INGO election poll 2012

[the1kidd03]

Ok, so I'm not "big" into politics. I simply don't have time to pay as close of attention/follow as close as I'd like to although the issues do concern me a great deal. Just for fun, I'd like to see who YOU are voting for.

You can simply poll and not discuss and that's fine, I just want to see the favorites in the gun owner community since we have a WIDE variety of people here. Since everyone here is a gun owner, I'd like to think that nobody will vote for candidates who are willing to harm our rights further, but everyone's different.

If you do plan on voting for a "non-favorite" candidate, explain why him and not another (if you don't mind). I'm really just curious to hear input on various candidates from those who are "more in the know" than I.

 

[the1kidd03]

Well it won't be for Obama or other gun haters

That's part of the reason I posted this. Since I don't have a lot of time to follow, research, etc. and it seems many here do much more than I can, I'd like to hear their feedback before it's too late.

I'm convinced that Obama is not an option for me. I've heard Romney isn't exactly "pro-gun" therefore I don't know if he would be much better. I've heard a lot of good about Johnson, but don't know much about him. I don't know his 2nd Amendment stance for instance and I'm fearful of voting for someone with such less "media coverage" than the others. I'm convinced the Obama needs to go, but that may not happen if enough people are split between the other two primary guys. I don't think the country can take another 4 years of him.

 

[Sylvain]

Well it won't be for Obama or other gun haters

So not Obama and not Romney?

I dont think gun laws will change for the worse if Obama is elected again.
Just like I dont think they will change for the better if Romney is elected.

I dont think Romey said he would fight against all the current gun laws that infringe upon the second amendment.That makes it a anti-gun politician to me.



Since they are both not going to do anything for or against guns I think you should focus on other issues.

 

[the1kidd03]

So not Obama and not Romney?

I dont think gun laws will change for the worse if Obama is elected again.
Just like I dont think they will change for the better if Romney is elected.

I dont think Romey said he would fight against all the current gun laws that infringe upon the second amendment.That makes it a anti-gun politician to me.



Since they are both not going to do anything for or against guns I think you should focus on other issues.

What about Johnson's gun stance??

 

[88GT]

So not Obama and not Romney?

I dont think gun laws will change for the worse if Obama is elected again.
Just like I dont think they will change for the better if Romney is elected.

I dont think Romey said he would fight against all the current gun laws that infringe upon the second amendment.That makes it a anti-gun politician to me.



Since they are both not going to do anything for or against guns I think you should focus on other issues.

You're right. Congress won't pass a single law. Why bother with the effort since the EOs coming from the Oval Office will get it done so much more quickly.

 

[sepe]

That's part of the reason I posted this. Since I don't have a lot of time to follow, research, etc. and it seems many here do much more than I can, I'd like to hear their feedback before it's too late.

I'm convinced that Obama is not an option for me. I've heard Romney isn't exactly "pro-gun" therefore I don't know if he would be much better. I've heard a lot of good about Johnson, but don't know much about him. I don't know his 2nd Amendment stance for instance and I'm fearful of voting for someone with such less "media coverage" than the others. I'm convinced the Obama needs to go, but that may not happen if enough people are split between the other two primary guys. I don't think the country can take another 4 years of him.

If you want Johnson's 2A stance, here you go.

Johnson position on Gun Control

The Second Amendment: Individual or Collective Right?

"I don't believe there should be any restrictions when it comes to firearms. None."
April 20, 2011, Slate Magazine

Legislations

"If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns. The first people who are going to be in line to turn in their guns are law-abiding citizens. Criminals are going to be left with guns. I believe that concealed carry is a way of reducing gun violence."
12 Nov, 2000, An Interview with Playboy magazine.

Johnson on Gun Control

 

[Sparkygod1]

Obama does not have to do anything when it comes to our rights as citizens. The collective he surrounds himself with are doing it for him. Be it Hillary giving away our second amendment rights to appease the UN, the Congress telling us what light bulbs to use, or the Courts telling us what doctor we chose, Obama doesn't have to show his hand for us to see what's up his sleeve.

 

[GREEN607]

Obama does not have to do anything when it comes to our rights as citizens. The collective he surrounds himself with are doing it for him. Be it Hillary giving away our second amendment rights to appease the UN, the Congress telling us what light bulbs to use, or the Courts telling us what doctor we chose, Obama doesn't have to show his hand for us to see what's up his sleeve.

You are correct. But you need to look even deeper....

Today, two of the worst enemies of not only our Second Amendment rights, but for the future of America (unless you simply love Socialism)..... are Obama's adviser Valerie Jarret, and his biggest supporter, George Sorous (sp?).

Either one of those fruit cakes would end legal individual gun-ownership, forever, in the U.S. if they could find a way. They (and particularly Jarret) are at the heart of Obama's socialist agenda, and both desire to see a "new world order" and singular world government.. where everything (no matter who the rightful owners) is shared equally among the masses; whether those individuals who make up the masses have ever worked a single day or contributed a single idea in their lives, or not. Sometimes I seriously think that BO is nothing more than a mouthpiece for Valerie Jarret and her anti-American/anti-Liberty train of thought.

Maybe this is why BO needs a teleprompter.... so he doesn't mess up Valerie's script!?

You will hear many MSM peeps talking about how "likeable" Obama is, in person. I read somewhere that Adolph Hitler was the same way, in certain circles........ at the time.

*Shame on the poster here whom recently said he would like to sit down and drink a few beers w/ BO. SHAME!

 

[Raskolnikov]

It's sad, the majority of people on a gun owners forum are voting for an anti-gun candidate (Romney).

 

[88GT]

It's sad, the majority of people on a gun owners forum are voting for an anti-gun candidate (Romney).

Funny, I wasn't aware that anti-gun candidates extended the term of firearms licenses from four to six years, reinstated a 90-day grace period for license renewal, and signed a law providing free replacement licenses.

 

[smokingman]

I will vote Johnson.The libertarian party needs 5% of the popular vote to get matching funds in 2016.It is a long term outlook for sure.I have been a registered Republican my entire life,but can not stand what the party has become.

168 men(the National Republican party members)will forever decide who the Republican Nominee is for president.State delegates are 100% meaningless to the entire process from this point forward,and can be replaced by the chosen presidential nominee.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo..._ride_rule_16_12_and_40_pass.html#post3259460

I will not be told I have no choice.Here is your candidate,you have no voice in this party.No.The line has been crossed one to many times.Now there is not even the illusion of choice.How can any party claim to represent you when you are not even able to give ANY input into how it is run(rule 16),who your candidates are(Rule 40),or even the rules of the party(Rule 12)!

I am dumping the Republican party for good.I will never vote the lesser of evils again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=35OXo9SSj5I#!

 

[GREEN607]

It's sad, the majority of people on a gun owners forum are voting for an anti-gun candidate (Romney).

Sorry to sound demeaning.... but you are seriously 'mis-informed' on Romney's record regarding the Second Amendment.

http://www.northstaroutdoors.com/mitt_romney_and_the_2nd_amendment

There are many such articles out there, that support Romney's dedication to the 2nd... if you just look a little.

 

[Benny]

I'm not wasting my time deciding on a turd sandwich or a giant douche.

 

[GREEN607]

I'm not wasting my time deciding on a turd sandwich or a giant douche.

Now there's a real intellectual post! You're better than this, Benny....

 

[Deadly Z Driver]

Now there's a real intellectual post! You're better than this, Benny....

I believe this is what he was referring too.

http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/154582/debate-2004

 

[GREEN607]

I believe this is what he was referring too.

Debate 2004 - Video Clips - South Park Studios

OK........... even worse.

Funny, but certainly not intelligent in any way.

 

[Benny]

Now there's a real intellectual post! You're better than this, Benny....

I'm really not.

I'm also not quite sure what you want from me here. They are both ****ing terrible and won't do dick to improve this country.

 

[rat-man]

Surprised by the results so far. Especially the support for Romney.

 

[EyesDownfield]

Anyone who supports Romney ought to naturally support Obama.

-Mitt supports the Patriot Act, just like Obama who resigned it and Bush who first signed it into law; they're all identical in this regard.

-Mitt also supports the stimulus (sorry for anyone who was trying to save anything in dollars) and has said in interviews that the bailout was the right thing because we would have had an economic collapse if not for stimulus.

-Obama and Romney both agree to bailing out certain special banks and corporations that give (or will give) them healthy campaign contributions and flood them with lobbyists, instead of letting them fail and pay for their own derivatives bubble that they created.

-Obama and Romney both support NDAA. As we all know, Obama is appealing the US Supreme Court decision that the Indefinite Detention Clause is unconstitutional. Romney has openly stated his full approval of NDAA, even among a hail of boos from the crowd during the Republican presidential debate.

-Obama and Romney both support the failed War on Drugs, which has once again proven that prohibition fails and only raises prices, creates a dangerous black market, and allows low-life thugs to become drug lords and lead their own drug armies.

-They both support unsustainable wars. Obama just says he wants to scale down international intervention and then does it anyway; Romney is pretty openly aggressive and ready to burn through our tax dollars with unsustainable military operations that we the people end up always paying for.

-both pro-choice

-both support gay marriage

-both supported PIPA/SOPA

The only real difference I see is that Romney is really pandering more to the Israel lobbyists and beating the war drum for Iran whereas Obama continues playing passively while remaining militarily aggressive nonetheless.

 

[ZX-14R]

Anyone who supports Romney ought to naturally support Obama.

-Mitt supports the Patriot Act, just like Obama who resigned it and Bush who first signed it into law; they're all identical in this regard.

-Mitt also supports the stimulus (sorry for anyone who was trying to save anything in dollars) and has said in interviews that the bailout was the right thing because we would have had an economic collapse if not for stimulus.

-Obama and Romney both agree to bailing out certain special banks and corporations that give (or will give) them healthy campaign contributions and flood them with lobbyists, instead of letting them fail and pay for their own derivatives bubble that they created.

-Obama and Romney both support NDAA. As we all know, Obama is appealing the US Supreme Court decision that the Indefinite Detention Clause is unconstitutional. Romney has openly stated his full approval of NDAA, even among a hail of boos from the crowd during the Republican presidential debate.

-Obama and Romney both support the failed War on Drugs, which has once again proven that prohibition fails and only raises prices, creates a dangerous black market, and allows low-life thugs to become drug lords and lead their own drug armies.

-They both support unsustainable wars. Obama just says he wants to scale down international intervention and then does it anyway; Romney is pretty openly aggressive and ready to burn through our tax dollars with unsustainable military operations that we the people end up always paying for.

-both pro-choice

-both support gay marriage

-both supported PIPA/SOPA

The only real difference I see is that Romney is really pandering more to the Israel lobbyists and beating the war drum for Iran whereas Obama continues playing passively while remaining militarily aggressive nonetheless.

Where do you get your information to reach these conclusions?