Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

NRA and Libertarians

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Robert J McElwain, Oct 19, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Robert J McElwain

    Robert J McElwain Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    368
    Location:
    Kansas City area
    Many of us, who are NRA members, recently got the latest issue of The Rifleman. In the center, there was the NRA recommendations for the upcoming elections. One fact that was clear is that the NRA will not endorse a Libertarian.

    I happen to know that in the State of Kansas, and also in Missouri, there were a number of Libertarians that are NRA members running against either Republicans (RINOs) or Democrats that were totally opposed to all gun rights and, at best, the NRA had no recommendation or recommended the Republican or Democrat.

    It seems that, no matter what the party label, if you've got a strong gun rights advocate, you recommend them, unless your agenda is not principles or the Second Amendment but back room politics as usual. I wonder how the Gun Owners of America stands on this.

    Does anyone know of any race in the country where the NRA is recommending a Libertarian?

    Bob
     
  2. wally

    wally Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2004
    Messages:
    12,113
    Location:
    Houston, Tx
    I don't, I was also shocked to see Ron Paul, who votes against most everything as being "unconstitutional", only got a B+.

    --wally.
     
  3. Zundfolge

    Zundfolge Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    10,755
    Location:
    Colorado Springs
    The NRA doesn't hate Libertarians.

    There are 2 main criteria for getting an endorsement from the NRA.

    1) you have to be pro gun (likely have to score an "A")
    2) you have to be able (and for that matter likely) to win.

    Here in Colorado I noticed that there were several incumbent Democrats that got the NRA's endorsement over their Republican challengers when both had "A" ratings because in any race the incumbent is more likely to win.

    Libertarians rarely win elections.
     
  4. Lone_Gunman

    Lone_Gunman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,056
    Location:
    United Socialist States of Obama
    Zundfolge is correct.

    The NRA wants to be able to say "95 percent (or whatever) of our endorsed candidates won". Being able to say that makes them a more powerful lobby in Washington (and more feared by politicians).
     
  5. real_name

    real_name member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2006
    Messages:
    938
    Location:
    Nashville, TN.
    To reiterate, a vote for a third party is perceived to be a vote wasted in present day US politics.

    I look forward to a three or even four party system, but I will not hold my breath.
     
  6. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    People are free to perceive whatever they'd like, of course, but a vote for the apparent lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil.
     
  7. ilbob

    ilbob Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    10,890
    Location:
    Illinois
    And letting a worse evil win out over a lesser evil is what?
     
  8. Autolycus

    Autolycus Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2006
    Messages:
    5,456
    Location:
    In the land of make believe.
    I will still vote Libertarian regardless. Guns are not the only issue I feel passionately about.
     
  9. geekWithA.45

    geekWithA.45 Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    9,037
    Location:
    SouthEast PA
    I had a conversation w/ some well placed NRA folks on this topic.

    Previous posters are correct: The NRA will not back candidate unlikely to win.

    For good or for ill, the structure of our first through the post, winner takes the district voting system is such that 3rd party candidates simply don't have realistic chances of winning.

    Folks need to factor that into their voting strategy.
     
  10. NineseveN

    NineseveN member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2004
    Messages:
    2,060
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    I find it funny that so many people say a vote for a third party is throwing away your vote...you know, if enough people threw their vote away, I wonder who would win?

    It's a self-fulfilling prophecy, if you're goal is to pick the winner like politics is a horse race, fair enough. If your goal is change and improvement, picking the winner isn't always the best choice.

    Wonder what would happen if a Libertarian managed to get 22% of the vote, even if they lost...what happens next election? There's something to be said for encouragement through making a showing; sometimes you have to take a few licks and get back up to go on and land your punches and win the fight...dodging every hit and going to the ropes every other minute becasue ti's the safe play isn't a winning strategy, it's an avoding a loss strategy.
     
  11. Green Lantern

    Green Lantern Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,665
    Well....I'm not overly fond of the "open borders" thing.

    Then again, all I know about Libertarians is that they support 2A :D:) :cool: and oppose borders... :confused: :what: :scrutiny:
     
  12. TexasRifleman

    TexasRifleman Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    18,302
    Location:
    Ft. Worth
    Uhhhh, they rarely win an election maybe?
     
  13. NineseveN

    NineseveN member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2004
    Messages:
    2,060
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    A reason to oppose borders is that any control the government can use to keep others out, will ultimately be used to keep us in. Your papers please, comrade.

    You want to fight the culture war, hit the businesses that give the illegals incentives to come here in the first place. Employ an illegal, lose your tax ID and business license and pay a huge honkin fine plus tax penalties through an audit from the IRS.

    Problem solved; mice don't breed where they can't eat.
     
  14. geekWithA.45

    geekWithA.45 Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    9,037
    Location:
    SouthEast PA

    Unfortunately, it's more than a self fulfilling prophecy.

    Read up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duverger's_Law
     
  15. real_name

    real_name member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2006
    Messages:
    938
    Location:
    Nashville, TN.
    NineseveN:
    In Britain, in the '80s, there was a no hope-no chance third party called the Liberal Democrats. (Ok, ignore the name for a minute.)
    The Conservatives are blue in the UK, Labour (sic) is red, the LibDems chose yellow.
    Everyone laughed.
    Everyone said if you vote for them it's a vote wasted.

    Then little by little they improved their share of the House.

    Now they are a real party, and get votes, and might win next time.
     
  16. mljdeckard

    mljdeckard Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    12,665
    Location:
    In a part of Utah that resembles Tattooine.
    I'm with nineseven. I don't think we need to make illegal immigration easier, but if there were no money for them here, they wouldn't come. Enforce existing tax legislation, and the problem goes away.
     
  17. Green Lantern

    Green Lantern Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,665
    Not that I don't agree with the suggestions of laying the smacketh down on people/businesses that employ illegal aliens...

    But my main concern is, how does that help prevent someone from walking from Mexico into Texas with a nuke or something...???
     
  18. NineseveN

    NineseveN member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2004
    Messages:
    2,060
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    geekWithA.45

    What did you think about the counter examples and converse at the bottom?
     
  19. NineseveN

    NineseveN member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2004
    Messages:
    2,060
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    The same thing that's to stop someone from building a nuke here on home field...law enforcement, investigation, prosecution and swift, decided action. Shortcuts aren't the way, arguing for closing us off entirely is akin to arguing that we all need video cameras installed in every square inch of the country, to be sure that no one's building a nuke.

    Safety sounds nice, but not when liberty can be jeopardized by it. No one is safe when they're under someone else's control, despite illusions to the contrary.
     
  20. mljdeckard

    mljdeckard Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    12,665
    Location:
    In a part of Utah that resembles Tattooine.
    Green Lantern -The biggest benefit would be that if Border Patrol isn't chasing thousands of Mexicans every day, they will have more resources to notice the real threats when they are fewer and farther between. Tracking 10 targets at a time instead of 1000.
     
  21. Green Lantern

    Green Lantern Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,665
    Hmmm...food for thought.
     
  22. CZ 75 BD

    CZ 75 BD Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    755
    Location:
    The Heart of Dixie
    At the Gun Rights Policy Conference in 2003, Michael Badnarick asked why NRA doesn't endorse independent candidates. The NRA speaker said "The (I) after your name on the ballot stands for irrelevant."
     
  23. geekWithA.45

    geekWithA.45 Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    9,037
    Location:
    SouthEast PA
    In some of the cases, with the 3 way systems, I considered the two minor parties counterbalancing in opposition to one dominant party to be functionally a single party, albeit operating under different branding. In other cases, I think it's probably a transitional case, where previously dominant parties have fractured, and are still in explorator mode prior to the consolidation phase.

    Our own 2 big parties aren't exactly homogenous: they have internal fault lines, and are essentially coalitions in and of themselves.

    Being fairly static and entrenched, it will take some major disruption or collapse to disrupt the stability of our system such as to give a third party a chance.

    There are some speculative scenarios under which that might happen, but the thing is that since none of those scenarios are imminent, and therefore a matter of abstract theory rather than of practical value for THIS election.

    Normally, what happens in American politics is that a party will implode after failing to gain traction for a certain number of cycles, and will undergo internal reorg and realignment, as the internal factions vie for control. It's during these periods that 3rd party planks tend to get assimilated in.
     
  24. mp510

    mp510 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2006
    Messages:
    3,045
    Location:
    PRKt
    When published in American Rifleman, the endorsement sheet mentions that libertarians are, by definition, pro-gun.
     
  25. xd9fan

    xd9fan Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    1,858
    Location:
    Under tyranny in Midwest

    Is currently the Game in American politics......and its not working. Both spend like piss drunk sailors

    (I have nothing against piss drunk sailors);)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page