So what if Hogan wins a Second term?

Jim12 · May 10, 2018

Boondock Saint said:
Like just about every scumbag to hold office and "serve," Hogan was more interested in his political future than doing what was right. Personally, I hold my vote in sufficiently high regard to not cast it for someone who put his signature to gun control bills.

Quinn or any other candidate is electable, by definition. All we need do is vote for them. If you're OK with a governor who signs bills restricting your most basic freedoms, vote for him.

I'm not, and I won't.

You and I have very different notions of electable.

Of course it would have been better to have Anthony Brown than Hogan as governor right now, because you could have been spared being offended by Hogan. :sarcasm:

The fact that Brown would have introduced, shepherded through the MGA, and signed multiples of more draconian infringements than Hogan did matters not a bit, right? Wrong.

ToolAA · May 10, 2018

inkd said:
I figure anyone who would willingly vote for a person who stripped us of due process is probably more likely to be at the head of the line to turn in their guns.

You make it sound like it such an easy decision but honestly I don’t think anyone wants to ever be in a situation where we have to choose between imprisonment or turning over firearms.

The fact is that tens of thousands of Marylanders can choose to fight in other ways against a majority of the state’s population that blindly votes for the democrat agenda.

Sending an openly anti-2A democrat to the statehouse by stubbornly not voting for a Hogan is the exact effect that Mike and Mike hoped for. After the primaries were over, many Evangelical voters reluctantly voted for Trump because they knew the alternative would have been far far worse. I wouldn’t fault any one if them who felt they compromised their religious principles in doing so.

It is the same situation we have here and the ONLY logical response at this time is for us to vote against the democrat in this upcoming race.

fidelity · May 10, 2018

inkd said:
I figure anyone who would willingly vote for a person who stripped us of due process is probably more likely to be at the head of the line to turn in their guns.

This. Stockholm syndrome. "Thank you, sir, may I have another."

ToolAA, take his response in context to the guy that was slinging mud in the first place.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

Jim12 · May 10, 2018

fidelity said:
Is it? Depends.

I think when person A asks person B (insert pissed off gun rights advocate) who you would pick for Governor instead of Hogan, the pissed off gun rights advocate wonders at what point do Hogan's actions become too much for person A.

Perhaps person A has a sliding scale, views themselves as a pragmatist, and there is no point at which they would not support Hogan as long as it can be argued that a potential Democratic Party alternative is worse for gun rights. Some people (like person B) might not have a sliding scale and Hogan lost their vote through his own actions.

It's true that Hogan came into office saying that he supported O'Malley's FSA 2013 gun restriction package. It's also true that Hogan has shunned gun rights groups since taking office. I'm not sure if any past state Republican Party leaders have. Hogan made the composition of the HPRB more favorable to gun owners, assisting a small fraction in the state. He didn't effect a change in the MDSP to alter their G&S standard that would have helped many more. And when his moment came to stop further gun control legislation in MD, he asked where he could sign. He didn't opt to veto when it might stick. He didn't opt to let it pass without his signature. He instead opted for the photo opportunity with gun controllers. For many gun owners, this was enough. He had gone further than O'Malley. For others, they sing his praises here, darkly whispering, it could be worse.

I also wonder what would be too much for people. If they want to argue that they want Hogan because he leans Republican on other issues, I think this is an honest argument. If they argue that it will be worse on gun rights otherwise, one could argue that they're deluding themselves or that there is a strategic perspective that they don't accept or possibly realize - that such thinking over time has made things worse.

If one has a sliding scale on gun rights, then Hogan only needs to promise to be a few percent better on gun rights than his opponent to lock in the vote of the sliding scale voter (I'm simplifying, because most sliding scale voters will consider more than gun rights in voting for a Governor). Hypothetically, Hogan could be 80% gun controller, and as long as his opponent was more, this presents an obvious choice for the sliding scale voter. However this leads to a race for more gun control over time, as it favors incrementalism. By today's standards, Erlich might have been a 30% gun controller. Now many gun owners view the far more restrictive Hogan as acceptable. We've accepted a change in standards, and the next Republican candidate for Governor can move to 90% gun controller, because he/she just needs to be a little less restrictive than the Democratic candidate. It's a race to the bottom.

Would it be better to have a Governor in office that wants to overreach and ban all civilian ownership of rifles in MD or a Republican that says you can keep your bolt and pump action rifles? Maybe the complete banner would fail because his/her efforts were too extreme, but a Democratic legislature with a Republican Governor like Hogan might push through the partial long gun ban because it had a shot. And some here probably would defend Hogan for it.

Hogan has already calculated that he can win without gun rights voters support. His actions indicate that he doesn't care a whit about gun rights. I think he'll win the election based on the state of the Maryland economy, his less taxes than Democrats policy, and being anti-Trump. At this point, while I will vote on other issues and for pro gun rights politicians running for other offices, I'm not planning on pulling the lever for Hogan. His actions have lost my support, and he's determined that he doesn't need it.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

That's a detailed, well-thought out comment that deserves more time and attention to respond than I can muster right now, Fi, so I'll try to get back to it tomorrow. Those mathematical sliding scales with A and B choices require sharp analytical tools.

East2West · May 10, 2018

Matlack said:
Yes, keep your blinders on. Please sit back and watch as a major gun grabber dem gets elected just so you can stick it to the man!!!

NEWS FLASH THEY'RE ALREADY IN OFFICE!!!

I'm so sick of the it'll be worse with a Dem in office mantra. HOW!?!?!? You guys make excuse after excuse for Hogan about how he is/was powerless to stop the Dems on 1302 and 888 but somehow if he gets reelected things will stop getting worse. HOW?

East2West · May 10, 2018

None of this bickering is going to amount to a hill of beans. People who make a lot more money than most here commenting did the political calculations. Hogan doesn't need the small amount of gun owners who actually have principles, to win. He'll be reelected easily. Part of me hopes so, and hopes the Mikes pass an AWB or Magazine ban. Part of me wants to see the mental gymnastics "gun rights advocates" on this site pull to make more excuses for Hogan.

inkd · May 10, 2018

ToolAA said:
You make it sound like it such an easy decision but honestly I don’t think anyone wants to ever be in a situation where we have to choose between imprisonment or turning over firearms.

The fact is that tens of thousands of Marylanders can choose to fight in other ways against a majority of the state’s population that blindly votes for the democrat agenda.

Sending an openly anti-2A democrat to the statehouse by stubbornly not voting for a Hogan is the exact effect that Mike and Mike hoped for. After the primaries were over, many Evangelical voters reluctantly voted for Trump because they knew the alternative would have been far far worse. I wouldn’t fault any one if them who felt they compromised their religious principles in doing so.

It is the same situation we have here and the ONLY logical response at this time is for us to vote against the democrat in this upcoming race.

It's not an easy decision and it's not a decision I came to easily. Doing something that you know is going to be painful in hopes that it will pay dividends down the line is not an easy thing to do.

Voting for Hogan is not the logical response. It's the easiest response.

Let me ask you a question. All those Evangelical voters who voted for Trump because they thought that the alternative was worse. I can't, and won't fault them for that either. Trump was, mostly, an unknown commodity.

But, do you think they would they vote for him again if he removed whatever Constitutional rights they were guaranteed, regarding their religion?

Matlack · May 10, 2018

East2West said:
NEWS FLASH THEY'RE ALREADY IN OFFICE!!!

I'm so sick of the it'll be worse with a Dem in office mantra. HOW!?!?!? You guys make excuse after excuse for Hogan about how he is/was powerless to stop the Dems on 1302 and 888 but somehow if he gets reelected things will stop getting worse. HOW?

I shall repeat myself. It's not just Hogan, its 5 Senators or 7 Delegates. Senators are more likely because Dems have already said they plan to loose 3 additional seats. This prevents vetoes from being overturned and allows for filibustering.

Im not the only one who has brought this up. But you need Hogan to actually veto and one house to be able to sustain the veto. Then there is also the ability to filibuster and prevent the passage of bills. It may also stop the cramming through of bills at sine die.

It's interesting that people pay so little attention to the GA that they miss that many bills didnt make it out of committee because of Hogan. Dems' were taken back by his 2014 win and how much he won by. You had Dem's who were pissed off with their own party, because normally some of these bills would have been let out without question. This election year, they did start moving some of them out because it was an election year. Some died on sine die. They got so frustrated with how much Hogan was holding things up, that they started stripping him of power and placing it in either their own control in a group they controlled already. The HPRB is a great example and so is putting more power in Frosh.

Not_an_outlaw · May 10, 2018

Matlack said:
I shall repeat myself. It's not just Hogan, its 5 Senators or 7 Delegates. Senators are more likely because Dems have already said they plan to loose 3 additional seats. This prevents vetoes from being overturned and allows for filibustering.

Im not the only one who has brought this up. But you need Hogan to actually veto and one house to be able to sustain the veto. Then there is also the ability to filibuster and prevent the passage of bills. It may also stop the cramming through of bills at sine die.

It's interesting that people pay so little attention to the GA that they miss that many bills didnt make it out of committee because of Hogan. Dems' were taken back by his 2014 win and how much he won by. You had Dem's who were pissed off with their own party, because normally some of these bills would have been let out without question. This election year, they did start moving some of them out because it was an election year. Some died on sine die. They got so frustrated with how much Hogan was holding things up, that they started stripping him of power and placing it in either their own control in a group they controlled already. The HPRB is a great example and so is putting more power in Frosh.

Some easy bills made it out of committee and were trashed on the floor. Out of both committees, (House and Senate) only one legislator voted against allowing a person to apply for a wear and carry permit before committing funds to do the other required items (training, fingerprint, and photos). That was Ramerez. With those odds, nothing pro-gun will ever be passed. EVER! Nothing was simpler than that bill. Not a peep from Hogan.

hodgepodge · May 11, 2018

Rushern Baker or Larry Hogan.

Pick one.

44man · May 11, 2018

Matlack said:
How many 3rd party candidates are currently elected in this country? You can count them on about 2 hands. Many of them switched after being elected as a major party candidate.

So for everyone in this thread who have said they would vote for anyone other than Hogan ... you are essentially saying you would burn your house down because it got a little dirty. You would rather throw away your rights just to prove a point. Good on you, stick to it. You will probably be first in line to turn them in when the next liberal progressive dem governor pushes a confiscation bill.

So me voting for a pro gun candidate and someone else voting for a confiscating anti means I would turn my guns in?

Ain’t that thinkin a hoot

44man · May 11, 2018

Matlack said:
Yes, keep your blinders on. Please sit back and watch as a major gun grabber dem gets elected just so you can stick it to the man!!!

A gun grabbing anti is a gun grabbing anti

Now that hogan mage it 100% clear he a gun grabbing anti folks say we should vote for him??

I don’t get it

Is hogan a cult leader?

CrazySanMan · May 11, 2018

hodgepodge said:
Rushern Baker or Larry Hogan.

Pick one.

Larry Hogans (at best) now and forever or Ronald Reagans 12 years from now and on. Pick one.

CrazySanMan · May 11, 2018

Maryland republicans have had to choose the lesser of two evils their entire lives.

I ask you all, how's that working out for you?

Squaregrouper · May 11, 2018

I plan on voting for Quinn. I am sick and tired of people complaining about the two party system, yet telling us why we shouldn't vote outside the two party system.

Schipperke · May 11, 2018

hodgepodge said:
Rushern Baker or Larry Hogan.

Pick one.

RB does appear to be the front runner. It would make sense with PG's population he has an advantage. There are plenty of gun owners that pay little to no taxes, support stronger gun regulations evidently and are of the entitlement mentality. Some gun owners in my neighborhood are like that, and employed in the safe cocoon of Government, so they vote tax and spend all the way for job security. Beretta gave a great story why they were leaving, but don't for a second believe that taxes and regulation relief wasn't a part of it. Watch the jobs head across our borders with a guy like Baker. I'm not happy Hogan supports mandatory family leave regulations. That policy however was a shadow of what the Dems with a more proactive leftist Governor would have pushed through.

We are dealt two cards, one will be elected Governor. If you see no difference then sure, do not vote. I see a difference and am voting for one.

I didn't vote for either Bush on second term because I wasn't happy with them. In Maryland, that of course was just symbolic. I voted Perot in 92, and have to wonder how many Perot voter's second choice was WJC. Perot got almost 19% popular vote but not one electoral vote. That folly taught me. Back then my biggest concern was NAFTA, etc. and both WJC and GB were proponents. I didn't look past that at all the other policies I'd be more aligned with GB. If Maryland had been a competive state between those two, and I hadn't of picked Bush, I wouldn't have been so happy about casting Perot vote. Clinton I believe can thank Perot for his win. I kind of doubt Stein voters 2nd choice was Trump, but maybe a lot of those votes tossed away, they thought no way Hillary was losing PA,MI,WI but Trump won states by less margin than Stein votes cast.

Shawn Quinn looks pro business, Lower taxes, Pro 2A, pro choice (abortion), Not a fan of entitlements or illegal aliens. I back all of that, but he has zero shot. I vote for him and legitimately risk letting a tax and spend entitlement platform roll right back in the Governor's seat. Friend of mine is VP of a gun club in the state and voted for Quinn last time. He's also a small business owner and has been delighted with no new regulations or taxes on a monthly basis. Hogan gave OC a huge lift by simply mandating public school schedules.

danb · May 11, 2018

Matlack said:
I shall repeat myself. It's not just Hogan, its 5 Senators or 7 Delegates. Senators are more likely because Dems have already said they plan to loose 3 additional seats. This prevents vetoes from being overturned and allows for filibustering.

Im not the only one who has brought this up. But you need Hogan to actually veto and one house to be able to sustain the veto. Then there is also the ability to filibuster and prevent the passage of bills. It may also stop the cramming through of bills at sine die.

It's interesting that people pay so little attention to the GA that they miss that many bills didnt make it out of committee because of Hogan. Dems' were taken back by his 2014 win and how much he won by. You had Dem's who were pissed off with their own party, because normally some of these bills would have been let out without question. This election year, they did start moving some of them out because it was an election year. Some died on sine die. They got so frustrated with how much Hogan was holding things up, that they started stripping him of power and placing it in either their own control in a group they controlled already. The HPRB is a great example and so is putting more power in Frosh.

^^ this. The problem here is we cannot prove a negative. Dems did not advance bills because they did not want a popular gov to veto them. Instead, they played games to strip his power, and negotiated on the remainder. With Anthony Brown (or Madaleno or Baker) as gov, the original version of the 1302 and bump stock and HPRB bills would have passed. As would a ban on rifles for 18-20 year olds, and a magazine ban like the one the Baltimore Delegation proposed. People have short memories, we beat that at the committee level.

People can complain, but MSI was very successful lobbying to strip out the worst parts of these bills. Sometimes the choice is to lose badly or lose less badly.

Good chance the GA loses some Dem seats and the veto-proof filibuster. People want Hogan in the gov office when that happens.

Shawn of the Dead Quinn is a protest toilet flush vote that puts Madaleno or Baker in the gov office, and marginalizes the rest of us.

CrazySanMan · May 11, 2018

By voting for who you think can win instead of voting for who you believe is best, you are enabling Maryland to further become a sh!thole. You're the proverbial frog in the pot, and every election the heat is turned up a notch, but you're happy that it's 10 degree increments and not 15...

Jim12 · May 11, 2018

CrazySanMan said:
Maryland republicans have had to choose the lesser of two evils their entire lives.

I ask you all, how's that working out for you?

Better than for Republicans in CA, NY, NJ, MA, and a handful of others.

And, when Republicans go "overboard" to prove a point like they did in the AL Senate race and others, they end up with Democrats who are worse.

How's that working out for ANY of them? Move to NY or NJ and report back to us.

Is it really that difficult to understand?

CrazySanMan · May 11, 2018

Jim12 said:
Better than for Republicans in CA, NY, NJ, MA, and a handful of others.

And, when Republicans go "overboard" to prove a point like they did in the AL Senate race and others, they end up with Democrats who are worse.

How's that working out for ANY of them? Move to NY or NJ and report back to us.

Is it really that difficult to understand?

"Maryland sucks and we get more repressed every year but hey, at least we aren't California!"

What kind of argument is that?

So what if Hogan wins a Second term?

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Let Freedom Ring

Ultimate Member

piled higher and deeper

Let Freedom Ring

Banned

Banned

Ultimate Member

Scribe

Ultimate Member

Senior Member (Gold)

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

2013'er

2013'er

Kragaphile

Attachments

Ultimate Member

dont be a dumbass

2013'er

Let Freedom Ring

2013'er

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics