Posted on 11/10/2012 6:53:22 AM PST by BobL
It seems to me that the most vocal conservatives around here prefer to lose elections so that they can P&M about how unfair the world is to them. That rank narcissism is not attractive. It is driving people away from their supposed cause.
There won't be any U.N. gun ban. Unlike pro-lifers, pro 2nd Amendment types actually make up a majority of voters. This explains why it has been nearly two decades since we've seen any significant gun-control legislation enacted.
How many votes could a properly functioning ORCA produce?
The trouble with the ones you mentioned, Santorum, Gingrich, Perry et al., is that they didn't get enough votes in the primary to win the nomination. That's how politics works. They lost. Conservatives have to learn something fundamental that liberals understand. To win you have to be united. As long as there are bruising and damaging primary fights among conservatives and then no unity afterward, the losses will continue.
Even that isn't saying anything hopeful, it's the equivalent of "we aren't losing ground" it certainly doesn't mean we're gaining ground.
If the even half of the electorate were pro 2nd amendment, why haven't there been even talks about repeal of GCA or NFA?
Because many gun owners just don't see these two acts as a threat to their 2nd Amendment freedoms, unlike the AWB that cost the Democrats congress. And gun owners have gained ground. The AWB was allowed to expire. CCW laws are passing in state after state. SCOTUS codified individual gun owner rights in Heller and President Obama himself loosened a ban on guns in national parks (granted it was quid pro quo). And the democrats have remained so chagrined by their '94 losses that except for a small handful of rabid liberals, most don't want their names attached to anything that looks remotely like gun control legislation.
I didn’t say that was what I PAID for. Fact is we paid it off in 15 years. Still, I couldn’t get near what the tax man claims.
Really! Like I said Tues. night. At least we didn’t have to wait long to be disappointed.
There won’t be any U.N. gun ban. Unlike pro-lifers, pro 2nd Amendment types actually make up a majority of voters. This explains why it has been nearly two decades since we’ve seen any significant gun-control legislation enacted.
Voters have defeated every “Gay Marriage” initiative when it hit the ballots. Unelected (appointed) judges forced the same initiatives into law. Judges have also allowed the theft of private property through eminent domain for the purposes of development based on higher expected tax revenue.
Do you really think they’ll let you vote on keeping your gun rights? Like I said before, they rammed through Obama Care.
“I didn’t say that was what I PAID for. Fact is we paid it off in 15 years. Still, I couldn’t get near what the tax man claims.”
LOL. I thought about that, but figured I’d roll the dice and guess that you overpaid. Oh well, at least you’re not upside down. Nice job.
My point was that the Fed is robbing us blind here and 4 more years of it will leave us on empty.
When the voting population wants it to change I will represent their desire.
And this is the best answer.
I’ve noticed that the liberal media rarely ask Democrat candidates to articulate their position on gun control. They understand that a truthful answer will only hurt these candidates so they give the issue a pass. Pro-life Republicans need to learn how to play this game as well and answering as above will help take the issue off the table and not drive away voters.
Thanks.
Line is mine. Simple and defendable.
Had media traing in the past and key point is say what you want to say, and keep on your point.
Dont let them lead you into their agenda.
If a bunch of people sitting around their keyboards understand that, why don’t Pubbie candidates?
Succinct, and about as accurate as one can get.
Understood to the nth degree by the libs who currently own the senate and the presidency.
Understood by virtually every single politician who is currently holding office.
The flip side is what is used on the losers, by every winner, each and every time.
The entire purpose of each and every commercial, campaign stop, debate, or utterance is to separate the opponent from his voters.
The libs have it down to a science. They play that tune on a grand piano, every time, while conservatives argue about platforms, right up to the election, not realizing that THAT is exactly the sheet music the libs are playing from.
Want to argue about platform? Fine. Do so while picking candidates, stressing the positives of each. After the candidate is selected, by getting the mostest of the votes, then unite behind that candidate, or prepare to lose, one more time.
Regards candidates utterances, practice, practice and practice. If you cannot join words into a coherent sentence without stepping on your richard, then STFU.
A candidate must know, absolutely, that whatever comes out of their mouths is going to be twisted by the media to suit their goal (getting dems elected).
The media? The media is the actual democratic/liberal party. The liberal politicians are merely an extension of the media, the actual pawns, that get their hands dirty, for the masters.
Expecting any type of fairness or positive exposure from the media is same as grabbing a viper by the tail, then being surprised when it bites you. It is what they do>
Anything they say, write, publish, ask of you, or state, has but one purpose, to elect libs into office. Therefore, just like the admonition given by police, anything you say, anything, can and will be used against you in the court of public discourse, during the campaign and election.
Their MO for winning is to cause division, as they themselves have nothing to run on, as exemplified by this election. Yet, they won, again not because their guy was stellar (choke), but because our guy had the base divided into multiple fragments, by none other than the media. We lapped it up like a starving rescue kitten drinks a saucer of milk.
Not united, and at a loss, every time.
WOW!! I’ve missed your posts up until now. I agree with every word you say. Too bad, but these are the facts and our side can accept this or continue to lose elections. Frankly, I fear it is too late and we may never have a fair presidential election—ever, by peaceful means. Too many on our side surrendered too soon.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.