Search found 1 match

by GrillKing
Thu Nov 13, 2008 12:56 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Who's for less Prohibited places?
Replies: 71
Views: 5147

Re: Who's for less Prohibited places?

KBCraig wrote:
Charles L. Cotton wrote:Our marching orders are to go out and win and we can't do that by diluting the pro-gun votes for third-party candidates that have absolutely no chance of winning.
Is anyone else amused that this example involves three pro-gun candidates? Two A-rated TSRA major party candidates, and a libertarian who would presumably be A or A+ if the TSRA would rate LP candidates?

And yet the defense is that TSRA mustn't "dilute" pro-gun votes?

:banghead:
It has to do with the candidates stance on the 2nd amendment as well as the candidates party and therefore ability for the PARTY to influence legislation via committe control and the like. It's not just about diluting the vote but diluting ability to control legislation.

:banghead:


In my view, pragmatism beats idealism except on issues of great moral importance.

Return to “Who's for less Prohibited places?”