OK charon... let's say that I am wrong and that voting for paul is a great way to protest.
Who do you think will get elected if 10% of the population votes for paul as an independent? A democrat or a republican?
You can be sure that the 10% who vote for paul will all be republicans and that will make the republican lose... worse.. the democrat will win.
Both parties are well aware of this calculation, on this and a dozen other issues. They know that they can use fear to manipulate our votes. Eventually, the "lesser of two evil"s can't be distinguished from "the greater of two evils". The Republican party today does not deliver on it's reputation. With a candidate like Rudy it's clear that the party leadership is unconcerned about those values moving forward. They might as well be running Feinstein where the 2nd is concerned.
If Hillary gets in I will not feel any worse than if Rudy wins. It's that simple. Neither party is fielding candidates that remotely represent my values. And the Republicans are not Republicans anymore.
We can sit and talk all we want about it but the truth is that only people who want freedom and individuality will ever vote for freedom..
freedom means less taxes and less government.. do you seriously think that any democrat will ever want that?
The Republicans will certainly not raise taxes, but they show little to no spending restraint across a broad spectrum of areas. Can't really have one without the other. It's not 1950 anymore, or the 1980s for that matter. Rudy is not a Republican and the party has not supported Republican values for some years now. Plus, I value the rest of the BOR perhaps a bit more than the current Republican leadership and certainly more than Rudy. I don't want to throw out the 4th for the 2nd (especially since Rudy is one of the worst enemies of the 2nd we have seen). Electing Rudy sends a further message that gun owners don't much care.
Arnie signed the .50 ban... I would hate to see what would have come up in front of his far left liberal opponent to sign tho...
From what I hear on the firearm boards, Arnie was elected over a real conservative. RINOS are RINOS. Hopefully he will have enough sense to Veto the microstamping legislation or California is likely to not only **** it's gun owners, but the rest of us, depending on how the manufacturers react.
I don't see either party as having a national platform anymore on anything. Republicans around the big blue cities are almost indistinguishable in their positions from Democrats. Rural Democrats are as Conservative as Rural Republicans. They change their values to suit political need. Every 4 months I deal with the latest Daley or Blago inspired gun control measure and you can see who votes for what.
My R federal congressman cosponsors AWB legislation and brags about it. My R state senator supports magazine capacity limits. It's at the point where the only way to achieve change is to get the *******s out and ride out the change (F rated is F rated, after all -- how bad can the evil Democrat actually be?). Maybe the next Republican candidate 4 years later will support the issues I support.
On the plus side with all this, is that nationally gun control is a loser. For the president to sign a bill it has to reach the president and the power to do that is waning. Even the media is getting the message (largely because they can now be ignored and bypassed by the Internet).
To me, unless we get REAL change in Washington, it's a complete wash long term on the 2nd. I imagine the national Democratic leadership has just as much interest in your being able to own a limited deer rifle or duck gun as the the Republican party leadership. As noted, Bush said he would sign an AWB if it was brought before him and he has not done anything I can see with the full control of the political process in Washington to move back from existing gun control legislation.
Charon
