Trump will hurt public lands

[MTGomer]

I If you really believe you're AR-15 can protect you from a government that spends over $700 billion a year on military and has drones, missles, and the whole works I can't help you. .

The continued existence of AlQueada pretty much throws that out the window.
You need your AR 15. If for nothing else, you can use it on the land grabbers.

 

[onpoint]

if we don't have the freedom to hunt (own firearms and ammo) then I care very little and bout public lands.

i am pretty much the opposite of you. I like to be out in the woods. Without public lands, i have little use for firearms and ammo.

First quote, all I can say is wow.......that's all public lands are good for?

I'm with Rocky Dog.

Guess a lot of us, probably more than ever, will be actually be voting against each others ideals.

I'll be heading back out to work, play, and generally live on our public lands, for the better part of the next 3 months. In a few weeks I'll be voting against any A-hole who endangers that.

But then again, I'm an idiot one issue voter.

 

[Washington Hunter]

Some of you are way more optimistic about the future than I am. I guess that's what allows you to be a one issue voter. When I said we may not have a country anymore, under a Clinton presidency, I mean it. So let's just say the United States ceases to exist. Are public lands still going to be your number one issue? I didn't think so. Public lands are extremely important to me. But even more important, as I said before, is national security and the economy. Remember, Clinton would only be a continuation of the Obama presidency- the guy who refuses to even say the words "Islamic terrorism."

 

[Ben Lamb]

How would the nation cease to exist under Clinton?

 

[Southwind]

In the beginning I liked Trump, I thought I could vote for Trump, but the closer we get to the election, I cannot vote for Trump. Despite what his son has said, it is a game of politics and it will be once he's elected whether you want to believe he is a politician or not. He has backtracked on issues, changes his opinions, contradicted himself at every turn, and has released news after news that shows just how bad for sportsmen he will be. Instead of making this thread about "he's better than Hillary" argument sit back and use some actual knowledge, common sense, and reasoning. Trumps plans would give away public lands to industry, sidetracking environmental laws helping keep our wildlife safe and ensuring we have clean water and air. With his choices of Supreme Court justices, a Trump presidency scares me with a republican congress. You will see public lands,hunters, and wildlife have to answer to the almighty dollar and not good management. If you want to trust the guy that he won't give your public lands away to states, be my guest but common sense and research shows just how much he lies. Hillary sucks, I'll admit that, but this post isn't about her, so don't bring up arguments of who sucks less. You should be voting for someone, if you vote for Trump, it may very well be a give away of our public lands and wildlife to industry and states. I just needed to vent a little.

Well then vote for the habitual liar criminal who has flip flopped probably more and would sell her mother if she thought it would advance her. You are playing Russian roulette either way but with what we know about the hag you are playing with fully loaded cylinders.

 

[Washington Hunter]

How would the nation cease to exist under Clinton?

Perhaps a nuclear war?

 

[b0nes]

Clinton can't manage an email account? Gee whiz let's give her the country!

 

[James Riley]

I'm going to write myself in for POTUS. On the down ballot, I will refrain from voting for any person who aligns themselves with a major party.

The two party system is the enemy, especially when they collaborate against non-members. It's basically two teams with stupid fans constituting an establishment and thus, in reality, it's one team.

I'm not quite raging against the machine, but I am against it. Heaven forbid I should rage. Rant, maybe, but if I were to rage, well, never mind . . . Ranting is good. At least that is not censored. Yet.

 

[shoots-straight]

I hate to discus politics on a forum but since this seems to be keeping relevant to hunting and since hunting in all its various forms is such a big part of who I am I must argue in favor of Trump if only because he is not Hillary. Much like Washington Hunter said, if we don't have the freedom to hunt (own firearms and ammo) then I care very little about public lands. I like to hike with a purpose.

I keep hearing this irrational statement from the Trump supporters. You do realize there is a constitution that guarantees that we will have firearms, and ammo? We have no such document to protect our public lands.

 

[shoots-straight]

Clinton can't manage an email account? Gee whiz let's give her the country!

conversely Trump has failed at building buildings in budget and on time. Stiffing working folks along the way. So is management of an email account the most important issue for you? Public lands management, and control are at a very serious risk with Trump. Clinton will protect those lands.

 

[Big Fin]

Nothing is ever solved with these candidate threads; no minds are changed; no net improvement to the world of hunting. So, now that I've locked it, take your passion and time over to the TV and watch the debate tonight.