Presidential Candidates 2016

jaredpuckett

New member
Joined
Dec 16, 2015
Messages
2
Have any of the presidential candidates stated an opinion on public land transfer/sales?
I am really just trying to get to the bottom of what these guys think... The only one I've heard give an opinion is Carson.... ( I did not like his stance) He wants to sell public lands to lower the nat'l debt... It really pains me to hear about that sort of thing. I hunt the very few public lands in Oklahoma. I also mule deer hunt and hike on public lands in colorado.
 
I have very little hope for the republican cantidates, on one side we have all the idiots that want to sell public land and on the other we have trump. My only hope is that jeb or rubio are more moderate and can be swayed towards our side.
 

Attachments

  • image.png
    image.png
    34.6 KB · Views: 610
Thanks Wyatt G for the graphic and your input. Does anyone have any info reguarding the democratic presidential candidates and there stance on this issue? I find it weird that more people havent chimed in... Please if you have any info I'd love to hear it.
 
The Democratoc candidates, all 2 of them, are pretty friendly toward public lands. There are other issues outside of hunting and fishing that are important to a lot of the HuntTalkers though, that favor the republican candidates.

We've had those conversations here before (Dem/Repub) and they are less than fruitful. That'd be my guess as to why the lack of input. It's sad that the GOP has been hijacked by anti-public lands goons. There is no reason for Conservatism to adhere to the anti-public lands sentiment and it's a shame.
 
Rob Bishop endorsed Marco Rubio so I guess he's out.

I'm thinking Christie might be my best choice right now. Cruz and Paul are the most dangerous, I think.
 
Ted Cruz is very outspoken about his stance for selling/transferring public lands. I don't know about other candidate statements and his are clearly hostile toward public land hunting and recreation in the American West. Is that enough to remove him from consideration?
 
All I know is that's it amazing Hillary even has a chance,yet alone the best chance of gaining office.I certainly don't agree with privatization of federal land.Giving the land to the states I still have no opinion on.Here in Pa we have a lot of state land that gets drilled on and forested and has had no impact on hunting except maybe to improve it.The east is far different then the west though,thus the no opinion on something I know little about.Regulations are put upon the gas drillers here,and they bring our game commission a lot of money in royalties.Give the local economies in some pretty small rural areas a big boost,and of course high paying jobs to locals.From what I've seen, they replant the access roads in clover and other good deer/turkey and bear feed.So its hard for me to see why giving that land to the states would be a bad thing,but a lot has to do with who's in office to decide how they will be used;or abused
 
Is this really one of those things that his stance is not much to really worry about? He can't make that change, it has to be worked up to him from the bottom. Kind of like when I hear uninformed women commenting about how a presidential candidate wants to take away of do more for abortion rights, I usually remind them of Roe VS Wade...... The POTUS cannot do much about it.
 
The power of the veto in light of a highly moronic congress is a real consideration for whatever issue an individual cares about IMO.
 
Is this really one of those things that his stance is not much to really worry about? He can't make that change, it has to be worked up to him from the bottom. Kind of like when I hear uninformed women commenting about how a presidential candidate wants to take away of do more for abortion rights, I usually remind them of Roe VS Wade...... The POTUS cannot do much about it.

I would respectfully disagree. The President gets to set the pace of development, management of public lands, and sets for his/her priority in terms of funding levels. They are in charge of the USFWS, BLM, USFs, nrcs, Etc. They also can help push through legislation. Give. The current congress, sportsmen should be plenty nervous about who occupies the Oval Office.

The President is a huge player when it comes to public land management.
 
From where I stand it seems that there are some definite no go candidates, but there are candidates that can be shown the will of the people and where we stand on this issue. I think the only real deal breaker is if someone is a Socialist or a Lying Ex first Lady, other than that I am wide open. John
 
Funny,sad, but true. We were so .........spaced? lol.
But then again, she was just another corp. mouthpiece then,er ah 1st Lady,trying to keep quiet and under the radar.

Then she found the Voice and the Shrillery is really hard to take. Seriously.

Where is Teddies ghost when we need him?
You know, to appear again now in a real life, movie theme, and save us and it ends with the crooks in jail and critters roaming free on land utilized by prosperous Americans.
Hell, I'd almost settle for a Nixon clone theme......At least he was an honest crook and started the EPA ....Naah,I'd a fragged his ass.

Carry on.
Glad I don't have kids and live in the middle of nowhere .....and at times I worry for my nieces and nephews.Folks like you all and yours.My good neighbors.
Sometimes I think I can make a difference.
I'm old and remember a really good life for most, or so it seemed.
 
Last edited:
Use Promo Code Randy for 20% off OutdoorClass

Forum statistics

Threads
113,586
Messages
2,026,039
Members
36,238
Latest member
3Wapiti
Back
Top