Can't be a one topic advocate

[MrMagoo]

It seems I can't turn the TV on, pick up a newspaper or view posts on the forum since last visit any more wihtout hearing or seeing something about the presidential campaign. That got me thinking about what, to the American people, is important. Granted the print media is biased and I feel it has a tendency to only say what it wants people to hear. What I've read though in the recent past is people talking about our military position in the Middle East, the economy, jobs, health care among other things. Let's face it, unless a person is asked directly how important preserving the 2nd Ammendment is in determining how an individual will vote on our next President, chances are the issue won't come up.

My point is this: We can't be one issue advocates. We can talk up our candidate of choice all we want to about their pro 2A, anti gun control positions but unless we can talk up their positions on other issues NOT related to 2A or gun control, are the sheeple going to pay attention? My purely unscientific guess is probably not.

The same goes with talking down a candidate. We can talk at length how frontrunning Democratic candidates should not be elected because of what they would push for gun control. So what, the sheeple say. What are they gonna do about illegal aliens, the war, MY JOB, etc. etc. etc.

Yes we need to educate people on the dangers of the anti-gun agenda. We need to give people a well rounded education though on other aspects of a candidate's platform. Just like high school teaches more than one subect, we need to be able to discuss more than just 2A and gun control.

The above is not endorsed by any political party or candidate and is the opinion solely of the author.

[mreising]

I am not a one issue voter, but I have found that most Pro 2A candidates are also acceptable to me on other issues.

[MR D]

yeah, I too have a list of issues that I use to defend/support or accuse/deride a candidate by...

seems that the one's who feel the same as I do on the 2A are usually not too far away on other issues either...

[mauser]

I am not a single-issue voter. I am a 1st-issue voter.

A candidate has to be pro 2nd amendment before I will ever consider him. Then I weigh how they stand on other issues when selecting a candidate. I will not even consider an anti because they are ok in other areas. Forget the whole lessor of two evils crap either.

I'm also not voting for a "pro 2nd" candidate just because they decided to be one to get elected. If you can flip-flop one way, you can flip-flop back.

Romney, Giuliani and McCain are all notorious anti's that found new religion when they decided to run for president. Forget it.

[farblue]

For years, I have voted for candidates based on several issues which are important to me, including a candidate's stance on 2A. And although the 2A gets a lot of weight in my decision, it's not the only issue I consider important.

[johnisaly]

Mauser –

I understand where you are coming from; I don’t like the whole “lesser of two evils” scorecard either, but I have been forced to play that game most of my adult life.

Let me ask you one question. On November 4th when you go to the polls, what if you face the following scenario........There are 2 names on the ballet; Rudy and that vile Clinton woman. What are you going to do?

[willbird]

It seems I can't turn the TV on, pick up a newspaper or view posts on the forum since last visit any more wihtout hearing or seeing something about the presidential campaign. That got me thinking about what, to the American people, is important. Granted the print media is biased and I feel it has a tendency to only say what it wants people to hear. What I've read though in the recent past is people talking about our military position in the Middle East, the economy, jobs, health care among other things. Let's face it, unless a person is asked directly how important preserving the 2nd Ammendment is in determining how an individual will vote on our next President, chances are the issue won't come up.

My point is this: We can't be one issue advocates. We can talk up our candidate of choice all we want to about their pro 2A, anti gun control positions but unless we can talk up their positions on other issues NOT related to 2A or gun control, are the sheeple going to pay attention? My purely unscientific guess is probably not.

The same goes with talking down a candidate. We can talk at length how frontrunning Democratic candidates should not be elected because of what they would push for gun control. So what, the sheeple say. What are they gonna do about illegal aliens, the war, MY JOB, etc. etc. etc.

Yes we need to educate people on the dangers of the anti-gun agenda. We need to give people a well rounded education though on other aspects of a candidate's platform. Just like high school teaches more than one subect, we need to be able to discuss more than just 2A and gun control.

The above is not endorsed by any political party or candidate and is the opinion solely of the author.

I think overall gun grabbers are going to be nanny staters in general, I hate nanny staters,

I CAN be a one issue advocate, I use that one issue to decide if I like a candidate, then look at other reasons to not like them, being darn sure I will find MANY other ones to go along with the gun control litmus test

Bill

[MrMagoo]

What I was refering to in not being a one topic advocate was for those times when we engage in discussion with those who may not look at 2A and gun control the same as we do. We need to be able to discuss and promote our candidate's other positions as well as their 2A and gun control positions.

[willbird]

Ten reasons why I hate Hitlery should not be hard to come up with hehe.

[BEAR!]

The 2nd amendment is my "acid test" for candidates. If they don't understand/support the second amendment, then I don't bother finding out their positions on immigration, abortion or taxes.

[Tweed Ring]

My acid test is our Bill of Rights. Does a candidate understand and support the BoR? Generally, the more politically conservative a candidate, the more they will have a historical pattern of supporting BoR's issues and tangental issues.

I have made it my policy not to work for the election or re-election any candidate who does not vocally support the 2nd. Amendment.

[Rhino]

On November 4th when you go to the polls, what if you face the following scenario........There are 2 names on the ballet; Rudy and that vile Clinton woman. What are you going to do?

I dunno. Who are the candidates on the other side?

[dr-exmedic]

Let me ask you one question. On November 4th when you go to the polls, what if you face the following scenario........There are 2 names on the ballet; Rudy and that vile Clinton woman. What are you going to do?

And to think this is the first election in a while that Lyndon LaRouche won't be running....

[color of law]

Mauser –

I understand where you are coming from; I don’t like the whole “lesser of two evils” scorecard either, but I have been forced to play that game most of my adult life.

Let me ask you one question. On November 4th when you go to the polls, what if you face the following scenario........There are 2 names on the ballet; Rudy and that vile Clinton woman. What are you going to do?

I'd write in Ron Paul. At least the other two won't get my vote. If all those who said they would vote for Ron Paul if he had a chance and did vote for him, Paul would get elected.

[johnisaly]

Please don’t take me wrong, I am not opposed to Ron Paul. But I think you need to look into the reality of the issue.

If all those who said they would vote for Ron Paul if he had a chance and did vote for him, Paul would get elected.

So then you are saying that at least 51% of the American electorate has said they would vote for Ron Paul if he had a chance? Or in the case of a 3 candidate general election, 34% of the voters ? In either scenario, that is just plain delusional. Where are you coming up with your info?

I'd write in Ron Paul. At least the other two won't get my vote.

This would be nothing more than a vote by default for Clinton. Your vote would make a statement to the world that you are dissatisfied, but the end result is that your actions will help put the Clinton’s back on Pennsylvania Avenue. That is a very big price to pay to make a point. Be prepared too live with that decision for 4-8 years.