I tend to avoid anyone nominated by the "nominating committee."
Think about it: "We, the people running this show, got together, and decided who should be running the show, and took out an ad that is formatted to look like its part of the ballot to tell you who to vote for."
Neal Knox recommended that idea in the late 90s, when the NRA was busy falling over backwards trying to appease the antis (and violating NY State corp law, under which the NRA was founded, with certain lobbying spending practices. Luckily, they did not get shut down. However, the attitude was more one of "circle the wagons and tell people to shut up about the improprieties," rather than, "Whoops! We'll fix that ASAP").
It doesn't mean a person is bad if the committee nominated them, but it does mean they're very much part of the good old boy network. Fresh blood keeps an organization moving.
I base my choices on the bios, with attention to any specifics they bring to the table. As someone mentioned, Mr Milius directed Dirty Harry, and Red Dawn. You don't see pro-2A sentiment like that latter in Hwood...well, EVER. (A few episodes of Bones come close.) So, that's publicity for the cause we don't have to pay for, and he's skillful at it. +lots.
Uncle Ted is a firebrand. That ticks a lot of people off. IMO, that's also a good thing in moderation. He's visible, has a large fan base and media presence, is vocal and active, and he supports law enforcement publicly as well. It doesn't matter if the left doesn't like him. They can't really say much bad about him other than, "We don't like this guy who supports hunting, God, guns, law enforcement and hates criminals." +some.
There are quite a few candidates who work in shooting programs from CMP to the Olympics to the Boy Scouts. Those are worth voting for--it brings more shooters to the sport. +a few.
There are lawyers and politicians who have sponsored/fought actual legislation. I tend not to vote for ones who are "supporters of the 2A" who can't tell us exactly what they've done. I believe they are supporters, but how effective are they at getting the job done?
After I've voted for all those, then I go back and apply the same standards to people nominated by the "nominating committee" and fill in the blanks--some continuity and familiarity is a good thing.