Maybe there is no 'better' in your view. However, since the fake 'Libertarian' running this time was a willing tool of the Leftists/Statist - who used him to get the control they wanted - there is clearly a 'worse'. And now we are going to get it, good and hard.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Democrat bundler financing Sarvis Campaign
- Thread starter JamesCanby
- Start date
Maybe there is no 'better' in your view. However, since the fake 'Libertarian' running this time was a willing tool of the Leftists/Statist - who used him to get the control they wanted - there is clearly a 'worse'. And now we are going to get it, good and hard.
You're new here so you haven't heard me say this before.
Just because someone owns a gun doesn't make him my friend, brother, or co defender of our rights. It just means his AmEx is paid up and he can afford a gun.
Not all gun owners here believe in the 2A. Some hold the 2.5A sacred (Permit ownership and carry only), some follow the 2A even though they're forced to have a permit...some of us refuse the permits and have to OC only.....some....are just too stupid to really believe in anything.
Thundar
Regular Member
I know many on the forum are very bitter about the election. The Cooch might have pulled it off if Sarvis had not run.
The real problem for the Cooch was the terrible campaign that he ran, not that the Libertarian Party was on the ballot.
Republicans continue to fight a very nasty ballot access war against Libertarians in Virginia. They even fight against some Republicans (remember what they did to Ron Paul supporters in the 3rd congressional district).
Republicans cannot win a "two front war" in Virginia. Smart Republicans should recognize this and try to create peace with Libertarians. Strategic thinking Republicans should try to support the growing Green Party in Virginia. Little threat to Republicans, but a huge issue for Democrats in close races.
A libertarian PAC took money from a Democrat. The libertarian PAC used some of its money to ensure Libertarians had ballot access in Virginia. This does not make Sarvis a shill for anybody. To suggest otherwise would require a two step vetting process, not only of PACs, but to all of the donors to PACs. This is a standard that neither Ds or Rs are held to. I could easily make a similar story asking why The Cooch accepts money from Holocaust Denial people or why Terry took money from Communists.
The story was a last minute desperation hit piece from Glen Beck, Inc. It is very amusing to see Glen Beck, of all people, trying to define a Libertarian.
Live Free or Die,
Thundar
Thundar
Regular Member
To which statist party are you referring sir, the Democrat statists or the Republican statists? One must be clear because of the significant overlap between the two.
I'm not bitter Thundar and I agree with most of what you just said, always have except for the fact that he couldn't win and the end result of splitting the vote would have very bad results...I know, Tess said it didn't take her vote away but the world doesn't revolve around Tess and the simple fact is anything over 2% for Sarvis was being taken from one party or the other.
Cuccinelly ran a perfectly horrible campaign and even though I was hoping he'd pull a rabbit out of his hat, I knew the results of that election before I set foot in that ball room.
Our new Governor will be a major problem for us but Tess said she'd come down and fight for our rights, so I feel better.:lol:
I don't agree about Sarvis though. He is not what he appears and therefore, no better than the other two. This election was a cluster from the convention to date.
The PAC's need work all around. VCDL for instance bases their endorsements on their survey which is far too pushy to get an honest answer from. They didn't endorse Chris Peace because he didn't return the survey and that's his policy...he just doesn't respond to them and relies on his voting record which is very good for us. That wasn't looked at for endorsements but the PAC keeps asking for money to support shallow endorsements. The candidates that filled it out as all Y's were just shoveling road apples to bob with.
Sarvis didn't even earn the 10% so everyone is a loser in this election ....except Bloomberg!
OC for ME
Regular Member
Uh, the Clintons won and don't you forget it.
If libertarians want to get elected, take the money. The Rs and Ds have known this for a very long time. The Ds and Rs do have a two step vetting process, well the Rs do before election day thanks to the "press" and the Ds catch up after election day by amending the official record.
Politics 101: You need a voting record before you can run on your voting record. The Sarvises of the world need to get elected to get a voting record, and they can't get elected when a majority of voters who consider themselves libertarian-ish still vote for the R.....why is that.
The democrats will always vote for the Clintons.....er, McAuliffes regardless of the candidates actual name.....it's a liberal thing.
Thundar
Regular Member
The PACs need to either be consistent and party neutral or they need to be overt in their support for one party. VCDL PAC supported a candidate that was openly anti constitutional carry. The Cooch told VCDL PAC that he was an anti in his survey. Shamefully they still endorsed him.
I hope there is one other winner in this election. What sweet irony if the Dems lose the special election and Saslaw loses his power over the Virginia Senate! Everybody is going to back the Libertarian in that race, right?
Last edited:
Thundar
Regular Member
Fixed it for you Peter
Hmmmmm
VCDL PAC
Judas
Sound alike.
Check those donations and see if 40 pieces of silver are listed.:lol::lol:
Hmmmmm
VCDL PAC
Judas
Sound alike.
Check those donations and see if 40 pieces of silver are listed.:lol::lol:
marshaul
Campaign Veteran
I fail to see how this is a "simple fact". Again, you presume you are entitled to, or would otherwise receive, these votes. I disagree.
Tell Sabatoe,not me. I kinda doubt he cares if you disagree though:lol:
Thundar.....yes, I know...30 pieces of silver. No Sunday hunting for me
OC for ME
Regular Member
When does the "render unto Caesar" stuff start in VA? The Clintons are getting itchy.
marshaul
Campaign Veteran
Agree with your points, but I am not truly new here. Been lurking since at least 2008... Finally decided to register!
Can't disagree with you there. However, as Ron Paul said Monday, Cuccinelli is/was a defender of constitutional freedoms. Despite Democrats, MSM, and fellow travelers attempts to distort this.
Thundar
Regular Member
The Cooch was a big defender of constitutional freedoms that he agreed with. The problem is that the Cooch did not agree with all of them.
The Cooch was not a big defender of the 2A. (Anti Constitutional Carry, ignored opportunity to join multi state AG amicus briefs)
The Cooch was an enemy of the 4thA.
The Cooch was against decriminalization of marijuana (10th A) (If the Feds needed a constitutional ammendment to start prohibition, how can the justify a war on marijuana without a similar ammendment?)
Nobody is perfect and the Cooch was better than many, and certainly more liberty leaning than Terry the liar king. He was not, however, a man that was going to stand up to the statist world view and fully occupy The Commonwealth of Virginia's place in the world as a sovereign state. He would have taken some small victories and accepted some small defeats within the statist framework that now dominates all of us.
Last edited:
The Cooch was not a big defender of the 2A. (Anti Constitutional Carry, ignored opportunity to join multi state AG amicus briefs.
** Legislative record says he was a big defender of 2A. I can provide cites for this if you wish. Attorney General has different constitutional obligations.
The Cooch was an enemy of the 4thA.
** cite, please?
The Cooch was against decriminalization of marijuana (10th A) (If the Feds needed a constitutional ammendment to start prohibition, how can the justify a war on marijuana without a similar ammendment?)
** this is an Open Carry forum so I won't refight the drug war here. I am a fairly recent convert against the WOD as I see now it contributing to Statist actions like no-knock warrants/entries. But I will observe that it will take a lot of emanations and penumbras to get marijuana wedged into the text of the Constitution.
Nobody is perfect and the Cooch was better than many, and certainly more liberty leaning than Terry the liar king. He was not, however, a man that was going to stand up to the statist world view and fully occupy The Commonwealth of Virginia's place in the world as a sovereign state. He would have taken some small victories and accepted some small defeats within the statist framework that now dominates all of us.
** first AG in the country to push back against ObamaCare, strong fighter against EPA outrages, strong legislative record on 2ndA. Granted he's not perfect but my life, maybe different than yours, has taught me that perfect is not to be found on this earth. So I accept the best visible/available option instead. YMMV.
** So now, with Terry, instead of accepting some small defeats, we can look forward to many major ones. I fail to see how that is an improvement. Wish it was otherwise.
** Legislative record says he was a big defender of 2A. I can provide cites for this if you wish. Attorney General has different constitutional obligations.
The Cooch was an enemy of the 4thA.
** cite, please?
The Cooch was against decriminalization of marijuana (10th A) (If the Feds needed a constitutional ammendment to start prohibition, how can the justify a war on marijuana without a similar ammendment?)
** this is an Open Carry forum so I won't refight the drug war here. I am a fairly recent convert against the WOD as I see now it contributing to Statist actions like no-knock warrants/entries. But I will observe that it will take a lot of emanations and penumbras to get marijuana wedged into the text of the Constitution.
Nobody is perfect and the Cooch was better than many, and certainly more liberty leaning than Terry the liar king. He was not, however, a man that was going to stand up to the statist world view and fully occupy The Commonwealth of Virginia's place in the world as a sovereign state. He would have taken some small victories and accepted some small defeats within the statist framework that now dominates all of us.
** first AG in the country to push back against ObamaCare, strong fighter against EPA outrages, strong legislative record on 2ndA. Granted he's not perfect but my life, maybe different than yours, has taught me that perfect is not to be found on this earth. So I accept the best visible/available option instead. YMMV.
** So now, with Terry, instead of accepting some small defeats, we can look forward to many major ones. I fail to see how that is an improvement. Wish it was otherwise.
KBCraig
Regular Member
Same song, how many verses now?
The Republicans run a weak and flawed candidate, and start howling about the Libertarian costing them the election even before the votes are cast.
The news articles I read all said that Sarvis voters were twice as likely to have supported McAuliffe than Cooch. Sarvis actually caused a narrower margin than if he hadn't been in the race.
The Republicans run a weak and flawed candidate, and start howling about the Libertarian costing them the election even before the votes are cast.
The news articles I read all said that Sarvis voters were twice as likely to have supported McAuliffe than Cooch. Sarvis actually caused a narrower margin than if he hadn't been in the race.
marshaul
Campaign Veteran
This confirms my own observations. And the map Thundar posted:
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...Libertarian-Impact-upon-Virginia-Red-Blue-Map
But we shouldn't let facts get in the way of partisan chest-thumping and blame-laying.
Drive by responses now, and no factual counter arguments?
Re: KBCraig's cite of unnamed articles as support, please provide cites to primary data, including questionnaire wording and sampling techniques. Lacking the primary data for critical review, it's going to continue to look like the usual MSM support for Statists like Obama/Bloomberg/McAuliffe/Sarvis, which is what we have all come to expect.
But even should the data hold up to critical review, it will simply quantify the point I've made several times now: we seem to have a large population even of gun enthusiasts who are willing to support someone whose primary funding was from anti-gun and anti-liberty Statists, who hid evidence of same, and who endorses government tracking of citizens. So I will be interested in seeing exactly how large that dupe population is.
Re: KBCraig's cite of unnamed articles as support, please provide cites to primary data, including questionnaire wording and sampling techniques. Lacking the primary data for critical review, it's going to continue to look like the usual MSM support for Statists like Obama/Bloomberg/McAuliffe/Sarvis, which is what we have all come to expect.
But even should the data hold up to critical review, it will simply quantify the point I've made several times now: we seem to have a large population even of gun enthusiasts who are willing to support someone whose primary funding was from anti-gun and anti-liberty Statists, who hid evidence of same, and who endorses government tracking of citizens. So I will be interested in seeing exactly how large that dupe population is.
Thundar
Regular Member
Funny you use the term "duped". Many here would argue that those who take the "lesser of two evils approach" as being the ones who are duped.
I took the time to meet with and discuss issues with Sarvis. He was a very enthusiastic supporter of gun rights and had no problem with my openly carried handgun.
Constitutional carry is just about the holy grail of political objectives here on the Virginia forum. Why? Because it stops the rift between open carriers and chippers and allows the 2A battle to be about the big issues and not the P4P issues, which many here feel is a distraction.
Sarvis not only understands this, he actually made it the centerpiece of his 2A plank. The Cooch opposes constitutional carry.
Those who read the threads on OCDO and voted for Sarvis were not duped, they were informed.