.

yanici said:
Fisher is not going to even come close to winning the primary for Governor. If you decide to vote Republican only to try to elect Fisher, you will give up your chance to block Tolman in the Dem primary race for AG.

If Tolman wins his primary he WILL be your next AG. I guarantee it.
Click to expand...
100% correct. Mark Fisher is an absolutely GREAT guy with exactly zero chance of winning. As good as he is, I do not throw away my votes on someone with no exposure and zero chance of winning when there is an evil SOB like Tolman to be taken down in the Dem primary.

Mike S said:
Tolman isn't going to win, the moonbats are in love with Healy.
Click to expand...
Why do you say that when Tolman won at the Dem convention (maximum moonbatism there) and has been running his union-paid-for ads nonstop for the last 3 weeks? You know that weak-minded Dems eat those stupid ads up. Have you even seen a Maura Healey ad yet? I haven't and I've been watching.

yanici said:
The latest polls have them in a tight race with Tolman ahead by a couple of points.
Click to expand...
That's what I am hearing. In my mind, Tolman must be defeated at all costs or kiss your 2A rights goodbye. If that is wrong thinking than I guess I'll just have to live with it.

It continues to amaze me that some people here see no danger in an anti-2A maniac like Tolman. [thinking]
 
question for you guys that are throwing away the Fisher vote to block Tolman.

How are Tolman and Healy any different? Her campaign stated yesterday that she also supports "smart gun" tech. What exactly are you gaining by pushing Healy through?

Also, if you want to talk about a snowballs chance in hell, lets talk about Miller for AG.
 
You guys can go ahead and focus on trying to pick up the turd by the clean end.

I believe that it is GOAL's responsibility to endorse the candidates that we think will best preserve and restore our 2A rights.
 
Mike S said:
question for you guys that are throwing away the Fisher vote to block Tolman.

How are Tolman and Healy any different? Her campaign stated yesterday that she also supports "smart gun" tech. What exactly are you gaining by pushing Healy through?
Click to expand...
Have you listened to their debates? Or at least read reports of the debates? Have you visited their respective websites and read their positions on 2A? The difference is night and day. While they are both loony moonbats, Tolman is the anti-2A extremist. Maura Healey is just another Marsha clone... anti-2A as well but no comparison to a rabid megalomaniac psychopath like Tolman on the issue.

Mike S said:
Also, if you want to talk about a snowballs chance in hell, lets talk about Miller for AG.
Click to expand...
Your point is... ???
 
EJFudd said:
Have you listened to their debates? Or at least read reports of the debates? Have you visited their respective websites and read their positions on 2A? The difference is night and day. While they are both loony moonbats, Tolman is the anti-2A extremist. Maura Healey is just another Marsha clone... anti-2A as well but no comparison to a rabid megalomaniac psychopath like Tolman on the issue.


Your point is... ???
Click to expand...

My point is that Miller isn't beating either of them. No way, no how.

Voting the D ticket to block Tolman is essentially voting for lots of gun control or gun control. Apparently that's how MA voters like it, so no surprise. Wake up people.
 
Mike S said:
question for you guys that are throwing away the Fisher vote to block Tolman.

How are Tolman and Healy any different? Her campaign stated yesterday that she also supports "smart gun" tech. What exactly are you gaining by pushing Healy through?
Click to expand...

I'll try to answer this question.

- Tolman intends to use Ch. 93A to expand his powers by blocking sale/transfer of any gun w/o smart technology by fiat (CMR expansion no doubt). GOAL and the rest of us already lost a case in MA courts on the current AG Regs many years ago and Tolman hangs his hat on that. AND I would expect any MA court to support him 100%.

- Healy would like the same thing, BUT (and it is a big but), she's convinced that she does not have the power to do it by fiat and will rely on the legislature to create a law. Legislative action is unlikely and can be thwarted as we did this year.

- We can't defeat a dictator that merely invokes something with no process (short of a federal case that will take 3-5 years) to stop him.

That's how I see the issue right now. YMMV
 
LenS said:
I'll try to answer this question.

- Tolman intends to use Ch. 93A to expand his powers by blocking sale/transfer of any gun w/o smart technology by fiat (CMR expansion no doubt). GOAL and the rest of us already lost a case in MA courts on the current AG Regs many years ago and Tolman hangs his hat on that. AND I would expect any MA court to support him 100%.

- Healy would like the same thing, BUT (and it is a big but), she's convinced that she does not have the power to do it by fiat and will rely on the legislature to create a law. Legislative action is unlikely and can be thwarted as we did this year.

- We can't defeat a dictator that merely invokes something with no process (short of a federal case that will take 3-5 years) to stop him.

That's how I see the issue right now. YMMV
Click to expand...

Tolman would get his ass handed to him by a Federal court, under a Heller ruling.
 
Mike S said:
My point is that Miller isn't beating either of them. No way, no how.
Click to expand...
On that we can agree... although I will vote for Miller in November.

Mike S said:
Voting the D ticket to block Tolman is essentially voting for lots of gun control or gun control. Apparently that's how MA voters like it, so no surprise. Wake up people.
Click to expand...
It is a fact that Tolman or Healey will be the next MA AG. Nothing short of an Act of God can stop that.

After studying both of them, I see a distinct difference on 2A. Like I said earlier, others here don't see any difference between them or simply don't care. But after all we went through this year, I'm not going to simply sit back and ignore Tolman's threats.
 
I'm sure there's been a discussion about this that I've missed, but I'd appreciate it if someone could point out to me the clause in 93A that Tolman proposes to use?

If someone could point me to the discussion I'd appreciate that, too. Thanks.
 
EJFudd said:
On that we can agree... although I will vote for Miller in November. ...It is a fact that Tolman or Healey will be the next MA AG. Nothing short of an Act of God can stop that.
Click to expand...

I get the whole throwing a fisher vote away / vote healy thing, my problem is voting for the R rep I want to, as he has other R competition in the primary... if the major diff between Tollman and Healy is that she doesnt have the balls to push smart guns herself (pun intended), I can't abandon support for the rep I want on the hope that she doesnt grow a pair...
 
I can't understand how anyone would want to remotely give Tolman a chance to dictate to them. To count on the courts to keep him under control is a risky proposition and a lengthy proposition. Remember that he will be the top law enforcement official in the state and will have according privileges. Better to cut off the head before it happens. Amen.
 
yanici said:
I can't understand how anyone would want to remotely give Tolman a chance to dictate to them. To count on the courts to keep him under control is a risky proposition and a lengthy proposition. Remember that he will be the top law enforcement official in the state and will have according privileges. Better to cut off the head before it happens. Amen.
Click to expand...

This is MA, it doesn't matter what anyone on this forum thinks about who should be AG or Governor. That game is rigged/wired for sound/a total joke. It's also a pretty sad state of affairs when outside of Fisher, the rest of the candidates make Mitt Romney look like a goddam saint. [puke]

-Mike
 
mbullism said:
I get the whole throwing a fisher vote away / vote healy thing, my problem is voting for the R rep I want to, as he has other R competition in the primary... if the major diff between Tollman and Healy is that she doesnt have the balls to push smart guns herself (pun intended), I can't abandon support for the rep I want on the hope that she doesnt grow a pair...
Click to expand...
I think that is understatement (the difference between maniac Tolman and moonbat Healey), but no matter. If you choose to participate in the Republican primary for other reasons, that is your decision and your right. Go for it!
 
OldNorth said:
I'm sure there's been a discussion about this that I've missed, but I'd appreciate it if someone could point out to me the clause in 93A that Tolman proposes to use?
Click to expand...

https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXV/Chapter93A/Section2

Section 2. (a) Unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce are hereby declared unlawful.

(b) It is the intent of the legislature that in construing paragraph (a) of this section in actions brought under sections four, nine and eleven, the courts will be guided by the interpretations given by the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Courts to section 5(a)(1) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 45(a)(1)), as from time to time amended.

(c) The attorney general may make rules and regulations interpreting the provisions of subsection 2(a) of this chapter. Such rules and regulations shall not be inconsistent with the rules, regulations and decisions of the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Courts interpreting the provisions of 15 U.S.C. 45(a)(1) (The Federal Trade Commission Act), as from time to time amended.
 
After having voted for the lesser of two evils in elections past, the way I see it (assuming you vote) there are two choices with three possible outcomes:

Choices:
1. Vote your conscience and support the candidate who most closely shares your values.
2. Vote for the lesser of two evils.

Outcomes:
1. You voted your conscience and still lost. Be honest, you knew he/she wasn't going to win in this state. You can rag on the winning candidate and anyone who voted for him/her, and even those who voted for the other lesser of two evils because they still supported a turd. But what you did was help validate an "outsider" and say "There really are people who won't vote for a less stinky turd".
2. The lesser of two evils wins and you can take pride in having voted for the winning turd. Good for you; you pulled the turd lever and won.
3. The greater of two evils wins and you can rag on them, confident in not having voted for him/her.

Notice I said "the candidate who most closely shares your values". Unless you're voting for yourself, it's not likely that any candidate will support everything you stand for.
 
ToddDubya said:
After having voted for the lesser of two evils in elections past, the way I see it (assuming you vote) there are two choices with three possible outcomes:

Choices:
1. Vote your conscience and support the candidate who most closely shares your values.
2. Vote for the lesser of two evils.

Outcomes:
1. You voted your conscience and still lost. Be honest, you knew he/she wasn't going to win in this state. You can rag on the winning candidate and anyone who voted for him/her, and even those who voted for the other lesser of two evils because they still supported a turd. But what you did was help validate an "outsider" and say "There really are people who won't vote for a less stinky turd".
2. The lesser of two evils wins and you can take pride in having voted for the winning turd. Good for you; you pulled the turd lever and won.
3. The greater of two evils wins and you can rag on them, confident in not having voted for him/her.

Notice I said "the candidate who most closely shares your values". Unless you're voting for yourself, it's not likely that any candidate will support everything you stand for.
Click to expand...

Well said TD, well said. The take away (as always) is VOTE, or STFU!!!
 
Please do not underestimate Warren Tolman. It's sad that we need to be playing defense (again) this election.
 
Warren Tolman is crazy. We need to do anything in our power to get out the vote and stop his chances in the primary.
 
So, is this endorsement like how GOAL endorsed the recent legislation? Best we're going to get given the situation?
 
LenS said:
Mark who? Don't recall ever hearing his name before.
Seriously if the majority of voters don't recognize a name, that person doesn't stand a prayer of a chance. People vote on name recognition . . . most couldn't tell you what any candidate stands for, just that they know the name.
Click to expand...

One of these days someone Pro-2A will go to Suffolk Probate Court, change his last name to "Kennedy", run for AG or Governor and before you know it all LTC's will be "shall issue".
(Hey, I can dream, can't I??)
 


Write your reply...
Back
Top Bottom