Gun Voters (and Others) Fail to Turf Worst Anti-Gun Governors

Pat-Quinn

csmonitor.com gets it! The mainstream media have shunned the “g” word, but the Christian Science Monitor reports that gun voters were a big factor in last night’s Republican-dominated mid-terms. “Gun owners in Colorado and Connecticut, two states that passed sweeping gun-control laws in the wake of the school shooting in Newtown, Conn., have helped turn Democratic gubernatorial incumbents into poll-trailers – underscoring the extent to which the evolution of the Second Amendment is intermingling with America’s voting habits.” Yes, well, since they penned that piece . . .

Anti-gun Governor Malloy (CT) squeaked through to re-election. Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper looks set to do the same. And California Governor Brown skated to a second second term. So did New York Governor Andrew Cuomo.

Pro-gun voters can take some solace in the fact that voters deep-sixed anti-gun Illinois Governor Quinn and captured the governorship in Maryland, where Martin O’Malley put the screws to gun rights. Overall, close, but no cigar.

comments

  1. avatar pwrserge says:

    Sounds like its time to talk about federal preemption of all state and local gun laws.

    1. avatar bobmcd says:

      Be careful what you ask for.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        I fail to see the problem. Federal statutes apply regardless of state law. If the liberals get federal laws passed, we’re screwed either way. I say it’s time for us to take the offensive and get some federal laws of our own on the books for them to repeal.

        1. avatar jwm says:

          Yep, national constitutional carry. Why have a bill of rights at the federal level if states rights are going to override it and establish the tyranny of the majority?

        2. avatar RLC2 says:

          +1 to jwm. Look at the map for concealed carry.

          Now is the time to close the deal by making it a simplr personal freedom issue, vs State tyrrany. The Senate elections were a repudiatiin of progressive policiy, which is top down, We Elites Know Whats Best For You Little People and will do as we like, starting with running guns to try to discredit LGS (F&F), adding taxes to gas for every person to pay in CA, and carbon taxes on corporations for corruptocrats like Al Gore to get fat on, and US FedGov grants to fake energy projects, (Solyndra) for Dem tech guys to get paid bwck, and us taxpayers pay off, for the now xploded AGW hoqx, to IRS suppression of voters, to lying outright about Benghazi, and suppressing and spyinv on the press (APs Rosen, which Holder ordered), and NSA spying on all citizenz, and CIA on Senate.

          The point is, even some centrist Democrats are waking up to the monster that they helped create, a totalitarian mindset, that is nothing more than the same soft warm fuzzy BS of Pajama Boy and Lena Durham and other dependent LIV marketing, that when exposed is exactlh thd same as 1930s Socialism, whether thats in Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, of Italy. Obama is simply the empty puppet shell behind which you find Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, Frank Marshall philosophy, enabled and manipukated by big bucks from Soros and his network of CAP funded NGOs, Progressive Comunity grouos, and variuos corrupt power abusers like ACORN, now SEIU, and all the ticks and fleas hanging off and feeding upon that vast feral hog of Democrat pork and entitlements, including he Jiurnolistas and faux news orgs like Media Matters, Politico, and Vox, created to help spin the Talking Points Memos as news.

          Enough have woken to the danger, that its time tk begin toreverse the damage. But now the hard work begins, and since 2A rights are the canary in the coal mind of FedGov oppressioj, vs working for the people, we use that to out the corrupt RINOS and tap the TeaParty lkmjted govt and less regulation, lower taxes, with greater personal freedom and independent/libertarian energy of the Millenials. That forces the dead wood out of GOP and brings new energy and integrity into politics. I say again. Look at Tom Cotton, Joni Ernst, Cory Gardner, for prrof of same. And Walker in WI. If Hickenpooper hangs on in CO it will be obvious only because of huge iut of state money, and Biulder Dem vote fraud. And that will inly energizd the conservative base to do more.

    2. avatar Nick says:

      It wouldn’t pass a test of constitutionality. The tenth Ammendment preserves any rights not granted to the federal government to the states.

      Beyond that, the federal government can only regulate interstate commerce in firearms, which is why ghost gunning is legal.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Except that right above that, we have the 2nd amendment which expressly reserves the question of firearms ownership to the federal level. (Under even the loosest interpretation of the text.) In any case, Federal preemption would basically be a way to forcefully incorporate the 2nd amendment at the state level. Perfectly constitutional.

        1. I kind of remember a war being fought to end some States Rights.
          I get tired of hearing POTG saying that a State has the right to infringe on any right because the Constitution only limits Federal power. What? What good are God given rights if a man can write a law and other men can enforce it at the point of a gun and that law goes against my human rights.
          I call bullshit! Interstate commerce my ass! You guys act like the Supreme Court never made a mistake. How on Earth do we have 5-4 decisions if they are always right?

        2. avatar John M. says:

          @Michael in GA:
          “What good are God given rights if a man can write a law and other men can enforce it at the point of a gun and that law goes against my human rights.”

          Hm, that’s a heck of a good question.

        3. avatar tdiinva says:

          That is a partiularly Southern take on State’s rights. The 10th Amendment talks about powers not given to the national government are reserved to States or the people. Those powers given to the national government cannot be nullified by the states. The Confederate position on States’ rights was not in line with the Constitution. The Confederate position was little more than we lost in Congress and we lost an election. We are going to take our bat and ball and go home.

        4. avatar SteveInCO says:

          ” I get tired of hearing POTG saying that a State has the right to infringe on any right because the Constitution only limits Federal power.”

          I think that was indeed the original understanding of the BOR. But since then the Supremes have been “incorporating” the BOR piecemeal at the state level.

          BTW Ron Paul believes that this is illegitimate.

        5. avatar LarryinTX says:

          I agree with pwrserg that is the way the law should work, but have to point out it is not the way it DOES work. Every one of this nation’s 20,000+ laws concerning firearms is illegal under 2A, yet we have a whole bunch of people in prison for keeping and/or bearing arms. Just as one example. And plenty of people have answered my assertions of violations of the constitution on this subject and others with comments essentially saying the constitution is old, we don’t need to worry about it any more.

          I think a fair case can be made that most of the BOR only applies to the federal govt, an example being “*congress* shall make no law…”, but “shall not be infringed” CLEARLY means “by any one, federal, state, county, city, anyone.”

      2. avatar Dave357 says:

        Gun Free School Zones act illustrates that more than just gun trade can be regulated at the federal level.

        1. avatar JimmyDelta says:

          Yes, in clear defiance of both word and meaning of the Constitution.

        2. avatar Justsomeguy says:

          Just for the record, the original GFSZ act was ruled unconstitutional precisely because congress didn’t have the authority to pass such regulation. It was “fixed” by adding a rider that any gun that “has moved in or otherwise affects interstate commerce.”

          Of course most of us believe that such things are BS, but that is why the law is on the books.

          JSG

    3. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

      That’s a common misunderstanding: that federal law and the federal court system is “higher” or has more authority than state laws and courts. It’s a misunderstanding driven and perpetuated by the fact that it is partly true. However, the greater and more relevant difference between the two structures isn’t their relative authority in some unified hierarchy, but rather the span of activities over which each system has authority in the first place. That is, the distinctions are more about scope than scale. They address different things.

      Even where there’s overlap in subjects, the two still approach the topics from different angles. Constitutionally, the feds are only supposed to be be concerned with what’s in the Constitution, which more or less comes down to international relations and interstate commerce. The rest is for the states and the people. The long, slow march toward “federalization”, whereby all issues are addressed at the national level, as distinct from what’s more commonly referred to as federalism and the traditional power sharing arrangement between fed and states, is a huge part of what’s wrong with America today.

      I know, it’s all MUCH more complicated than this, but I don’t have time to write a thousand page, meticulously researched treatise on the subject today. Suffice it to say that you really want to avoid policy prescriptions at the federal level, even if you agree with them, over issues that are rightly state matters. It’s a Faustian bargain.

  2. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

    1. avatar Dr. Kenneth Noisewater says:

      Truer words have rarely ever been spoken.

      You can’t fix it, you can only flee it or kill it.

  3. avatar Accur81 says:

    The close races could have easily been “won” by voter fraud. When there are more registered voters than actual citizens of voting age, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize that voter fraud is a serious issue. I reckon voter fraud is also a threat to to the 2A since scumbags tend to vote for Democrats.

    1. avatar Troutbum5 says:

      And I would bet my hat that fraud decided at least a couple of the close races. There were many reports of voting machines switching votes for Republicans to the Democrat candidate. And those were just the ones where it showed on the screen. How many votes were switched without being visible?

    2. avatar Hobbez says:

      Maryland is one of the states that had verified reports of electronic voting machines changing Republican votes to Democrat. I’m not a big fan of electronic voting machines anyway, especially with how Anonymous has shown how easy they are to hack, but with verified stories of them changing votes in MD, I seriously question any Democrat wins there.

    3. avatar Hannibal says:

      Loser talk. Same kind of thing I remember hearing from the libs after Bush won.

      The fact that these states re-elected these bozos should surprise no one, as it’s well in line with their political leanings and trajectory. Frankly Maryland going R for governor is a big surprise to me but even he has said he won’t turn back the gun legislation.

      1. avatar Jus Bill says:

        You haven’t been following Hogan’s campaign very closely, have you?

  4. avatar dan says:

    the REPUBLICAN Congress ..MUST….REPEAL, REPEAL,REPEAL…..anything the RINO’s have enacted into law…the past 20 + years….or we as conservative voters will FINALLY be able to SEE…that…BOTH parties have the same masters and agendas….IN YOUR FACE….tyranny….imho

    1. avatar tdiinva says:

      I believe that only significant piece of Federal legislation passed in the last twenty years was the lapsed assault weapons ban. Talk about low information voters.

      1. avatar SteveInCO says:

        That was slightly more than twenty years ago, to be completely accurate.

        You forget that Brady–morphed from waiting period to background check–passed in 1993 also (AWB passed in ’93), with the concurrence of the NRA. And we are still stuck with that piece of crap.

        1. avatar SteveInCO says:

          I have to correct myself. The AWB passed in September 1994, not 1993, though it was still a bit more than 20 years ago.

          The Brady act did pass in 1993 so my recollection was correct on that one.

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          So was your recollection that it’s a piece of crap.

        3. avatar SteveInCO says:

          Am I to understand you like the federal background check?

        4. avatar SteveInCO says:

          Nevermind Larry, I read your comment backwards; I thought you had misunderstood me.

    2. avatar JimmyDelta says:

      How about something requiring a “Constitutional Compliance” assessment for any new legislation, and something to start working backwards, looking at things already passed, using economic impact to help prioritize?

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Wouldn’t you think the people who seek out and receive positions in the House or Senate would understand the necessity for checking on the constitutional legitimacy of bills they support? I’m afraid a bunch of them (both parties) are dumb as a post, and completely uninterested in anything which may limit their power.

      2. avatar Stinkeye says:

        The fact that such a thing can even be proposed (let alone the fact that it’s probably needed now) only serves to illustrate how far we’ve fallen, and how broken our system has become. You made me sad, JimmyDelta.

        1. avatar SteveInCO says:

          My understanding was that legislation (at least at the federal level) used to cite the fedgov’s authority under the constitution to do whatever it was. E.g., the interstate highway system was justified on the grounds it would help the military move materiel, thus aiding the national defense.

          Now they don’t bother, probably because they’d die laughing trying to come up with an actual rationale for the crap they are shoveling.

  5. avatar Survivor1090 says:

    I tried to boot Malloy, but it looks like more people in Connecticut don’t care about their rights than those who do. Wish I had money so I could vote with my feet and move to Vermont, New Hampshire or Maine.

    1. avatar Dr. Kenneth Noisewater says:

      Don’t figure on NH holding out for long, with the pinko takeover that’s been infecting them thanks to Masshole migration. In 20 years or less, the state motto will change to “Live Free or Don’t.”

    2. avatar Joe says:

      +1 Mostly good news across the country. Scott Garrett, NRA A+ was reelected here in NJ, but “true to the blue”, “we” elected Booker for Senate, mostly because of a weak (but pro-gun) Repub. candidate with almost no support from the state party. Over 1 million registered Repub./ 2.5 million unaffiliated, and all we could scrape up was 700k votes. Another 240k votes would have beat Booker. I’m leaving as soon as I can too, but I’m going south, where the weather suits my clothes, and where taxes and gun laws suit my way of living.

    3. Leave the East Coast, come to middle America.

  6. avatar Dave357 says:

    Maryland turned on tax issues, it appears, Cuomo and Brown were never in doubt, and Hickenlooper and Malloy got a close shave that wasn’t really expected otherwise, especially for Hick. They did learn that Bloomberg will indeed put up money trying to save his minions, so the lesson is mixed. Oh, well.

    Federally, things went well. NC was unexpected, and Landreu will likely be creamed during the runoffs in LA. And the US Senate lost its rubber stamp for Federal judgeships, an important development. Not sure how the state-level races went where gun control was an issue in some form.

    The key is to figure out what to do about anti-gun initatives. Even in a pretty blue state like WA, even being outspent by 10 to 1, and even after a pretty bad school shooting, it only got 60 percent of the vote. So, UBC’s are clearly not a 90 percent issue, as they have been telling us. Still, it is a big change in the anti-gun tactics and the pro-gun tactics will need to change as well, the question is how.

    1. avatar Mike says:

      FYI…According to the NY Post, Brad Pitt gave $5000 to Landreu…remember that when he wants you to plunk down $10+pp to see “Fury”, when it comes out in a few months. I’m going to wait a few extra months until my library gets it on DVD, and watch it for free…None of my $ for Brad to pass along to Mary…or any other Libs.

  7. avatar Jolly Roger Out says:

    So, wait, I’m confused. How could the Democratic machine in Chicago fail to reelect Quinn, with all his visits from various Obamas, but Colorado and Connecticut couldn’t get rid of their idiots?

    1. avatar Curtis in IL says:

      It just shows that Quinn is so worthless that even a corrupt bureaucracy couldn’t save him. Even the liberals were fed up, and a number of pastors of black churches in Chicago publicly supported Rauner.

      Bruce Rauner was savvy enough to beat the Democrats at their own game. Volunteers knocking on doors, encouraging early voting, social media, etc.

    2. avatar Nagurski says:

      Bruce Rauner is also buddies with Rahm Emanuel. Everything about the guy screams RINO to me.

      1. avatar Jean says:

        This. Rauner basically won the election by outspending Quinn. Rauner never offered a plan of action on how to fix anything, but Quinn is so hated in Illinois there was no way he would be kept in office.

        1. avatar Avid Reader says:

          Quinn was a bit player in the machine but was never truly embraced by it. Rauner has to deal with Dem majorities, the machine, and the speaker of the house whose power is close to absolute. Even if he weren’t a RINO, he’d be basically powerless.

  8. avatar Curtis in IL says:

    If we put up a good fight, we can influence politicians’ decisions in the future, even if we come up short. The gun-grabbers realize that at the very least, their anti-2A votes made things worse for them (in most cases) and turned what would have been easy elections into nail-biters. Don’t think that won’t change their attitude toward anti-gun rights legislation in the years to come.

  9. avatar Juliesa says:

    I’m interested in hearing how many state houses flipped. Repubs were already ahead in governors and state houses, and we gained more last night.

    I understand the U.S. House now has the biggest majority since WW2, and the biggest GOP majority since the 20s or 30s.

    1. avatar SteveInCO says:

      In part, untrue.

      After 1974’s election the Democrats had a 292 seat majority.

      Though you may be right about this being the biggest R majority since the 1920s.

      1. avatar Juliesa says:

        Thanks for the correction.

        How are the CO state legislative races turning out?

        1. avatar SteveInCO says:

          Looks like we got the senate. So we can block new gun control crap now.

          The house would have been nice, but it ain’t happening. And frankly with Chickenhumper winning, the house is moot, since in order to repeal the crap they did pass last time, we need all three.

        2. avatar SteveInCO says:

          Update–both the CO House and Senate are uncertain due to tight races in areas ballots are being counted. However, few of them have to do with Boulder County so there is hope.

  10. avatar Coldhammer says:

    I’m starting to think that maybe we should make a deal at the Federal level for UBC’s, in trade for everything we want. They get their little ‘feel good’ story and we get state reciprocity, the repeal of any mag capacity limits and AWB’s in return. They don’t care about the details anyway. They can paint this as a win for them with UBC’s and maybe it will deflate this issue for the next few decades or so. Of course, I’m a little upset today in PA with losing the protector of our gun rights at the Governor level. If Wolfe turns PA into a friggin nanny state like NJ, he has no idea the voter backlash that will ensue. People didn’t vote for him because he’s anti-gun. And PA is not NJ or NY. Hopefully the state Senate and House can keep his Liberal panzy Anti-gun stuff in check. Guess we’ll see.

    1. avatar tdiinva says:

      If one or both houses of the legislature remains Republican/Second Amendment supporter hands no progress will be made but no damage will be done. Look what happened in Virginia. McAuliffe’s anti-gun agenda went no where and Republican control of the legislature has reduce McAuliffe to a figurehead.

      1. avatar Coldhammer says:

        Thanks. That’s a good reference to cite in this case and gives me some hope.

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Absolutely not. The only goal of UBC is a universal registration, to be used in a universal confiscation by SWAT teams countrywide. All the repealed AWBs or whatever in the world are not worth giving Washington a complete and computerized list of who owns what.

  11. avatar Tex300BLK says:

    Robert, dont cheapen what was overall an incredible night for freedom, and peoples rights as a whole. Yes we failed to bump Malloy and Hicky but we did do some cleaning in the house and senate on members from both of those states, and on a National level we sent a very strong message.

    Anyone want to film a Slide Fire (or full auto if you got it) 21 mag dump salute for all the Dems lining up in the unemployment line this morning?

    1. avatar SteveInCO says:

      I was only willing to give two 30 round mags for the actual death of Mikhail Kalashnikov, who may have been an unrepentant commie but at least gave us the AK. I’m not spending over ten times as much on the non-death of a bunch of completely useless individuals.

    2. avatar Coldhammer says:

      It sure wasn’t an incredible night for freedom for me in PA, Tex. We lost our pro-gun Governor and got a Liberal panzy in his place. We all saw it coming, but it still sucks ass. Only hope the state senate and house can keep his drooling hoplophobery in check long enough to vote his ass out.

    3. avatar RLC2 says:

      I agreed abiut not cheapening the win, by complainng about the losses. This could have been MUCH worse, and thecwins prove the tide is turning. So now is the time to get back to work, continue thevmomentum, and dont forget…thd Progressives wont go down withiut a nasty fight . It took them 40 years to slowly buildvThe Narrative, to become entrenched in academia, the media, the unions, including key parts of FedGov, the long obvious parts, HUD, Education, Interior, and State, but also a cancer in the IRS and now parts of the DOJ, and DHS.

      That will only change based on principle, and practicality of what works, and most of all, holding our Republican politicians to thd same, so the dont get corrupted by the power and money, in DC….they are only human, so we voters have to keep involved.

      If your State Party is old and tired, then get involved. If your state is screwed, like CA, then attack from a different angle, the law, like SAF in Peruta, in combo with effective grassrootsclike CalGuns. Thats what worked for national concealed carry.

      Never ever NOT support the NRA, first in money and second in your voice, as both worked, and they listened to flks like TTAG, when LaPierre put foot in mouth post Newtown. Just look at new role models, like Cheng, Noir, and all the outstanding Women of the Gun. Thousands of new women gun owners, a wave within the wave, is the result.

      And Never Forget The Power of the Innertubz, and how YOU spread the word. Read Army of Davids, by Glenn Reynolds. Read Rise of the AntiMedia, and watch as NYT slowly folds into Newsweek…
      CNN drops the news to become MSNBC…shhhh dont tell them …never stop the enemy while they are committing suicide….

    4. avatar Hannibal says:

      Oooh, a message.

      Great for those who don’t need more than a message,I guess, but the gun owners of NY, CT, CO, PA, WA, etc can hold that message in one hand and shit in another; guess which hand fills up first?

  12. avatar Coldhammer says:

    I’m thinking we should use our strength at the Fed level in Congress to pass a UBC bill and bury everything we want in there, such as the repeal of state AWB’s and Mag limits with Fed pre-emption(?). We have to save the States. The Anti’s can trumpet their win for UBC’s (because none of them really care about or know any of the details of anything anyway. They’re all fluff and propaganda anyway and will see this as a win regardless of what we get out of it — as long as they Brand it as “UBC’s”) and we in turn can protect ourselves at the State level, so a win win for all. I’ve never purchased a firearm without a BC anyway, so no difference to most of us I presume. NYC, MD, NJ, CO and others would get their freedoms back and it would end the war at the state level.

    1. avatar Dave357 says:

      Maybe, but it could also be than once UBC’s are handed to Bloomberg over on a platter, he will be free to push initiatives on other issues. Someone really smart needs to figure out the best strategy.

      1. avatar Coldhammer says:

        Agreed. That would be my concern as well.

    2. avatar Stinkeye says:

      Why should citizens of AZ or FL or TX give up some of their rights to partially restore the rights freely given up by the citizens of NJ, NY, or CA?

      Another problem with your strategy is that it seems to assume that pro-2A Republicans will retain control of Congress forever. What happens when Democrats inevitably regain control and decide to pass another Federal AWB (likely in the aftermath of a spree killing or terrorist attack)? We end up with more restrictions and UBCs.

      If history has shown anything, it’s that the rabidly anti-gun people will not stop, no matter what gains they make, so what’s the benefit of giving up rights to compromise with them? Do you think Bloomberg will decide to spend his money elsewhere if we give him UBCs?

      1. avatar Dave357 says:

        AZ is among the states that have an initiative process, so I-594 style UBC’s may come here anyway some day. But then, only about half the states allow such a process. There are many pros and cons to weigh in this game.

        1. avatar Stinkeye says:

          If the citizens of AZ (or any other state) wish to piss away their rights, that is their option. One of the great advantages of living in a multi-state republic is the freedom to vote with your feet. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that most of the states with overbearing governments, high taxes, more oppression, and less liberty are also the ones mired in debt and shrinking economies, as more and more productive citizens and businesses move to more hospitable states. I believe that that’s how the system is supposed to work.

          The biggest problem right now is that we allow outside parties to participate in the electoral process regardless of their location. Prohibiting out-of-state money from being spent on state and local elections would go a long way toward fixing the system.

      2. avatar Dan says:

        AZ has an initiative process. you can bet bloomy is going to use the same tactic as WA.

        either write your own UBC bill or get a draconian one rammed down your throat.

        your choice.

        1. avatar Dave357 says:

          Or defeat his initiative. AZ is not as red as people think, but it is not WA State either. I don’t consider myself smart or knowledgeable enough to know which approach is best. Hopefully, some smart people are thinking about it.

        2. avatar Stinkeye says:

          But why would it be better to have a federal UBC bill that drags the pro-gun, non-ballot-initiative states down with the others? Wouldn’t it be a better strategy to make the gun-grabbers fight for every inch of ground, forcing them to contest each state one at a time (and likely losing in places like AZ)?

          I think it’s better to have a few full-retard states and a few full-freedom (well, as close as is possible in statist America today) states for comparison. Then we can later show that WA’s bill did nothing to stop “gun crime” as compared to states without UBCs, which should make it easier to fight future expansion of the flawed concept.

    3. avatar LarryinTX says:

      We should be working to repeal all background check legislation, to prevent the registries they entail. Yes, I know those registries are illegal, just as you know they exist anyway and what are YOU gonna do about it, nanny-nanny-boo-boo!. BC are expensive beyond belief and accomplish nothing.

  13. avatar Mike says:

    Rauner is not a friend of POTG, but, he is at least not necessarily an enemy, Quinn absolutely was the enemy. Perhaps the gun voter turnout was enough to push the last bit to defeat Quinn, but, we would not have done it without his epic bumbling at every turn, the fact that the guy who really controls this state (Madigan) had zero respect for him as a member of the same party just shows how pathetic and impotent he really was. The fact that it was as close as it was really shows how messed up IL is, and how the corrupt public unions have so much power.

  14. avatar Zebulon Pike says:

    A Libertarian candidate stole enough votes (35,000+) from the R candidate to keep Hickenlooper in office here in Colorado. When will you L voters ever learn?

    1. avatar Dr. Kenneth Noisewater says:

      When you field a candidate worthy of L votes.

      No more RINOs, no more Statists, no more feminists. Rs need to field candidates that are unambiguously principled for liberty. Basically, Goldwater 2.0 please.

      Frankly, letting the Ds have their way is a fantastic object lesson on how awful their ideas are, and the Statist/Libertarian axis is starting to become obvious to more and more people. They’re learning just how irrelevant the Repub/Dem axis is when it comes to their lives, and when that axis sits squarely on the Statist end.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        I agree. I often vote Lib, and when I do it is because neither the R nor the D have earned my vote. In that case, I vote Lib even if the Lib hasn’t earned my vote, either. Basically, I am saying to the candidates that I VOTE, not just complain, but they did not show me anything to vote for. IOW, when are the damn CANDIDATES going to learn?

    2. avatar John M. says:

      If the past 40 years of Libertarian Party politics hasn’t convinced people that the LP isn’t effective at preserving or increasing our actual liberty, then what would?

      I know we have some LP voters on here. This is a serious question.

      1. avatar Dr. Kenneth Noisewater says:

        Most folks with 2 brain cells know that LP votes are protest votes against statists. Candidates like Reagan who, while having his failings, better exemplified a commitment to individual liberties, will get LP votes.

        Republicans need to figure out whether or not they want to pull libertarians and other ‘independent’ voters at the expense of their own Statist elements. If they did a better job of educating their own as to why they should support liberty in all cases for their own self-interest, they’d be able to pick better candidates and win more elections.

        Incidentally, why you should support liberty in all cases is because once you give government power to enforce your opinions, you’ve given them power. They will inevitably use that power against you in due time. Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.

        1. avatar Yellow Devil says:

          Mark Levin, the other night, said something along that lines, when a caller complained about Liberterians “stealing” votes. His response is that if the Republicans put up an actual pro-Liberty candidate that can effectively articulate his or her stance on the ballot, they wouldn’t have to worry about losing votes to any third party candidate.

        2. avatar RLC2 says:

          Thank you, good point. And even better, by Yellw, per Mark Levin. So, that is next step,cas Ralph points out. Find that candidate now, for the next primary. You dontvwait for someone else to do it, you get in thecgame in your own state. Find that person on a school board (thisvis how Mary Burke was platformed, ascpopulist post political hack at Commerce, andcto cover for her executive failure at Trek…)

          That person has to be presentable, and trainable. Principles matter, but if you cant smooth of the rough edges to appeal to a wider base, you become kryptonite…Akins, for example. Thats why Buck had to swap out for Gardner, to win in Senate for CO.

          You might be the smartest Libertarian geek in the room, and maybe even 100% right on the issues, buf if you are too Rain Man to play well with others, it doesnt matter. You’ll just be the butt of jokes, again. And lets face it, the Libertarians have been doing this long enough to figure this out, or should have…

        3. avatar John M. says:

          Do you have any evidence that the “message” sent by LP voters is heard by either party?

          If Ralph Nader’s voters in Florida had voted for Gore in 2000, we would have had a Gore administration. The Democrats understood this and haven’t been out-maneuvered on the Left since. I’ve yet to see anything like that on the Republican side. Nor have I seen an LP presidential candidate get half of the popular support that Nader did in 2000. (LP record: 1980’s Clark/Koch ticket at 1.06%, Nader: 2.74%)

      2. avatar Hannibal says:

        Strange, I see the opposite… we get Dems and Repubs in office but things have been going downhill regardless for decades anyway.

    3. avatar RLC2 says:

      Cut the infighting. The point is if yiu want to win sometimes you havre to hold your nose and support the RINO to avoid the Democrat, or you will suffer for years in the wilderness while the toralitarian Left rules AND consolidates power.H.Ross Perot is the best example. Look at the libertarian who saw the poing and conceded and endorsed the GOP candidate this time…

      CO Repubs are gojng to have to buckle down and figure this out, or they will look like CA. And by Repubs I mean grassroots, just like the plumber who got the recalls going, in spite of Bloomberg money then.

      You walk away in a huff and take your fooball with you, you are out of the game. Thatvis the traditional borderline OCD Libertarian jn a nutshell. All self aggrandizing talk, but no get r done in the real world of politics walk.

      1. avatar Stinkeye says:

        If the Republicans can always count on the Libertarians to hold their nose and vote R, then what’s their incentive to put up candidates that aren’t left-wing RINOs? The two major parties have been moving ever closer together on many issues over the past couple decades, and I think a few losses because of Libertarian “spoilers” is good for the Republicans, to keep them on their toes and remind them not to wander too far to the left.

        1. avatar Ralph says:

          If the Republicans can always count on the Libertarians to hold their nose and vote R, then what’s their incentive to put up candidates that aren’t left-wing RINOs?

          Primaries. That’s how David Brat ousted Eric Cantor in Virginia, and now Brat has been elected to Congress. That’s how libertarians can make sure that the GOP puts up candidates that aren’t left-wing RINOs.

        2. avatar RLC2 says:

          @Ralph. Exactly so, and YOUR Libertarian or Independent wont make it to primaries if he/she cant work with others. I dont like it, but look at the fiery TeaParty guy, radio host eith a history of rascist rants on air. He mobilized some, but in the end HAD to be sidelined from above to win that Senate seat, by keeping the stuffed owl Repub in place, to win the Senate. Why? Because if you want iur 2A rights, closely won on Heller, McDonald, Palmer and soon Peruta, you NEED to appoint the next SCOTUS. Period, end, full stop on 2A alone, the enabling right that protects the individual from State Tyrranny.

          This was a close thing…not because of any particular genious on part of GOP, bug because of gros incompetence and over reach of Dems, with the Empty Suit making ig obvious to all. It was nog abiut race, tho some will insist, as a diversion, it was simply about what works in the real world.

          Which is geg back to work, get started on what we agree on, respectfully disagree on what we dont, and keep shining thd light of Truth, enabled with Reason and a passion informed by a moral argument. (Shapiro, at Truth Revolt). And know giur enemy. See Horowitz at Frontline.Roger Simon at PJMedia. SultanKnish. Mark Steyn.

      2. avatar Dr. Kenneth Noisewater says:

        Why is it libertarians who have to buckle down all the goddamn time? Why the fuck can’t socons buckle down for a change? ISTR they did so for Reagan, and he turned out a whole lot better than any of the socon-friendly shitbag successors of his…

        1. avatar RLC2 says:

          Everone buckles down. Its a team sport. You move the ball together.

          Stand on the field blaming others while swearing like a spolied brat means you dont even get invited to training camp.

      3. avatar LarryinTX says:

        I am equally frightened of the possibility of the totalitarian right gaining power. As the Doc says, neither party supports freedom as a general necessity. They will seldom get my vote until they do. For example, the catchy “pro-life” translates to “anti-choice”, since everyone is pro life, and everybody is anti-abortion, the question is FREEDOM, that question is not your business unless you are pregnant. Which was precisely what SCOTUS said in deciding Roe v Wade. You can believe whatever, but you cannot pass laws opposing freedom, or I will not only vote but contribute against you.

        1. avatar John M. says:

          Have you ever watched a video of an abortion? Just asking.

        2. avatar Hannibal says:

          John M I have not but have also not watched a video of a scat party… doesn’t mean I think there should be laws against it.

        3. avatar John M. says:

          Go ahead. Do it for science. It’s just a health care procedure, right? Like a tonsillectomy or something? Why not?

  15. avatar RandallOfLegend says:

    NY has 19.7 Million residents, only 8 Million reside in NY and the surrounding area. Only 3.5 million people voted for governor.Astorino won nearly every upstate county, but not enough votes, so he lost 53% to 39%.

    FUAC

    Source:
    http://nyenr.elections.state.ny.us/

    1. avatar Dr. Kenneth Noisewater says:

      Upstate NY will never secede, there’s really no hope. Upstate NYers need to pack up their jitneys and move to SD/WY/TX.

      1. avatar ropingdown says:

        Non-NYC MSA voters just need to…vote. Every time. All of them.

    2. avatar Dave357 says:

      If you include the surrounding counties, NYC area is more than 8 million. And upstate, it’s not all rural either, with the cities of Albany, Buffalo, and Rochester.

      1. avatar Hannibal says:

        True but missing what I think is the point. This was the first election cycle after Governor Cuomo and the state assembly (including some republicans) passed the ridiculous “Safe Act” (there should be a law against bills named things like that). That law strove to make NY the most unfriendly state for gun owners in the nation by not only banning “assault weapons” but by first trying to ban possession of magazines over 7 rounds and then eventually by trying to force owners to download their 10rd mags to 7. That latter provision has mostly been tossed by the courts for being retarded (maybe not the word they used) but it speaks to what has been happening in NY.

        And after all that, despite the fact that it is the norm to own a gun in anywhere but NYC, Cuomo still glides to victory. The fudds rule NY.

        1. avatar Dave357 says:

          That was my point too. NYC and surrounding areas, with the help from some of the bigger upstate cities, dominate in numbers, so Cuomo couldn’t have lost on the gun issue alone no matter what. Some states are too far gone for a punishing statewide vote.

    3. avatar Sean says:

      There are 62 Counties in New York State, Cuomo won 15 of them. 15. -5 of the Counties are NYC, several others encompass the other cities in NY State, and the rest still have me scratching my head. Astorino won in the remaining 47 Counties, some by significant margins. On average, if less than 9000 additional people in each of those 47 Counties voted for Astorino then Cuomo would be gone in a few months.

  16. avatar former water walker says:

    I’m good with Rauner in Illinois. I was more po’d with the income tax and extreme anti business crap than guns. I just expect any Illinois governor to suck-the last Republican just got out of prison.

    1. avatar Tex300BLK says:

      Spot on, if he does a good job leading Illinois then people will be happy, and then clowns like Rahm and others begin to stick out like a sore thumb, and one by one they will fall. If Gov Elect Rauner does a good job it opens the door for more people like him locally and nationally, its a move in the right direction. That goes for any state where people may be less than thrilled with their results. As long as they took a step in the right direction, the rest of the change will follow. Give it time, and by God, never stop fighting.

  17. avatar nonames says:

    Brown is actually going into his FOURTH term. This after almost running Oakland into the ground prior to his current term….

    1. avatar RLC2 says:

      I think sometimes an organization, a business, a family can be so toxic, or befudled by addiction, that you realize an intervention wont work. Like an individual addict, alcoholic, gambler…you are desperate to save them, butbafter years of trying, you realize you have to stand aside watch until they hit bottom, and hope its not a fatal one, that they will learn from…this can take a long time, and doesnt always work. Thats the status of the GOP in CA, while the druggies party on in Sacramento, and run the old family Mercedes into the guardrails repeatedly.

      Thus the continuing outfow of healthy family members, to healthy states run by healthy adults.
      I’d like to believe Jerry Brown gets it, bug he is stuck withba lot of Hollyweirdos and La Raszists, in LA and the Crazy Old Aunts, and simply amoral google geeks in the bay area, who feed him enough votes and money, so he can hold the family together.

      I am not sure how adding hundreds of thiusands of new dependents and refugees and criminals from the worst of the corrupted totalitarian states immediately to our south is going to help, but I suspect that was his bargain with the devil, for one more round. Unlike Reagans amnesty, there is no farm work to be had, since tge enviro nitwirs have starved entire communites, and singl handedly turned the agriculural vegetable baskeg of the nation, into a dustbowl, for itty bitty minnows,

      Or crushed the 70% of new business, that is small business, with more regulations, and tge highest corporate and individual taxes in the nation….but, hey rich people need maids and gardeners, for cheap, I guess, and the google geeks are glad to get programmers at half the going homegrown rate.

      Thats my charitable view.
      My cynical, math side says. Remember Detroit.

  18. avatar Another Robert says:

    Is Colorado official, governor-wise? I haven’t seen it mentioned in any of the national round-ups I’ve read this morning.

    1. avatar Tex300BLK says:

      Shannon Watts is proclaiming it all over her Twitter, but I thought someone had to get 50% or else it goes to a run-off. You can assume the majority of the L votes would go to R if that’s the case, or at least one can hope. You can expect Bloomberg to pull out all of the stops if it does though.

      1. avatar Another Robert says:

        Well, you have to take everything Shannon says with a grain of salt. I expect it varies by state whether an actual majority is required or a plurality will suffice. Hopefully, even if he wins Hick will decide he doesn’t want to touch anything to do with gun control with a 10-foot pole anyway. Can’t imagine how Colo could turn out Udall but fail to unseat Hick, but stranger things have happened.

      2. avatar SteveInCO says:

        Colorado has no runoff provision.

        1. avatar Another Robert says:

          Kind of what I thought–I expect most states do not. Thanks for the confirmation. Just looked again, saw Hick was claiming victory but Beauprez had not conceded, in fact cancelled a concession speech. I’ll go out on a limb and say if it’s that close, the odds are that Hick was the beneficiary of same-day registration, mail ballots indiscriminately all over the state hanky-panky. Not that it matters, the results will stand.

      3. avatar Zebulon Pike says:

        Yes, thank you, Colorado Libertarian voters, for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. You have been a big help to Hick, Watts, and Bloomberg. Your stubborn idealism has failed you yet again. You think you are teaching RINOs a lesson or something. In reality, it is you who have failed to learn. And now we all burn for it.

        1. avatar SteveInCO says:

          You’re making the utterly fallacious assumption that if there were no Libertarian candidate, all the L votes would have gone R.

          Untrue; I was once heavily involved in the LIbertarian Party and know (and knew) many Ls who would NEVER vote for an R because abortion and the religious right are their biggest single issue. Or perhaps their biggest issue is opposition to the war on drugs. From their standpoint, the Rs suck worse than the Ds, in spite of the gun issue, and in spite of the difference in outlook on government being an engine of redistribution.

          There are also a fair number of younger “libertarians” who think socialism is OK as long as the government lets them do their own thing after they pay the taxes. That’s a load of crap and the older libertarians who actually understand what the word means probably tear their hair out, but unless something has changed since I left the party values numbers over actually knowing what the word “libertarian” means.

          TLDR: Although I suspect MOST (which is to say “some number over 50 percent”) Ls would pull the lever for R if someone stuck a gun in their ear and said “Pick R or D or I will shoot you,” it’s by no means all–or even a strong majority. So don’t assume that the race would have ended any differently if there were no L on the ticket.

          Furthermore, the Green party undeniably DID help Beauprez more than they hurt him; I notice you aren’t condemning them, or bothering to thank them.

  19. avatar Ralph says:

    Can’t win ’em all, but the GOP came pretty damn close. Even in true-blue MA, where the hag was defeated in her run for governor, and in Maryland too. Freakin’ Maryland!

    I’d say that Republicans had a great day.

  20. avatar ropingdown says:

    Washington voters’ approval of 594 isn’t the story. Brown re-elected in CA isn’t the story. A Republican majority in the U.S. Senate is the story, for they are the gateway to moderation in, and protection of rights by, SCOTUS… without which 2nd amendment rights would still, today, be buried in the swamp in which they lay until Heller.

    We have breathing room, an interval in which to refocus and expand our education efforts and legislative goals.

  21. avatar RLC2 says:

    Here is that AWR Hawkins conversation I heard on Breitbart Live last nite:

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/11/04/Second-Amendment-Crushes-Gun-Control-Candidates-In-Midterm-Elections

    One suggestion: we gun wners will do a lot better in next few months riding this early rise of the wave, together, agreeing on what WE can agree on, rather than falljng into the all_too-typical circular firing squad, that is also easily started by trolls from the left, at leading sites, amongsg naive and new innertubz users.

    Lets NOT do that, is my suggestion. Be respectful of one another as a person, even if we disagree on an idea, debate on the facts, and tge reason and logic of the argument, while respecting the pasiin, even if wrong of our counterpart. It takes longer, bug it works, and because people will come back, if you listen, and dont punch them in the face, personly, you create value for the site, by the tenor and deep info of the commenters who do visit. There are few places on line were this works, but you can see the value, and it cant happen with a heavy hand from above. It must also come by example, from peers. And those who wont or cant play as adults out themselves as trolls much more quickly, as a result, and are ignored faster, and thus havd to go elsewhere fof attention, if its a personal problem, or fir Paid For By OFA money to create Nudge Team memes, will be ouf of luck, anx havd to seek work elsewhere…(WAPO comments forums come to mind as an example).

    Sorry for run on, so
    TL:DR, great job RF and Staff, and to all of us readers…remember ” a clean, well lit room” ~ Hemingway.

  22. avatar JSF01 says:

    I hate to say this but for the long run this is a very bad sign for us gun owners. Between Colorado and the Washington ballot passing, we can expect an increase in attacks on the 2A, and most likely more defeats. Because of the Washington ballet passing you can be sure that the anti’s will be trying a similar tactic in every state they can, in which case then we not only have to contend with not only being greatly out spent by the anti’s, but also the uniformed voters who don’t realize that there are background checks already, and the implications of such a law.

    Not beating Colorado’s Governor is especially bad. Colorado is considered a “purple” state, so it should have been a relatively easy win for gun owners if we were any where close to as powerful as democrats or even ours selves think we are. By not defeating the governor there in a purple state we now look pretty week and that gun issues are not as big of a deal and gun owners are not much of a threat to them. The lost in Colorado will be a message to the anti’s that you can attack the 2A with out fear of voter backlash, and they will.

    This is actually a realization of one of my biggest fears, that the power of us gun owners is far smaller then most politicians believe. That the believe that we were all powerful was simply because the democrats wanted an easy scapegoat after the 1994 defeats instead of admitting that voters were unhappy with them for a host of reasons. It was only the illusion that us gun owners were that powerful that gave us the power to make politicians fear us. In reality though if they had actually challenged us we would have lost years ago. At least it bought us some breathing room while the illusion lasted, but I suspect our most difficult fights lay ahead of us.

    1. avatar RLC2 says:

      I disagree, but defer to CO residents in the know. 2A rights are important to most of us here, but you have realize they arent to a lot in the middle, or have as much power in reverse ti the anti’s.

      The CAN energize citizens who are fed up with the culture change in general, when triggered by egregious abuses by foolish progtards. And so, because of the passion of a plumber, and other gun owners, in a short time, you had a recall. But that is not enough, when there are many more issues on the table, with middle of the road voters, especially where there is big money against.

      So, lesson learned?

      1. Get big money. That would be NRA and state groups, as a start. So go give if you havent wlready, and dont forget to say thank you.

      And later on, dont whine if you dont get all you want right away as everyone has their hand out. You want power? Go find someone with money the GOP doesnt already know, and bring it with you, with your gun wants.

      2. Start educating now, what you want different from GOP, whether you call youself Libertarian, Independent, TeaParty or Rastas of Boulder For Freedom of Self Defense. Whatever works, but sitting in a bar b1tching or scrbbling in anon forums doesnt…

      They are alwaysvlooking for new blood, and you will be surprised how much you learn and can do, if you are willinv to work at both.

      soapbox, OFF

      1. avatar SteveInCO says:

        I think here in CO the focus wasn’t on guns all that much, unless of course you were POTG and spent time talking with other POTGers. Most of the griping at our governor had to do with other issues.

        Nonetheless, this is the most stinging reprimand we could have handed the guy without actually giving him a pink slip. I don’t know his personality well enough to know whether he will become defiant or actually think and learn. Chances are good by the time the close races are decided the Dems will lose the State Senate and we will be able to block any further gun control, absent a fit of hysteria that makes a RINO flip their vote AND makes the leadership bring a bad bill to a vote.

    2. avatar Kyle says:

      The GOP made a point in Colorado as Hickenlooper squeaked out a victory. It wasn’t any solid victory. He barely made it. Also, the GOP won a Senate seat in Colorado and multiple seats in the state legislature. The Democrats had turned Colorado from red to blue with what has since become known as the “Colorado Model.” It turns out that Colorado wasn’t as blue it seems as they thought though. Also the recalls that were done successfully, including the third one that didn’t have to go through because the Democrat resigned to prevent the GOP from winning control.

      So hopefully the message has been sent to the Democrats in other states. I think if the recalls had failed, that would have been really bad.

  23. avatar BHirsh says:

    Dog half a loaf is better than none, yo.

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