• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

One question is all you need to screen a candidate. Condolences to CNN, FOX, etc.

77zach

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,913
Location
Marion County, FL
With one question: "Do you believe free adults have a right to own and peaceably carry firearms of military pattern without a license?" you can find the lesser of two evils. I have tried this a few times and sure enough it works. Has anyone had a different experience?

For this reason (as a time saver) I am a single issue voter, who only participates in local and state elections. I am aware that many libertarians view voting as an act of aggression, and I am somewhat sympathetic to that view under our current statist system. For this reason and because there is no practical difference on so many other issues and because one vote is meaningless, I do not vote for national office holders (senate, congress, president). I don't want to legitimize their sick game with their false choices.

If a person were devoted, it is possible to influence policy at the local level. I believe in the non aggression principle (nap) and am interested in many issues. Since I have to participate in the system I practice voting for the "lesser evil" in local elections but only look at a candidate's view on the right to keep and bear arms.

I will also add that relatively free gun ownership in most states is the only thing that makes us freer than other first world nations. It's boring and depressing how similar US, UK, French, Canadian, French, etc laws are. In fact some totalitarian states (Singapore and China for example) now have more economic freedom and lower taxes than the USSA.
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
With one question: "Do you believe free adults have a right to own and peaceably carry firearms of military pattern without a license?" you can find the lesser of two evils. I have tried this a few times and sure enough it works. Has anyone had a different experience?

For this reason (as a time saver) I am a single issue voter, who only participates in local and state elections. I am aware that many libertarians view voting as an act of aggression, and I am somewhat sympathetic to that view under our current statist system. For this reason and because there is no practical difference on so many other issues and because one vote is meaningless, I do not vote for national office holders (senate, congress, president). I don't want to legitimize their sick game with their false choices.

If a person were devoted, it is possible to influence policy at the local level. I believe in the non aggression principle (nap) and am interested in many issues. Since I have to participate in the system I practice voting for the "lesser evil" in local elections but only look at a candidate's view on the right to keep and bear arms.

I will also add that relatively free gun ownership in most states is the only thing that makes us freer than other first world nations. It's boring and depressing how similar US, UK, French, Canadian, French, etc laws are. In fact some totalitarian states (Singapore and China for example) now have more economic freedom and lower taxes than the USSA.

Seen this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeSW3s-Wm9Y
 

twoskinsonemanns

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
2,326
Location
WV
I will never vote for evil... no matter what you compare it to.
My only question is "Do you intend to legislate based on the assumption that every man owns his own body and can do whatever he wants with it save directly hurting others?"
 

The Truth

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
1,972
Location
Henrico
Voting for the lesser of two evils has got the be the dumbest idea in the history of voting.
 

77zach

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,913
Location
Marion County, FL
Voting for the lesser of two evils has got the be the dumbest idea in the history of voting.

Yeah, but I'm going to be victimized no matter what. May as well try to mitigate the damage. The enemy of the better is the perfect. I do agree though at some subjective point voting is pointless or immoral, which is why I don't vote for national office.
 
Top