Skip to main content

View Diary: Conservative guns-in-schools plan runs afoul of the insurance industry (191 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Your point was silly because it had nothing to (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LilithGardener

    do with the question I asked you and secondly there are many things that poll with less than 90 percent democratic support.  I in no way suggested that is good for Dems.  that's just absurd.  Nice try.

    As a matter of fact I'm sure the voting rights act would have polled worse than that for Dems than that watered down bill that we don't even know if the Dems that were relieved in that poll actually wanted the bill dead to get an even better more restrictive bill. As in the ACA polls.

    The point we were discussing was the NRA not the Dems.  

    The only reason that Busch was up by nine points was because Mr appalachian trails was making a total ass of himself not because that district was suddenly democratic leaning, stop being obtuse. For fucks sake the last winner of that seat won 62-36 in 2012 just six months before the Busch race.  That is just classic intellectual dishonesty

    The President proposed a ban on assault weapons but that never made it to the final bill because there is no support for it in the senate nor the house.  The NRA lie by claiming that the bill would take your guns away.  It is a blatant bold face lie.  They are liars.

    You keep bringing up all these stats that have nothing to do with

    background  checks.
     The reason you do it is that you have no reasonable argument against universal background checks and you are doing the same bs the NRA does by clouding the argument with strawman arguments and false claims that Obama is going to to take away your guns.

    Right man, right job and right time

    by Ianb007 on Tue Jul 09, 2013 at 08:59:12 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  "The only reason...." (0+ / 0-)

      The reason why Sanford was down by nine points a mere 2 weeks before the election was because he used state funds to commit adultery, was outspent 4-1, was arrested during the campaign, and was abandoned by his own party.
      In contrast, in 2008 the Democratic candidate lost in a squeaker 52-48., because the GOP candidate received a fine.
      52-48 in 2008, because of a fine.
      A fine.....not adultery, not arrested, not outspent 4-1, not stealing state funds, not abandoned by his own party, not down by 9 points 2 weeks before the election.....A fine.
      He won because he made the election national....and your 'big winner' was unable to keep Colbert-Busch from losing eighteen points in two weeks to the weakest candidate imaginable.

      "Clouding the argument with strawmen arguments and false claims that Obama is going to take your guns away"
      1) I never made that claim.
      2) it's not a 'strawman'. It was the President's proposal.
      Nothing in that sentence is correct. 'Strawmen and false claims', indeed.

      Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

      by FrankRose on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 05:39:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site