Would it be, though? It's actually more dangerous for a Democratic President. The GOP Pres can assume the RKBA crowd have no other place to go. Are we going to vote for the Democrats if Romney turns south on gun rights?
Well, that is a valid point. Saying that, the point is really only valid if you have a Democratic President who actually cares about the RKBA crowd. If he thinks he can buy their votes with government handouts why care about 2A rights? Is there danger Romney could "turn south" on gun rights? Possibly, but what would he gain by doing so? The anti's would never vote for a Republican and by honking off the RKBA folk, Romney will assure that even if they don't go to the dark side, then they may well sit at home on election day. That happened with George H W Bush when he lied about "reading my lips"
As far as Court appointments, the key there is to get sufficient conservative Senators in place to police the nominations. A Republican president is no guarantee that the appointed justices will be friendly. There's a long list of justices who changed stripes after getting that lifelong tenure. It's the Senate judiciary that weeds these folks out.
Yeah, that would be great to have sufficient conservative Senators... but they DID have enough to block Obama's last two anti-gun appointments to the bench and they didn't. Isn't it better to have someone in office who isn't almost a guarantee to appoint anti-gun judges?
Quote:
Romney HAS to realize that it is extremely dangerous politically for him to mimic what he did as governor as far as gun rights.
why?
what he did as gov got him this far, a front runner to become president of the U.S. of A. So his flippy floppy on 2A, or socialized health care hasn't really hurt him any.
Sure it has hurt him. He may be front runner (on some days) but even when he is, it isn't by much of a margin. He knows full well that his STATE government health care plan causes much concern in potential voters. As far as 2A issues, I go back to my above point, whose vote does/would he gain by supporting anti-gun measures?? Those who would applaude him for doing so aren't going to vote for him. Those who are upset about his doing so will sit at home come election day.
If he can't convince me that he is 101 % pro 2nd Amendment he will not get my vote.
Just what would it take to convince you? A hunting trip like Kerry took? And Mr. "Cling to your guns" Obama obvious is 101% pro 2A, right? *sigh*
The President, and the rest of us Democrats, is NOT a Socialist.
I certainly didn't say ALL Democrats are Socialist and I hope you're not implying I did. As far as Obama - well, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck... Believe whatever you want, but though he may not be a PROCLAIMED socialist, he is one in sheeps clothing which is, IMHO, far more dangerous. He has put government into our lives more and more, promotes class warfare by demonizing those who are successful - socialistic actions those. Years ago, I WAS a Democrat, but I left that party because it was taken over by extremists. I do still vote for a Democrat or two if I think they are best for the job, but I hardly think Obama is better for the job than Romney... Romney is hardly a pure-bred conservative but as far as 2A goes, I think he is ambivalent. NOT a good trait, but far, far better than someone who endorses such actions as Fast and Furious. Think of the damage that would have done if it was successful in it's intent. THAT is who is now in office and that is NOT who Romney is.
If it's between Obama and Romney I'll vote third party or write in a name.
I played the lesser of two evils came with McCain and I felt like a giant whore. Never again.
While I understand and have felt much the same (especially after having to choose between Obama and McCain), I would submit that 3rd party vote is essentially a non-vote which will help keep Obama in power. That is exactly what happened with the Perot vote in 92. Clinton didn't even get 50% of the vote and if those who voted for Perot had voted for Bush we never would have seen the AWB signed into law. Just things to consider.
Romney as the lessor of evils over Obama? Well, I won't feel as strongly about that vote as I did about McCain's. That was a horrible choice. If you think about things with your head over your heart, I think there is much to like about Romney - certainly no Ronald Reagan, but neither is he one who wants to spend YOUR money buying votes.
Interesting thread and I for one appreciate those who express themselves in a cordial, thoughtful manner (even if I may not agree with you). I don't consider myself a single issue voter, but the RKBA is near and dear to me. I don't ever expect to see Romney on the range next to me, but neither do I see him enacting any legislation that restricts gun rights (if he is elected.) I do think Obama will have the opportunity to appoint at least one (possibly two) more anti-gun judges for the SCOTUS. If that does happen, the anti's will be out in force to get anti-gun issues to that court. And the 5-4 victories that squeaked through will be lost for years to come. And if voting for Romney keeps that from happening, that is how I will vote.
. I've had this same conversation with an alarming number of people on another forum I spend time on. If enough people boycott the next election ( and I fear it won't take very many), then they will quite likely be a party to very substantive infringements of the 2nd amendment during the following 4 years, infringements that will never be rescinded.
