Election Dilemma


PDA






Bubbles
October 20, 2004, 10:34 AM
I've voting for Bush in the Presidential election. That's not an issue.

The problem is the Congressional race. The incumbent RINO has a GOA D rating, and was one of only 22 House Republicans to vote against the repeal of the DC gun ban last month. The Democrat challenger is unrated, but known as a hard-left liberal, and he has stated that he supports the AWB. This race was supposed to be a shoo-in for the incumbent, but has now become too close to call.

Here's the dilemma - neither candidate is good on guns. HOWEVER, there is a very good, GOA A+ rated Republican legislator in the General Assembly who won't challenge the incumbent in a primary, but who will run for the nomination in 2006 if the Democrat wins this year.

So, do I hold my nose and vote for the incumbent, or do I withhold my support from both candidates and leave that section of the ballot blank? There is no third-party candidate in this race, and there's no way I will vote for the Democrat.

If you enjoyed reading about "Election Dilemma" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Zrex
October 20, 2004, 10:44 AM
Ah! Short term sacrifice for the potential of a long term gain.....

Its a tough call. How does the Republican stand on other pro-freedom issues compared to the Democrat?

Mikul
October 20, 2004, 11:36 AM
Vote for the Democrat. When I have to choose between two terrible candidates, I vote for the challenger. I'm certainly not going to reward someone for years of poor service. In your case, it has the added benefit of giving you the potential for a big win when this Democrat's re-election comes up.

RealGun
October 20, 2004, 11:58 AM
Vote Republican. The D-rated GOP legislator is still subject to peer pressure, when there is the usual effort to vote along party lines. Voting otherwise just makes it easier for Democrats to accumulate votes for or against a bill, and one does not really have to speculate how they will vote.

benEzra
October 20, 2004, 12:07 PM
Or leave that section of the ballot blank, write the Democratic party and tell them why you couldn't vote for their candidate, and write the Republican party and tell them why you couldn't vote for their candidate.

(Just an option.)

pax
October 20, 2004, 01:36 PM
Write in "None of the Above" and tell the Republicans why.

pax

Diggler
October 20, 2004, 01:43 PM
VOTE REPUBLICAN!!

For no other reason that we NEED a solid majority in Congress whether Kerry gets elected or not. Liberal Repub's are a pain in the butt but they are pretty irrelevant within their party and still help to keep the power out of the hands of such critters as Feinstein, Kerry and Kennedy.

Poodleshooter
October 20, 2004, 01:48 PM
+1 to pax's response. Write to the candidate AND the local party.
I've written in my own name in many VA elections where a "Republican" was running.
Local elections here are the hardest to deal with because there's seldom a libertarian or other viable third party alternative (hello third parties, get working at the local level in VA!)
Then again, there aren't enough of them in this region to shake a stick at. Perhaps that's why there is no local activity.

Standing Wolf
October 20, 2004, 04:35 PM
Vote for the Libertarian.

Bubbles
October 20, 2004, 04:45 PM
How does the Republican stand on other pro-freedom issues compared to the Democrat?

If you go by their statements, they're about the same. The problem is the Democrat has no voting record.

Write in "None of the Above" and tell the Republicans why.

I was thinking about writing in "No Gun Control" since the write-in votes are tabulated.

Vote for the Libertarian.

There is none in this race; otherwise there would be no question about my vote.

ssr
October 20, 2004, 04:48 PM
I'm in the same boat. I'm sick of these RINO Republicans who actively vote against our gun rights. But then all I'm left with is voting for a true Democrat.

But then, what if we vote against these RINOS, and then Democrats win and win a majority or close to it, and then Kerry wins. Not good at all! Thnik about the future pushes for Semi-Auto Bans and then the upcoming UN conference on world wide small arms treaty. Do we want Democrats in control of everything? Not at all.

RealGun
October 20, 2004, 04:49 PM
Withholding a vote and making it easier for the Dem is not productive. It's idealistic, perhaps righteous, but it's not productive. It's counterproductive.

The seemingly automatic Libertarian suggestion wouldn't apply. Take note that there was no LP alternative mentioned.

Turkey Creek
October 20, 2004, 04:51 PM
I follow a standard proceedure in these situations- I vote against the incumbent- it's my way of being an equal oportunity employer- give everyone a chance to be a moron- plus the challenger, if elected, will start at the bottom of the heap and not have as much influence in committees, thus being less of a danger-

RealGun
October 20, 2004, 05:22 PM
I'm sick of these RINO Republicans who actively vote against our gun rights.

There aren't very many of them running according to the GOA ratings of candidates for contested seats. A number of the 12 incumbent Republicans in the Senate do not look very good, but the House is generally impressive. There are not nearly as many, but it is surprising how many Dems are highly rated. None are incumbent Senators, but 12 Democratic House incumbents are rated B or better.

The ratings indicate 34 states with Senate races, a few uncontested. All House seats are up for election.

GOA Congressional candidate ratings (http://www.gunowners.org/votetb04.htm)

ssr
October 20, 2004, 05:37 PM
Well, my Republican Senator has a D rating, but he's running against a Democrat with a F.

RealGun
October 20, 2004, 06:05 PM
Well, my Republican Senator has a D rating, but he's running against a Democrat with a F.

I'll guess that you are in a State with a megalopolis and dominated by big city government. They're all pretty much the same, it would seem.

mrapathy2000
October 20, 2004, 09:59 PM
is their a libertarian candidate? that or leave blank. wouldnt vote for the republican with that record then again he could prove very usefull when it comes to a Dem vs Rep issue in congress and we need reps. part could pressure him.

do not vote dem we got to many as is.

Gifted
October 21, 2004, 02:16 AM
Is there no Libertarian on the ballot, or no Libertarian at all? I'll assume you've looked them up to see that there's not one to write in.

Bartholomew Roberts
October 21, 2004, 09:28 AM
If the Republican in question is Frank Wolf, I would definitely follow Pax's suggestion as he is no friend to us. If not, then I would probably still follow it.

With the Texas redistricting giving the Republicans about six seats, we can afford to lose a few RINOs in other states and still keep comfortable control of the House.

RealGun
October 21, 2004, 09:42 AM
The Democrat challenger is unrated, but known as a hard-left liberal, and he has stated that he supports the AWB.

When you don't help to defeat the Democrat, aren't you doing the cut-off-your-nose-to-spite-your-face thing? Why give the Dems more votes, when some of the Republicans are already unreliable in a weak majority? Electing another weak Republican at least gives the party leadership a shot at leveraging more conservative voting.

ShadowOne
October 21, 2004, 08:35 PM
Remember, majority leaders determine the agenda in congress. Vote Republican even if it means giving the nod to a RINO.

CannibalCrowley
October 21, 2004, 08:45 PM
Remember, majority leaders determine the agenda in congress. Vote Republican even if it means giving the nod to a RINO. That really doesn't make much sense. Voting for an Rep anti instead of a Dem who is pro, simply puts another anti in office. How is this a good thing?

pinblaster
October 21, 2004, 08:51 PM
Since there is little or no difference between the two candidates I would vote for the challenging democrat and show the incumbent RINO the door . Doing this might encourage the democrat to maybe update thier posisitons . Reelecting the RINO will only give you more of the same ol same ol .

Bubbles
October 21, 2004, 10:20 PM
If the Republican in question is Frank Wolf, I would definitely follow Pax's suggestion as he is no friend to us.

I did finally find out why he decided to vote to keep the DC gun ban in place. During a debate with Socas (the Democrat) this issue came up, and Wolf stated that:

- he supports DC "home rule". In other words, he's willing not only to ignore the Second Amendment, but the Constitution as well, where DC is defined as a Federal territory, and

- he believes that, given DC's high crime rate, the ban is a good idea. :fire: :banghead: :cuss:

RealGun
October 22, 2004, 12:08 AM
That really doesn't make much sense. Voting for an Rep anti instead of a Dem who is pro, simply puts another anti in office. How is this a good thing?

It depends upon whether you are referring to the House or the Senate. Too often, the Senate votes strictly along party lines, especially the Democrats. Personal judgment about doing the right thing is not very much in evidence. Check sometime. You'll see what I mean.

The House is all over the place. There are even 12 Democratic incumbents with B or better GOA ratings, a number of them A. The Senate is downright evil by comparison. All Democratic Senate incumbents running except for Grassley's C (D-IA) are rated F or are anti-gun leaders at F-. That's across 34 states, so it's pretty safe to say that Dem Senators vote anti-gun across the board.

In the House I think it's true that a RINO can be more of a rogue, but I believe he or she will be badgered for conformity by his own party members. I would rather see that rogue badgered by Republicans. The GOA ratings tell us that would be a good idea when playing the odds.

Bartholomew Roberts
October 24, 2004, 12:42 PM
I did finally find out why he decided to vote to keep the DC gun ban in place. During a debate with Socas (the Democrat) this issue came up, and Wolf stated that:

- he supports DC "home rule". In other words, he's willing not only to ignore the Second Amendment, but the Constitution as well, where DC is defined as a Federal territory, and

- he believes that, given DC's high crime rate, the ban is a good idea.

Remember the Tiahrt Amendment that blocked NICS from keeping data on approved, legitimate purchasers more than 24 hours? It originally removed a whole host of restrictions on FFLs that had been put in place by Brady including some of the storefront requirements and other rules that had been put in place during the Clinton Administration as part of a plan to actively reduce the number of FFLs.

Rep. Frank Wolf is the Republican who removed those additional protections from fellow Republican Tiahrt's bill in committee. In this election you can not vote for him because:

1) He won't support your gun rights in any form even as a Republican
2) He isn't necessary to retain Republican control of the House

As for sending a message, I don't really think the polls are a good place to send any message besides "Your performance has been totally unsatisfactory". Oftentimes, the main parties can't even figure out what the message you were sending was. I'd just vote for someone else here on the principle that turnover will keep them from acquiring too much power that they can later put to negative use.

RealGun
October 24, 2004, 03:58 PM
Let's not lose sight of the fact that we don't really know who we're talking about, at least not confirmed by the original poster. Mention of Wolf was your own speculation or hypothetical.

I'd just vote for someone else here on the principle that turnover will keep them from acquiring too much power that they can later put to negative use.

Bob Locke
October 24, 2004, 09:08 PM
Let's not lose sight of the fact that we don't really know who we're talking about, at least not confirmed by the original poster.
Actually, if you look at the post near the bottom of the first page you will find:
Good Guess Bart!

If the Republican in question is Frank Wolf, I would definitely follow Pax's suggestion as he is no friend to us.
It would seem that Frank Wolf is definitely the elected official being discussed, and he is DEFINITELY anti-gun.

Jim March
October 24, 2004, 09:20 PM
Well here's the good news: the GOP majority in the House doesn't appear to be much at risk this year, so letting the Dem into this seat won't hurt anything.

When that's the case, punishing RINOs is a good thing. I'd outright vote for the Dem.

In the US Senate, voting straight GOP is absolutely critical unless the Dem is "Zell Miller class" *and* the GOPer is a turd.

RealGun
October 24, 2004, 09:26 PM
If the Republican in question is Frank Wolf, I would definitely follow Pax's suggestion as he is no friend to us.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


It would seem that Frank Wolf is definitely the elected official being discussed, and he is DEFINITELY anti-gun.

I still read that as another guess, not that it's a big deal, but let's not say vote against the GOP when we're talking about the wrong person.

Bob Locke
October 25, 2004, 12:36 AM
Bartolomew Roberts put forth the statement:
If the Republican in question is Frank Wolf, I would definitely follow Pax's suggestion as he is no friend to us.
Bubbles (who started the thread) quoted that statement in a reply post with the header:
Good Guess Bart!
I hope there isn't any further doubt as to which elected official is being discussed.

And among GOP elected officials who don't deserve the vote of pro-gun folks, Frank Wolf is close to the top of the list. I lived in Virginia for several years and was chairman of the GOP in the city of Portsmouth for a while. I know who and what he is, and, as I stated, he is NO friend of ours.

RealGun
October 25, 2004, 09:49 AM
Got it! This would have been easier if Bubbles had been forthcoming from the start. Even identifying his subscriber location would have been helpful.

Bubbles
October 26, 2004, 12:40 PM
Remember the Tiahrt Amendment that blocked NICS from keeping data on approved, legitimate purchasers more than 24 hours? It originally removed a whole host of restrictions on FFLs that had been put in place by Brady including some of the storefront requirements and other rules that had been put in place during the Clinton Administration as part of a plan to actively reduce the number of FFLs.

Rep. Frank Wolf is the Republican who removed those additional protections from fellow Republican Tiahrt's bill in committee.

I should have remembered that.

Now I just have to decide - do I vote for Socas, or write in 'No Gun Control' since the Republican Party tracks the numbers for votes cast per precinct...

Black Snowman
October 26, 2004, 12:48 PM
Vote 3rd party. If say the Libs or other 3rd party steal enough votes then maybe the "big two" will at least start to change their platforms to conform more closely with those values.

foghornl
October 26, 2004, 12:53 PM
Here is My choice for US Senator:

DISTRICT NAME PARTY RATING
VOINOVICH R D
FINGERHUT D F

Fingerhut is the State Senator from the Shaker Heights area of Greater Cleveland, and he did all he could do to oppose CCW in Ohio, complete with Brady Bunch/VPC scare quotes.

If you open up your "Funk & Wagnalls" to RINO, there is the pic of DeWine, Voinovich, and Guv Booby Daft.

My next vote for Guv Booby [term limits out in 2006] will be for 5th alternate 3rd shift sewer worker....in Baghdad

Bartholomew Roberts
October 27, 2004, 09:50 AM
Voinovich isn't much of a choice; but in this case he is still the better choice. The Senate hangs by a thread right now with Republicans having only a 1-vote lead.

While some Senate Republicans (like Voinovich) are no friends of ours, they do serve one important purpose - they vote to keep pro-RKBA Republicans like Bill Frist in charge of the Senate Judiciary committee. The Democrat will vote for the likes of Leahy, Kennedy, Feinstein and Schumer. That is a big enough difference that given a choice between two losers, I would still go with the RINO in the Senate.

Bubbles
October 27, 2004, 11:56 AM
While some Senate Republicans (like Voinovich) are no friends of ours, they do serve one important purpose - they vote to keep pro-RKBA Republicans like Bill Frist in charge of the Senate Judiciary committee.

Not to mention there's that whole USSC appointee issue during the next four years...

At least I don't have to vote on a RINO Senator for a while...

If you enjoyed reading about "Election Dilemma" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!