2 articles on gubanatorial candidates gun positions

Discussion of Firearm Politics & Legislation. This forum is now strictly limited to discussions directly related to firearms.

Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators

Post Reply
M-Quigley
Posts: 4782
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:06 pm
Location: Western Ohio

2 articles on gubanatorial candidates gun positions

Post by M-Quigley »

The 2 articles have slightly different statements on which issues the candidates support or oppose.

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/p ... 355432002/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.whio.com/news/gun-issues-ohi ... 0Z2a6773L/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Here is an interesting statement from Cordray from 2010. It's too bad he doesn't believe it today. Despite his support of gun rights, he lost to Dewine anyway, so maybe he thinks gun rights don't matter anymore?
In 2010, when campaigning for attorney general, Cordray said of gun rights: “These are rights that don’t depend on putting them in a constitution. These are rights that we have as human beings. They’re natural rights. They extend beyond any government, whatever form that takes. The Constitution merely reminds government to respect and honor these freedoms.”
Here's a video of Cordray from 2010, from 4:32 mark to the end. It's a shame that there isn't more candidates from either party that actually believe this today

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prK7a8llKCE" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Most politicans seem to think that the voters are stupid and won't remember what they previously said, (despite the existence of on line resources) or they have an attitude of "That was then, this is now, tomorrow it will be something else) :(

I know it's never going to happen, but it would be nice to fantisize about the choices in this fall being between Mary Taylor and the Richard Cordray from 2010. :)

While it seems obvious that Mary Taylor is the obvious choice for someone who cares about gun rights in Ohio, what happens if she doesn't get the nomination? What if in the fall it ends up being a choice between an F rated Republican or an F rated Democrat?

There's a friend of mine who doesn't usually vote in the nomination process for either major party, as he doesn't completely support all of either the far right wing Republication or the far left wing Democratic party platforms. On most political issues, he's a moderate. The problem is, he's a strong gun rights supporter, and is usually disappointed with what ends up being the candidates in the fall to choose from. He think voting third party is a wasted vote. He normally doesn't go to political rallys but he went to the statehouse and really appreciated what Hickok45 said about people other than Republicans who also support gun rights issues.

Regarding the upcoming election day, he said he didn't know if he should vote for a particular candidate from one of the two parties, and if so, should he try to make sure Taylor gets the nomination over Dewine, or Cordray gets the nom over the other dem candidates?
User avatar
FormerNavy
Posts: 2342
Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2008 3:19 pm
Location: Southwest Ohio

Re: 2 articles on gubanatorial candidates gun positions

Post by FormerNavy »

I agree Mary Taylor is the obvious choice in the primary... but if it's a choice between Dewine and a Democrat, my choice will come down to the judiciary at that point. And that means Dewine...
M-Quigley
Posts: 4782
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:06 pm
Location: Western Ohio

Re: 2 articles on gubanatorial candidates gun positions

Post by M-Quigley »

FormerNavy wrote:I agree Mary Taylor is the obvious choice in the primary... but if it's a choice between Dewine and a Democrat, my choice will come down to the judiciary at that point. And that means Dewine...
I'm confused, what do you mean? I thought the judiciary at the state level was elected, not appointed by the governor.
Post Reply