Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Should gun owners in the 10th NOT vote for Glen Sturtevant?

  1. #1
    Regular Member Repeater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,519

    Should gun owners in the 10th NOT vote for Glen Sturtevant?

    It's true that every vote counts, especially in a 4-way race for State Senate, but it really seems Glen Sturtevant have proven himself a weak, scared candidate. The Richmond Times-Dispatch article is quite revealing:

    Outside money on both sides of gun control debate elevates issue in 10th Senate District race

    It's bad enough that Matt Brown, Sturtevant’s campaign manager, lied misspoke about Philip Van Cleave "supporting" Sturtevant, but the most damning comment is actually from Lori Hass, who said, "Sturtevant is running away from his NRA endorsement."

    That's true; he really is. He would rather change the subject, or bleat the usual Establishment "Enforce existing gun laws" line.

    Honestly, if he's too scared to defend the RKBA while campaigning, how can anyone trust him to defend the RKBA in the Senate when things get really tough?

    Under the circumstances, should voters in the 10th who care about gun rights vote for Sturtevant, or Loser, or maybe not vote at all?

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by Repeater View Post
    SNIP...should voters in the 10th who care about gun rights vote for Sturtevant, or Loser, or maybe not vote at all?
    Mmmmmph.

    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  3. #3
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by Repeater View Post
    Honestly, if he's too scared to defend the RKBA while campaigning, how can anyone trust him to defend the RKBA in the Senate when things get really tough?

    Under the circumstances, should voters in the 10th who care about gun rights vote for Sturtevant, or Loser, or maybe not vote at all?
    Keep the big picture here, people.

    Running a campaign to get elected in a district that is full of weak-minded feel-good people susceptible to the propaganda of the gun-haters is NOTHING to compare to standing up for what's right in the Senate. It is FAR tougher to battle the illogical, touchy-feely, mind-numbing drivel put out by the left during a campaign than it is to fight the right battles in the Senate.

    One of the STRONGEST pro-gun candidates in Virginia does not ever return his VCDL survey. Why? Because it DOES NOT HELP HIM GET ELECTED.

    It is paramount that gun rights supporters USE THEIR BRAINS to study a candidates position, and NOT rely on a STUPID piece of paper. I have not studied this particular race, but it is QUITE POSSIBLE that NOT returning a survey is actually in the BEST INTEREST of the VCDL and all gun-rights supporters!

    The gun haters are LAUGHING at posts like this. PLEASE don't let that laughter turn into a celebration of the Senate going back to the control of McAuliffe and his puppeteers from up North.

    TFred
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 11-01-2015 at 01:07 PM. Reason: rule #19

  4. #4
    Regular Member Repeater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    Keep the big picture here, people.

    One of the STRONGEST pro-gun candidates in Virginia does not ever return his VCDL survey. Why? Because it DOES NOT HELP HIM GET ELECTED.

    TFred
    Oh sure, a low turnout might cost a candidate the election. Let's hear from an expert, who should know:
    Tucker Martin, a veteran political strategist for Sturtevant, said, “We certainly feel a lot of energy on this side.”

    “As far as we’re concerned, when you have a candidate like Glen who people like and really relate to: The more interest the better. You just can’t ultimately tell who’s going to vote in a state Senate election,” he said.
    Yes, boys and girls, Tucker Martin is the wizard behind the curtain, providing his experienced strategy on how to win lose.

    Voting for the lessor of 4 evils is still voting for evil.

  5. #5
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by Repeater View Post
    Voting for the lessor of 4 evils is still voting for evil.
    So once again, the residents of the district have failed the rest of the citizens by not providing a "good" candidate. No matter who is on the ballot, given a choice of 4 levels of damage, only a sadist - or a disingenuous "supporter" - would choose to not vote for the least damaging among them.

    ALL candidates are evil, because all candidates are human. Human nature is evil. Every election is a choice of the least evil among them.

    TFred

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Dinwiddie, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    213
    its Glen Sturtevant or Bloomberg

    easy decision.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •