Posted on 10/15/2015 8:59:41 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
At the Democratic debate on Tuesday night, Sen. Bernie Sanders bragged about getting a "D-minus" from the National Rifle Association (which was also Lincoln Chafee's GPA in high school).
Nonetheless, Hillary Clinton attacked Sanders for having voted against an insane bill that would have held gun manufacturers and sellers legally liable for the behavior of anyone who uses one of their guns in a crime.
I would be open to such a law -- but only after we pass a law holding psychiatrists liable for crimes committed by their patients; lawyers for crimes committed by their clients; and sanctuary cities for crimes committed by the illegal immigrants they released in violation of federal law.
Gun dealers are a lot more careful about whom they sell guns to than psychiatrists, lawyers and sanctuary cities are about the criminals they loose on the public.
In several recent mass shootings, the psycho was at least temporarily delayed when gun shops refused to sell him guns -- such as the Colorado gun range owner who put his whole staff on red alert in case James Holmes ever wandered in, simply on the basis of having heard Holmes' strange voicemail message.
As Sanders himself once said, holding gun sellers liable for the crimes of their customers would be like holding "a hammer company responsible if somebody beats somebody over the head with a hammer." (As happened to Lincoln Chafee.)
To cheers from the Democratic audience, Hillary denounced Sanders for his vote against imposing unprecedented liability on gun makers, saying, "It's time the entire country stood up against the NRA."
Sanders bowed and scraped, finally saying he'd "take another look" at the gun bill.
Former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley bragged about passing the strictest gun-control laws in the country (which explains why Baltimore is such a safe city). Asked which "enemy" he was proudest of, O'Malley said: "The NRA." (Loud applause -- especially from the radical Muslims in the audience!)
I gather Democrats have written off the gun vote.
Plenty of Democrats own firearms -- or at least have armed bodyguards, such as Rosie O'Donnell, Jim Carrey, Michael Moore and Michael Bloomberg.
But Democrats have made a calculated decision that they are not going to win a majority of gun owners, so they denounce them with abandon, making no concessions at all.
Why don't Republicans do that with the Hispanic vote? Somehow, the left has convinced the GOP to obsess over winning people who will never give us a majority of their votes, which is the exact opposite of the Democrats' strategy for themselves.
I would wager that Democrats get more votes from NRA members than Republicans do from La Raza members (0). But try to imagine a Republican answering the "enemies" question: "La Raza."
Republicans don't need to treat Hispanics with the contempt that Democrats treat gun-owners. We do not dislike Hispanics. We do not dislike any group.
We just have to protect Americans first -- American jobs, American taxes and American social programs being bankrupted by immigrants . Most voters don't think it's an outrageous imposition to ask people to obey our laws.
Donald Trump opened his campaign talking about Mexican rapists, pledged to build a wall and deport illegals -- and has soared to the top of the polls.
The massive Hispanic blowback consists of this: Trump is getting about the same percentage of the Hispanic vote as Romney did.
I have no doubt that the 73 percent of Hispanics who will be voting against Trump are prepared to be much angrier about it than the 73 percent who voted against Romney. But the result won't look any different on election night. Voting machines don't register angry glints in people's eyes.
On the other hand, by driving up the white vote -- to say nothing of the black vote -- we will see a difference in the Republicans' box score on election night.
The Holy Grail year for Republicans is supposed to be 2004, when President Bush won a record-breaking 40 percent of the Hispanic vote. He had to turn his entire White House into a Hispandering operation to do that -- and he still lost the Hispanic vote.
It's crazy to deform our whole platform in pursuit of some group that won't give us at least 51 percent of its vote, anyway. The Democrats ignore white voters and they were 73.7 percent of the electorate in 2012. Hispanics were only 8.4 percent that year.
I haven't seen an estimate of the electoral percentage of gun-owners, but with one-third to half of all Americans owning guns, it's a lot more than 8.4 percent.
Democrats know not to fritter time on constituencies they can't win, but have buffaloed Republicans into wasting resources on a quixotic bid to win a slightly larger -- but still losing -- percentage of the 8.4 percent of the electorate that is the Hispanic vote.
You've been conned, GOP. You are never going to beat the Democrats at sucking up to foreigners. And your conservative base will flee.
The GOP should expend precisely as much effort fawning over the Hispanic vote as Democrats do over the gun vote, the pro-life vote and the white vote.
Republicans have got to stop believing The New York Times line that the only honorable votes are from minorities. It's honorable to get votes from taxpayers, too.
Facts:
1) Except in the very odd/exceptional election year of 1964, the Dems haven’t cracked 50% of the whites in a Presidential election since 1932.
2) Once the ‘64 election was over, the Dems understood that they would never win another Presidential election again unless the Republicans REALLY screwed up...or unless they changed the electorate in a dramatic way.
3) The Dems, courtesy of Bobby Kennedy who wrote the law, and Teddy Kennedy who pushed it in the Senate, passed the 1965 Immigration Act. That law dramatically reduced immigration from our then-traditional large sources of immigrants - England, Ireland, Holland, Germany, etc. - and replaced them with vast numbers of Turd Worlders...whom everyone knows vote around 80% for Dems, and will continue to do so for the rest of their lives, as new immigrants have traditionally done.
4) As a result of the ‘65 Act, and due to the Dem’s outright lying in ‘86 regarding an effective (or any) fence, there are now probably 30 - 40 million illegals in this nation. Note that the (probably low-ball) figure in 2005 was 11 million...we have 2-3 million come in every year, so simple math says that the number is actually somewhere between 31 and 41 million). If any substantial portion of these people ever become citizens, then the Dems will have accomplished a complete shift of the electorate, and will be virtually invincible on the national level. Every state will become like California, both politically and economically - which is to say, overwhelming Dem and broke. But at least if you don’t like California now, you can leave for a better place without much trouble - where are you going to go if EVERY state is like that?
5) Every Republican, and every Conservative voter MUST UNDERSTAND that if such a state of affairs comes to be, NO OTHER ISSUE WILL MATTER AT ALL, because we will ALWAYS AND FOREVER lose on those issues. Immigration is THE issue of this election, and this election is as critical as the 1860 election was - and for the same reason, because it will determine whether this nation continues on as it has existed in the past, or becomes a new and unrecognizable entity that simply occupies the same geographic territory.
Please wake up, and help others to do so by sending them this post (or recommending “Adios America” to them). It really is THAT important.
“Hillary Clinton attacked Sanders for having voted against an insane bill that would have held gun manufacturers and sellers legally liable for the behavior of anyone who uses one of their guns in a crime.”
Which is something the Supreme Court has already ruled against! So, even if they passed a bill, it’s void right out of the gate.
I think Trump will win the votes of most of the Whites who still call themselves Democrats.
Heck, I'll add that if you get government assistance in the form of basic needs such as food stamps, aid for dependent children, or housing assistance, your voting rights should be suspended until such time as you no longer get that government assistance. This is an INHERENT CONFLICT OF INTEREST, much like public employee unions.
“He had to turn his entire White House into a Hispandering operation...”
Ahahahaha, “hispandering”, I gotta remember that one!
I don't think that's precisely true, because of the time element. Such a bill would be law, and do its damage, until a case was brought before a court which then overturned the law. Look at what happened in DC after the Heller decision. Gun licenses were still restricted by local ordinances, until further cases were brought.
Skeltor is right on this one - well kind of - Trump is doing a respectable 31 with Hispanics as of the SurveyUSA Labor Day poll. But so what he is doing 25 with Blacks so Pedro can decide to be an American or a Mexican - it’s his choice.
True, they could “float” for a while til the lawsuits got to the courts, but I don’t think it would have to get to the Supreme Court, because there is already an SC ruling on the subject. Any lower court could apply that precedent and issue an injunction on the law to stop enforcement.
The GOP should expend precisely as much effort fawning over the Hispanic vote as Democrats do over the gun vote, the pro-life vote and the white vote.
Republicans have got to stop believing The New York Times line that the only honorable votes are from minorities. It's honorable to get votes from taxpayers, too."
Maybe not in such harsh tones, but I believe the principle is correct.
Pandering to the minorities only makes the majority angry. You can’t satisfy the blacks, Latinos, and apologetic liberals because they want handouts and socialism. If something doesn’t change the US will become a third world hell hole just like the rest with a ruling oligarchy.
Supreme Court
Roberts?
Obamacare?
UGH.....
No representation without taxation.
Excellent point. Trump will get at least 50% of the non mexican hispanic vote....Ann Coulter has outlived her usefulness!
No representation without taxation.
Jeb Bush - Pleasant man who likes us and speaks Spanish.
Hillary Clinton - Insufferable beeyatch, and the whitest woman on Earth, who will give us access to tons of free sh*t.
Which do YOU think Hispanics will vote for?
The myth ignores the reality that blacks are just socially conservative as Hispanics on issues like abortion and gay marriage, but still overwhelmingly vote for Democrats. Why? Because their racial solidarity, combined with economic concerns (welfare, food stamps) drive their political sympathies. "Viva La Raza" Hispanics and families of 10 with minimum wage jobs who rely on food stamps and "bilingual education" programs aren't going to suddenly start voting Republican.
“You are never going to beat the Democrats at sucking up to foreigners. And your conservative base will flee.”
Ann, Ann, Ann. The conservative base fled because people like you, talked up Crispy Creme and Romney instead of Cain, Palin and other Conservatives.
I love you Ann, but I will never buy another one of your books or listen to who you are supporting, because if history is to be repeated, instead of Cruz you will want Rubio.
Ironic that they want to turn this country into the same cesspools that they have left.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.