In the headlong rush of anti-2A opportunism in the aftermath of the horrific Newtown shooting, three states stood head and shoulders above their hoplophobic peers: Connecticut (of course), New York (i.e., the SAFE Act) and Maryland, which enacted an “assault weapons” ban. Never mind that the defunct federal version had been universally judged an utter failure. Details like that really don’t matter when events make ramming through new restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms less of a heavy lift. When the middle-of-the-night law was challenged in court, a “three-judge panel cast doubt on the constitutionality of the law that also prohibits magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition.” You know, Heller and all. Only now . . .
As the Washington Post reports,
The full U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit agreed to rehear the case after a three-judge panel cast doubt on the constitutionality of the law that also prohibits magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. …
If the full court in Richmond reverses, gun rights advocates say it would upend past practice by other lower court judges.
“Such a decision would further erode the rights of law-abiding citizens to own protected firearms to the point where they would be equated with criminals, domestic violence misdemeanants, and illegal drug users,” according to those challenging the law, including the Maryland State Rifle and Pistol Association, the Maryland Licensed Firearms Dealers Association and Maryland business owner Stephen Kolbe.
So some of the most commonly owned civilian weapons are now back in play in the laughably named Free State. Watch this space.
Let’s hear it for all these NeverTrump people.
Hillary will be so good for the country with her 2 to 3 communist appointees to SCOTUS.
Yeah…. That will show Trump. Then we can sleep better at night knowing that the NeverTrump crowd was so principled that they were so against a wild card that they defaulted to a communist out of spite by voting to defeat Trump and not a communist.
For those of us who understand electoral politics in the U.S. One of two people will be president, no one else, the system rounds all protest votes down to ZERO unlike a parliamentary system.
And of course, they can all come back to TTAG and quote the 2A in all caps as the courts continue to piss on us.
Feel free to vote convenience, I’ll vote conscience.
#nevertrump
Convenience? That’s absurd. Preventing HRC from appointing to the SC is a “convenience”, good gravy. It’s you who would be acting ignoring reality. There will be two names on the ballot, the president will be one of them; that is all.
That there are other names in addition is absolutely meaningless, you pathetic vote for some third party will only be noted in passing by news reporters calling off the tally on election night, and your vote will have zero impact in furthering any libertarian causes or whatever it is you plan to vote for.
It’s a vote to elect Trump, or a lack of a vote to elect Trump. These are your choices. Your only choices.
Vote Trump Hard.
So are you voting for Hillary? Or are you voting for someone who is mathematically eliminated from winning? I don’t understand how someone can claim to not vote for Trump due to their consciences, yet knowingly vote for a different person who due to an absolute mathematical impossibility, can’t and won’t win. Willful ignorance does not equal a good conscience.
I am with you. Never trump. Why you may ask? For the future. Trump destroys the conservative movement, and moves the entire political spectrum to the left if he wins. Trumpism gets conflated with conservatism for generations to come and not only is that bad for the country, its not going to yield winning elections as younger voters who are absolutely not going to put up with his inflammatory rhetoric will pass on the republican party in favor of the democrats. You could potentially lose for the next several decades with a trump vote.
Yea, that totally potentially thing has me way worried too.
Word.
/super-genius
“Trump destroys the conservative movement,”
WTF does that mean? Are you going to define “the conservative movement” for us? I say a conservative supports smaller government, lower taxes, and repealing/cancelling a few hundred thousand useless or damaging laws and regulations (NFA 1934 would be an example) dating back over a hundred years and accomplishing nothing while costing our country and our economy trillions. The best man for that job, a year ago before the first primary vote was cast, was Donald Trump, if he were willing to accept the job. Now, how about *YOU* tell us what part of any real “conservative movement” I missed, or he opposes?
If the democrats win both the Presidency and the Congress in November, the Nation will irreversibly slide into another Venezuela. The last time the dems took control, the DOW sank +50%.
The next time, it will sink 80% and there will be no recovery. Investors will start bailing out of all the markets if it looks like a repeat of 2008 may occur. The young people (for the most part) in the USA are ignorant, self-centered and lazy, little wonder the rest of the world has stolen their jobs and their future.
LarryinTX: The conservative movement as defined as one that advocates for hawkish foreign policy (engaging the forces of evil before they get to your doorstep); Small government (Donald has come out in favor of single payer health care and expansion of government programs) and Civil Liberties (Donald came over to the side of gun rights in the last 10 years, has advocated for opening the libel laws to eliminate the burden of Actual Malice in the case of public figures, and is the very political elite that embodies the “guns for me but not for thee” in the city of New York)
Conservative values on abortion are not on his platform, conservative values on low taxes are not in his plans, conservative values on foreign policy are noticeably absent, conservative values on civil rights are shaky and inconsistent at best. Its really not hard to prove that the man is not a conservative.
Mr. 308: Somehow people who are staunch defenders of the Constitution have now sided with a man who was one of the worst when it came to Constitutional rights in the entire 17 original GOP runners. How is it that someone who advocated for an assault weapons ban openly is getting a pass where if someone else did that they would be crucified?
“younggun21 says:
May 11, 2016 at 12:41
Mr. 308: Somehow people who are staunch defenders of the Constitution have now sided with a man”
I’m voting against HRC dude, I’m not siding with anyone. You have no choice here. Trump or certain disaster. Make your choice.
And what exactly makes you so sure that Trump isn’t a disaster as well? I will never vote for HRC either, but likewise I have never voted for a democrat, and I still won’t vote for one even when he is pretending to be a republican. He plays lip service to the RKBA, but he is anti free trade, anti free speech, pro abortion, pro planned parenthood, pro big government, pro universal healthcare, and a registered democrat voter and supporter for far longer than he has been for conservatism. I hate PC culture, I agree with him on the RKBA but in no circumstances will I place my vote of approval for someone that will cripple the American economy and drive us back into an isolationist world view to be relentlessly attacked.
He can’t be any worse than Nixon was.
I know what you are saying younggun21 but where is the conservative movement. The time for the conservative movement to stop trump was during the primary and they failed. The Republican Party tried to stop him, they failed because they considered Cruz just as toxic as trump. The ineptitude of the Republican Party is astonishing. So I am more than happy to vote for a guy that rank and file republicans can’t stand, they haven’t done s$&t for the last 16 years. Mitch and friends have already pushed us to the left by bending over and asking Obama to go another round.
Do what you want, we each get one bullet in this gun fight. If you want to waste yours knowing that Hillary would thank you for voting for a 3rd party candidate then go for it, in fact I can probably find you a liberal that would more than happy to drive you to the polls. If you actually think that a 3rd party candidate has a chance of winning then by all means vote for them because that just proves that the some American are really too dumb to have a gun. All I know is Hillary would not be happy with my vote because it would cancel hers out, a liberal wouldn’t volunteer to drive me to the polls, and I will know that I did everything I could to put someone in there that doesn’t hate everything I stand for.
#neverTrump folks are unfortunately infected with Leftist traits that vote their feelings rather than logic.
Nobody here knows what Trumps real positions are on many topics.
However, everybody knows for certain the many bad implications are of HRC.
So if you’re an adult you have a choice between an unknown bad and a certainly worse.
Be an adult and use your brain not your heart.
What is there to destroy, that hasn’t already been subverted by Uniparty, Establishment GOP policies and power brokers, and their chosen candidates such as McCain and Romney, who got trounced by the likes of Barack Obama?
And by the way, speaking of destruction: Hillary Clinton destroys the country. The TTAG commentariat is pretty intelligent; I don’t understand why this point is seemingly ignored by some.
” I’ll vote conscience.”
WTF does that mean? Conscience concerning what? Are you saying something, or just making noise to convince yourself that you’re important? What conscience, about what, in which situations, or is it supposed to be a secret, magical conscience? Say something or STFU.
Simple. Conscience of voting in a leader who you respect, not a bully. Someone who you can look up to, not turn the tv off when your kids are in the room because you wouldn’t want your child to repeat that same language. Voting for someone that has the best interests of the country in mind, not pandering to unskilled workers by promising them to return the world back to a place of factory work when the only means of achieving this is crippling protectionist economic plans. Voting for someone that believes that planned parenthood should not be getting my tax dollars to abort children. Voting for someone that is going to dismantle the affordable care act, not advocate for another single payer healthcare system to “take care of everybody”.
Younggun – what good will it do you to vote for someone you believe MIGHT do all those things if that person has exactly ZERO chance of getting elected? You might as well vote for Ralph Nader or write in Mickey Mouse. The end result will be that when you pull the lever to submit your vote there will be a very loud sound of a toilet flushing because that is exactly where your vote will go. And that wasted vote will count as a vote for Hillary since it would have otherwise at least have canceled out some nitwit Liberal who voted for her.
If you sit out this election or waste your vote on a candidate with no chance of winning I hope you can live with your all-important conscience if Hillary wins and starts appointing Progressive justices to SCOTUS who will undermine all of the Bill of Rights, not just the 2A.
Yes, Trump is a huge question mark, but Hillary definitely is NOT. Please, do not make your final decision until at least the campaign process is over.
Matt, I see you post often in TTAG. As long as your CONSCIENCE doesn’t tell you to vote for Hillary! Otherwise, you will make a lot of enemies here. Me included. #NeverHillary
Never hillary. She should be indicted on charges of treason but assuming the Obama justice department is going to do that to one of their own is wishful thinking at best and foolish at worst. Bernie is no friend of ours either and would be a scourge on the economy, as well as trashing civil rights in favor of ‘feelings’ and being ‘offended’. I wouldn’t trust Trump to drive my car to the gas station much less run a country, sure Hillary and Bernie would steal the car, but that still doesnt make Trump the right candidate.
Failing to vote against Clinton and voting for Trump does not make these people our enemies.
It is short sighted, wrong, disastrous, terrible, fail… lots of things.
I don’t understand how anyone could possibly come to any decision that doesn’t clearly and directly work against allowing Clinton to win as the correct decision.
Perhaps these people do not understand how totally corrupt and dangerous she is. These people need to be talked out of this insanity, reasoned with, scolded, set straight.
But that doesn’t make them enemies here.
Look, Trump made stupid jokes about killing people. Clinton has killed people, not by pulling the trigger of a gun but her decisions have directly resulted in people dying horrible deaths, there is your reason, Trump has not killed anyone, that we know about. Look up Chris Stevens, there you go, vote Trump. Does that help?
No it doesn’t help. I am well aware that Clinton would be the worst thing to enter the White House in American history. I happen to think that Trump would be a close second. For that reason, I will not vote for him. I believe communism to be the single worst political and economic ideology that has ever been seen on this green earth, BUT that does not mean when someone give me the choice to vote for a communist or a fascist that I’m going to pick the fascist. There is a minute chance that the fascist will use their supreme power to do something good (trains run on time) and there is a 100% change that the communist will mess everything up but I will not, WILL NOT put my stamp of approval on the second worse thing. A fascist is better than a communist but it is still evil and wrong and disgusting. Hillary is terrible, the single worst. Like getting fed dog crap but when the only thing on the menu is dog crap or bird crap I’m going to order off menu or go elsewhere.
Voting Hilary is like Russian Roulette with a fully loaded cylinder. Voting Trump is Russian Roulette with one chamber loaded.
I’ll take my chances with Trump, but u Never Trumpers can dig your own grave if you want to. Hilary be like
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlz3-OzcExI
@Jared, I’m with you. Sometimes I think that the #nevertrump crowd simply needs their diapers changed.
I most certainly do not. I do not buy into the idea that I need to side with someone who does not represent my values in order to stop someone else who does not represent my values. I don’t side with Hitler to stop stalin, I won’t side with satan to stop the anti christ, and as much as I hate Hillary, I won’t side with Trump and be part of the downfall of the constitutional republic that has given the world, and myself the best opportunities imaginable.
Dude you forgot to say ‘potentially’.
Mr. 308
Its too late to edit the comment, guess I will have to add potentially down here for your convenience. Not your conscience though.
” I don’t side with Hitler to stop stalin”
Interesting. So you’re saying Stalin was a bad dude (in this analogy, you dont support a bad dude to stop another bad dude, ergo Stalin is a bad guy). So in your estimation, siding with Stalin to stop Hitler (which is, ya know, exactly what we did in WWII) was a bad idea? I mean, socialism/communism in the 30s/40s was as close as you could get to the antithesis of the American ideals of capitalism, individual freedom and personal responsibility. So it would have been completely wrong of us to team with him against Hitler. In your world, we would have been better off to take a principled stance against communism, and let the 3rd Reich usher in an era of totalitarian control of the entire continent. Jews? Freedom? Who needs em! At least we stood by our conscience and didn’t support that Bolshevik scum!!!
Seeing the way the Cold War developed and came close to taking out humanity, I’d say we got really, really lucky.
The Hitler/Stalin analogy is a poor one as they were never in an election together. A better question would be would you support Paul Von Hindenburg to stop Hitler? You would have one knowingly evil person (Hillary/Hitler) vs the competitor (Trump/Von Hindenburg). But your right you stay home or vote 3rd party that seemed to work out well for the Jews that voted for Theodor Duesterburg, I am sure they were glad they voted on principle.
I read a lot of your posts here. You seems to be very uninformed.
I think that you are just a troll.
We don’t need your stupid vote. Trump will win big and will be one of the best presidents in this country’s history.
Sometimes I think that this country has it coming. Too many stupid people or too many sellouts.
God help us all!
Younggun, should Hildog be elected, know that you were party to and a friend of hers in irreparably damaging this great Republic of ours. Is the upcoming election the one we all wanted? Certainly not; but part of being a man and a patriot in the real world requires sacrifice and often making the best of a bad situation. I think your bible would consider it a sin to value your pride over your duty to your countrymen to make such a small sacrifice. One that just might protect our Great Nation when the alternative is guaranteed destruction of much of what we all hold dear. If you don’t like being put in the situation we are all in fine; do what a man does and change it – but do it in a way that matters instead of a prideful symbolic display of burning your vote.
It is said that all evil needs to triumph is for good mean to do nothing and by throwing your vote away you are choosing to do nothing. …May posterity forget that you were our countryman should you choose to aid the enemy in our destruction.
Like the molon labe crowd needs to quit watching so many hero action movies? Way to demonize and trivialize anyone with a differing viewpoint.
What, exactly, is infantile about opposing a meglomaniac autocrat whom the majority of the party opposes and the majority of whose own supporters are Democrat open primary crashers?
“whom the majority of the party opposes”
This is a feature, not a bug.
“Democrat open primary crashers?”
This, also, is a feature, not a bug. Between rational GOP voters and rational Dem voters, it will be Trump in a landslide.
How is this a feature? So the entire congress is going to fight him tooth and nail every time he makes a move and this is a feature? Everyone on here hates when the president unilaterally makes a move using an executive order and now you are voting for a guy that will only get policy passed by doing exactly this and you call this a feature?
“younggun21 says:
May 11, 2016 at 12:53
How is this a feature?”
Do you not see the Democrats and the GOPe working together all the time for the last few… decades? Ignore what these idiots say, what has been accomplished? Obamacare, bailouts, spending up all the time up, ignoring IRS political activities.
One might think that the GOPe and the Democrats are actually conspiring together.
I really don’t care about Trump, I don’t give a single shit about him, other than the fact that he makes Paul Ryan unhappy, that he makes Rince Prebus unhappy. If this is true and Trump isn’t in on this with them all the whole time, this is the best thing since they invented water.
Its Trump or Clinton, that is it. They are all working against you, directly. There is a chance Trump will do good, it is certain what Clinton will do. This is not difficult.
Mr. 308
The political elite are certainly colluding, that is how politics work. I will remind you that not a single GOP member of the senate or house voted for the ACA. ALL 178 of them voted against it. The reason it was passed was simply the people voted for more democrats so blaming the GOP for the Affordable Care Act is asinine.
Like I have already said, I will not vote for someone that is contrary to nearly all of my values on the off chance that he MIGHT do some good. You say you hate ‘potentially’ but that is your whole argument. He ‘potentially’ could do some good. He also could ‘potentially’ destroy any chance for real political change in the nation because he will be a caricature for what not to vote for, for generations to come. When new voters are deciding who to put on the ballot, they have some no name Dem, or a republican and they remember the inflammatory trump and conflate everything that trump has said to the entire party.
For years, decades even; the left has been saying people on the Right are evil,racist, dimwits who only believe in low taxes because they got daddy inheritance. So now we have given it to them on a silver platter. A guy who has given them sound bites for the next 20 years on mexicans, women etc and one who gained their wealth from their father. He is everything that we have been accused of for years and now the left has a face to put to their accusations.
“ALL 178 of them voted against it.”
Yes, of course they did.
Then they stood by meekly and failed to do any of the many things they could have done to halt it, suspend it, postpone it, vote to repeal it (except in the weakest of possible ways that they know would be vetoed), defund it, stand up for you and your money and your health insurance. They have failed you on the ACA. They fail us on 2a. They fail us on immigration, on taxes, on regulation, need I go on?
Maybe you don’t understand how political power really works, you should have seen how the Democrats fought Reagan holding power by the weakest of margins, screaming and hollering at his every possible move, standing up on TV every single say saying ‘dead on arrival’ to his budget and on and on. And getting nearly everything they demanded, from a minority position. You don’t know these things, ok fine.
This Republican congress has done jack and shit, except to bow down to Obama in every possible way, give hime everything he demanded. They are all in on the game, they are all corrupt from the head to toe.
The Republicans are responsible for the ACA more than anyone else, you can thank them for it.
Let it burn.
I give up.
I do know how the political system works, I am in it. It is you that doesn’t. You think that you can vote for an ‘outsider’ and “burn it all down”. That is not how this works. I find it interesting that you blame people that voted against legislation, while absolving the people that voted for it and more importantly voted for the people in power that crafted the legislation and brought it to the floor. How does that make sense? All the trump supports can say now is ‘this is the will of the people’ yet when the will of the people was represented in that congress that passed the ACA its all the GOPs fault when they didnt have the votes to overturn it, because the PEOPLE voted more Dems in power. How does this make any sense?
You can’t burn down the system by voting in a demagogue. You don’t fix your house by burning it to the ground. If people are fed up with the GOP, vote in new legislators. You can’t keep having your cake and eat it too. The republican party lost the 2012 election by 5 million votes because they lost the female vote by 15%, the young vote by over 20% and both the Hispanic and black vote by considerable margin. You have now nominated a man that loses the woman by 30% and all major minority groups by an even greater margin. Could he pull Dems over to his side? Maybe. Will all the bernie supporters just stay home and not vote? Some will, and Donald might win.
However, sitting there and espousing the prowess of a protectionist, big government, bloviating leftwing candidate as the best solution for the country is mindless.
“younggun21 says:
May 11, 2016 at 14:03
I do know how the political system works, I am in it…. you blame people that voted against legislation…its all the GOPs fault when they didnt have the votes to overturn it…The republican party lost the 2012 election by 5 million votes because they lost the female vote by 15%, the young vote by over 20% and both the Hispanic and black vote by considerable margin….espousing the prowess of a protectionist, big government, bloviating leftwing candidate as the best solution for the country is mindless.”
—————————-
Hang on a second there, I really did misread you didn’t I? I took you for a student, possibly a poli-sci student, early college perhaps. But up there you are sounding a lot like a “Republican” GOPe something or other. What do you mean you are “in it” if you don’t mind, generally?
Very interesting indeed.
Hey younggun21, wher’d you go? I asked you a question. I think you need to answer it.
Yes. The username that I run under was created years ago when I was in fact, 21 years of age and just getting into the gun world having just found this site. Law and politics being my passion, I focused on politics and constitutional law, and without getting into specifics, I now work in Washington. By “in it” I mean to say that politics and the legality of legislation is not something that comes up for me by way of elections every 4 years, but by way of profession.
In the political world, assuming that one man is going to “burn down” the system that has been in place by unilaterally enacting executive actions/orders is not only ignoring the political processes that take place inside the beltway, but is morally irresponsible. Could the GOP legislators and leaders have done more regarding the ACA? Probably. However, at the same time they got a solid coalition together (which is rare nowadays) and unanimously opposed the law. Cruz filibustered the action for 21 hours. Then it was challenged in the Supreme Court where Roberts did in fact, screw the pooch but he is a judge, not a legislator affiliated with a political party.
As I have already stated, I think that a Clinton presidency would be the absolute worst thing for the nation, but in my mind that does not justify putting my stamp of approval on the second worst thing for the nation. Just as my communism and fascism analogy above stated, one is the purest evil, and the other is the second purest evil. I could not, in good conscience vote for something that is detrimental to the conservative values that I espouse on a daily basis on the soul argument that the alternative is worse.
Don’t worry 308 I’m still here
I asked you a question, and given the bent of your discussion and the fact that you are an insider – of some sort – you owe it to the people reading here to answer it.
Are you a Republican staffer – a political operative, cause it sure looks mighty suspicious to me, to be perfectly damn honest. Own up. I am not, I am a real live honest taxpaying citizen-voter.
Are you working for the Republican party? Are you working on behalf of the Republican party – other than as a private citizen that is.
I am sorry to be a downer, but I don’t owe anyone on here anything. I don’t give out personal information over the internet, a privacy issue I’m sure most would understand. I opine on topics of interest just like everyone else, I am neither an “inside source” for the intelligentsia nor am I being paid to give my legal opinion on this site.
I have given my opinion on why I will not vote for a Trump presidency and I’m not going to jeopardize anything for the benefit of commentators on a site, including my livelihood.
Hmm. Well I disagree, I am not asking you anything personal, and as a political insider, coming in here and talking Trump down the way that you do and then avoiding the question of whether or not you are a Republican operative I think stands for itself.
Plus that whole
“I opine on topics of interest just like everyone else, I am neither an “inside source” for the intelligentsia nor am I being paid to give my legal opinion on this site”
I didn’t ask you anything legal oriented, that’s a very weaselly answer to be frank. I asked you a simple question, are you working in the capacity of the Republican party.
You force the reader draw their own conclusions then. Obviously you are free to correct any misconception.
Very, very interesting. Good day sir.
It is simply a matter of personal privacy. Despite my age, I am not the most savvy with computers and I don’t pretend to understand the far reaches of the internet; so simply put I leave work related matters to work, I keep personal matters personal, and I keep this separate from my individual passions such as firearms.
I am not talking down Trump per se, I am talking him down from a staunch conservative perspective. If Trump aligns with your political ideology, or stopping Hillary is enough to compromise your values, that is your prerogative and all the more power to you sir. You are a free man that is free to make whatever decision you want to with your vote to give. I have made my choice that my values are more important to me than a political race, and that voting second worse is not something that I would want to live with. Nor would it be something I would be comfortable telling my children I did because I do not think that this man would make a suitable president.
Good day to you as well.
“the majority of the party opposes”
Man, dude keeps getting a lot of primary wins for someone who is opposed by “the majority” of the party.
“so simply put I leave work related matters to work, I keep personal matters personal”
Look, that’s all fine, I have the same concerns on my end, and I wouldn’t want to tell you who I work for. But here’s the thing, I work in the IT business and I am happy to tell you that. I also don’t go around bad mouthing other IT companies even though I have many many opinions on such matters, as you might imagine.
So here’s the thing, you ARE in here bad mouthing Trump, clearly. And ok fine, don’t tell me where you work, no problem. But you cannot confirm that you do _not_ work for the Republican party, or are working on behalf of the Republican party. That to me raises a lot of red flags. That is not a personal question, and to a DC insider, clearly making party oriented political statements, it seems a reasonable question.
Because to think that the Republican party might be sending people out into the wild to talk down the presumptive Republican candidate for president, now that sounds awful shady to me. You can see my point of course, right?
Look, if you don’t want to answer that’s your business. I think if you really are a political insider and you are unwilling to do campaigning in the open (like all ABOVE BOARD and HONEST and all of that, right?), you might take my advice and just keep your mouth shut when it comes to politics like I do when it comes to the IT business, if you know what I mean.
See what I am saying?
308:
Firstly, you do see that there is a difference between being in the IT field and being the political field when discussing a politically charged event? This is an argument on the upcoming election, if it were one about a particular IT company in a scandal, things might work themselves out a bit differently for you.
Second; I am “bad mouthing” him from my perspective, but I am in no way attempting to tell you who to vote for. I was simply justifying my reasoning for not voting for him. That is my opinion based on my values. You can tell me to go pound sand and vote what you think is best and that is fine, I’m not trying to influence you, I’m just explaining my reasoning. Additionally, I don’t care what kind of “red flags” its raises for your personally, that is not my concern. I don’t give my opinion on topics in order to adhere to the sensibilities of the other people giving their opinions. If this raises red flags or makes you feel a certain way, thats fine. Thats also your right.
Third: You think that the republicans are hiring people to go out and give their opinion on Donald in some conspiracy theory? Fine. If that is what you want to believe than go for it. I can tell you that would be ridiculous but I don’t pretend like my words have any effect here. If you want to believe that than go ahead, no skin off my nose.
Lastly, no I don’t see what you are saying. I am a citizen, and I still have a vote. My professional life is inconsequential. No one is forcing me to vote a certain way, no one is forcing me to think a certain way. I am not part of some hive mind, and I am not going to just clam up about something that I am passionate about. You have an expertise on topics related to IT and I would assume that you would be willing to give this expertise to those, or to simply explain why you went a certain way in relation to a computer set up, or something of the sort (I told you I am not all that computer savvy). It is not telling people inside information on IT companies that would be wrong. I have no inside information, I have not given any inside information.
All that I have done is state my opinion on a candidate for the presidency predicated upon public information. I don’t like his foreign policy, I don’t like his stance on planned parenthood, I don’t like his stance on abortion, I don’t like his stance on free trade, I don’t like his history on firearms, and I don’t like his stance on Libel law. That is enough for me to say that he has not earned my vote as of this time. Nothing more, nothing less.
“Lastly, no I don’t see what you are saying. I am a citizen, and I still have a vote. My professional life is inconsequential. …It is not telling people inside information on IT companies that would be wrong. I have no inside information, I have not given any inside information.”
It’s called conflict of interest, insider information is a completely different animal. That’s another deflective response there.
Look you stated you are a DC insider, you will not tell us that you are not a Republican operative, you are bad mouthing the presumptive Republican candidate. I think that tells us all we need to know.
I never said I am an insider. I said I work in the city of Washington DC. If you want to interpret this as some conspiracy theory that is your prerogative, I have found arguing with conspiracy theorists is a waste of time. Every dismissal of their conspiracy is just further ‘proof’ that you are in on it. If you want to think that ttag has been infiltrated by some republican insider (who curiously has been commenting on this site long before this nomination, go figure) that is your right to think that way. No matter how ridiculous it is. Have a good one.
“I never said I am an insider. I said I work in the city of Washington DC. ”
No you said you work in DC and in politics, that is just anohter deflection. Furthermore you refuse to assert that you are not a Republican operative which frankly is both pretty non identifying even assuming you do, and not an unreasonable question. It would be a simple thing to state it seems to me.
308:
Firstly, you do see that there is a difference between being in the IT field and being the political field when discussing a politically charged event? This is an argument on the upcoming election, if it were one about a particular IT company in a scandal, things might work themselves out a bit differently for you.
Second; I am “bad mouthing” him from my perspective, but I am in no way attempting to tell you who to vote for. I was simply justifying my reasoning for not voting for him. That is my opinion based on my values. You can tell me to go pound sand and vote what you think is best and that is fine, I’m not trying to influence you, I’m just explaining my reasoning. Additionally, I don’t care what kind of “red flags” its raises for your personally, that is not my concern. I don’t give my opinion on topics in order to adhere to the sensibilities of the other people giving their opinions. If this raises red flags or makes you feel a certain way, thats fine. Thats also your right.
Third: You think that the republicans are hiring people to go out and give their opinion on Donald in some conspiracy theory? Fine. If that is what you want to believe than go for it. I can tell you that would be ridiculous but I don’t pretend like my words have any effect here. If you want to believe that than go ahead, no skin off my nose.
Lastly, no I don’t see what you are saying. I am a citizen, and I still have a vote. My professional life is inconsequential. No one is forcing me to vote a certain way, no one is forcing me to think a certain way. I am not part of some hive mind, and I am not going to just clam up about something that I am passionate about. You have an expertise on topics related to IT and I would assume that you would be willing to give this expertise to those, or to simply explain why you went a certain way in relation to a computer set up, or something of the sort (I told you I am not all that computer savvy). It is not telling people inside information on IT companies that would be wrong. I have no inside information, I have not given any inside information.
All that I have done is state my opinion on a candidate for the presidency predicated upon public information. I don’t like his foreign policy, I don’t like his stance on planned parenthood, I don’t like his stance on abortion, I don’t like his stance on free trade, I don’t like his history on firearms, and I don’t like his stance on Libel law. That is enough for me to say that he has not earned my vote as of this time. Nothing more, nothing less.
You still haven’t addressed the fact that any vote not for Trump (even the ones that abstain completely) is a vote for Hillary. You claim that you are diametrically opposed to everything hillary is yet in the next breath you pledge your support to her.
As wrong as the system is the system is binary. A or B, there is no other option. Now here’s the scuzzy part, any vote not counted for A is a vote for B.
(Don’t reply for my sake, I am sadly no longer technologically capable of following these blogs. Reply for the sake of who comes after me)
A vote for neither Trump nor Hillary is neither politically nor mathematically the same as a vote for Hillary. Politically it’s completely different. It’s a rejection of both. Mathematically you can argue it is the same as a _half-vote_ for Hillary, but it certainly does not yield the same mathematical result as an actual vote cast for Hillary.
Mmm… #MaybeTrump.
#trumpoverhillary
When it comes down to it (Trump vs Hillary). Who are they going to vote for? Are they just going to not vote (which would be a vote for Hillary), or vote for Hillary?
#neverhillary
?
“#trumpoverhillary”
Now there’s an visual I could have happily done without…
*yeeeech*
Never Trump! Why? Precisely because of the SC.
Hillary nominates another Kagen, the GOP fights.
Trump nominates another Kagen (and he WILL), the GOP will approve unanimously, just because he’s “our guy.”
Hillary in office keeps conservatives energized and fighting to keep the Congress, and keep it afraid of crossing conservatives.
Trump in office is a mockery of conservatism and will keep conservatives demoralized and away from the polls, which hands Congress over to the Dems.
YOU will be turning in YOUR guns next summer if Hillary is elected.
The BATF will track every internet poster and come to their house to collect the firearms. Your maid, neighbors, a burglar, looters, a peeping Tom, etal will report you and get a fat reward if you keep any guns and they see them.
Sorry, but YOU will probably live to regret your vote.
When the cartels take over Houston completely (they have already started in case you didn’t notice), you will be unarmed.
That’s pure delusion of how the world works. I wouldn’t expect any less from a chump man. People who said NeverChump said that more than 6 months they would never vote for him and you people still nominated him. It was a fair warning. Now more than ever people are starting to wake up to BS of the two party system and yes they have a conscience for voting for people with principal.
I think calling trump the GOP’s “man” is absurd at best. If anything they’ll try to bone him as hard as they can for 4 to 8 years, or use him as the patsy for whatever stupidity they can think of. To say there’s a lot of people in Congress swallowing the bitter pill of their presidential candidate is an under statement.
What about the 70 or 80 percent of us who live in states that are absolutely certain to go one way or the other? Are we allowed to vote our principles (and potentially help smaller parties with ballot access in future elections), or do we have to cast a meaningless vote for Trump to show solidarity?
Are those mutually exclusive? I’m not seeing it. Hyperbole?
They are not necessarily mutually exclusive. If your principles align with voting for Trump, go for it. Mine do not, and I have the luxury of knowing that, no matter what happens short of Herculean election fraud, my state will not go to Hillary. If I lived in one of the ten or so “swing” states that will actually decide this election, I would try to suppress my nausea and vote Trump and pray for the best.
I’m not affiliated with a party. If you guys wanted to make sure the GOP had vote you should have picked anyone else. You can point fingers all you want, but maybe you’ll learn that your plurality of insanity in the party doesn’t put you on a high horse.
I’ll do whatever I can to keep the dems out of the senate and house but I don’t see myself voting for someone I see as a proto-mussolini.
The democrats will get control Congress on Hillary’s coattails. Their main order of business will be Australian Style Gun Control and it will become the Law Of The Land just like Obamacare. The Supreme Court will be turned permanently anti-gun leftist and dump all pro gun laws.
“You can keep your guns” will go down the same toilet as “You can keep your insurance”.
Trump has changed his position on everything, usually more than once. I submit that you can have no confidence in anything he says or any action he claims he will take. You can vote for him if you want, but it’s because you hope he will do certain things, not that you know he will do certain things.
Gary Johnson, (L), 2016
This is not “Breaking”.
It was scheduled months ago.
This is the en banc hearing that was granted back in March after the appeals court ruled to remand to the lower court to hear the AWB under strict scrutiny.
And the banned weapons are not exactly “back in play”. The gun-grabbers are possibly having a second bite at the apple to uphold their ban at the appeals court level.
“having a second bite at the apple”
Must be nice to be one of the privileged class that get to just keep trying at these things until it goes their way. Meanwhile on our side we get the ACA rammed hard and tight right up the pooper. Done. It’s the law.
Not really. This is exactly how the federal courts are set up – whatever side you are on. District, Circuit, Circuit en banc (optional), SCOTUS.
Keep in mind, if you want to politicize it, it might be that the 4th wanted to send a message to the SCOTUS in reaffirming their prior decision.
“send a message to the SCOTUS in reaffirming their prior decision”
I’ll believe that when I see it. I have a prediction, this will be a win for the state, not us.
Let’s see if I’m right.
In four years you might all be saying, vote for anybody BUT Trump, after we learn he’s just an arrogant authoritarian statist. And we will once again choose the lesser of the two evils. And the cycle will continue, as the evils get worse and worse and we choose the lesser worst each time.
Get enough people to support a third party Libertarian candidate and we may have a chance to reverse and return to our individual liberty heritage, when we’ll be choosing the BEST of both candidates who DON’T want to run your life with government.
*Sigh*
Maybe someday…
Realpolitik.
Look have you considered it this way. HRC is a known quantity, obviously. Trump is at some degree an unknown. Yes we know what this guy has done in the past, fine, and we see his public statements on this and that, and he’s quite full of himself and wishy washy on things. Yes, fine.
That’s experience seen from our side of the fence, all we see is the public persona of this guy, we really know nothing about him – people in the public like him always are putting on an act. Who is he fooling with this, is he trying to get one over on the liberty minded people or is he putting one over on the other side, because you know this is possible. For all we know he is a well studied liberterian thinker who really stands by the constitution. He has never held public office, he has no voting record, right now he is campaigning.
Here is what we do know. It appears the Democrats *and* the GOP do not want this guy in the race – this could be all BS also for all we know, but given what our choices are and the information we have, this is all I need to know. He pisses off exactly the people I want to piss off. And he does so very effectively, I can live with that.
I wouldn’t pick this guy if I had my choice of candidates, but I do not. The fact is he is an unknown, HRC is beyond a known quantity, she is about the worst that the Democrats could offer up.
Vote Trump Hard.
Even if I agreed with your entire argument right up until your conclusion, your argument would still more strongly support the alternate conclusion of voting for Hillary.
Vote Hillary and fight hard with Congress to oppose her always and everywhere.
Vote Trump and proceed to compromise your rights away in the name of party unity and for the sake of “making deals.”
Really, with Trump in office, the GOP’s 2018 election campaign will be founded on all the wonderful things they accomplished. None of which accomplishments will expand rights.
With Hillary in office, the GOP will have to behave and run as the opposition, conceding only enough to avoid being blamed for gridlock.
Vote Hillary and we can ride this out until 2020. Vote Trump and America will ride the Trump Train straight over a cliff long before 2024 arrives save us.
That makes no sense. You are saying that if we vote for Trump, we cannot oppose his dictates in Congress? We have to have Hillary in order to have a say in the Senate? Where do you get this stuff? You can vote for Trump and still do *EVERY* thing you are advocating, whether he wins or loses. You can also vote for Hillary and do the same. In fact, if you vote for Trump and he still loses to Hillary, your ability to do everything you are wishing for still hasn’t changed. If you vote for Hillary and Trump wins, you can still begin working on starting a third party run before he is even inaugurated. You are tossing around non sequiturs as though you had millions.
“…and fight hard with Congress to…”
Oh yea, cause that’s worked so freaking well all these years.
Yea, that’s some genius level stuff right there. We’ll just WORK WITH CONGRESS.
head –>> wall
“Vote Trump Hard.”
That will be easier now that Viagra is $2 per pill generic…
🙂
Let’s worry about getting Trump elected first, then we can all become philosophers and throw him out after this election if need be.
I suspect you’d have more trouble convincing him to run for a second term, than to get him to leave. He may endorse a candidate to replace him. If I had *one* billion, you couldn’t get me near that job. Hell, never mind the money, you couldn’t *now*. There’s a lot of fun shit to do in this world, and we don’t get forever.
The orals from today are posted, and they’re not pretty. Very hostile panel. Looking like a loss.
And, unfortunately, with a 4-4 SCOTUS, the chances that we’ll get this overturned are slim at best. The stun gun ruling was small potatoes compared to overturning every AWB in the country.
Got a link?
Maybe he has something better, but here is where the official arguments will be posted (not there yet) http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/en-banc-cases
It’s up, if you have the 1:15 to listen to it.
link please ??
“Down-ticket” elections.
It’s sad what time has done to the 4th Circuit. I remember when it was very conservative. Now it seems the retirements and replacements have turned it into a challenger for the 9th Circuits title of most stupidly liberal judicial hellhole.
The original ruling that started all of this was by an activist judge who inserted feelings in place of those pesky and annoying facts. Her ruling (approved of by our draft-dodging “Progressive” AG) was outed by the 4th and sent back for a re-do. Frosh, our Boy AG, decided to try his luck with En Banc. Meanwhile, all clocks stop; the prohibition stands; and we all wait impatiently. We’re all very disappointed that Governor Hogan, who AG Frosh works for, has not directed him to FOAD. But that’s another thread for another day I guess.
By the way, nice thread hijack by the anti-Trump injectors. I’ll be so glad when Thanksgiving rolls around again.
Now back on topic.
Yeah, the progs are shitting all over themselves at the thought of Trump in the white house. They’re getting desperate. They know it’s gonna be a landslide for the man.
Wonder how many will leave the country or off themselves when he gets sworn in?
Forcing states to hold in the federal minium standart and not lower is good idea.
A fantastic article on why conservatives and others should vote for Trump…
…by Bobby Jindal
http://www.wsj.com/articles/im-voting-trump-warts-and-all-1462739009
Comments are closed.