Sportsmen beware, unless you're only an archer...

[Irrelevant]

Although I would like to side with the write-in-ers I'm too insecure and will likely go with the Lamb special of slightly more tolerable turd

 

[pointingdogsrule]

I think that she's no friend to the second amendment, and that she's got a much larger issue ahead of her than guns. I've been told that Obama is going to take my guns for the last 8 years. The damned things just multiply in my safe.

I was told that Clinton's AWB ban was going to eliminate black guns - they just went up in price slightly.

Hillary on guns is dog whistle BS. She still will have a congress that won't go along with any kind of sweeping gun control, even when the Senate turns blue in November.

As for the supreme court - I would rather have centrist jurists who are grounded in law versus the shills like Clarence Thomas who is making bank through his wife shilling for conservative groups. Stacking the supreme court with justices that are anti-gun completely ignores the role of the senate in confirmation, and how easily an appointment can get hung up. 1 Senator can squee-haw the whole deal and cause gridlock over an appointment. I don't want more justices who think corporations have the same rights as citizens and I don't want justices that sell their vote for kick backs & juicy gigs for their wives. I do want justices that will defend public land against the landgrabbers, will help hold up laws that ensure clean air, land and water and justices who believe that the people are more important than politics.

I'm not a fan of Hillary Clinton. She's not whom I wanted as the nominee. Trump isn't who I wanted to see as the nominee for the Republicans, but as Sagebrush pointed out, they're who we have. In that light, I'm not sure that the dude endorsed by the KKK, Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong Un is what's best for America.

Ben, good points, however there are other ways to control guns. If you can not outlaw something then make a law that makes it hard for the industry to exist. Example: Obama has stated that he will make it impossible for coal fired electricity to be viable (instituted new regulations that are burdensome and increase costs). Here is what HRC will do (so I believe):

She will try a and go around the "second amendment" and regulate the gun makers & ammo makers out of business. (just my thoughts). No need to mess with the Supreme Court when you use this tactic.

good luck to all
the dog

 

[dannyb278]

I've been told that Obama is going to take my guns for the last 8 years. The damned things just multiply in my safe.

This. If I was one of those Agenda 21, Jade Helm conspiracy types, I would think that the Dems are actually in the pocket of Big Firearm, because business is booming.

 

[dannyb278]

Wasn't Obama supposed to have declared martial law by now so he could have a 3rd term? I saw that somewhere, 24h maybe.

In the past 8 years we were suppose to have SHTF, need bugout bags, no ammo, brass, powder, primers, 22LR ammo, black guns, rifles, shotguns handguns, bb guns and sling shots.

I suppose to be living in a rail car up on the high line because of Agenda 21, wolves were suppose to have wiped out all game and put and end to hunting so I wouldn't need any of the above. Preppers were to be the only ones left alive and I saw that on TV.

Gas was going to be $27 a gallon the stock market was to be 6K, the dollar was worthless and gold was to be $8000 and ounce.

I still cant find .22 ammo! Pocket gophers are raising hell, with nothing to take them out! Might have to dust off Grandpas old .16 gauge.

 

[MinnesotaHunter]

I still cant find .22 ammo! Pocket gophers are raising hell, with nothing to take them out! Might have to dust off Grandpas old .16 gauge.

Danny, I have some CCI Standard lying around I can borrow ya....

 

[MTGomer]

This. If I was one of those Agenda 21, Jade Helm conspiracy types, I would think that the Dems are actually in the pocket of Big Firearm, because business is booming.

That's not really that far-fetched. Most of the rest of the rest of their(the major two party establishment) agenda is driven by corporate interests. Why wouldn't guns be? Whenever any politician or government agency claims to do something for the peasants 'safety' you can bet your butt theres more to it than them genuinely caring for your well being.
To believe that there might be a money trail to follow on 8 years of record firearms sales is far more reasonable than a new world order.

 

[dannyb278]

I will incorporate your constructive criticism and not be too flippant next time.

Vote your conscience, but own it when the sh#t goes south.

Given the choice we have in this election, I know how I have to vote. I don't like it, nor do I think the candidate is the best person to lead the country - but the alternative is much, much worse.

Yup, its embarrassing for both parties. I foolishly though Palin was the worst our Republican party could put fourth. how wrong I was....best we can do now is bend over and take it from Hillary with a smile, because no way that maniac Trump should have any say on the next generation of Supreme Court Justices

That said.... I still cant imaging going into a voting booth and checking HC's name without vomiting all over the old lady next to me, so with her health in mind, I'll write in somebody.

It would be interesting to learn of a "write in" movement for a single individual as the election draws near.

 

[MinnesotaHunter]

The people that concern me the most in all of this, are the ones who actually think either the R or D candidate is worth a crap.

 

[JLS]

The people that concern me the most in all of this, are the ones who actually think either the R or D candidate is worth a crap.

Truth brotha!

 

[jryoung]

The people that concern me the most in all of this, are the ones who actually think either the R or D candidate is worth a crap.

They're worth a crap, followed by a wipe, flush and washing our hands.

 

[dannyb278]

Danny, I have some CCI Standard lying around I can borrow ya....

Would I have to sell my Granddads gold pocket watch for a box, because that seems the price point lately.

 

[Nemont]

Trumps not a Conservative, who ever said he was? Unlike your's, my voting record isn't even close to being conservative and I'm damn proud of that. Can anyone name one Democrat in the Country who is or has proposed to privatize even 1 acre of your public land?

Well if you are a single issue voter, life is easy. Are you saying that no Democrat ever has voted for selling a single acres of public lands? We all have political opinions and you know what they say about opinions, they are like another part of the human anatomy we all have.

So good on with your voting record. That and $5 will get you a cup of coffee at any Starbucks.

Nemont

 

[MinnesotaHunter]

Well if you are a single issue voter, life is easy. Are you saying that no Democrat ever has voted for selling a single acres of public lands? We all have political opinions and you know what they say about opinions, they are like another part of the human anatomy we all have.

So good on with your voting record. That and $5 will get you a cup of coffee at any Starbucks.

Nemont

MN is pretty blue, but every year I see legislation authorizing sale of surplus state land.....weird.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Well if you are a single issue voter, life is easy. Are you saying that no Democrat ever has voted for selling a single acres of public lands? We all have political opinions and you know what they say about opinions, they are like another part of the human anatomy we all have.

So good on with your voting record. That and $5 will get you a cup of coffee at any Starbucks.

Nemont

It's easy to say no to any land sale, swap or trade, but the reality is that sale, trade & swap are all viable land management tools when we look at specific parcels. While democrats are generally better as a party than the GOP on the issue, I bet with a little bit of work, finding a Dem who sponsored a land swap bill wouldn't be terribly difficult.

What we should be talking about, in terms of transfer & sale, is the wholesale transfer and inevitable massive sale of public lands - not the day to day management actions necessary for good stewardship.

 

[Nemont]

It's easy to say no to any land sale, swap or trade, but the reality is that sale, trade & swap are all viable land management tools when we look at specific parcels. While democrats are generally better as a party than the GOP on the issue, I bet with a little bit of work, finding a Dem who sponsored a land swap bill wouldn't be terribly difficult.

What we should be talking about, in terms of transfer & sale, is the wholesale transfer and inevitable massive sale of public lands - not the day to day management actions necessary for good stewardship.

I agree with that 100%. I am not the one supporting a party line based upon the thought that no member of that party ever proposed the sale of a single acre. Whenever anyone gets into such absolute statements it just proves that they are part of the problem and not part of the solution.

If anyone thinks that Hillary will be an effective leader, I suggest one go look at her numbers, large numbers of even her own party don't like or trust her.. There will not be the normal honeymoon for newly elected presidents because she has been in the public spot light for 25 years and the Republicans will still hold the house and perhaps a slimmer majority in the Senate. She will be a gut shot, beaten up, ineffective president from day one and it will only get worse. I still cannot see how I could ever vote for Trump but I will never vote for Hillary. So all I can do is cast my ballot and pray that a third term of the same party doesn't end badly. It usually does and then what happens is the pendulum swing to far the other way.

Down ticket races in some cases are even worse choices or no choice at all. I hear local ads for the two vying for the Republican Nomination to run for HD 33 and it sounds like ALEC/ALC have written both of their ads for them.

Nemont

 

[hank4elk]

I'm locked out from voting next Tues,as usual here in NM. Closed primaries=BS.
I have not been registered to any one party for 45 yrs. Personal Ethics are my reason. I hate the parties and what they now stand for.

Gary Johnson will probably be my vote,since the Shrill had the DNC licked up before voting started......
Trump will be welcome like any other common thief or criminal at my place.....and would be dispatched like the snake he is.

 

[noharleyyet]

Another Dog Whistle meme...; )

Frump University?

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presi...llege-as-state-dept-funneled-55-million-back/

 

[Schaaf]

HD 33 and it sounds like ALEC/ALC have written both of their ads for them.

Yeah, those have gotten pretty ridiculous to hear. Quite the pissing match between the two of them.

 

[Ben Lamb]

I agree with that 100%. I am not the one supporting a party line based upon the thought that no member of that party ever proposed the sale of a single acre. Whenever anyone gets into such absolute statements it just proves that they are part of the problem and not part of the solution.

If anyone thinks that Hillary will be an effective leader, I suggest one go look at her numbers, large numbers of even her own party don't like or trust her.. There will not be the normal honeymoon for newly elected presidents because she has been in the public spot light for 25 years and the Republicans will still hold the house and perhaps a slimmer majority in the Senate. She will be a gut shot, beaten up, ineffective president from day one and it will only get worse. I still cannot see how I could ever vote for Trump but I will never vote for Hillary. So all I can do is cast my ballot and pray that a third term of the same party doesn't end badly. It usually does and then what happens is the pendulum swing to far the other way.

Down ticket races in some cases are even worse choices or no choice at all. I hear local ads for the two vying for the Republican Nomination to run for HD 33 and it sounds like ALEC/ALC have written both of their ads for them.

Nemont

Your district must have something in the water that attracts a certain element.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Ben, good points, however there are other ways to control guns. If you can not outlaw something then make a law that makes it hard for the industry to exist. Example: Obama has stated that he will make it impossible for coal fired electricity to be viable (instituted new regulations that are burdensome and increase costs). Here is what HRC will do (so I believe):

She will try a and go around the "second amendment" and regulate the gun makers & ammo makers out of business. (just my thoughts). No need to mess with the Supreme Court when you use this tactic.

good luck to all
the dog

This is an interesting legal issue. We held big tobacco liable when it was proven they not only hid the effects of tobacco usage, but actively lobbied against any kind of regulation that would help protect consumers, even if it was a warning on the package of smokes. I think that it's an interesting legal theory, and not so sure the gun industry can stand up to it based on past case law. Essentially then, if a lawyer can prove that XYZ gun manaufacturer was directly involved in suppression of evidence about what causes gun violence, or spent significant money to lobby congress to not even look at ways to reduce gun violence, then there may actually be cause to sue them as a matter of public health.

@Moonraker33's pithy comment is funny, but not applicable to the situaton the Secratary is looking at. Plus, it would still need to be litigated all the way to the Supreme Court, and even with a conservative court, the precedent stands, no?

As for the president & Coal - it's easy to get wrapped around the axle of the clean power plan (it's been stayed so not in play at the moment), but the global market for coal is tanking due to other nations moving away from fossil fuels and towards renewables. China was our biggest customer for coal and they've reduced demand significantly over the last year or so. Beyond those economic factors, you have a glut of natural gas which is driving down the cost of coal, and is being used as a bridge to transition away from coal because it's cheaper, cleaner and easier to convert a station to gas as opposed to upgrading coal facilities to meet those evil emission standards for clean air.