Time to think outside of the box...and take the gloves off...

If Democrats in Maryland supported the right to keep and bear arms they wouldn't be Democrats.

East2West said:

If Democrats in Maryland supported the right to keep and bear arms they wouldn't be Democrats.

Click to expand...

QFT!

Dogmeat said:

In reality, the districts are assigned based on the number of voters. Using voter registrations, the party in charge always seeks to minimize the strength of the opposition by chopping their strongholds up or burying them in larger groups of their own.

Think about it, if everyone was registered in the same party, how would they know where to draw the district lines?

Click to expand...

Correct.

If every gun owner in strategic districts registered as a Democrat, then voted in the primary for the best choice, which would be: 1) someone we ran as a dem, 2) an honest open minded dem that would not cowtow to the crooked established dems, 3) anyone running against an incumbent; we could break the stranglehold they currently have.

With virtually everyone registered as a dem (in strategic districts), it also prevents them from being able to gerrymander.

Thousands of us are already doing this, this proposed strategy clashes with what we are already doing. Not just talking, but actually doing. Get more people to 'DO' is the key. Help us with Operation DINO 2018.

Click here:
http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=190211

aquaman said:

For once I agree with Muleskinner.

Thanks, but for the most part these ideas came from Industry people and other 2A supporters. I'm just collecting and passing on the thoughts of others.

Instead of #4 which may be illegal HQL class should be full of pro 2a propaganda and explain clearly how the democrat party works against the people.


Apparently there are already some FFLs in the state already denying sales to dems. I guess a lawyer would need to be consulted.


#6 is great, all shops should charge a 2A rights tax for every purchase. It can be small and will add up just like midway round-up.

At the very least have firearms retailers ask their customers to voluntarily round up to a dollar amount like Cabelas does and donate that amount to MSI.

Click to expand...

.

Minuteman said:

Correct.

If every gun owner in strategic districts registered as a Democrat, then voted in the primary for the best choice, which would be: 1) someone we ran as a dem, 2) an honest open minded dem that would not cowtow to the crooked established dems, 3) anyone running against an incumbent; we could break the stranglehold they currently have.

With virtually everyone registered as a dem (in strategic districts), it also prevents them from being able to gerrymander.

Thousands of us are already doing this, this proposed strategy clashes with what we are already doing. Not just talking, but actually doing. Get more people to 'DO' is the key. Help us with Operation DINO 2018.

Click here:
http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=190211

Click to expand...

Exactly. There seems to be a misconception that the people who keep 2A rights going are entirely republican, which is simply not true, nor should party affiliation matter in that regard. In addition to it not being true, like you said, drawing district lines and moving forward in primaries *requires* members on BOTH sides of the democrat/republican lines to come together on 2A issues.

Additionally, as (apparently) difficult as it is for some to believe, there are issues outside of 2A rights. This is just one out of a million different reasons why one's party affiliation would be x, y, or z. Regardless, to deny services based on party affiliation is simply discriminatory and provides flak to the anti-gunners who are *also* ignorant enough to assume that every advocate of gun ownership is a republican, a hick, etc.

I'd also like to point out that the OP started with the very noble sentiment of acknowledging ALL points of view. Points like (4) are in complete opposition to this concept. Liberals are not the problem. It is too much of a generalized and blanketing term. Conservatives are not the problem. It is too much of a generalized and blanketing term.

Minuteman said:

Correct.

If every gun owner in strategic districts registered as a Democrat, then voted in the primary for the best choice, which would be: 1) someone we ran as a dem, 2) an honest open minded dem that would not cowtow to the crooked established dems, 3) anyone running against an incumbent; we could break the stranglehold they currently have.

With virtually everyone registered as a dem (in strategic districts), it also prevents them from being able to gerrymander.

Thousands of us are already doing this, this proposed strategy clashes with what we are already doing. Not just talking, but actually doing. Get more people to 'DO' is the key. Help us with Operation DINO 2018.

Click here:
http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=190211

Click to expand...

If every Republican registered as a democrat in those districts no one could vote for a Republican in a primary, effectively giving the election to the dem..

In a state where nearly 70% of voters are REAL democrats your plan can't work. It's a great idea in theory, but statistically you can never get enough voters to have the desired impact. Even if you were successful in removing an incumbent, if you live in a district with a majority of dems, the dem primary winner will almost always win the general election. And since the GA is controlled by the big 4 (Montgomery, PG, Howard counties and Baltimore City) which are highly liberal, there is no way your plan can influence the power in Annapolis.

DINO

Because dreaming the same sh*t up decade after decade will work eventually..

Medshot said:

Exactly. There seems to be a misconception that the people who keep 2A rights going are entirely republican, which is simply not true, nor should party affiliation matter in that regard. In addition to it not being true, like you said, drawing district lines and moving forward in primaries *requires* members on BOTH sides of the democrat/republican lines to come together on 2A issues.

Additionally, as (apparently) difficult as it is for some to believe, there are issues outside of 2A rights. This is just one out of million different reasons why one's party affiliation would be x, y, or z. Regardless, to deny services based on party affiliation is simply discriminatory and provides flak to the anti-gunners who are *also* ignorant enough to assume that every advocate of gun ownership is a republican, a hick, etc.

I'd also like to point out that the OP started with the very noble sentiment of acknowledging ALL points of view. Points like (4) are in complete opposition to this concept. Liberals are not the problem. It is too much of a generalized and blanketing term. Conservatives are not the problem. It is too much of a generalized and blanketing term.

Click to expand...

I could not agree more. Have we met? We need to.

I also appreciate that you confirm and validate the OP's (Original Poster, in this case Muleskinner) well meaning intent to get more people involved and be more 'open-minded' to alternative paths. I feel the DINO movement (a movement requires some sacrifice (i.e. registering as a democrat (in certain districts, and voting); is such an alternate (aggressive) paths. No doubt, it takes guts to register as a Democrat when you have conservative values; I know a few extremely pro-2A folks that just won't do it because they are so disgusted with the Democrat party. In many cases it makes sense, NOT to register as a Democrat, such as if your district is a 'safe-zone' for Republicans, and you want to help in the Republican primary to get a better candidate elected.

Anyone interested in this strategy and joining us, please read the several other reasons and advantages of registering as a Democrat, even if you are a conservative, libertarian, or independent, etc.

Muleskinner said:

If every Republican registered as a democrat in those districts no one could vote for a Republican in a primary, effectively giving the election to the dem..

In a state where nearly 70% of voters are REAL democrats your plan can't work. It's a great idea in theory, but statistically you can never get enough voters to have the desired impact. Even if you were successful in removing an incumbent, if you live in a district with a majority of dems, the dem primary winner will almost always win the general election. And since the GA is controlled by the big 4 (Montgomery, PG, Howard counties and Baltimore City) which are highly liberal, there is no way your plan can influence the power in Annapolis.

Click to expand...

I respect your efforts here to put new-wind into the movement, and your personal sacrifices. We may not always agree on the details, but I assure you we are together in the big picture; and I deeply respect everyone in this community that supports what we are ultimately trying to achieve (make Maryland a better place).

I suggest that if we can get every gun owner in specific strategic districts (there are many) we could untie this terrible knot of repressive Dem rule - and we would do it in a hurry, like in 2018. Not everyone who votes is a gun owner, and not everyone will register as a Democrat. And as I've explained, there are some areas where its advantageous having registered Republicans (in Rep safe-zones). If you simply look at the data we are compiling there are districts where long time, establishment Democrats are vulnerable, ESPECIALLY in the Dem primary; we can vote them out of office in their primary. This will shake up the system, and scare the heck out of the establishment Dems. It is the only real power we have, voting. As a registered Democrat, I get two votes, two chances to make a difference. First I vote for the best Democrat candidate during the Dem primary, then in the general election I vote for the best candidate again, which is most often the more conservative/libertarian minded candidate. I'm happy to talk with you in person or on the phone about this or any of these other strategies, just let me know.

Respectfully submitted.

Muleskinner said:

If every Republican registered as a democrat in those districts no one could vote for a Republican in a primary, effectively giving the election to the dem..

In a state where nearly 70% of voters are REAL democrats your plan can't work. It's a great idea in theory, but statistically you can never get enough voters to have the desired impact. Even if you were successful in removing an incumbent, if you live in a district with a majority of dems, the dem primary winner will almost always win the general election. And since the GA is controlled by the big 4 (Montgomery, PG, Howard counties and Baltimore City) which are highly liberal, there is no way your plan can influence the power in Annapolis.

Click to expand...

You seem to have completely missed Minuteman's points. Yes, voting democrat in many of these counties, particularly the big 4, is really the only way to go. Hence why we should be USING that and using our DEMOCRATIC base (as well as educating democrats) to get in a politician who supports our cause, and this, as was also stated, is *already happening.*

Medshot said:

Exactly. There seems to be a misconception that the people who keep 2A rights going are entirely republican, which is simply not true, nor should party affiliation matter in that regard. In addition to it not being true, like you said, drawing district lines and moving forward in primaries *requires* members on BOTH sides of the democrat/republican lines to come together on 2A issues.

Additionally, as (apparently) difficult as it is for some to believe, there are issues outside of 2A rights. This is just one out of a million different reasons why one's party affiliation would be x, y, or z. Regardless, to deny services based on party affiliation is simply discriminatory and provides flak to the anti-gunners who are *also* ignorant enough to assume that every advocate of gun ownership is a republican, a hick, etc.

I'd also like to point out that the OP started with the very noble sentiment of acknowledging ALL points of view. Points like (4) are in complete opposition to this concept. Liberals are not the problem. It is too much of a generalized and blanketing term. Conservatives are not the problem. It is too much of a generalized and blanketing term.

Click to expand...

Liberals are not the problem?? You're kidding right??


Party affiliation absolutely should and does matter..for a couple of reasons...first and foremost where is the logic behind being a registered democrat and voting for them? Even if your delegate claims to be a 2A supporter they are susceptible to party leadership influence as we saw in 2013. Beyond that they still support other parts of t he liberal agenda that can and do have an effect on our 2A rights. It boils down to this...If your gun rights, financial stability, employment or child's future are important to you in Maryland, you have zero business being a registered dem...all you are doing is empowering the enemy...

I think one thread we could use would be "different ways to register as a democrat" for those interested in becoming a DINO. I would wager a lot of people here vote every time but only ever registered to vote years or decades ago and aren't sure how to change their party affiliation.

We need sleepers. We groom an entire group of future politicians throughout the state who are conservations to live a life of liberalism to get elected. Once they are all in we "activate" them to restore all our rights.

zoostation said:

I think one thread we could use would be "different ways to register as a democrat" for those interested in becoming a DINO. I would wager a lot of people here vote every time but only ever registered to vote years or decades ago and aren't sure how to change their party affiliation.

Click to expand...

Correct.

I explain this in my Operation DINO thread <---click that link to read that important thread; or click --->here<--- to change your registration. Its very simple to change your registration to Democrat, and be able to vote twice (one in the primary, and one in the general election).

Minuteman said:

If you simply look at the data we are compiling there are districts where long time, establishment Democrats are vulnerable, ESPECIALLY in the Dem primary; we can vote them out of office in their primary. This will shake up the system, and scare the heck out of the establishment Dems. It is the only real power we have, voting.

Click to expand...

This. And traditionally, some of the worst anti's have come from districts where you have "top three" elections and it doesn't take a huge margin to make them lose. As I recall this was how Neil Quinter and the other guy whose name escapes me at the moment from MoCo, who also sponsored an AWB lost. Nothing really stupendous happened, they both just fell a few votes short and so adios.

Minuteman said:

I could not agree more. Have we met? We need to.

I also appreciate that you confirm and validate the OP's (Original Poster, in this case Muleskinner) well meaning intent to get more people involved and be more 'open-minded' to alternative paths. I feel the DINO movement (a movement requires some sacrifice (i.e. registering as a democrat (in certain districts, and voting); is such an alternate (aggressive) paths. No doubt, it takes guts to register as a Democrat when you have conservative values; I know a few extremely pro-2A folks that just won't do it because they are so disgusted with the Democrat party. In many cases it makes sense, NOT to register as a Democrat, such as if your district is a 'safe-zone' for Republicans, and you want to help in the Republican primary to get a better candidate elected.

Anyone interested in this strategy and joining us, please read the several other reasons and advantages of registering as a Democrat, even if you are a conservative, libertarian, or independent, etc.



I respect your efforts here to put new-wind into the movement, and your personal sacrifices. We may not always agree on the details, but I assure you we are together in the big picture; and I deeply respect everyone in this community that supports what we are ultimately trying to achieve (make Maryland a better place).

I suggest that if we can get every gun owner in specific strategic districts (there are many) we could untie this terrible knot of repressive Dem rule - and we would do it in a hurry, like in 2018. Not everyone who votes is a gun owner, and not everyone will register as a Democrat. And as I've explained, there are some areas where its advantageous having registered Republicans (in Rep safe-zones). If you simply look at the data we are compiling there are districts where long time, establishment Democrats are vulnerable, ESPECIALLY in the Dem primary; we can vote them out of office in their primary. This will shake up the system, and scare the heck out of the establishment Dems. It is the only real power we have, voting. I'm happy to talk with you in person or on the phone about this or any of these other strategies, just let me know.

Respectfully submitted.

Click to expand...

Thank you very much, and I'm very grateful that we have views such as yours representing gun-ownership - it's what people need to see more of.

As is obvious in this and many more threads, there are many things that people here will disagree on. There is more to the world of politics than the 2A issues at hand. There is nothing wrong with this disagreement, so long as we do not become volatile and alienate each other, PARTICULARLY when there are platforms and issues that we can and DO agree on. We should be working past the differences in order to achieve our common ground. (And being "liberal" or "conservatives" on many different issues does not preclude this, particularly in regards to gun rights - just look at Sanders and Vermont.)

Although it seems to fall along party lines (DEM vs REP), I have to agree with the other posters who advise *not* to make it strictly a party line thing.

Frankly, I don't think that's sticking to the Ailinsky plan very well. We need to *personalize* it.

Pick a target and freeze it.

So to me, that means NAMES of individual delegates and senators who don't support 2A.

Don't even say "Democrat" or "Republican" in the sign or the talking points.
Don't paint with the broad brush of "All Democrats".
Put our actions behind making it a non-party issue, but a civil-rights issue.

Just call them out individually for their anti-civil rights stance.

Picket *for* anyone running against them, even within their own party during the primary.

Heck, do the same at the US Rep level.
Rep. Hoyer is going up against a Transgendered ex-NAVY SEAL within his own party in the primary. (yes. you read that correctly.)
Picket *for* her, and her *2A* civil rights.

Pick a target and freeze it.

I personally think all this DINO stuff is a side show.

my $.02, which with inflation is worth less and less....

-M

Minuteman said:

Correct.

I explain this in my Operation DINO thread <---click that link to read that important thread; or click --->here<--- to change your registration. Its very simple to change your registration to Democrat, and be able to vote twice (one in the primary, and one in the general election).

Click to expand...

I just stickied your Dino thread and moved it to the MD 2A section so all the bastards can see it. Not just their fat ladies who stalk the Water Color. (hi girls! )

the DINO movement can work, especially in off election years (2018, 2014). in the primaries, in some counties, the winner barely cracks 1000 votes. in counties where it is top 3, there are often 6 or more people running on the primary ballot.

the goals of the DINO movement are
1. to get the incumbent asshat out. you get the incumbent out, the replacement has nearly no power in the senate and house, as opposed to someone who has actual power on a committee.
2. to get the least anti 2A on the ballot come November,
3. to put the weakest D on the ballot come November in the hopes that they lose.
4. to get in Miller's face about being a registered democrat that is pro gun... it'll blow their minds.... but but but... you aren't supposed to have free thought and free will.....

also, if number 1-3 don't work, you get the pleasure of voting against the asshat more than one time.

mrgnstrn said:

Although it seems to fall along party lines (DEM vs REP), I have to agree with the other posters who advise *not* to make it strictly a party line thing.

Frankly, I don't think that's sticking to the Ailinsky plan very well. We need to *personalize* it.

Pick a target and freeze it.

So to me, that means NAMES of individual delegates and senators who don't support 2A.

Don't even say "Democrat" or "Republican" in the sign or the talking points.
Don't paint with the broad brush of "All Democrats".
Put our actions behind making it a non-party issue, but a civil-rights issue.

Just call them out individually for their anti-civil rights stance.

Picket *for* anyone running against them, even within their own party during the primary.

Heck, do the same at the US Rep level.
Rep. Hoyer is going up against a Transgendered ex-NAVY SEAL within his own party in the primary. (yes. you read that correctly.)
Picket *for* her, and her *2A* civil rights.

Pick a target and freeze it.

I personally think all this DINO stuff is a side show.

my $.02, which with inflation is worth less and less....

-M

Click to expand...

*ding* You, my friend, are right on the money. The Hoyer example is dead-on, as it represents an incumbent...*insert insult here* who does not care about civil rights, getting his first taste of fear from his own party, from someone who seems to actually support the rights of the people. Kristin Beck is certainly getting my vote.

Z_Man said:

the DINO movement can work, especially in off election years (2018, 2014). in the primaries, in some counties, the winner barely cracks 1000 votes. in counties where it is top 3, there are often 6 or more people running on the primary ballot.

the goals of the DINO movement are
1. to get the incumbent asshat out. you get the incumbent out, the replacement has nearly no power in the senate and house, as opposed to someone who has actual power on a committee.
2. to get the least anti 2A on the ballot come November,
3. to put the weakest D on the ballot come November in the hopes that they lose.
4. to get in Miller's face about being a registered democrat that is pro gun... it'll blow their minds.... but but but... you aren't supposed to have free thought and free will.....

also, if number 1-3 don't work, you get the pleasure of voting against the asshat more than one time.

Click to expand...

Exactly! Now, some would argue that that would be counter-productive, in that what happens if you actually get a democrat who supports gun rights running against an equally 2A-supportive republican?

...what does that matter? At that point, we can argue to our heart's content about all of the *other* issues, because gun-rights would be fine and dandy! Again, there is more to politics than gun rights, but if we can rally on that issue, regardless of party, it's one more thing that the people in general can benefit from, and one less thing for us to end up vehemently insulting each other over.