TexasCHLforum.com

mamabearCali wrote:My apologies....I misread the article. Obershain lost by an extremely small margin. I for one think he lost because of democrat voter fraud. He was ahead by a small margin and then miraculously votes showed up from "broken" voting machines in all democrat districts. Democrats cheat once again. Fat chance proving it. The powers that be don't have the guts to withstand the cries of racisim and voter suppression to actually look into how those votes got missed the first time around.
\

I don't even remember any ads at all for his opponent. Perhaps because they would not play well here in central VA.

Perhaps in Arlington they ran on gun control, but here in central VA there was no so much as a peep about it. It is a bad thing though. If it had been a more decisive victory for Obershain there would not have been the option to weight the scales.

Like the situation with Al Franken where a few hundred (ineligible) felons voted him in then because of their fraud we got Obamacare if the marxists have the option they will tip the scales. They want victory in VA bad. It is going to be a long four years here.

No apologies are necessary. It is easy to mis-read articles based on what you were expecting. I was just trying to get back to my reason for posting it. Like the CO situation, Dems may well over-play their hand and get punished at the voting booth later for it but not before damage is done.

Sooner or later, there has to be enough guts to start challenging the fraudulent elections. I agree that they exist and also believe that the other side can be just as guilty if they think that they can get away with it. I do not believe that a fair election has occurred in Chicago, NY or Phila. in a very long time. I don't have enough information about Richmond but it could be on that same list.

I won't be surprised that you didn't see a single ad. The Dem machine is very good at specific targeting of their audience. That is the only way that they can keep their unwieldy coalition together. If they really preached their entire message to all of their constituencies, they would loose supporters left and right. It is the uninformed who don't see the total picture that keeps them in power. They sing to their Left wing base about gun control and a lot of gun rights voters never hear that.

mamabearCali wrote:Baloney



He won for many reasons, none of which was gun control. He did not run on gun control....he ran saying that Cooch wanted to deny women access to birth control which was a load of horse poo. He won because the RNC did not help cooch, the DNC ran a smear campaign against McDonnell and Cooch for 10 months trying to dig up dirt and when none existed they manufactured some, Cooch made a few tactical errors, and then they scared he he urban unmarried that cooch wanted to take away their BC pill. He said nearly nothing about gun control. Cooch still might have own, but there was a fake libertarian candidate that split the vote. So all that conspired to bring about McAwfuls win.

MBC, with respect, this article was about the Att. General race, not about the Govenor's one. I acknowledge that the coattails of McAwful could have carried the Att.General results. I also acknowledge that the same woman's health attacks that were leveled at Cooch were trumpeted against Obenshain. But each race is a bit different. Here in Texas, we have a very interesting set of races for governor and Lt gov. shaping up. Abbott has just put himself strongly on the pro-gun side while his opponent wants to run the race over abortion and will likely get a lot of DNC help and financing to do just that. At the Lt. Gov level, there is a 4 way race among the Republicans where it appears that neither of those issues will be the center point. Jerry Patterson, one of the Lt. Gov candidates, is championing the fact that he sponsored the original Texas CHL bill. I'm not sure that will be enough for him to win.

My point is simply that races for each office can have different dynamics and the fact that the Dems behind Herring's success are willing to talk about that success relative to gun control is important. While your Att. General cannot make laws, he could take a cue from the US Att. General and pursue actions against people and organizations based on politics. Since he and his campaign believe that they have a mandate on the gun control issue, the results could be very bad. I believe that politicians and their staffs NEVER do anything that isn't political so this could be a trial balloon to see if Herriing can get away with gun control actions to the extent that he would like to. It would be interesting to see if there was any public blowback on the article.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ ... ml?hpid=z3
Washington Post
By Kevin O’Holleran, Published: December 1

We knew this would open an opportunity for us to draw an effective contrast; public polling showed widespread support for sensible gun-safety laws, as did our own polling.

The article talks about the confrontation with the NRA and says essentially that the Mayor's Against platform is a winning one. I sure hope they are wrong.