candidates on the issues. You rank

B

baker437

New member
A good review of where the top tier candidates stand on the most popular issues. http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/254/story/202392.html

"GUN CONTROL:

DEMOCRATS:

-Clinton: Voted for ban on assault-type weapons and to require background checks at gun shows. Favored leaving gun-makers and dealers open to civil suits. Also, in 2000 supported proposals for a federal requirement for state-issued photo gun licenses, as well as a national registry for handgun sales.

-Edwards: Voted as North Carolina senator for ban on assault-type weapons and to require background checks at gun shows.

-Obama: Voted to leave gun-makers and dealers open to suit. Also, as Illinois state lawmaker, supported ban on all forms of semiautomatic weapons and tighter state restrictions generally on firearms.

-Richardson: Signed into law a bill allowing residents to carry concealed handguns.

---

REPUBLICANS:

-Giuliani: Now says states should decide appropriate gun controls. As New York mayor and Senate prospect in 2000, favored variety of federal controls, including ban on assault-style weapons and waiting period for purchases. Also favored a federal mandate to register handgun owners and require handgun buyers to "demonstrate good moral character and a reason to have the gun."

-Huckabee: Supports state laws allowing people to carry concealed weapons and a national "right to carry" law that would require states to recognize concealed weapons permits issued by other states.

-McCain: Voted against ban on assault-type weapons, but in favor of requiring background checks at gun shows. Voted to shield gun-makers and dealers from civil suits.

-Romney: As governor, supported state's strict gun-control laws and signed into law one of the nation's toughest laws against assault-type weapons. Also supported regulatory changes favored by gun owners and sellers, including setting up appeals process for people denied gun licenses. Previously supported federal ban on assault-type weapons and federal waiting period for purchases.

-Thompson: Hostile to many gun control proposals, including mandatory background checks at gun shows. Supported campaign finance changes that gun groups and other activists saw as an infringement of their speech rights."

Seems like Clinton, Edwards and Obama are very similar on nearly all issues. I wonder if this is why this race is tightening up so much. Richardson is only one that seems remotely ok i.e. “socialist light”.

I know everyone is scared of Clinton but I think I might dare to say Obama is even worst for us or at least he admits to it i.e. ban all semiautomatic guns. ( I am glad I like revolvers so much.)

Republican pool is only slightly better on gun control and moderately better on all issues.
Giuliani & Romney have poor recorded but claim to have seen the light on gun control and many other issues I value, but I have trouble trusting anyone that has change that much.

I am being to wish we had more than a 2 viable parties and yes I am start to get involved in the smaller parties.

Here my top 5 candidates when I consider all the issues listed here:
1) Thompson
2) McCain
3) Romney
4) Huckabee (note close to being 3rd)
5) Richardson

What are your top 5 most viable candidates mention in this article
 
Romney: As governor, supported state's strict gun-control laws and signed into law one of the nation's toughest laws against assault-type weapons. Also supported regulatory changes favored by gun owners and sellers, including setting up appeals process for people denied gun licenses. Previously supported federal ban on assault-type weapons and federal waiting period for purchases.
Click to expand...

This is factually incorrect. We already had a state AWB since 1994. All he did was sign into law a rewrite of the original 1994 law. Which actually was a benfit to gun owners since it cleared up the language in the poorly written 1994 law. Romney actually was the only governor in recent history not to sign any further gun restrictions into law. A openly pro-gun canidiate can not get elected as Governor in this state. It is a sin to be pro-gun politican in Mass. I don't believe he is at all pro-gun, and will support any gun law to make him more popular with the majority of voters.
 
the candidate that is most definitely pro-firearm, least tax inclined, and more for the US instead of other countries (includes borrowing $$ and "dictating") gets my vote in the end.
 
Clinton: Voted for ban on assault-type weapons and to require background checks at gun shows.
Click to expand...

That's funny, because background checks are already the law EVERYWHERE a sale is made by a Dealer, gun show or not, and has been for some time.

1) Thompson
2) McCain
3) Romney
4) Huckabee (note close to being 3rd)
5) Richardson
Click to expand...

I would submit that your list is extremely out of whack with the candidates' actual records and views on gun rights.

The #1 gun right supporter, bar none, and this doesn't even begin to approach debate, is Dr. Ron Paul. McCain sucks. Romney is a standard yankee wolf-in-sheep's clothing.... let's try this one on for size:

1. Ron Paul
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2. Fred Thompson
3. Duncan Hunter
4. Mike Huckabee
5. Tom Tancredo
6. Bill Richardson
7. Mitt Romney
8. John McCain
9. John Edwards
10. Various assorted 2nd tier Democrats, including Chris Dodd
11. [3-way tie]: Hillary Clinton, Barrack Obama, Rudy Guliani
 
1) Thompson Violated his oath by turning confidential material over to the Nixon administration. Big K street lobbyist. Middle class boy that tried to look country by renting a pickup to drive during his senate campaign. If you don't vote for him the little baby Hollywood Jesus cries.

2) McCain Has embraced the man that made the US a nation that practices torture. But not before Bush called him a traitor, his wife a crack whore and his adopted daughter a darky love child. Irony ain't dead it's just resting. If you don't vote for him the little baby Ho Chi Minh wins.

3) Romney has lied consistently since he entered the campaign. There is no postition that he's taken that he hasn't denied taking. If you don't vote for him the little angel Moroni cries.

4) Huckabee Has released one serial rapist and tried to do the same with other "Christianized" felons. Wears his religiosity on his sleeve. If you don't vote for him the little baby JEZuZ cries.

5) Richardson ably led the Energy Dept. and has been a popular Western Gov. Lost his chance at a VP slot because of the imaginary Wen Ho Lee scandal. Come on your not going to vote for him cause he's a Democrat no matter who cries.
 
...

I agree Ron Paul is best on gun rights and I agree with him in many other areas. The idea I had for this thread was to go on the candidates in the article mention that are at least at this point the ones that have the highest probability of win the primary.

I agree this crop of candidates is pretty crappy, and would love to see a 3rd or 4th party become a real power in this country. It appears it will be another year of chosen between the lesser of 2 evils i.e. who I think will do the least amount of irreversible damage in the unlikely hope that next election a real leader will show up.

As far as Richardson goes honestly it depends on who he was running against for president if was Giuliani I would likely vote for Richardson.

Also I would love for all the religious stuff to disappear from both sides. I don’t think it is right that Romney gets asked stupid questions about it and the fact that Huckabee talks about it so much is a little much for me. In general does anyone else think Huckabee some times sounds a little to much like our current president when he ran the first time with all the faith stuff and compassionate conservative ideas (i.e. liberal spending).

Lastly while gun right are one of the must important issue if not the top of the list it is still part of a list for me and gets weighed in at the appropriate amount relative to other issues.
 
In general does anyone else think Huckabee some times sounds a little to much like our current president when he ran the first time with all the faith stuff and compassionate conservative ideas (i.e. liberal spending).
Click to expand...


+1 and I would be forced into voting against him just like I voted against Bush in 2000 and 2004. I would really like our political figures to quit pandering.
 
Lots of the candidates have very little experience in gov't, they may do OK once they're in (like Teddy Roosevelt), but how can you know?

I think Bill Richardson has the most relevant experience, and has proven that he is competent.

This may surprise some people, but most democrats believe in capitalism and freedom, especially if they don't live in NY or LA.
 
FirstFreedom

That's funny, because background checks are already the law EVERYWHERE a sale is made by a Dealer, gun show or not, and has been for some time.
Click to expand...

I believe he is making reference to efforts which would require a background check for any handgun sale, either dealer or private party.
 
#1 Ron Paul: He's 100% pro gun and I know he'd like to get rid of a lot of the current gun regulations.

#2 Fred Thompson: Pretty good record but not perfect.

#3 Duncan Hunter

#4 Mike huckabee: He's got a good record but I've got a feeling he'd be a softy about mental health restrictions (he'd be ok with em).
 
This may surprise some people, but most democrats believe in capitalism and freedom, especially if they don't live in NY or LA.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you are talking about Democratic voters or Democratic candidates.

I have watched every debate televised so far, and I have seen absolutely zero evidence to support this statement, at least from the candidates' perspective. Every single Democratic debate becomes a gift-fest. Each proposes to solve the country's problems through this government-subsidized program or that. Each tries to outdo the next with promises of money thrown at every problem. (In all fairness, some Republicans aren't much better).

As long as the Parties finds bribery of the public to be the path of least resistance, and as long as the voters choose government handouts over self-reliance, it's not going to change...until the system collapses under the weight of it's accrued obligations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top