North Dakota Democrats Try to Suppress Pro-Gun Vote With Hunting License Warnings

North Dakota Democrats Try to Suppress Pro-Gun Vote With Hunting License Warnings

courtesy facebook.com

Someone in North Dakota seems to want to keep pro-gun and pro-hunting voters away from the polls this week. As Fox News is reporting, the laughably-named North Dakota Democratic-Nonpartisan League is claiming that North Dakotans could lose their hunting licenses if they cast a ballot.

The North Dakota Democratic Party is discouraging hunters from voting in the upcoming election, claiming they could lose their out-of-state hunting licenses if they do so.

“Attention hunters: If you vote in North Dakota, you may forfeit hunting licenses you have in other states. If you want to keep your out-of-state hunting licenses, you may not want to vote in North Dakota,” the ad says, linking to a similar warning on the North Dakota Democratic-NPL website.

“By voting in North Dakota, you could forfeit your hunting licenses. You MUST be a resident of North Dakota to vote here. And if you are a resident of North Dakota, you may lose hunting licenses you have in other states,” the website said.

North Dakota Democrats Try to Suppress Pro-Gun Vote With Hunting License Warnings

courtesy facebook.com

The NPL created a Facebook page to help spread the misinformation. And the message is right there on the state Democratic-NPL Party’s web site:

You’ll be shocked to know that really isn’t true. Even the so-called fact-checker sites are calling BS on the claim. Here’s what PolitiFact wrote:

We ran the ad by Cameron Wimpy, research director at MIT Election Data and Science Lab.

“I do absolutely think it is voter suppression to try and trick folks this way,” Wimpy said.

Most North Dakota hunters can breathe easy.

If you have an out-of-state hunting license anywhere outside of North Dakota — and it’s an out-of-state license, rather than a residential one for residents of that state — you’re safe.

If you have a North Dakota residential hunting license, you’re also safe, because in applying for that license you already gave up any other residential licenses. North Dakota’s Game and Fish department doesn’t allow a person to hold two residential licenses. (Those tend to expire within a season or year anyway.)

And from Snopes:

An additionally misleading aspect of the ad is the suggestion that the act of voting could pose a threat to out-of-state hunting licenses. “If you want to keep your out-of-state hunting licenses,” the Democratic-NPL states, you may not want to vote in North Dakota’s 2018 election” (our emphasis added). The only population of people this ad could possibly be relevant to are people who live in North Dakota, have a resident hunting license in another state, and also do not have an up-to-date North Dakota ID or driver’s license.

By not providing those supporting details, the ad does nothing to correct the false notion an already legal North Dakota voter (i.e., one already in possession of a state-issued ID) could put the legality of their theoretical out-of-state hunting licenses in jeopardy by going to the polls. The fact that this ad was released less than a week before the election also speaks poorly of its legitimacy.

The argument presented by the Democratic-NPL is based on a highly implausible scenario that has state hunting licensure boards actively and continually communicating with other state’s DOT or DMV offices and would relate only (if at all) to a population of people who have claimed to be residents in other states for the purpose of obtaining discounted resident hunting licenses. Even then, it would not be the act of voting that theoretically put out-of-state licenses at risk, but the act of obtaining the state-issued ID required for voting.

Gee, why would North Dakota Dems be so desperate to keep pro-gun voters away from the polls? Maybe it has something to do with this:

Real Clear Politics Heitkamp Cramer North Dakota Democrats Try to Suppress Pro-Gun Vote With Hunting License Warnings

courtesy Real Clear Politics

So make sure you get out and vote, North Dakotans, and piss off an anti-gunner this week, okay?

comments

  1. avatar Jeff says:

    More filthy brown shirts/commies tactics. In FL the “everytown for gun safety” has doubled up on the ads/propaganda. Sadly, I believe Gillum has a chance to be our next Governor and that would be an absolute nightmare.

    1. avatar waynefromfl says:

      I can see it now. Being raced to oblivion, Out of control violent crime, corruption at every level, pollution in cities and.towns especially with drug needles that pose a threat to the health and safety to the community, strict “common sense” gun laws which they refuse to enforce against the criminal element all the while blaming other states for the crime rate and try to speak out against any of it will get every ist and ism thrown at you then getting physically assaulted and your life ruined by the “party of peace and tolerance”.

      This what a liberal “utopia” looks like.

      1. avatar possum says:

        That almost sounds like lyrics for a Bionic Jive or Rage Against the Machine song.

  2. avatar ORCON says:

    Honestly, you’d have be pretty ignorant to fall for something like this. I could see this working on dems by telling them that voting will cause them to lose welfare checks.

    1. avatar RGP says:

      That’s an idea for an ad campaign, but make it more than just welfare checks, tell them they’ll also lose their right to do drugs etc.

    2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      Warning; if you’re collecting welfare checks from 2 different states, voting could cause you to lose your welfare in the state you don’t live in.

      Oh who are we kidding? They’ll just vote in both states – they’re Demoncrats.

      1. avatar Chadwick says:

        And make sure they cast a few for their dead relatives while they are there.

    3. avatar Cooter E Lee says:

      Troll ad campaign:

      WARNING: voting in your state’s election may cause you to be arrested immediately for outstanding warrants and overdue child support payments.

      I’m a radical nut job, I would support bringing back a “polling tax.” If you don’t pay state and federal income tax, you don’t get to vote in state and federal elections. You don’t pay city or property tax or prove you rent non-section 8 in your district, you are ineligible to vote in local elections. #common sense voting

      1. avatar neiowa says:

        But but but da b racccist. Would keep illegals from voting demtard.

      2. avatar Jon in CO says:

        I’m ok with the paying state and federal taxes part. As a renter though, having to pay for property tax would be an issue. Not sure how I’d provide evidence that I pay rent, I guess just a receipt from my property management company.

        My idea for Obamacare was something like this. Make it a check box on a W-2. Want the healthcare, you get taxed more. Don’t want it, you don’t have to pay for it, and you’re not forced. Keeps people who aren’t contributing out of the healthcare pool, provides money for those in the pool, and doesn’t charge those wishing not to be charged. Also helps small businesses provide healthcare for those employees who want it, and doesn’t cost the business owners their entire business to do so. Simple checking for who’s eligible, provide SSN, is paying for it or not.

        1. avatar Geoff "Mess with the bull, get the horns" PR says:

          “As a renter though, having to pay for property tax would be an issue.”

          I hate to break it to you, but part of the rent you pay to the landlord the landlord uses to pay *his* (or hers) property taxes…

        2. avatar Cooter E Lee says:

          I guess I didn’t make it clear enough. As a renter, the landlord is paying your property tax so you are ok in my book. I was only seeking to take the vote away from section 8 subsidized housing. Basically I would keep millennials and Zs living in parents basement from voting socialist as homeless or section 8 are unlikely to vote as previously noted.

          POTG don’t seem to find my “polling tax” too objectionable. Can I go a bridge further and add ending birthright citizenship for everyone?

          If you can’t take a citizenship test and pass, I really don’t feel you are informed and educated enough to qualify to vote.

      3. avatar Varmint says:

        I’d damn sure vote for that .

    4. avatar rt66paul says:

      Dems are not all on welfare – if you really want to know – getting welfare mothers out to vote would be like herding cats. Many have never voted, many can’t really comprehend what they read(at least the ones that can be coerced into voting the way someone tells them).

      People like that will almost always take the easiest path, the one where they do not have to worry about today and the next day because someone is taking care of it for them, kind of like being pets. The Dems that do vote are the true believers – those that were taught that way and believe that politicians actually care about them and society.

      These people believe that their leaders are good, like the pastor at church. They take them at face value, but as many of you know, there are many that use goodliness and religion for nefarious reasons

      1. avatar GluteusMaximus says:

        You are correct. The permanent underclass will always take the easiest route

  3. avatar BLAMMO says:

    Non-partisan, huh? The name of the organization contains a lie, so why wouldn’t they be in the business of spreading outright lies?

    That’s even worse that the “Working Families Party”, which is really just a non-threatening euphemism for the Communist Party. I mean, who can’t love working families? They’re like cute little puppies.

  4. avatar Rocketman says:

    It says a lot that the Dems think that the only way that they can win is by cheating. Democrats, if you can’t win any other way then maybe you should just quit period.

    1. avatar frank speak says:

      right now the democrats are a desperate bunch….

  5. avatar tdiinva says:

    Another example of Democrats falling for their own propaganda. States love non residents coming to hunt. The non resident fees are 3-5 times higher than for residents. They would have to be stupid to pass that up.

  6. avatar RA-15 says:

    North Dakota gun grabbing society for the right to end our rights !! Much more appropriate name IMO 🙂

  7. avatar kenneth says:

    Looks like the Loony Left has bought into the widely spread idea that North Dakodians are just about the stupidest people imaginable. Truth be told, we in Montana have done more than our share to promote that.
    We long ago turned Polack jokes into North Dakota jokes.
    My favorite:
    Q: Why is it so windy in Montana?
    A: Because Idaho blows and North Dakota sucks.
    If anyone doesn’t “get it”, it will make sense if they look at a map of the US.

    1. avatar RMS1911 says:

      Maybe it’s because of Heidi heitkamp.

  8. avatar Ralph says:

    So the NDak dems are trying to scare the Fudds? News flash — they’re Fudds. They were born scared.

  9. avatar Logan says:

    The ND Democratic-NPL is a far left group that the actual ND Democratic Party refuses to have anything to do with. Actual NoDak dems know that including those socialists will torpedo any chance in this state.

  10. avatar former water walker says:

    THIS would work in ILLinois. Unbelievable all the BS TV ads…oh well.

    1. avatar tdiinva says:

      So what you are telling us is that Illinois voters are dumb as rocks. If you still live there you probably are.

  11. avatar Pat H says:

    I hate it when people try to suppress the vote. Don’t you?

  12. avatar Mister Furious says:

    3 more days and we’re sending Heitkamp to the unemployment line. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

  13. avatar possum says:

    I as a possum champion the idea. Now if we can just revoke the licenses of motorist. This senseless killing must stop. …. hmmmmm what’s this!!!!,? A dead roadkill armadildo!!!!. Thank-you God of Hi Speed Traffic

  14. avatar Bierce Ambrose says:

    I thought voter suppression was a bad thing?

  15. avatar A Deplorable says:

    This is so impossibly stupid. In North Dakota your identity as a Voter is known. Your identity as an owner of Hunting Licenses for ND and other States (?) is known. The State is going to run the recorded fact you went to a Polling Place, or submitted a Mail-in Ballot, against the record of Hunting Licenses in ND and other States and revoke Hunting Licenses where a match is found not only in ND but other States, as well.

    So, ND has sovereignty in multiple other States? In ND it is legal to penalize Voters for Voting? In ND Federal Election Regulations do not apply? In ND the State will not act to prohibit a Democrat run PAC from running patently false and illegal Advertisement or PSA? In ND Voters actually believe, or find Plausible, such a message?…and I thought Voters in Commiefornia were a bunch of brainless idiots…

  16. avatar MJ-NC says:

    They need to be investigated and charged for Voter Suppression. Personally, I would want the DNC also charged as a “parent entity” for which NDDP is a branch.

    Maybe we need to start demanding by peaceful and legal means severe criminal and civil repercussions for the Democrats who do this kind of shit. Same for Republicans if empirically true.

    1. avatar Jim Bullock says:

      ^This^

  17. avatar Isaac says:

    As a resident all I can say is *FACEPALM*

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