote is as good as a D vote

  23. avatar Tom says:

    Even if anti Second elected officials are defeated in mass numbers, the gun grabbers will start acting like martyrs and come up with every convoluted excuse imaginable. Whats happening in Colorado is the granola crunchers and Commiefornia transplants have woken up a sleeping populace and the leftists are about to be hit with a major backlash. The liberals should have known what was coming when Morse and Giron got the boot. Their own smugness and self righteous attitude will be their undoing.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      CO was bought and paid for by Pat Stryker, Jared Polis, Tim Gill, and Rutt Bridges. Loop and his sock puppets are just the front men for the Gang of Four.

      1. avatar Avid Reader says:

        Unfortunately I live in Polis’ district. He’ll skate to reelection, since Boulder comprises much of the population.

  24. avatar mirgc says:

    Vote
    Ask your like minded friends, buddies, neighbors, local organizations, etc to vote.
    Ask them to remind others as well.
    If you have time, volunteer for your local pro-2nd amendment candidate as well.

    Why? In mid-term elections, 30-35% of eligible voters actually vote. Or 65-70% of eligible voters don’t.
    That means that someone could get elected with as little as 15%+1 votes. For a lot of local state districts, that is not very many people. And the other side knows this. Hence their efforts in the final two weeks to “get out the vote” any means possible. We need to do the same as well.

    Now go vote 🙂

  25. avatar David says:

    Vote without compromising in the primary. Vote for the lesser of two evils on the general.

  26. avatar Tony says:

    This morning I mailed my absentee ballot in MD, voting Hogan (R) for governor in the hope that he gives the state police direction for issuance of MD concealed carry permits that are closer to shall-issue than the current very restrictive may-issue rules. First time in my life voting Republican; I am a registered Democrat and have always voted D before. (I don’t expect to switch parties generally, but I might do it again in the hopes that both parties might move towards more sensible centrist positions.)

    1. avatar Avid Reader says:

      So your ballot stands a chance of sneaking through and being counted.

  27. avatar Sean in MT says:

    A great discussion on the Lesser of Two Evils concept in elections is found here: http://polymontana.com/logic-lesser-evil/ (Part one of a bunch…the whole site is very good, really) Dr. Ed is talking about Montana politics, but it applies nationally just as well. His logic explains why I went from being a capital-L Libertarian to a small-l republican voter. I’m not wasting my votes electing Democrats, but rather I’m moving the paradigm back from way out there on the left towards my desired place.

    I used to vote Libertarian, even in close races until I realized that I was shooting myself in the foot by contributing to Democrat victories. Democrats have done the same thing in the past (Nader, for example), but now really understand the Alinsky tactics and are putting forth a unified front. If anyone needs ANY reason why they shouldn’t split the Republican ticket, I’ll give you two: Sotomayor and Kagan. If we had a Republican-controlled Senate, these two whack jobs would not be on the court (for life). NOW imagine what happens if Reid retains his rubber stamp for the President’s next appointment. We’re a stroke or heart attack away from Supreme Court Justice Eric Holder. See the light yet?

    So this election elect the guy who is not perfect, but at least he’s not a progressive Democrat. And then next election, primary him against someone who is a little better, a little more libertarian, and move the frame of reference a little more towards where we want it. If we consistently do this, then we can expect to see future elections where in order to stay viable the Democrats are forced to run candidates who we would by today’s standards consider to be “moderate Republicans” against a small-“l” libertarian Republican candidate. That’s how we fix things–one small step at a time, never giving anything back.

    1. avatar Mike says:

      Well said, I believe the big Ls here in IL will cause Quinn to beat Rauner. I don’t trust Rauner on guns but I know Quinn’s itching to pass an AWB so there we go. On the other important issue, my state’s fiscal spiral, I trust a successful businessman over Mr Potatohead every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

      1. avatar Former Water Walker says:

        I agree with everything you said Mike. I wish I could move a mile east to the great state of Indiana…and I don’t trust Rauner a damn bit. He should run those Harold Washington recordings about Quinn being such a dumba##LOL

  28. avatar GunGal says:

    As 2nd. defends all the others, I have become a single issue voter.

  29. avatar brentonadams says:

    All these ‘vote for neither party’ or ‘both parties are the same’ people can celebrate when democrats keep the senate.

    There’s no difference right?

    Vote the lesser evil. Every time. The only thing that matters in politics is winning. You can grow a conscience later after our side wields the power.

  30. avatar Hannibal says:

    If so we’ll hopefully have another decade until the next batch of politicians decide to try putting their hands on the stove.

  31. avatar DisThunder says:

    Having to vote against a poseur tea party member and a “moderate” Democrat was a crappy choice, until I found that little “supports Universal Background Checks” line in the Dem’s platform list.
    Off you go, then. I’ll take poseur over punk bitch any day of the week.

  32. avatar CTsheepdog says:

    Yo, don’t forget Connecticut where we are doing our best to get rid of the POS Malloy. Foley may not be the most gun-friendly candidate but he is far better than Malloy who signed PA13-3 and promises he’s not done yet.

  33. avatar franco says:

    I don’t like politicians. Do I want a libertarian in office? Hell yes! The chances of that happening are pretty slim. What to do instead? Not vote? That won’t stop the wrong guy from getting elected. What does the lesser evil do? Think supreme court, majority leaders, control over agendas. Its important and if you stay home you deserve what you get. You can’t vote once a year or so and expect things to happen. You got to stay on top of them and get involved. It is frustrating for sure. In my opinion the most important amendment is the 2nd. If they don’t protect one single other thing it is worth it to protect our gun rights.

  34. avatar DerryM says:

    The issue we have to face right now is that ONLY the Republicans or Democrats can win significant elections in most States and at the Federal level. In some few cases Libertarians may have a realistic chance of winning.

    Voting for “the lesser of two evils” is unpalatable, but pragmatic in the present circumstances. If we keep the Obama Democrats in power over the next two Elections, we will see more of the same as the past six years…maybe worse. Each of us has to decide how well that has worked and decide what we want. The preamble to the Constitution reads, “We, The People of the United States,…” and We, The People, need to stand-up and reclaim our Republic.

  35. avatar Zebulon Pike says:

    Those of you voting L or just not voting because you don’t completely love the R candidate are wasting your vote and causing actual harm. It is PARTIES that control the legislature, not people. Parties pick the speaker of the house, the president of the senate, and committee chairs. In any legislature it is those individuals who determine what comes up for a vote and what does not. Face the reality–the Ls will NEVER have enough seats in ANY legislature to pick the leaders. You’ve got to pick R or D. Hold your nose if you must.

    You have a right to waste your vote on an L. But you need to understand the harm you are doing. That’s right–you are making it worse.

  36. avatar Wood says:

    Not choosing is a choice. I agree there are too many turds in the punch bowl, and we need to pour it out and get a new bowl, but until we the people take the initiative to fix the problem, we will continue to suffer under charlatans and criminals, being that is what gets vetted under the two corrupt parties. Don’t ever make the mistake of thinking the Repubs have your best interests at heart. They’re statists too, just like the leftists.

  37. avatar anonymous says:

    it is not quite 1994. The lay of the land is different from 1994 in other ways

    The biggest difference from 1994 is that there is a lot of anxiety about the economy today.

    And whereas in the 1990s, we could argue about Democrat vs Republican economic policies, I think a lot more people believe that today’s problems are the result of fundamental flaws in the system that go beyond partisan politics.

  38. avatar Kap says:

    bring back Tar and feathers!

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email