Big Gay Al
Member
I didn't think you were assuming anything. I just like to clear the air when I join a new group, that's all.
Thanks!!
If Bush vote to extend the AWB, will you vote for him?
- Thread starter albanian
- Start date
- Status
Thanks!!
AZLibertarian
Member
OK, I have to admit I have plenty of reasons to be unhappy with Pres. Bush....
Elements of the Patriot Act,
His stand on the AWB,
His failure to adequately arm pilots (hopefully rectified soon),
The growth in government under his watch (read: big budgets),
etc, etc, etc.
But I cannot imagine that a Pres. Kerry would make my life measurably better than a re-elected Bush. In each of these areas, and others, I would expect to be measurably less well off than I am under Bush.
I firmly believe in the Libertarian philosophy, and think that the Republicans can have great success if they co-opt the LP out of business.
With all this said, the one issue that Bush wins hands down is the War on Terror. Kerry's position (or lack thereof) on the WOT will be the undoing of this country. We must win this war, or civilization will not survive. I will be voting for Bush.
Elements of the Patriot Act,
His stand on the AWB,
His failure to adequately arm pilots (hopefully rectified soon),
The growth in government under his watch (read: big budgets),
etc, etc, etc.
But I cannot imagine that a Pres. Kerry would make my life measurably better than a re-elected Bush. In each of these areas, and others, I would expect to be measurably less well off than I am under Bush.
I firmly believe in the Libertarian philosophy, and think that the Republicans can have great success if they co-opt the LP out of business.
With all this said, the one issue that Bush wins hands down is the War on Terror. Kerry's position (or lack thereof) on the WOT will be the undoing of this country. We must win this war, or civilization will not survive. I will be voting for Bush.
After reading all the posts thus far, I have come to a conclusion. If Bush votes to renew the AWB, I would vote for Kerry even though I know he is more anti-gun than Bush is. It is more important to send a message that we will not be pawns in the GOP game. They use us to get elected and stab us in the back when they feel the need.
It may be bad to have Kerry in the White House but at least at the next election, there will be no doubt about where we stand and what we will and will not stand for! If we vote for Bush despite his signing of the AWB, what friend will we have in the future? We need to make a point even if it costs us something in the short term.
I hope that poster that said the AWB was as good as dead was right but I don't think so. If he lets it die, that may be reason enough to vote for him. I wonder if he knows how important his vote on this matter is, it could lose him the election if he screws us.
You ever get the feeling that no politician is really on our side?
Maybe I am just not a very trusting person when it comes to politics.
It may be bad to have Kerry in the White House but at least at the next election, there will be no doubt about where we stand and what we will and will not stand for! If we vote for Bush despite his signing of the AWB, what friend will we have in the future? We need to make a point even if it costs us something in the short term.
I hope that poster that said the AWB was as good as dead was right but I don't think so. If he lets it die, that may be reason enough to vote for him. I wonder if he knows how important his vote on this matter is, it could lose him the election if he screws us.
You ever get the feeling that no politician is really on our side?
Maybe I am just not a very trusting person when it comes to politics.armabill
Member
If he voted for the ban, it would be very hard for me to not vote for him, considering the alternative candidate.
Fly320s
Member
Even if Kerry does win, that is no guarantee that our guns and personal rights will be more restricted.
The President is not a dictator.
As long as we fill the House and Senate with "our guys" then we should be okay. If no new anti-gun legislation is sent to the President for his signature, then there will not be any new anti-gun laws.
The President is not a dictator.
As long as we fill the House and Senate with "our guys" then we should be okay. If no new anti-gun legislation is sent to the President for his signature, then there will not be any new anti-gun laws.
Esky
Member
This thread starts with a big "IF"-- that IF Bush signs the AWB.
Well, if he did I'd still (tho very reluctantly) be voting for him.
As has been said earlier by several members, the WAR that we're in right now has to take first priority. This war is not going to be a short one, or easy, but our whole civilization is at stake. Islam may be a "religion of peace" but a lot of its practitioners seem to want the peace of the grave for all of us, whether right-wing or left, straight or gay, and they aren't troubled by the doubts that civilized people have about their actions or the consequences of their actions.
And that's where Bush has made his mark. He's taken this war to our deadly enemies and has not let them have their choice of battlefield.
There are a lot of reasons that Kerry is supported by so many foreign leaders- who do you think Osama, or the Mad Mullahs would prefer to win? In your heart you know, don't you? Personally, I wish that I could muster enough respect for Kerry to hate him, but for that he'd have to stand for something, and be clear and direct about whatever it was. But he just can't seem to do that. You know, he's the guy who "voted FOR the war before he voted AGAINST it." Yeah, right.
As has also been said before, Bush has made a lot of mistakes, at least by my lights, since I support small government, flat tax, a LOT fewer gov't regulations, NO government handouts, and a return to the Constitution as it was written before "interpretation" got to be so much fun for the Supremes. With particular emphasis on the Second Amendment!
But at least when the chips are down Bush makes the hard decisions and gets it on. Thank God, he's not noted for "nuance."
I reckon the reason that he said, at the beginning of his term, that he would sign the AWB was because he didn't think he would ever have it placed on his desk to begin with, and he wanted to make some "free" political points with the Dems, which of course didn't work.
In fact my biggest gripe about Bush is that he keeps trying to meet the opposition halfway (or further,) and it doesn't buy him any friends there (or anywhere.) All that happens is he gives an inch and they take a mile. Or even worse, he tries to beat them at their own game by spending big, but they hate him even more for that. And that ticks me off too!
Whatever the reason, I sure hope that any extension bill gets trounced long before it gets to his desk, so I don't have to find out. (Please, please, please let it be so!)
So I can't see supporting anyone else in the election. Let's face it, much as we can dream of a Libertarian winning, it ain't gonna happen. Some here think that by giving their vote away they will make some brownie points somewhere, but seems to me all you will be doing is cutting off your noses to spite your faces.
One thing we CAN all do is put our support behind the groups that are in the front line for US, in our struggle for liberty here at home, and by that I mean-- well, see my sig.
Esky
Well, if he did I'd still (tho very reluctantly) be voting for him.
As has been said earlier by several members, the WAR that we're in right now has to take first priority. This war is not going to be a short one, or easy, but our whole civilization is at stake. Islam may be a "religion of peace" but a lot of its practitioners seem to want the peace of the grave for all of us, whether right-wing or left, straight or gay, and they aren't troubled by the doubts that civilized people have about their actions or the consequences of their actions.
And that's where Bush has made his mark. He's taken this war to our deadly enemies and has not let them have their choice of battlefield.
There are a lot of reasons that Kerry is supported by so many foreign leaders- who do you think Osama, or the Mad Mullahs would prefer to win? In your heart you know, don't you? Personally, I wish that I could muster enough respect for Kerry to hate him, but for that he'd have to stand for something, and be clear and direct about whatever it was. But he just can't seem to do that. You know, he's the guy who "voted FOR the war before he voted AGAINST it." Yeah, right.
As has also been said before, Bush has made a lot of mistakes, at least by my lights, since I support small government, flat tax, a LOT fewer gov't regulations, NO government handouts, and a return to the Constitution as it was written before "interpretation" got to be so much fun for the Supremes. With particular emphasis on the Second Amendment!
But at least when the chips are down Bush makes the hard decisions and gets it on. Thank God, he's not noted for "nuance."
I reckon the reason that he said, at the beginning of his term, that he would sign the AWB was because he didn't think he would ever have it placed on his desk to begin with, and he wanted to make some "free" political points with the Dems, which of course didn't work.
In fact my biggest gripe about Bush is that he keeps trying to meet the opposition halfway (or further,) and it doesn't buy him any friends there (or anywhere.) All that happens is he gives an inch and they take a mile. Or even worse, he tries to beat them at their own game by spending big, but they hate him even more for that. And that ticks me off too!
Whatever the reason, I sure hope that any extension bill gets trounced long before it gets to his desk, so I don't have to find out. (Please, please, please let it be so!)
So I can't see supporting anyone else in the election. Let's face it, much as we can dream of a Libertarian winning, it ain't gonna happen. Some here think that by giving their vote away they will make some brownie points somewhere, but seems to me all you will be doing is cutting off your noses to spite your faces.
One thing we CAN all do is put our support behind the groups that are in the front line for US, in our struggle for liberty here at home, and by that I mean-- well, see my sig.
Esky
HBK
member
No.
RealGun
Member
I think you know that the premise of this thread will not be tested. At least that is a good bet for the period before the election. There is an excellent chance that Bush was advised to take the stance on being willing to sign an AWB renewal. That removes it from being a campaign issue. Imagine what Kerry would do with it, if Bush did not appear to support the AWB, at least to the extent that he would not veto a renewal.
The stance as a political maneuver, should have some appeal to the right leaning Democrats, those who could become needed crossover votes. An incumbent has inherent strength if the number of issues can be kept to a minimum.
Why is signing an AWB renewal contrary to Bush's history of endorsing CCW for Texas? Because it is not what Bush really thinks, most likely. That and the fact that CCW and AWB are hardly the same issues beyond fundamentals. One has to factor in political strategies here. Cheney's speech to the NRA is the real message IMHO.
When Bush is in a second term, don't be surprised to see his administration more clearly differentiate itself from liberal initiatives. I would doubt that in any scripted comment Bush will make AWB a direct Presidential issue. He has bigger fish to fry. It will be left to Congress to figure out gun issues, perhaps while bearing the weight of a White House statement on the issue, and Bush will sign whatever they send him, if relatively clean. He won't have time to allow any such bill to become a distracting issue, and he will not alienate Congress at the expense of higher priority legislation. If AWB does not go the way you like it, blame Congress. Do your best to make sure any such bill never gets to the President's desk.
The stance as a political maneuver, should have some appeal to the right leaning Democrats, those who could become needed crossover votes. An incumbent has inherent strength if the number of issues can be kept to a minimum.
Why is signing an AWB renewal contrary to Bush's history of endorsing CCW for Texas? Because it is not what Bush really thinks, most likely. That and the fact that CCW and AWB are hardly the same issues beyond fundamentals. One has to factor in political strategies here. Cheney's speech to the NRA is the real message IMHO.
When Bush is in a second term, don't be surprised to see his administration more clearly differentiate itself from liberal initiatives. I would doubt that in any scripted comment Bush will make AWB a direct Presidential issue. He has bigger fish to fry. It will be left to Congress to figure out gun issues, perhaps while bearing the weight of a White House statement on the issue, and Bush will sign whatever they send him, if relatively clean. He won't have time to allow any such bill to become a distracting issue, and he will not alienate Congress at the expense of higher priority legislation. If AWB does not go the way you like it, blame Congress. Do your best to make sure any such bill never gets to the President's desk.
nero45acp
Member
No.
Even if the AWB expires, I'm going to have to hold my nose when I vote for Bush.
If Bush and Kerry are the best we can hope for, we're in trouble.
nero
Even if the AWB expires, I'm going to have to hold my nose when I vote for Bush.
If Bush and Kerry are the best we can hope for, we're in trouble.
nero
CAPTAIN MIKE
Member
Which Would Bin Laden Vote For???
All things being equal, I'd say YES to voting for Bush.
A perfect world I want, but an imperfect world I live in. Kerry would seek to ban all firearms ownership. Bush would not.
All things being equal, I'd say YES to voting for Bush.
A perfect world I want, but an imperfect world I live in. Kerry would seek to ban all firearms ownership. Bush would not.
Partisan Ranger
Member
I'd vote for him holding my nose.
But it's not going to happen. AWB is finished. I read a month ago in an NRO article that the VPC conceded that the AWB is useless as far as fighting crime. That means they know it's dead and they're just spinning it to avoid admitting it's a huge loss for their anti-freedom cause.
But it's not going to happen. AWB is finished. I read a month ago in an NRO article that the VPC conceded that the AWB is useless as far as fighting crime. That means they know it's dead and they're just spinning it to avoid admitting it's a huge loss for their anti-freedom cause.
My view on this is if the GOP renews/replaces the AWB then that effectively eliminates gun control as a defining issue between the two parties. Other issues will now come to the forefront to define the two parties and consequently drive the election.
YMMV.
The only message I see that's being sent is that you'll cut of your nose to spite your face.
:banghead:
YMMV.
The only message I see that's being sent is that you'll cut of your nose to spite your face.
:banghead:
Sam Adams
Member
Tough Issue...
One the one hand, no one likes to get stabbed in the back, and I would certainly like to repay such an act by not voting for Bush. That will send a message to other Repubs, esp. if Bush loses.
OTOH, there is a simple fact to consider: even though the Prez isn't a dictator, he does get to nominate all federal judges (including the Supremes, 2-4 of whom are likely to either retire or die by 1/20/09; he does get to nominate all of the cabinet officials and higher-level bureaucraps who'll be writing regulations and giving orders to federal LEOs; and he does get to take the initiative with legislation by submitting proposals to Congress and jawboning. Will Ketchup Boy be any better on these issues than Bush? Yeah, having "our" people in Congress can gum up the works for any Dem/anti-gun president, but is that enough? Can they totally gum up the works, or only partially? I think the answer is obviously the latter.
How about the fact that there is a War on Terror to consider - who does Osama want to win? Will any of you feel good about "teaching Bush and the Republicans a lesson" and having Kerry become President, if that emboldens terrorists and their supporters around the world, and results in an American city going up in a mushroom cloud?
Who do you want setting tax policy? Environmental regs? Education policy?
There are other issues to consider, and the biggest is the WOT. Were it not for that, and also the Supreme Court, I'd have much less trouble staying home or voting 3rd party. Given our current situation, this is a hard decision. Rest assured, I'd find a legal way to punish the Pubbies for a betrayal on the AWB, but I don't know if tossing Bush out is the answer - especially since he wouldn't be the only guilty person.
artherd
member
We've got a chocie between a War Criminal, and a Communiest.
I don't like those choices.
I don't like those choices.
NIGHTWATCH
Member
You all have a choice but choose to not see it. Your in the web of the two party tyranny and committed more to "winning" than standing on principle (how can any gun owner vote for Kerry and live with themselves? ).
VOTE LIBERTARIAN!
). VOTE LIBERTARIAN!
RealGun
Member
Now don't be a thread killer NIGHTWATCH. That's not on topic. We're talking about a real candidate here.
Sam Adams wrote:
Is that supposed to make us vote for Bush?
Bush's tax policy had not been a success and his administration just admitted that they are going to have to raise taxes to pay for the war. His environmental policy has been questionable also. It seems as if he really doesn't understand that people want clean water to drink and clean air to breath. Edjucation policy? Is that a joke? He is the last person I want setting the edjucation policy of this country.
You picked Bush's three weakest areas. If you had said; who do you want setting gun control laws, dealing with the Middle East and going after terrorists, then I would say Bush!
I was against the war because I thought we rushed into it but now it is on and there is no going back, I am glad he is not backing down. He is going to do what he set out to do or have everything blow up in his face trying. At least he is not going about it in half measures. If someone shoots at our soldiers, I think the orders are pretty clear that they can defend themselves. I like that, that is the only way to deal with something like Iraq, strength and resolve. We need to be more like Israil when dealing with the Arabs. They hate us and nothing we do is going to change that, might as well kick their asses until a better idea comes along.
Is that supposed to make us vote for Bush?
Bush's tax policy had not been a success and his administration just admitted that they are going to have to raise taxes to pay for the war. His environmental policy has been questionable also. It seems as if he really doesn't understand that people want clean water to drink and clean air to breath. Edjucation policy? Is that a joke? He is the last person I want setting the edjucation policy of this country.
You picked Bush's three weakest areas. If you had said; who do you want setting gun control laws, dealing with the Middle East and going after terrorists, then I would say Bush!
I was against the war because I thought we rushed into it but now it is on and there is no going back, I am glad he is not backing down. He is going to do what he set out to do or have everything blow up in his face trying. At least he is not going about it in half measures. If someone shoots at our soldiers, I think the orders are pretty clear that they can defend themselves. I like that, that is the only way to deal with something like Iraq, strength and resolve. We need to be more like Israil when dealing with the Arabs. They hate us and nothing we do is going to change that, might as well kick their asses until a better idea comes along.
RealGun
Member
Perhaps you could offer some foundation for all this heavy duty opinion.
one45auto
Member
Yes, I'd still vote for Bush because to do otherwise would constitute a de-facto ballot for Kerry and quite honestly I don't even want to think about the possibility of his winning the election.
Zach S
Member
I keep hearing folks say they'd go 3rd party, yet there aren't any names to go with it? I really dont want to sound like an ******* here, but is there any hope of a 3rd party winning? Seriously, most liberals are going to vote Kerry, and conservatives are going to vote for Bush, or a third party. Third party votes will take votes from Bush, and we'll get Kerry instead. Didnt this already happen with Perot, Bush I, and Clinton? Seems like I've heard that mentioned here or 1911forum.com, but that was a while ago and I'm only 22 so I cant say for sure.
I wont be voting for Dubya, I'll be voting against Kerry. Unfortuneatly, Dubya is in that spot on the ballot. Add a third party that stands more of a chance than a snowball in hell, I'll change my mind.
I wont be voting for Dubya, I'll be voting against Kerry. Unfortuneatly, Dubya is in that spot on the ballot. Add a third party that stands more of a chance than a snowball in hell, I'll change my mind.
I've said so before...
If Bush signs the AW Ban, I hold my nose, and vote for Kerry, costing Bush not one, but 2 votes.
If the AW Ban comes before Bush, and he refuses to sign it, I vote Bush, and I bully others into showing up to the polls.
If Kerry (has a St. Paul like conversion) and promises to kill the USA PATRIOT act, I vote for Kerry.
Default setting is to vote for Bush due to his better record on Economics freedoms, particularly the tax cut, and proposed changes to Social Security.
-Morgan
If Bush signs the AW Ban, I hold my nose, and vote for Kerry, costing Bush not one, but 2 votes.
If the AW Ban comes before Bush, and he refuses to sign it, I vote Bush, and I bully others into showing up to the polls.
If Kerry (has a St. Paul like conversion) and promises to kill the USA PATRIOT act, I vote for Kerry.
Default setting is to vote for Bush due to his better record on Economics freedoms, particularly the tax cut, and proposed changes to Social Security.
-Morgan
jnojr wrote:
Then, quite simply, the war starts sooner.
Everyone can continue to rant about the WOT, our borders, taxes, and other such distractions, but I for one am simply fed-up with the erosion of our constitution. By standing by and allowing GWB to be voted back in office, or John Kerry for that matter, along with the rest of the felons in that swamp, is disgusting to our rights, a filthy legacy to leave our children, and a dishonor to our founding as a republic.
As for showing you, or anyone else, a third party candidate that is a winner, is nothing more than hyperbole. Stand on your conviction’s sir and vote them, then you will see a third-party winner. Further, it has been done before, the Repugnant Party did it in 1860, and I think it is about time it happens again.
Denny
Then, quite simply, the war starts sooner.
Everyone can continue to rant about the WOT, our borders, taxes, and other such distractions, but I for one am simply fed-up with the erosion of our constitution. By standing by and allowing GWB to be voted back in office, or John Kerry for that matter, along with the rest of the felons in that swamp, is disgusting to our rights, a filthy legacy to leave our children, and a dishonor to our founding as a republic.
As for showing you, or anyone else, a third party candidate that is a winner, is nothing more than hyperbole. Stand on your conviction’s sir and vote them, then you will see a third-party winner. Further, it has been done before, the Repugnant Party did it in 1860, and I think it is about time it happens again.
Denny
RealGun
Member
Zach S, be sure to include a qualified candidate with connections in Congress. Voting Libertarian just cuz is not smart. An outsider will not be an effective President...been there/done that.
denny, did the Repugnant President (Lincoln) come out of nowhere or had the party already established its influence and representation at lower levels of government?
Diggler
Member
Those of you who would vote for Kerry instead of Bush to 'make a statement'...
That won't be seen as a message. All it will do is to make Kerry's liberal policies more centrist, and acceptable. Nobody's going to analyze the votes like that. It will be, "More people agree with Kerry than Bush."
If that happens, I hope that all you guys who voted that way have a lot of fun shooting your principles at the gun range. Because that's all you'll be shooting.
Vote for the lesser of the two evils at the top levels of government, and do all you can at the local level to keep politicians like that from rising to the national level. It's all about damage control from people being apathetic over the last 30 years or so.
That won't be seen as a message. All it will do is to make Kerry's liberal policies more centrist, and acceptable. Nobody's going to analyze the votes like that. It will be, "More people agree with Kerry than Bush."
If that happens, I hope that all you guys who voted that way have a lot of fun shooting your principles at the gun range. Because that's all you'll be shooting.
Vote for the lesser of the two evils at the top levels of government, and do all you can at the local level to keep politicians like that from rising to the national level. It's all about damage control from people being apathetic over the last 30 years or so.
- Status
