TexasCHLforum.com

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Let me ask two questions? First, have any Libertarian candidates running for state office against a Democrat or Republican been elected? (This isn't a loaded question, I really don't know. I don't think so, but I'm not at all sure.)

Without digging through too many lists, Andy Borsa and Don Gorman were elected to the NH state legislature as Libertarians back in the 90s, shortly after two Republicans already on their legislature changed parties to Libertarian.

As I recall, there were also a few others elected to lesser-known state offices around the country. (I hesitate to say less important, because it's hard to know what oddball-named-office might be a lot more powerful than it sounds in a given state.)

nitrogen wrote:Barak Obama has made no statements or promises in his campaign to ban concealed carry nationwide, other than his support of it previous to his campaign.

Paraphrasing (because stuttering is hard to type) "I continue to support a ban on concealed carry laws." That was during his campaign, and the question specifically asked about a federal ban on concealed carry.

I'm pretty sure he wasn't referring to banning the laws that restrict concealed carry.

Charles L. Cotton wrote: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.

I don't vote my principles because it won't affect the election, and I doubt many of those 1,059 do either. If I wanted to not affect the election I'd stay home.

If all of those Libertarians had stayed home, your candidate would still have barely been good enough to beat the Democrat. Stop trying to blame it on people who at least have the guts to vote their principles.