My friend, I think you’re ignoring the fact that the Second Amendment doesn’t exist in a bubble. Candidates’ proclivities for bigger or smaller government weigh in on every decision they make and can very easily influence them to change their position.
Case in point: the so-called “pro-life” Democrats on Obamacare. When it became clear that their support was needed for passage, many of them cast their votes even though it was clear even then that it would usher in abortion.
Would it not be better to err on the side of caution and side with conservatives, who are less likely to vote for big government policies?
I TOTALLY agree with you. That’s why I said it can be infuriating to see the NRA endorse a dem, but the NRA doesn’t judge candidates the way I do.
They strictly look at previous records voting on firearms related legislation, and stated positions. (voting records carry more weight)
If someone as liberal as Nancy Pelosi had a strong voting record supporting firearms owners, the NRA would endorse her. If her opponent had a similar established voting record, they would endorse neither. That’s how they have always done it.
The NRA pays no attention to political parties or even ideology when choosing a candidate to endorse. In the long run, I believe that helps their credibility all around, as they are focused on one single issue and nothing else.