Dan Coats is OUT!

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Twangbanger

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    21   0   0
    Oct 9, 2010
    7,062
    113
    Although I find a re-election of Trump unlikely, this is one of the things I'd look forward to (in addition to more potential SC appointments), in the event he pulled it off: the number of people in the national security apparatus within striking range of retirement , who would finally pull the trigger and get off the public tit the morning after he wins.

    (But then, maybe the fact Coats voted for the AW ban, and I think he's a pr!ck for it, is just getting the better of me here).
     
    Last edited:

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    Although I find a re-election of Trump unlikely, this is one of the things I'd look forward to (in addition to more potential SC appointments), in the event he pulled it off: the number of people in the national security apparatus within striking range of retirement , who would finally pull the trigger and get off the public tit the morning after he wins.

    (But then maybe I just think Coats is a pr!ck for voting for the AW ban).

    I'm honestly not so sure. I give him a >50% chance of being re-elected. His base is solid, and will certainly turnout.
     

    Twangbanger

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    21   0   0
    Oct 9, 2010
    7,062
    113
    I'm honestly not so sure. I give him a >50% chance of being re-elected. His base is solid, and will certainly turnout.

    60/40 against. Base plays are a risky strategy. They only work if Independents don't show up. And you have never seen money like what is going to get spent by the Left and Right to defeat this guy. But I was wrong the first time...
     

    two70

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    19   0   0
    Feb 5, 2016
    3,725
    113
    Johnson
    Independents or swing voters may get all the attention but Base voters win elections. Focusing on the small percentage of people that either can't make up their minds or change their minds as frequently as the wind is not a wining strategy.
     

    churchmouse

    I still care....Really
    Emeritus
    Rating - 100%
    187   0   0
    Dec 7, 2011
    191,809
    152
    Speedway area
    I'm honestly not so sure. I give him a >50% chance of being re-elected. His base is solid, and will certainly turnout.

    I am leaning towards 60%+ on staying in the big boy chair.

    Most all the polls are seriously skewed.
    MSM would not know or even report the truth if it hit them in the face.
    So lets see where this goes. He has a huge base.
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    I am leaning towards 60%+ on staying in the big boy chair.

    Most all the polls are seriously skewed.
    MSM would not know or even report the truth if it hit them in the face.
    So lets see where this goes. He has a huge base.

    I place his base at around a little more of 30% of voters. That's a solid baseline, but certainly not enough to win alone. He needs to bring out those who are like his base, who didn't vote in the prior election, and needs to try to suppress turnout from an invigorated left. When I say suppress, I mean I don't mean in a shady way, but rather suppressed due to frustration... as what appeared to be the case with Clinton.
     

    churchmouse

    I still care....Really
    Emeritus
    Rating - 100%
    187   0   0
    Dec 7, 2011
    191,809
    152
    Speedway area
    I place his base at around a little more of 30% of voters. That's a solid baseline, but certainly not enough to win alone. He needs to bring out those who are like his base, who didn't vote in the prior election, and needs to try to suppress turnout from an invigorated left. When I say suppress, I mean I don't mean in a shady way, but rather suppressed due to frustration... as what appeared to be the case with Clinton.

    I think we are looking at this differently and that is really OK. How I focus on an issue and form opinions is from my views and life experiences. No 2 of these are the same even in family.

    I look at his rally turn outs....the real numbers not the ones CNN and those agenda driven outfits put out but the real pics put up for all to see should they want to.

    Then we see the turn outs for the "Freebie" lefty's and those same MSM outlets use camera angles and staging to skew the numbers.

    We get the exact same thing locally as well. Last year there was a 2A rally on the state house steps. The numbers attending were in the thousands. I was there. I saw it. The news (:lmfao:) outlets posted up ridiculously low numbers and took pics very early to make it look poorly attended. This is the norm. The same thing is going on with Trump.

    Love him/hate him......no matter. It is what it is.
     

    ChristianPatriot

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    28   0   0
    Feb 11, 2013
    12,801
    113
    Clifford, IN
    I place his base at around a little more of 30% of voters. That's a solid baseline, but certainly not enough to win alone. He needs to bring out those who are like his base, who didn't vote in the prior election, and needs to try to suppress turnout from an invigorated left. When I say suppress, I mean I don't mean in a shady way, but rather suppressed due to frustration... as what appeared to be the case with Clinton.

    I’m thinking it’ll be a lot like last election, a big “nope” of the left rather than an endorsement of Trump.
     

    edporch

    Master
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    25   0   0
    Oct 19, 2010
    4,664
    149
    Indianapolis
    Good riddance of a RINO anti-2nd Amendment sellout.
    I've never trusted or voted for Coats since he voted to support banning so-called "assault weapons" more than once.
     

    Libertarian01

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Jan 12, 2009
    6,006
    113
    Fort Wayne
    Is this what you really think?


    I was tired when I posted this and didn't say it well.

    What I think I meant was that Trump wants people whom he believes generally think like him, who are also willing to do as they're told. It is that "believing" part that I refer to. Almost everyone he has tapped for a government job in the military/intelligence community does not think like him. They (in my opinion) believe in premises that Trump doesn't, nor do I for some of them. For example, Sec Mattis, whom I greatly respect, in my opinion sees nothing wrong with waging a "forever war" in Iraq and/or Afghanistan until some vague objective is reached. In my opinion what he and others want/wanted is simply unattainable, and therefore should be dismissed.

    Trump has turned over most of the folks who have been surrounded by the "big state" mentality and Coats was one of them. These folks simply cannot comprehend a world where the US intelligence community doesn't have its fingers in every pie. They cannot comprehend a world where we aren't deploying special ops in almost every continent on the world several times a year. The idea of not lobbing ordinance into dozens of countries to get the bad guy is alien to them.

    I don't know if I am saying it real well or not but that was the idea I think of with Coats and Trump. Coats is unable to imagine a world where Trump is actually questioning departments that have a vested interest in maintaining their hegemony over their little parts of the world (and budget.)

    Regards,

    Doug
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149


    I was tired when I posted this and didn't say it well.

    What I think I meant was that Trump wants people whom he believes generally think like him, who are also willing to do as they're told. It is that "believing" part that I refer to. Almost everyone he has tapped for a government job in the military/intelligence community does not think like him. They (in my opinion) believe in premises that Trump doesn't, nor do I for some of them. For example, Sec Mattis, whom I greatly respect, in my opinion sees nothing wrong with waging a "forever war" in Iraq and/or Afghanistan until some vague objective is reached. In my opinion what he and others want/wanted is simply unattainable, and therefore should be dismissed.

    Trump has turned over most of the folks who have been surrounded by the "big state" mentality and Coats was one of them. These folks simply cannot comprehend a world where the US intelligence community doesn't have its fingers in every pie. They cannot comprehend a world where we aren't deploying special ops in almost every continent on the world several times a year. The idea of not lobbing ordinance into dozens of countries to get the bad guy is alien to them.

    I don't know if I am saying it real well or not but that was the idea I think of with Coats and Trump. Coats is unable to imagine a world where Trump is actually questioning departments that have a vested interest in maintaining their hegemony over their little parts of the world (and budget.)

    Regards,

    Doug

    Thanks for the clarification. The part bolded in your post I think is spot on, and I think that's a problem. There's nothing wrong with the president wanting people in his administration to share his vision, but there is absolutely something wrong if the president wants people to believe in a vision that is based on what he wants it to be rather than how it is. A good counselor will tell his boss the hard truths even if he doesn't like it. I don't think the president want a person like that in his administration. He wants his "truth" to be gospel, regardless of it's actual veracity. It's not a concept that has ever been foreign to heads of state.
     

    mmpsteve

    Real CZ's have a long barrel!!
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Nov 14, 2016
    5,869
    113
    ..... formerly near the Wild Turkey
    I place his base at around a little more of 30% of voters. That's a solid baseline, but certainly not enough to win alone. He needs to bring out those who are like his base, who didn't vote in the prior election, and needs to try to suppress turnout from an invigorated left. When I say suppress, I mean I don't mean in a shady way, but rather suppressed due to frustration... as what appeared to be the case with Clinton.

    If the current crop of Democrat craziness isn't enough to frustrate any remaining rational Democrats, I don't know what it would take.

    .
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    If the current crop of Democrat craziness isn't enough to frustrate any remaining rational Democrats, I don't know what it would take.

    .

    Democrats say the exact same thing about Republicans due to their support for Trump.
     
    Top Bottom