Which Candidate to Support?

[Infringed]

Keep in mind, Obama's court and cabinet nominations alone represent a grave risk to RTKBA. (Particularly Eric Holder and the ongoing border BATFE operations scandal, which was deliberately set up to demonize gun availability.) In addition to the list Dr. Mall Ninja posted, understand that the only reason he hasn't taken a flamethrower to the Second amendment is that he chose to use up his political capital in other places.

I agree. But I also think continuation of the establishment agenda, be it through Obama or most of the GOP candidates, represents a grave threat to our liberty.

If he got a second term, he would have no more reason to fear the consequences. Everything he has held off doing by executive order within BATFE could then be done.

I'd guess the DNC would put a lot of pressure on him to not set up the party and the 2016 nominee (Hillary Clinton?) for a backlash.

Hopefully, seats may change in the Senate. That may be more important. It is very critical that we all cast our vote

Yes, let's all vote and be aware of where our senators and congressmen stand on 2A.

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

Presidents just don't tend to be "pro 2A". In recent memory many would say that Reagan was "pro 2A" yet he signed FOPA into law with Hughes attached. There's only so much the President can do.

I'm joining this thread late but Reagan is not to blame for that signing but the NRA. Reagan asked the NRA what to do about it and they said to sign it on the premise that the NRA will challenge Hughes later.

From what I've heard, Rick Santorum is Pro Gun. I think he even hunts.

 

[hso]

From what I've heard,

We see this a lot, but this question is too important to just work off of hearsay. Everyone should check multiple sources themselves to actually see what a politician's words and actions have been and not what someone thinks they heard about them.

 

[zxcvbob]

You're all forgetting -- the president sets the agenda for the executive branch and what laws he wants enforced and which ones let's say "are not a priority." I think Ron Paul would effectively shut down the BATF without any need for any legislative action.

 

[rm23]

If all the people who said, "I really like Ron Paul, but he can't win" would support him, he'd beat Romney and Santorum by 25%. Your vote is worth as much as anyone's. Pick the guy you want to be president and stop picking the guy you think is going to win.

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

We see this a lot, but this question is too important to just work off of hearsay. Everyone should check multiple sources themselves to actually see what a politician's words and actions have been and not what someone thinks they heard about them.

That's why I didn't say it as fact.

 

[Infringed]

If all the people who said, "I really like Ron Paul, but he can't win" would support him, he'd beat Romney and Santorum by 25%. Your vote is worth as much as anyone's. Pick the guy you want to be president and stop picking the guy you think is going to win.

Indeed. In the Drudge 'primary', Paul is leading Romney. And actual polling as of yesterday shows both Paul and Romney would tie Obama in the general.

If everyone who likes Paul's constitutional stand would stop listening to the establishment media and vote for Paul, we wouldn't have to be fretting about what the next President will do to 2A, who he will appoint to SCOTUS, whether BATFE is conjuring some scheme to turn public opinion against guns or some backdoor gun registration scheme, whether DHS (supported by everyone but Paul) will target preppers or those with 'assault rifles', etc.

 

[Dr.Mall Ninja]

That's why I didn't say it as fact.

Its fact.

 

[hso]

Note the professional photographer wearing black in the right background. A photo op doesn't make a body of practice.

It is also a sad fact that not all "hunters" are 2A supporters. Remember Kerry's background as a hunter?

 

[Lunie]

Ok, he hunts. And it's a fact that being a "hunter" is all but meaningless when it comes to supporting the RTKBA (for anyone else but themselves). Even the most ardent anti-gun zealots are sometimes found either owning guns, or under the protection of armed goons.

 

[Dr.Mall Ninja]

It is also a sad fact that not all "hunters" are 2A supporters. Remember Kerry's background as a hunter?

Kerry did not have an A rating from the NRA.

I dont understand why people just because they support Ron Paul have to demonize other canidates.

I support Newt, but I understand that other guys have strengths too.

 

[hso]

DMJ,

The point being made is that you have to take the whole body of personal and political positions with respect to RKBA and not just bits. A hunter doesn't by definition have to support RKBA. Heck, even "supporters" of RKBA may not be actual supporters of RKBA when it comes to the thorny infringements that people call "reasonable gun control".

Look at the details for each and every candidate in the primary and then make a decision based on an in-depth look.

 

[Dr.Mall Ninja]

HSO,

I understand exactly what your saying, about not just taking someones word that they are pro gun. If I recall correctly Obama has even said that he supports the 2A, which of course he does not.

In Santorums case though he clearly does.

He [Rick Santorum] was the most effective advocate of bringing it [legislation to protect gun companies from frivolous lawsuits] to the floor and getting a vote scheduled. He used his influence to get it to the floor. Without that, we would have lost every American gun company.”
– Wayne LaPierre, CEO – National Rifle Association, October 25, 2006

Also he was against the AWB.

Yes he did support Arlen Specter, but is that really enough to call him anti gun??
The guy is clearly on our side.

As far as me taking in-depth look, I have watched every single debate, if I cant see them live, I record them on my DVR. I also have done my own research on every person running. I dont take my vote lightly.

 

[hso]

Excellent and the type of work we all need to do.

 

[Sky]

Wow a Political discussion that has remained less heated or argumentative than most AR threads!!!!

Salute and way to go THR!!!!

It might have been brought up already but everything I have read says Ron Paul is one of the few candidates that the Independents and even Democrats will vote for. That is why some polls show him either head to head or winning during the presidential campaign.

Just depends on whose agenda and worked poll numbers you are looking at?

Will he get the nomination and if he does will he survive the first year in office; only time will tell but we will never know unless those who agree with him about freedom, the Constitution, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness with personal responsibility quit listening to the talking heads and vote with your heart and who you believe will protect your constitutional rights.

Young Turks on the Iowa caucus bring up how the system has an agenda. Just their opinion but interesting. My question is how can any talking head say regardless of your vote Ron Paul will not get the nomination? IMO It is not supposed to work that way in America and is a very effective Psyop with the use of language. Repeat any lie long enough and watch the believers grow.

Even with all the demonetization before Iowa Dr. Paul came in 3rd and will probably come in 2d in New Hampshire....It is a long hard road to the nomination and anything can happen; let us hope the best man for the job ends up on top regardless of our favorites and the process works as it should.

http://youtu.be/3C8PE1W5cKA

 

[Armed012002]

Ron Paul is the obvious pro 2A choice as well as the pro conservative choice.

Unfortunately, people are voting for Romney because he's "electable".

In other words, people are not voting FOR Romney, but rather voting against Obama.

Romney is McCain 2.0

What does Romney have to offer conservatives? Not much.

As much as I hate to see it, another 4 years of Obama is guaranteed.

 

[Armed012002]

If all the people who said, "I really like Ron Paul, but he can't win" would support him, he'd beat Romney and Santorum by 25%. Your vote is worth as much as anyone's. Pick the guy you want to be president and stop picking the guy you think is going to win.

Excellent post.

 

[Lunie]

If you stand for the RTKBA, then the candidate to choose has always been Dr. Ron Paul. The guy who continues to climb no matter how much he gets talked into the ground.

I can only hope that agencies like the ATF are shaking in their boots at his rise. Be even better if they had a nickname for him like "Wrecking-Ball Paul".

 

[Dr.Mall Ninja]

If all the people who said, "I really like Ron Paul, but he can't win" would support him, he'd beat Romney and Santorum by 25%

Really?
Romney has 25% of the vote give or a take a couple points.
So what your telling me is that he would have 50% of the vote? that seems a little bit of a strech...

I can only hope that agencies like the ATF are shaking in their boots at his rise. Be even better if they had a nickname for him like "Wrecking-Ball Paul".

Ron Paul is not running for King of the United States, he wont be able to do even half of what you guys think he will!
He is outside the mainstream, therfore anything that most of his pro 2a ideas would be shutdown.
In order to have the repeal of Hughes,Lautenberg, national open carry and everything else, we would need clones of Ron Paul making up most of the house,senate and Supreme court.
I am glad that this is not going to be the case due to some of his ideas which are insane, but i'm not going to go into them due to the forum rules.

 

[Lunie]

Ron Paul is not running for King of the United States, he wont be able to do even half of what you guys think he will!
He is outside the mainstream, therfore anything that most of his pro 2a ideas would be shutdown.
In order to have the repeal of Hughes,Lautenberg, national open carry and everything else, we would need clones of Ron Paul making up most of the house,senate and Supreme court.
I am glad that this is not going to be the case due to some of his ideas which are insane, but i'm not going to go into them due to the forum rules.

A great part of his appeal is that he isn't running for King.

One of the great specters of an Obama term 2 is the appointment of "anti's" in positions of power. What is something positive that can come from a Paul Presidency? Good nominations and appointments that can lead to better conditions for those of us who value our right to bear arms. He can veto unconstitutional legislation, finally acting as a legitimate check on Congress.

Is he a messiah? A savior? Of course not. But he would be the first small step in a real positive direction. Is someone like Romney even that? I don't believe so. :banghead:

I'm asking for a lot. I'm asking for a person who believes that the Constitution is the ball and chain that restrains the Federal (and State) Government(s) from trampling on the Liberties of the People. I'm asking for the person who believes most firmly that "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,
the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." It's the Law of the Land, but in name only today. I want to see that at least challenged in my lifetime. Electing Romneys, Gingrichs, and others pushes me farther from that goal.

 

[parsimonious_instead]

I always interpreted my right to vote as my opportunity to "vote for the person I want to see holding that office" - not "the guy most likely to win" "the one that will do less damage" or "the lesser of two evils." In that latter case, you're still voting for evil.

 

[Dr.Mall Ninja]

Lunie, I respect what your saying but I still disagree, when you say that Ron Paul is the only choice to advance RBKA.

Good nominations and appointments that can lead to better conditions for those of us who value our right to bear arms.

If Ron Paul were to nominate or appoint someone who is a true liberation then the congress would never approve them.

Ron Paul's philosphy is most aligned with us, but as president with regards to RBKA we would feel no difference between him and Santorum or Perry.


The same bills would show up on any of these guys desk, and I think that all 3 of them would make the right descions.

Ron Paul is just so extreme on every issue, that I doubt anything he wants would get done.

Paul sponsored 620 bills as a Congressman from Texas and only four made it to a vote, and out of those only one passed..

Is he a messiah? A savior? Of course not. But he would be the first small step in a real positive direction

At the rate he gets things done, they wouldnt just be small steps, they would be baby turtle steps.

Now if we elected a guy like Gingrich who has a history of getting things done we might be able to get somewhere.

I'm not saying that Ron Paul wouldn't be great for the 2A, all I'm trying to say is that he is not the only answer.

 

[mark1616]

Don't ask me who to support, my candidates keep dropping out.

 

[Lunie]

1) Lunie, I respect what your saying but I still disagree, when you say that Ron Paul is the only choice to advance RBKA.

2) Ron Paul is just so extreme on every issue, that I doubt anything he wants would get done.

3) Now if we elected a guy like Gingrich who has a history of getting things done we might be able to get somewhere.

4) I'm not saying that Ron Paul wouldn't be great for the 2A, all I'm trying to say is that he is not the only answer.

DMN, my apologies for snipping your quote up, but I wanted to answer some of your points specifically.

1) I respect your opinion, even though it differs from mine. I don't think I've said that Paul is the only acceptable choice, but only that he is our best choice. There are others who occupy a second or third place in my mind. Paul is my first choice for a number of reasons, but for THR purposes, because he is the strongest RKBA supporter. If I have the choice, I want the best. I'm gonna pick the one who I want, regardless of anything else. Later on this year, if I have to make a different choice, I'll reevaluate who that "best" choice will be.

2) I don't know where this notion of "extreme" really comes from. And if you doubt that anything he wants would really get done, then you have nothing to lose if he is elected.

3) I cringe when people mention the name "Gingrich". He is incredibly low on my list (Just above Romney). In theory, he would be THE man of the Republican party, but he isn't. I can't find many things I like about him as a candidate, and apparently, neither can most other people (so far).

4) Again, I would agree with you that he is not the ONLY choice. But he is the best choice, and I refuse to throw away my Primary vote on someone who I don't want.

One other thing I would like to point out... Of the current field of candidates, no one else poses such a significant danger to the Republican party. Why? Because no one else has such a (large, and growing) loyal base of supporters. Supporters who may well not be there for [insert name] when the time comes around. I don't think any other candidate poses such a risk to the party. I guess if you want to beat Obama, you better make sure Paul, and the votes that will follow him, are on the Republican ticket.

 

[Lunie]

Interesting tidbit:

http://www.revolutionpac.com/2012/0...of-only-two-republicans-on-all-state-ballots/

I knew some of the other candidates were not on all ballots, I didn't realize that only Paul and Romney are serious enough to take care of something so basic.