If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/Pioneer Valley Arms April Giveaway ***Smith & Wesson SD9VE 9MM***

Reply to thread

Message

Seems to me it is the exact opposite, assuming you feel that GOAL compromised too much in regard to the recent legislation.

Mark Fisher is a great pro-2A candidate for governor. This is the true believer's candidate, not a compromise candidate. I am not surprised at all that GOAL chose him as their guy because that's what GOAL is charged with doing, i.e., endorsing pro-2A candidates. That fact that he has no chance of winning does not affect who GOAL endorses and probably shouldn't affect who GOAL endorses.

The compromise governors candidate choice would have been Baker. He has a very good chance of winning this time around. But the purists don't feel he is solidly enough pro-2A while Mark Fisher is. I get that.

The problem comes in on the Dem side with multiple anti-2A candidates, two of them (Tolman for AG and Grossman for governor) radically, dangerously anti-2A. In combination, we can expect huge new trouble. What to do about that in the primaries is the big question.

<blockquote data-quote="EJFudd" data-source="post: 4103365" data-attributes="member: 41570">Seems to me it is the exact opposite, assuming you feel that GOAL compromised too much in regard to the recent legislation.Mark Fisher is a great pro-2A candidate for governor.&nbsp;&nbsp; This is the true believer&#039;s candidate, not a compromise candidate.&nbsp; I am not surprised at all that GOAL chose him as their guy because that&#039;s what GOAL is charged with doing, i.e., endorsing pro-2A candidates.&nbsp; That fact that he has no chance of winning does not affect who GOAL endorses and probably shouldn&#039;t affect who GOAL endorses.The compromise governors candidate choice would have been Baker.&nbsp; He has a very good chance of winning this time around.&nbsp; But the purists don&#039;t feel he is solidly enough pro-2A while Mark Fisher is.&nbsp; I get that.The problem comes in on the Dem side with multiple anti-2A candidates, two of them (Tolman for AG and Grossman for governor) radically, dangerously anti-2A.&nbsp; In combination, we can expect huge new trouble.&nbsp; What to do about that in the primaries is the big question.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="EJFudd, post: 4103365, member: 41570"] Seems to me it is the exact opposite, assuming you feel that GOAL compromised too much in regard to the recent legislation. Mark Fisher is a great pro-2A candidate for governor. This is the true believer's candidate, not a compromise candidate. I am not surprised at all that GOAL chose him as their guy because that's what GOAL is charged with doing, i.e., endorsing pro-2A candidates. That fact that he has no chance of winning does not affect who GOAL endorses and probably shouldn't affect who GOAL endorses. The compromise governors candidate choice would have been Baker. He has a very good chance of winning this time around. But the purists don't feel he is solidly enough pro-2A while Mark Fisher is. I get that. The problem comes in on the Dem side with multiple anti-2A candidates, two of them (Tolman for AG and Grossman for governor) radically, dangerously anti-2A. In combination, we can expect huge new trouble. What to do about that in the primaries is the big question. [/QUOTE]

Verification