TexasCHLforum.com

seamusTX wrote:

txmatt wrote:In your thread on this race, you mentioned that the Democrat is also A rated. On the whole having pro-gun Democrats make up a larger percentage of the democrats in congress is a good thing,

This is a Texas House of Representatives race. The majority in the Texas House is not finally decided.

Congress is already a done deal.

I agree that having more pro-RKBA Democrats in the U.S. Congress is a good thing. This issue should be a "third rail" for both parties.

- Jim

I suppose "congress" is the wrong term, but I was referring to the Texas House.

My point is that it is more productive to look at races where the anti-gun Democrats beat pro-gun Republicans and look at those to get the extra seat needed to secure a Republican majority. Even if it causes problems in the next session in the longer term having these pro-gun democrats in the Texas House will help us more than hurt us, I believe. I'm not familiar with the numbers but I would imagine we are much closer in the Texas legislature to having pro-gun Democrats control their party than in the US House or Senate.

I wish we could rank candidates in order of preference on the ballot instead of voting for just one. I think that would help a lot.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I understand Liberty's objection to the TSRA and NRA rating practices. However, the fundamental truth is that both organizations are charged with protecting the Second Amendment and gun owners, not helping political parties grow. 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.

I have posted on the recount in Texas House District 105 where the incumbent pro-gun, A-rated Republican defeated her Democrat challenger by 25 votes, with the Libertarian getting 1,059 votes. This election is going to determine whether the Republicans or the Democrats control the Texas House. So the theory that one should "vote your principles" because it won't affect the election is simply not always true.

Chas.

In your thread on this race, you mentioned that the Democrat is also A rated. On the whole having pro-gun Democrats make up a larger percentage of the democrats in congress is a good thing, I would think. And the if the Republicans lose control of the house over this race it seems that the blame for that could equally well be placed on other elections where a anti-gun Democrat beat a pro-gun Republican and blame and future efforts placed there would be more productive.

I do understand the issue of control of the house though and the influence that has on the make up of committees. I'm in US district 17 and while my rep is a dem who is good on gun rights (even endorsed by the NRA) I hate the thought of his party affiliation giving more power to Pelosi.

I would really like to see us move towards a future where the 2A is not a partisan issue and to see more races between three pro-2A candidates.