Wildalaska
Moderator
Guess ya didnt read sanity's post, above
WildandpaulsaclownAlaska TM
WildandpaulsaclownAlaska TM
Do you know anyone who supports Giuliani?
- Thread starter cabin pressure
- Start date
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
Many gun rights folks are more interested in the righteous defeat and complaining about it, then taking a smaller pragmatic step.
It's an interesting authoritarian personality characterisitc that has been noticed before.
In Oregon, the first Shall Issue permit law was passed as a pragmatic pro and anti compromise. Quite clever. Of course, some folks will argue as the GOA did in TX, that there shouldn't be shall issue permits as the 2nd is absolute. Thus, they fought shall issue bills.
It's an interesting authoritarian personality characterisitc that has been noticed before.
In Oregon, the first Shall Issue permit law was passed as a pragmatic pro and anti compromise. Quite clever. Of course, some folks will argue as the GOA did in TX, that there shouldn't be shall issue permits as the 2nd is absolute. Thus, they fought shall issue bills.
Hillbama would like to thank you for not voting, encourage you to stay home, and to get ready for some new "sensible" gun control -- er, I mean, "sensible gun safety" legislation, likely consisting of a new assault weapons ban that is even more restrictive than the prior version. Hillbama's core supporters (MoveOn, DemoUnderground, etc.) won't be upset about the new legislation; to the contrary, they will be delighted, and they will then "move on" to encourage Hillbama to sign legislation that is even more severe than the assault weapons ban. After all, hunters don't need semi-automatic guns to hunt, right.....?
But at least you stuck to your guns (ha!
) and didn't vote for anyone because Paul was not the nominee.Your vote is to your benefit. It is an assertion of your will. To not vote because your sore is to assert no will and resign to the will of others that were more assertive,
If your sore be sore at the candidate you wanted to win the nomination.
The attitude of refusing to have a voice because you refuse to choose the lesser of two evils is naive. There will be no candidate ever that fits all of the priorities of a majority of people because people each have a different priority list.
Vote for the candidate that most resembles your will. But assert your will. In primaries, mid-terms, and the general elections.
If your sore be sore at the candidate you wanted to win the nomination.
The attitude of refusing to have a voice because you refuse to choose the lesser of two evils is naive. There will be no candidate ever that fits all of the priorities of a majority of people because people each have a different priority list.
Vote for the candidate that most resembles your will. But assert your will. In primaries, mid-terms, and the general elections.
Dirty_Harry
New member
I disagree, I call it sticking to my guns....pun intended
. Why would I vote for someone that I don't want to win??? Someone who I did not to see in office. I agree with some of his views, but he does not seem like the best choice for me or America for that matter. I am going to vote for who I want to see win...that is the beauty of votng and America.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
The tantrums on the part of the political extremes as compared to the pragmatic incremental view are always interesting.
Don't get shall issue as the 2nd says we don't need it.
Let's get a strong anti because the other candidate isn't ideologically pure and thus I can whine more about the result.
It's like the gay folks who opposed civil union bills as they wanted marriage. Thus, they missed the chance to have legal rights that they wanted.
So in TX, we passed a shall issue bill, it had some bad things. Thus, it shouldn't have passed, dang it, 2nd Amend. commies, liberals, martians, ( %(#+%(*%$@@
Then, the bill was in and some of the bad parts were changed. Pragmatic but not ideologically pure. We should still not have the CHL and be better off with more tantrums and a new Ann Richards clone.
Don't get shall issue as the 2nd says we don't need it.
Let's get a strong anti because the other candidate isn't ideologically pure and thus I can whine more about the result.
It's like the gay folks who opposed civil union bills as they wanted marriage. Thus, they missed the chance to have legal rights that they wanted.
So in TX, we passed a shall issue bill, it had some bad things. Thus, it shouldn't have passed, dang it, 2nd Amend. commies, liberals, martians, ( %(#+%(*%$@@
Then, the bill was in and some of the bad parts were changed. Pragmatic but not ideologically pure. We should still not have the CHL and be better off with more tantrums and a new Ann Richards clone.
The Legislature was taught the hard way what happens for passing bills like the AWB. They, not Rudy, are our hope for the next Presidential term if a Rep like Rudy or any Dem get in.
Anyone who thinks Rudy has had a real change of heart and will not sign antigun legislation put in front of him is deluded, plain and simple. If he gets in it will not be the pro2A crowd who did it and he will count on his draw from both parties, remember he has been both a Liberal and Democrat, to stay in. Once in he also is not really afraid of a Dem opposing him on 2A grounds. Does anyone really think the possibility of a strong 2A Dem candidate gaining the nomination is even a possiblity?
So what are we to do if Rudy gets the nod? Either stay home or vote third party! Both are a statement that can be read loud and clear by the politicians considerring a run in the future, the party leadership and... those legislators now in office! Those are the people we need to be concerned about if either Rudy or Hillbama get in. Those legislators need to see the toll an anti paid and need to remember it. If Rudy goes down because of the 2A vote staying home it tells those legislators outside of districts like NYC "Hey, the 2A crowd is serious and anti gun legislation is still very dangerous to be attached to!" It is much more likely that legislators can be frightenned into not supporting anti agenda than it is that Rudy would not sign it if it reached him!
I do not advise staying home or voting 3rd party on "principal." I advise it because in a case of Rudy vs. Hillbama with regards to 2A issues there is no downside to it and only possible benifits.
2A Benefits to voting Third Party or Abstaining in a Hillbama vs. Rudy election.
2A Drawbacks to voting Third Party or Abstaining in a Hillbama vs. Rudy election.
As far as 2A issues go there are no greater negative consequences to having Hillbama in than to having Rudy. Having Rudy though does tell the politicians that the 2A movement is flippant and has become inneffectual. That will only embolden them to pass the very sort of legislation that Rudy will sign!
Anyone who thinks Rudy has had a real change of heart and will not sign antigun legislation put in front of him is deluded, plain and simple. If he gets in it will not be the pro2A crowd who did it and he will count on his draw from both parties, remember he has been both a Liberal and Democrat, to stay in. Once in he also is not really afraid of a Dem opposing him on 2A grounds. Does anyone really think the possibility of a strong 2A Dem candidate gaining the nomination is even a possiblity?
So what are we to do if Rudy gets the nod? Either stay home or vote third party! Both are a statement that can be read loud and clear by the politicians considerring a run in the future, the party leadership and... those legislators now in office! Those are the people we need to be concerned about if either Rudy or Hillbama get in. Those legislators need to see the toll an anti paid and need to remember it. If Rudy goes down because of the 2A vote staying home it tells those legislators outside of districts like NYC "Hey, the 2A crowd is serious and anti gun legislation is still very dangerous to be attached to!" It is much more likely that legislators can be frightenned into not supporting anti agenda than it is that Rudy would not sign it if it reached him!
I do not advise staying home or voting 3rd party on "principal." I advise it because in a case of Rudy vs. Hillbama with regards to 2A issues there is no downside to it and only possible benifits.
2A Benefits to voting Third Party or Abstaining in a Hillbama vs. Rudy election.
- Convincing anti politicians that they have no chance winning on the Rep ticket is a benifit.
- Convincing party leadership that if an anti gets the nod they will be opposed even at the cost of the election is a benefit.
- Telling legislators in office "If we would toss the presidency over this you KNOW what we would do to you!" is a benefit.
2A Drawbacks to voting Third Party or Abstaining in a Hillbama vs. Rudy election.
- Hillbama gets in and is willing to sign the same gun control legislation as Rudy would have signed. (basically no drawback)
As far as 2A issues go there are no greater negative consequences to having Hillbama in than to having Rudy. Having Rudy though does tell the politicians that the 2A movement is flippant and has become inneffectual. That will only embolden them to pass the very sort of legislation that Rudy will sign!
JuanCarlos
New member
This argument fails for me, though, because I have yet to see an election where both candidates are equally bad on all issues. Between any two candidates there is always one who is "worse" when taking their positions as a whole compared to mine. If this is not the case for you I'd suspect that not only are you likely a single-issue voter, but that you see only black or white as well.
From a gun-rights point of view, I'd agree that there is very little difference between Clinton and Guiliani. But note: very little. Not "none." And that's before you get into the idea that there are a host of other issues on which they hold very different positions...if you can honestly say none of those matter enough to cast a vote based on them, then I say your worldview is both incredibly limited and simplistic.
Musketeer presents a halfway decent argument for abstention, however...but again, only provided that gun rights are the only issue you care about.
Boy, I wish I lived in a world where gun rights were the only thing that mattered to and affected me.
See also: what Bruxley wrote.
Though what I think this country really needs is some sort of electoral reform. Instant runoff voting, anyone?
I would like to point out that as soon as I saw that bit - well, soon as the show and The Repor' was over - I fired off a message to the producers suggesting that if they're going to make jokes about guns and gun owners (which was indeed hilarious) that they remember all the safety rules in regards to firearms and even replica firearms.
^_^
For me the 2A is my main issue, though not the only one. The degree of importance I place on it is high enough though that in a Hillbama vs Rudy race I would go third party.
Others have different opinions on the importance of the 2A overall. I think though that Rudy's real history as a liberal (not simply calling hima liberal but meaning he actually ran as a "Liberal" candidate) means the majority of his views are close enough to those of Hillbama that it really doesn't matter as I see it.
The big issues for the majority for the electorate are Iraq and usually Abortion. The economy with the tanking housing market is likely to grow in importance and Rudy will take the hit for being a Rep while a Rep president watched the market go down the drain. Neither of them are going to pull us out of Iraq right away (Obama may express that interest but the bottom line is neither will). Both will will draw down troops gradually or knowingly commit political suicide. On abortion Rudy is a Democrat and will loose that part of the base Republican vote to people who stay home. Those who have abortion as their primary issue tend to hold to it religiously (from either side). Rudy may pull some Dems but he is going to loose droves of Reps. I just don't see enough difference between them to both force the Reps to turn out for Rudy or to justify a vote for him over Hillbama from those with Dem leanings.
Others have different opinions on the importance of the 2A overall. I think though that Rudy's real history as a liberal (not simply calling hima liberal but meaning he actually ran as a "Liberal" candidate) means the majority of his views are close enough to those of Hillbama that it really doesn't matter as I see it.
The big issues for the majority for the electorate are Iraq and usually Abortion. The economy with the tanking housing market is likely to grow in importance and Rudy will take the hit for being a Rep while a Rep president watched the market go down the drain. Neither of them are going to pull us out of Iraq right away (Obama may express that interest but the bottom line is neither will). Both will will draw down troops gradually or knowingly commit political suicide. On abortion Rudy is a Democrat and will loose that part of the base Republican vote to people who stay home. Those who have abortion as their primary issue tend to hold to it religiously (from either side). Rudy may pull some Dems but he is going to loose droves of Reps. I just don't see enough difference between them to both force the Reps to turn out for Rudy or to justify a vote for him over Hillbama from those with Dem leanings.
Hannity sure seems to, but who cares what Hannity says anyway?
Giuliani will not get my vote, period. I'll stay home and watch the election with a beer in hand before I'll vote for him. I can't do the lesser of two evils thing anymore. I did that in 04, and I still got evil. Not happening again, my conscience won't allow it.
Rudy,
Even if he agreed with me 100% on everything that's important, ruled himself out when he said
and with his attempt to cancel the NYC mayoral election after 9/11/01.
Nobody with that attitude towards power can ever be trusted with it.
"If you really want to test a man's character, give him power..." Guliani has absolutely failed that test. Nobody else running, from either party, even comes close to him on the authoritarian scale.
It doesn't matter what he says, or even even what he believes about the issues. Who and what he is make him absolutely unfit to hold any power over anyone, ever.
--Shannon
Even if he agreed with me 100% on everything that's important, ruled himself out when he said
and with his attempt to cancel the NYC mayoral election after 9/11/01.
Nobody with that attitude towards power can ever be trusted with it.
"If you really want to test a man's character, give him power..." Guliani has absolutely failed that test. Nobody else running, from either party, even comes close to him on the authoritarian scale.
It doesn't matter what he says, or even even what he believes about the issues. Who and what he is make him absolutely unfit to hold any power over anyone, ever.
--Shannon
From the gun rights point of view the only way I can tell the difference between Giuliani and Clinton is that Giuliani is willing to make a speech of questionable sincerity to the NRA and rudely answer his cell phone in the middle of doing so. Clinton has nothing to say to the NRA members because she is not counting on their votes.
Giuliani and Clinton may have wide differences in opinion, but in the arena of hot button issues that mobilize voters he's practically indistinguishable from her.
Wildalaska
Moderator
And that is the quote that is holding my support of Rudster in escrow, for what that is worth.
WildofcourseimayhavenochoicebutthatmaybeallhegetsAlaska TM
Really?!???? So Rudy has the same opinion about Hillary concerning the following "hot button" issues:
1. National Security.
2. The War in Iraq.
3. Socialized medicine and a health care plan.
4. Taxes.
5. Spending.
Wow! I didn't know that Rudy was so aligned with Hillary about these issues. In fact, I can't recall that Rudy's opinions are anything like Hillary's on these matters. Educate me, please. For example, please let us know how each candidate feels about taxes, specifically the tax cuts signed into law by President Bush, and whether that legislation should be renewed in 2011. Heck, maybe I'll learn something. Thanks!
I don't buy that Guliani holds basically the same views as hillary on gun control.
Whether you believe what he is saying right now or not (which is certianly understandable since people will say anything on the trail) Guliani is very VERY much aware that a huge portion of his base is pro-2nd. We made that point loud and clear in the first part of his campaign, and continue to beat him over the head with it.
Hillary doesn't have any such base to speak of. Thus, I would say that Guliani has much more of a vested interest (since at the end of the day he is a politician) to not piss off the gun lobby. He knows what disaster can result from it i.e. no second term.
Add to this the fact that he has (albeit) recently stated that he believes gun control is a state and local issue, as well as the fact that he opposes any national gun control measures, and I think you have a candidate that is much better than Hillary on gun rights.
Of course this is only one issue among many important ones. Someone here said that they like Guliani because he seems like the kind of guy who wakes up in the morning and thinks about how to best kick al quaeda in the nuts. Assuming thats true, thats something we should all agree on and is far more than anyone can say of ANY of the democratic candidates, or Ron Paul.
Whether you believe what he is saying right now or not (which is certianly understandable since people will say anything on the trail) Guliani is very VERY much aware that a huge portion of his base is pro-2nd. We made that point loud and clear in the first part of his campaign, and continue to beat him over the head with it.
Hillary doesn't have any such base to speak of. Thus, I would say that Guliani has much more of a vested interest (since at the end of the day he is a politician) to not piss off the gun lobby. He knows what disaster can result from it i.e. no second term.
Add to this the fact that he has (albeit) recently stated that he believes gun control is a state and local issue, as well as the fact that he opposes any national gun control measures, and I think you have a candidate that is much better than Hillary on gun rights.
Of course this is only one issue among many important ones. Someone here said that they like Guliani because he seems like the kind of guy who wakes up in the morning and thinks about how to best kick al quaeda in the nuts. Assuming thats true, thats something we should all agree on and is far more than anyone can say of ANY of the democratic candidates, or Ron Paul.