In the last election, Barber won by only about 2,500 votes. Hardly a decisive victory. And the most recent poll in July shows them virtually tied 46% to 45%.
So if Barber loses is it an indication that a loss for the gun control movement? Or will it be called some sort of political trick devised by the evil gun lobby? Either way, the voters will get their say.
Yes, obviously that would be a loss for the gun control movement. How would we explain it? That's another question. Since most people are not one-issue voters, I suppose immigration and the foreign wars will enter into their decisions.
"So you are going to judge win, or lose by gun issues alone?"
Want to bet that ARS will be taking credit if McSally loses the election? And Mike's title suggests that this kind of ad is the way that the "gun control movement" will win this election. Interestingly, the ad repeats the oft mentioned statistic of 90% of the voters in favor of background checks. Though we are seeing in polls that in Arizona its pretty much a tie. Even where the issue of background checks is being decided independently of any other issues as it is in Washington, it isn't showing the giant majority claimed.
Another reason SS has solid gun loon credentials. Every election won,or lost will be won, or lost because of the gun issue? Laughable. Politicians claim lots of things and if you believe them you are worse than a gun loon, which you have already proven to me many times.
"Every election won,or lost will be won, or lost because of the gun issue? Laughable. "
Actually Anon, I'm with Mike on this one. Most electios are won or lost based on several issues which are important or unimportant depending on the individual voter. Mike's title for this post suggested that he believed that this would be a pivotal issue. His response clarified that. McSally has many other qualities that make her a a good choice,
"She was the first American woman to fly in combat since the 1991 lifting of the prohibition of women in combat, flying the A-10 over Iraq and Kuwait in support of Operation Southern Watch"'
"McSally is also the first woman to command a USAF fighter squadron, the 354th Fighter Squadron (354 FS) based at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base."
However, in the world of single issue politics, my guess is that her winning will be blamed on the "gun lobby", and her losing will be credited to the masses who want universal background checks aided by the ever noble Americans For Responsible Solutions. We have but to wait for November to see which it will be, though in the last election the official results were delayed for a week due to there only being a gap of about 2500 votes between the winner and loser.
"The win, or loss will be blamed on the gun issue.WRONG."
I said this,
"Actually Anon, I'm with Mike on this one. Most electios are won or lost based on several issues which are important or unimportant depending on the individual voter."
I predicted that McSally's win or loss will only be construed by gun control groups or gun rights groups as a single issue deciding that. In the eyes of Giffords's lobbying group, if McSally wins, its because of the evil gun lobby, and if she loses, its a victory for those advocating for "common sense" gun laws. We'll just have to wait till after the elections to see if I'm correct or not.
And you said, "Want to bet that ARS will be taking credit if McSally loses the election? And Mike's title suggests that this kind of ad is the way that the "gun control movement" will win this election. Interestingly, the ad repeats the oft mentioned statistic of 90% of the voters in favor of background checks. Though we are seeing in polls that in Arizona its pretty much a tie. Even where the issue of background checks is being decided independently of any other issues as it is in Washington, it isn't showing the giant majority claimed."
Claiming that a win/loss is do to gun issues. WRONG Stop embarrassing yourself by being caught in your own twisting dishonest words.
Anon, I was making a prediction on how the ARS will spin the victory or loss of McSally. They are one of the single issue lobbying groups involved in the campaign. Just as the NRA is. If you look at the exchange of ideas between Mike and I you can see that things became clearer as the conversation continued. You should try it sometime.
"Actually Anon, I'm with Mike on this one. Most electios are won or lost based on several issues which are important or unimportant depending on the individual voter. Mike's title for this post suggested that he believed that this would be a pivotal issue. His response clarified that. McSally has many other qualities that make her a a good choice,"
Right, and you have also said in the past that money does not influence elections when I suggested that's why gun loon issues win over the majority who do not want those gun loon issues. I guess you like to have it both ways, typical for a gun loon stance that cannot stand up to reality.
I believe I said that no amount of advertising will change a persons mind that has firm belief on an issue. For example, the NRA could likely spend all of the money it has on ads and it wouldn't affect how you vote on the issue gun legislation on election day. What all of the special interest groups are after are the votes of those who are undecided. That's the way of the world with all advertising.
And as I said before, that's BS. Like it , or not the amount of money put into ads for political campaigns is directly related to winning. So even though the majority of Americans want background checks the huge amount of money the NRA gives to politicians rules the outcome. Government by minority.
Just saw this on the news and thought I'd share it,
"Six weeks after Election Day, the lone Congressional race left uncalled has been decided: Republican Martha McSally, a former Air Force colonel, has defeated her two-time opponent, incumbent Rep. Ron Barber, by a razor-thin 167 votes in Arizona’s 2nd district. This afternoon an Arizona judge put to rest a nail-biter of a rematch. The race’s initial ballot count found the congresswoman-elect ahead by 161 votes — so slim a lead it called for an automatic recount according to state’s election law."
Republican Martha McSally has defeated Democrat Ron Barber after a lengthy recount, finalizing the last outstanding race of the 2014 congressional elections.
Gifford's group, Americans for Responsible Solutions (ARS), spent over $2 million to support Barber (or oppose McSally), which is more than one third of their total expenditures in the 2014 campaign. Their efforts included a TV ad attacking McSally with false claims about her positions. The group was forced to pull the ad after it was shown to be inaccurate.
Man--that's gotta be a kick in the gut for Giffords and the rest of the hive insects.
In the last election, Barber won by only about 2,500 votes. Hardly a decisive victory. And the most recent poll in July shows them virtually tied 46% to 45%.
ReplyDeletehttp://atr.rollcall.com/gop-poll-mcsally-and-barber-tied-in/
So if Barber loses is it an indication that a loss for the gun control movement? Or will it be called some sort of political trick devised by the evil gun lobby? Either way, the voters will get their say.
Yes, obviously that would be a loss for the gun control movement. How would we explain it? That's another question. Since most people are not one-issue voters, I suppose immigration and the foreign wars will enter into their decisions.
DeleteSo you are going to judge win, or lose by gun issues alone?
Delete"So you are going to judge win, or lose by gun issues alone?"
DeleteWant to bet that ARS will be taking credit if McSally loses the election? And Mike's title suggests that this kind of ad is the way that the "gun control movement" will win this election. Interestingly, the ad repeats the oft mentioned statistic of 90% of the voters in favor of background checks.
Though we are seeing in polls that in Arizona its pretty much a tie. Even where the issue of background checks is being decided independently of any other issues as it is in Washington, it isn't showing the giant majority claimed.
"So you are going to judge win, or lose by gun issues alone?"
DeleteI'm not. That's why I said it would be a loss "for the gun control movement."
Another reason SS has solid gun loon credentials. Every election won,or lost will be won, or lost because of the gun issue? Laughable.
DeletePoliticians claim lots of things and if you believe them you are worse than a gun loon, which you have already proven to me many times.
"Every election won,or lost will be won, or lost because of the gun issue? Laughable. "
DeleteActually Anon, I'm with Mike on this one. Most electios are won or lost based on several issues which are important or unimportant depending on the individual voter. Mike's title for this post suggested that he believed that this would be a pivotal issue. His response clarified that.
McSally has many other qualities that make her a a good choice,
"She was the first American woman to fly in combat since the 1991 lifting of the prohibition of women in combat, flying the A-10 over Iraq and Kuwait in support of Operation Southern Watch"'
"McSally is also the first woman to command a USAF fighter squadron, the 354th Fighter Squadron (354 FS) based at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base."
However, in the world of single issue politics, my guess is that her winning will be blamed on the "gun lobby", and her losing will be credited to the masses who want universal background checks aided by the ever noble Americans For Responsible Solutions.
We have but to wait for November to see which it will be, though in the last election the official results were delayed for a week due to there only being a gap of about 2500 votes between the winner and loser.
But that's not what you said and you just said it again. The win, or loss will be blamed on the gun issue.WRONG.
Delete"The win, or loss will be blamed on the gun issue.WRONG."
DeleteI said this,
"Actually Anon, I'm with Mike on this one. Most electios are won or lost based on several issues which are important or unimportant depending on the individual voter."
I predicted that McSally's win or loss will only be construed by gun control groups or gun rights groups as a single issue deciding that. In the eyes of Giffords's lobbying group, if McSally wins, its because of the evil gun lobby, and if she loses, its a victory for those advocating for "common sense" gun laws.
We'll just have to wait till after the elections to see if I'm correct or not.
And you said,
Delete"Want to bet that ARS will be taking credit if McSally loses the election? And Mike's title suggests that this kind of ad is the way that the "gun control movement" will win this election. Interestingly, the ad repeats the oft mentioned statistic of 90% of the voters in favor of background checks.
Though we are seeing in polls that in Arizona its pretty much a tie. Even where the issue of background checks is being decided independently of any other issues as it is in Washington, it isn't showing the giant majority claimed."
Claiming that a win/loss is do to gun issues.
WRONG
Stop embarrassing yourself by being caught in your own twisting dishonest words.
Anon, I was making a prediction on how the ARS will spin the victory or loss of McSally. They are one of the single issue lobbying groups involved in the campaign. Just as the NRA is. If you look at the exchange of ideas between Mike and I you can see that things became clearer as the conversation continued. You should try it sometime.
Delete"Actually Anon, I'm with Mike on this one. Most electios are won or lost based on several issues which are important or unimportant depending on the individual voter. Mike's title for this post suggested that he believed that this would be a pivotal issue. His response clarified that.
McSally has many other qualities that make her a a good choice,"
Right, and you have also said in the past that money does not influence elections when I suggested that's why gun loon issues win over the majority who do not want those gun loon issues. I guess you like to have it both ways, typical for a gun loon stance that cannot stand up to reality.
DeleteI believe I said that no amount of advertising will change a persons mind that has firm belief on an issue. For example, the NRA could likely spend all of the money it has on ads and it wouldn't affect how you vote on the issue gun legislation on election day.
DeleteWhat all of the special interest groups are after are the votes of those who are undecided. That's the way of the world with all advertising.
And as I said before, that's BS. Like it , or not the amount of money put into ads for political campaigns is directly related to winning. So even though the majority of Americans want background checks the huge amount of money the NRA gives to politicians rules the outcome. Government by minority.
DeleteJust saw this on the news and thought I'd share it,
ReplyDelete"Six weeks after Election Day, the lone Congressional race left uncalled has been decided: Republican Martha McSally, a former Air Force colonel, has defeated her two-time opponent, incumbent Rep. Ron Barber, by a razor-thin 167 votes in Arizona’s 2nd district.
This afternoon an Arizona judge put to rest a nail-biter of a rematch. The race’s initial ballot count found the congresswoman-elect ahead by 161 votes — so slim a lead it called for an automatic recount according to state’s election law."
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/12/mcsally-recount-win-gives-gop-biggest-majority-since-1929/
What's this about "How the 'Gun Control' Movement will Prevail?
ReplyDeleteColonel McSally beat the little tyrant wannabe
Republican Martha McSally has defeated Democrat Ron Barber after a lengthy recount, finalizing the last outstanding race of the 2014 congressional elections.
Oh, and dig this:
Gifford's group, Americans for Responsible Solutions (ARS), spent over $2 million to support Barber (or oppose McSally), which is more than one third of their total expenditures in the 2014 campaign. Their efforts included a TV ad attacking McSally with false claims about her positions. The group was forced to pull the ad after it was shown to be inaccurate.
Man--that's gotta be a kick in the gut for Giffords and the rest of the hive insects.