OUR Candidate for 2000?

E

Ed Brunner

New member
Look at Alan Keyes' position on the Second Amendment:
http://keyes2000.org/issues/secondamendment.html
While you're there check out his positions on other issues,too.

------------------
Better days to be,

Ed




[This message has been edited by Ed Brunner (edited May 06, 1999).]
 
Ed:

I like his views on most things. However his stand on abortion unfortunately will kill him in any election. The women in this nation who are pro-abortion are just to strong a voting block to overcome on this issue.

Take a look at the last Senate race in CA. Fong lost the election to Boxer over one issue and one issue only, abortion. In talking with quite a few ladies about the election and why they voted for Boxer, their answers were all the same, abortion.

In debating them prior to the election, I could not get them to focus on any other issue. They are against taxes etc. but the debate allways ended with one thing. Abortion. Even though Fong's stance was a middle of the road stance.

We need to find someone who is going to win.

Strider
 
From a realistic standpoint, I have to agree with Bookkie's rationale.

The Demos have succeeded in turning "pro-choice" into a make or break issue for any candidate for any position. It is an intensely emotional issue; one which few people really understand the practicalities of. Matt Fong is a perfect example....he personally is against abortion, but it wasn't an issue he campaigned on nor was it something he would do anything about...it really was a moot point. Further, even though he is pro 2ndA, again it wasn't a key issue for him. He believed that rather than more GC laws it was time to fully prosecute under the existing ones. His top priorities were taxes, crime and education.

"The campaign had been a hard-fought one throughout
the fall, as Boxer and Fong disagreed on almost all
important issues, including abortion and gun control." (Stanford Daily)

Boxer supporters succeeded in killing Fong on abortion and gun control....2 issues that he was unlikely to be a mover in. Basically he wouldn't help in encouraging abortion on any level and he would discourage further gun control. But Boxer supporters painted him as a radical anti-woman, anti-safety reactionary. They started on his personal anti-abortion position, savaged him and finished him off on his pro-2ndA stance.

Most women bought it

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes"
 
True. However,so far no one has said "as California goes,so goes the nation" AND why use a state that elected DiFi as an example?
I am against abortion and I think it is another issue where the tide is turning. We shall see.

------------------
Better days to be,

Ed
 
Ed - I agree that the tide is turning, but I think the reason is that people like me (pro-choice on everything, Libertarian-like) are using the Second Amendment as my one issue in voting decisions, but won't throw my vote for a candidate who has no realistic chance of winning (the Libertarians).

-Your friend, and former Democrat (okay, Dad, you were right!), Morgan.
 
Yeah.

Although bad for we Californians, I believe that the Dem's greed, arrogance and impatience have finally caught up with them. The intentional and aggressive polarization is beginning to result in a backlash; which hopefully will overturn many of their mischiefs.

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes"
 
Finding someone who will win? Doesn't that mean that that person would be for me government programs, more restrictions on firearms, more handouts, etc...?

If the majority of people want to stick with one immoral issue, I say let them receive their just rewards.

As for me I will vote for the person that I think is best qualified for the job based on all the issues, and past performance.



------------------
John/az

"Just because something is popular, does not make it right."

www.countdown9199.com
 
Morgan: I'm curious: What do you do, how do you vote, when (As happens more and more.) the two major parties provide you with candidates who are BOTH gun grabbers? Like Clinton vs Dole in '96? Or, potentially, Gore vs Dole in 2000? The problem I've always had with the NRA's policy, (Gradually going by the wayside, thankfully!) of endorsing only major party candidates, is that it basically licenses one party to get our votes by being, not our friends, but instead the lesser of our two enemies. And that's a recipe for defeat!

It's a basic rule of pragmatic politics, you know, that if a constituency "has no place else to go", you treat them like dirt, in an attempt to win the votes of their enemies as well. The only constituencies that get any respect are the ones which are "in play", whose loyalty isn't fixed. Since the Democrats have more or less sold their souls to the gun control movement, if we're not willing to vote third party, we're not "in play", and the Republicans will walk all over us.

Anyway, have you noticed that the Libertarian party has been electing more candidates every year, and it's membership has been growing at double digit rates for some time now? Frankly, I think that, if not in 2000, certainly by 2002, we aren't going to have to chose the lesser of two evils. The genuinely good candidates WILL have a realistic chance of winning.
 
Brett - what I've done (and will continue to do, unless I can think of a better, more effectual, way) is vote for the pro-Second Amendment candidate with the best chance of winning. If none exist, then I vote for the Libertarian candidate. I'm on the verge of voting Libertarian anyway, but sometimes I can't help but think I'm throwing away a vote - especially in a close race.

I'm undecided on Bush boy - he did, after all, sign both the shall issue law and the improvement upon same. If actions speak louder than words, I'd say he's not so bad. If the election were today, Bush v. Gore, I'd vote for Bush if the race was close. If it were a runaway for either side, I'd likely vote Libertarian.
 
As long as gun owners continue to support the Republicans we will continue to lose ground. It's really that simple. To vote for someone, "who has a chance of winning" is the ultimate example of a wasted vote. The Libertarians could win many elections strictly on the gun issue if voters would stop listening to the media about who "has a chance to win" and who doesn't. Remember, by doing this you are in essence letting the media pick the candidates. Is that who you trust to pick the best candidates?

To me, the biggest waste of a vote is voting for someone who not only doesn't agree with you, but is, in the end, against you. Why not just vote for the gun grabbers in the first place and get it over with?

------------------
"The only good bureaucrat is one with pistol at his head. Put it in his hand and it's goodbye to the Bill of Rights." H.L. Mencken


[This message has been edited by Ipecac (edited May 06, 1999).]
 
All good points on selecting a canidate. I've wrestled with the same points for years. It seems I've always supported in the primaries the loosing canidate. By the time it gets to the general election it is a vote not for the best canidate, but for the lesser of two evils.

I've been a republican all my life. In fact I was the very first 18 year old to registar and vote in my county way back when. Have never missed an election. Sad to say that I feel that all my efforts have been wasted. It is not to often that the canidate I support has ever won.

It seems that there for awhile the republican party was getting further and further away from my beliefs. Then Regan came along and gave me new hope. Since then they not only have been going down hill again. Most republican canidates are just as bad on most of the issues as the democrates.

Last year I wrote both our local & national republican leaders expressing my concerns over the shifting values of the republican party. I stated what I wanted to see was a national platform that all republican canidates had to sign onto... if they did not sign up to the package then the party would not support them... I got patted on my little head and told to get lost.... In effect what they told me was that my proposal was impratcial. That they would not have any canidates if they tried something like that... My response, bull! They just are not looking for the right people.

So..... in protect and because I now feel that the libritarian party is now closer to my views, I am going to re-registar as a libritarian. Maybe if enough of us did likewise, we might get the attention of those yoho's who are running the republican party into the ground.

Richard
 
Okay, guys, you've convinced me. I often spout off that the media doesn't report truth, but creates it.

No more compromises! Libertaria, here I come!
 
I don't throw away my vote by choosing libertarian candidates... I double it. Rather than ONE vote FOR, I get TWO votes AGAINST!
 
And Clinton er? Gore wins! If we split our second amendment vote we're in trouble again. It's still a two horse race. If any third party on the national level starts getting some serious poll numbers, the democrats and republicans will steal their ideas. Look at Ross Perot. The democrats and republicans were sitting on their thumbs until he started making waves for them. Maybe we could find a pro-second amendment billionaire who would like to volunteer to run for President...

------------------
Join the NRA!!!
 
18 year olds have had the vote in Georgia since World War II :)

In 1972 I voted both Republican and for the lesser of two evils. Richard Nixon taught me the folly of voting Republican and the folly of voting for the lesser of two evils.

In 1976 I voted for Jimmy Carter and he proceeded to teach me the folly of voting Democratic.

I have voted straight Libertarian since 1976.
So I haven't won, right? I have voted my principles. I have voted for freedom. I have not traded my sovereignty for "winning."
I am not responsible for voting for the Republican president who signed the Volkmer bill furthering HCI's agenda against our freedom. I am not responsible for Bush's ban on "assault rifles." I am not responsible for the instigators of Ruby Ridge and Waco holding office. I am not responsible for the "War on Drugs" policy that can only fight drugs by attacking the Bill of Right's guarantees of ALL of our freedoms. Every American citizen who did vote for these folks bears some responsibility for their actions once in office. I bear none for I voted for principle not "winning."

In answer to the Republicans and Democrats stealing third party positions...how can we lose if they steal the position of the Libertarian Party? The only position the Libertarian Party has to steal is liberty for the individual and drastically limited government. Can you see the Republicans and Democrats stealing that? Go to the website of the Libertarian Party. Read their platform. Identify the planks in the platform that the Republicans and Democrats would steal. There are not any. Liberty scares those folks to death. The Republican Party supports the primary opponents of Ron Paul in every election and he is the only Republican Congressman who supports liberty right down the line with no buts, no maybe ifs, no except whens. Not surprisingly, he is a Libertarian in Republican clothing.
 
With ya, buddy.

I now vote Libertarian whenever I can, unless I know that the Republican candidate is firmly pro-freedom. I never vote Democrat...for any reason. The social engineering is, in the long run, ultimately more of a threat to our freedom than almost anything else. It is this overbearing, elitist, "government as mommy" attitude that is responsible for our freedoms being taken in the first place.

You can keep the Social "Security" I've paid the feds. I just wish they would "let" ( :() me decide how to best run my life in the future.
 
Spartacus. I think you are 100% on target. To hell with a winning vote. Vote your consciense, and the devil take hindmost.
You know? If enough people do that, a lot of Dems and Repubs could be on the unemployment list. Wouldn't that be nice?
When I was 21, and became eligible to vote, but too stupid to do so wisely, I was a Democrat. :( In the mid 60's when I got somewhat smarter(?) :O I became a Republican. You know, the lesser of two evils thingy.(more :O) I voted almost straight party lines, thinking I was doing what was right for me and my country. (Even more :O) Well I admit it, I screwed up. :D Yes Spartacus, you're right. I have just joined the Libertarian Party. :) They espouse my views better than anyone else. :D
I also have never missed voting in an election of any kind since becoming eligible, and I am now 60 years old. :D
By the way, although this is not pertinent to the thread, I believe the Republicans who voted to go along with Schumer and Feinstein, and crew are guilty of treason against the United States of America. :( They should be charged with such, brought before a proper tribunal, and if found guilty, punished according to law.
Paul B.
COMPROMISE IS NOT AN OPTION!
 
Floyd2U, I'm not flaming you, but haven't we tried it your way for too long now? Look where we are today, and where we seem to be headed. How much ground have we regained under your lesser of two evils theory since '68? How much have we lost? Why not try voting Libertarian for a change? What have you got to lose? At worst, the gun control and social programs come slightly faster if, as you say, the Dems win. At best, a bunch of people vote their conscience for once in their lives, and a Libertarian takes office. Remember, the media and pundits said Ventura couldn't win, either.

Spartacus is correct, as he so often is. I, too, have been voting libertarian for several years now, and I am glad that I have had nothing to do with putting the current batch of criminals in office.

Vote your conscience, Floyd, that is the only way you have a chance of winning.

------------------
"The only good bureaucrat is one with pistol at his head. Put it in his hand and it's goodbye to the Bill of Rights." H.L. Mencken
 
I have also been a long time Republican supporter. I have felt that voting other than the two "major" parties would be throwing my vote away.
This thread has made me realize that I have been wrong. I started to think about this situation in a different way. The RNC boasts that 308 elected Democrats have switched to the Republican Party. What better way to destroy the opposition than join them and weaken their positions on issues? Perhaps we truly do have a one party system now.
I am switching to the Libertarian party ASAP.
Thanks for the education.

Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top