US Presidential Contenders

[Unorthodox]

It was along the lines of "if it were held today, I'd vote for Johnson, but there's time to look and I'm still deciding" type comment.  I guarantee that's why he polled 16% here as I doubt anyone knew anything more about him than I did prior to that comment. 

[Unorthodox]

As for the gun issue, the party is emphatic. They are adamant Bill of Rights people, more than any party I've ever seen. Bill Weld barely got approved because although a hunter, he once supported an assault rifle ban. They insisted on 2nd Amendment pledges. If they broke faith  2 weeks after securing the nomination, I could easily see state parties failing to assist in ballot access... " Oh darn. Did we get your name wrong? File late? Forget to get it notarized? The whole thing musta slipped my mind when you forgot you were a Libertarian."

I'm all for 2nd amendment.  The problem is when ANY discussion of anything even remotely around guns becomes "calls for more deadly restrictions and prohibitions on the rights of peaceful, responsible gun owners to stop shooters and minimize their impact."

That's just horrendous fearmongering. 

The guy in Orlando was on the FBI watch list.  He would have been able to legally purchase guns and ammo (don't know if it's been released whether he did or not).  It should be a no-brainer argument that he probably SHOULDN'T have been able to. 

I can at least understand the gun free zone argument. 

[Rusty Edge]

He legally purchased from a reputable local dealer ( former NYC police officer ), and complied with the waiting period.

The killer worked as a professional security officer until he quit. He passed that background check, too, with no objections from law enforcement. I wonder if he had hopes of letting terrorists in through a loading dock or side entrance at a stadium or civic arena or convention center. Orlando has 'em.

How a guy on the no-fly list gets to be a security officer, I have no clue. It suggests that a security  company .... okay I'm simply baffled.

{EDIT Okay, to be fair he may have been a security officer before he was officially no fly or under FBI scrutiny. I find the reporting still spotty, not clear and consistent about what happened when. }

[Unorthodox]

AFAIK, it passes muster that a person can be on a terrorist watch list, and not be flagged in a criminal background check at the same time, due to privacy laws and such as they are now. 

[Dale]

I don't see how anyone can justify needing more than a single shot breech loader.  I used to hunt too with a .22 and a 303.  There's no reason you need more than a single shot gun/rifle.

[Unorthodox]

There's no reason you need more than a single shot gun/rifle.

The .303 is a little difficult to get ammo for here, but I understand it's like the British equivalent of a 30.06, if a little smaller.  (not of consequence to hunting anything in NA or Australia)

What were you hunting out of curiousity.

Anyhow, I disagree.

A 700-900 lb elk at 300+ yards is not an easy one-shot, and not uncommon situation in the Rockies. 

Also, I've seen a LOT of bad shooters hunting, and am of the opinion it's better to KILL than to let a wounded animal escape due to bad first shot.  I don't see a need for a Semi-auto by any stretch, but don't see a problem with bolt actions.  (For the record, my 1903 springfield only ever took one shot at a living thing.)

[Rusty Edge]

Today's Gleanings-

* Hillary and Bernie met to discuss measures to aid working families, and opposing Donald [Sleezebag]. Her aide viewed it as positive, Bernie's as constructive. But he hasn't conceded victory to her, or endorsed anyone else.

* [Sleezebag] is in a snit from Republicans handling him with a 10 foot poll, saying he considered running alone in the beginning, and he can still do it. Examples are former presidential hopeful Lamar Alexander pointedly saying [Sleezebag]'s not the nominee until the convention, and then we'll see. Scott Walker was rated a "half-flip" by fact checkers. He no longer speaks Trumps name. Speaker Ryan was denouncing one of the statements since the mass murder.

* Johnson's campaign manager explained that he thinks they can when some of the mountain states. A battleground state like Ohio or PA is too expensive to be competitive in. But New Hampshire ( home of the Libertarian Free State project ) is considered in play, and possibly another Eastern state ... I'd assume Delaware or Maine.

* Bill Weld is doing his part. He is getting a lot of coverage in Massachusetts. People in his old firm are forming a PAC.  He came out with a proposal for a terrorism task force and a tip line to make it easier for American Muslims to indicate radicals. Modeled after successful programs he worked with as a federal prosecutor. Also CNN will do a town hall with him and Johnson.

* [Sleezebag]'s negatives exceed 70% in the latest poll.  In other words, with negatives over 2/3rds in a 3 way race, [Sleezebag] is now the spoiler.

[Dale]

There's no reason you need more than a single shot gun/rifle.

The .303 is a little difficult to get ammo for here, but I understand it's like the British equivalent of a 30.06, if a little smaller.  (not of consequence to hunting anything in NA or Australia)

What were you hunting out of curiousity.

Anyhow, I disagree.

A 700-900 lb elk at 300+ yards is not an easy one-shot, and not uncommon situation in the Rockies. 

Also, I've seen a LOT of bad shooters hunting, and am of the opinion it's better to KILL than to let a wounded animal escape due to bad first shot.  I don't see a need for a Semi-auto by any stretch, but don't see a problem with bolt actions.  (For the record, my 1903 springfield only ever took one shot at a living thing.)

My brother and I used to hunt rabbits and roos (kangaroos).  We used to also use the 303 to put down cows (single shot, back of the ear).  Sure it won't bring down a large animal, but is very popular here for medium size animal hunting.  It became very popular in British countries as it was a fast bolt-action rifle with good accuracy over medium distance.

The 303 is a branch of the Lee-Enfield.  Over here the cartridge, short-cartridge and auto models are illegal.  However with the proper license you can purchase a bolt-action single or clip (5 round).

[Buster's Uncle]

Why hunt roos?  I gather they're considered giant rats and not anything you'd eat...

[Dale]

They jump, and they can't see to well.

I bet you can imagine the mess they make with farming fences and getting tangled up in them.  And you can eat roo.  The legs are made into dog food too.

[Unorthodox]

Why hunt roos?  I gather they're considered giant rats and not anything you'd eat...

Heck, there's open bounty on coyotes around here, and you don't eat them. 

My brother and I used to hunt rabbits and roos (kangaroos).  We used to also use the 303 to put down cows (single shot, back of the ear).  Sure it won't bring down a large animal, but is very popular here for medium size animal hunting.  It became very popular in British countries as it was a fast bolt-action rifle with good accuracy over medium distance.

The 303 is a branch of the Lee-Enfield.  Over here the cartridge, short-cartridge and auto models are illegal.  However with the proper license you can purchase a bolt-action single or clip (5 round).

So, it is just like my 5 round clip 1903.  I'm sure it would put down an elk with the proper rounds.  Just hard to find here (thus expensive).

[Rusty Edge]

* [Sleezebag] can't win is part of today's articles. They cite how 55% are in the Never [Sleezebag] category, and 70% disapprove of him. Remember how [Sleezebag] used to cite the polls to prove how popular and right he was? He doesn't. The latest poll was taken after the shootings, and people approve of how Hillary and Obama responded rather than [Sleezebag]. So his fearmongering didn't work. Today he was giving depositions. Celebrity chefs Geoffry  Zacharian and Jose Andres were supposed to open restaurants in his new DC hotel, but they refused when he started disparaging Mexicans. [Sleezebag] sued, they counter-sued, hence today's dispositions.

* Hillary's campaign is vetting senator Elizabeth Warren. Strategically speaking, adding another white woman doesn't broaden the appeal, but adding a liberal does. Being a two woman ticket makes [Sleezebag] look bad when he attacks them. Also, removing her from the Senate takes away an embarrassing  voice for bank reform, kinda like Obama deporting Hillary by making her Secretary of State, so she couldn't highjack his healthcare proposal.

* Bernie is doing a simulcast over the internet tonight with his supporters. He's not going to endorse Clinton, and he's not going to give up trying to get concessions out of her , so what's he up to? I think he'll try to transform his movement into a something like Perot did at the end of his first presidential bid, "United We Stand" and organization to endorse candidates, and advocate views. If so, I think he'll learn that he'll make more of a difference as a political party, just as Perot found.

[Unorthodox]

* T rump can't win is part of today's articles. They cite how 55% are in the Never T rump category, and 70% disapprove of him. Remember how T rump used to cite the polls to prove how popular and right he was? He doesn't. The latest poll was taken after the shootings, and people approve of how Hillary and Obama responded rather than T rump. So his fearmongering didn't work. Today he was giving depositions. Celebrity chefs Geoffry  Zacharian and Jose Andres were supposed to open restaurants in his new DC hotel, but they refused when he started disparaging Mexicans. T rump sued, they counter-sued, hence today's dispositions.

There was always a nagging thing in my head that wondered if that attack might not have been staged.  (yes, I'm THAT paranoid)  My original thinking was that it would help T rump, but he played it so horribly (and yet predictably), perhaps it's the opposite.  Is there any reasonable chance he could be replaced on the ticket barring him bowing out? 

[Spacy]

20% or so I would guess, with it growing as he keeps opening his mouth.

Basically, there would have to be a very large republican revolt, with the majority of the party threatening to leave the party and form a new party. 

It would have to happen in a very crazy way, however, as he has guaranteed delegates that should automatically vote for him at the convention and thus lock him in.  One thing that I have heard is that the RNC refuses to pay for the convention, and thus there is no vote, and thus craziness.  But, I really don't know.

I am waiting for the RNC to basically say "vote Johnson", or "write in XYZ".

The problem with the RNC, and they recognize it, is that the idiot basically hit the highlights of what the average Joe wants out of the party - security.  Job security with no more farming out of jobs overseas.  Body security with fear of Muslims.  Hey, I live in Detroit, with the largest US population of muslims, but I have friends from Grand Rapids (other side of the state) have never met anybody from the middle east let alone a muslim and get all their info off the news which basically has said since before 9/11 that muslims are a dangerous and crazy group of people! 

[Rusty Edge]

I don't see how it happens without his resignation or criminal conviction, and while [Sleezebag] is always in court, it's not for criminal stuff. I wonder if any state could have a "recall election" for a presidential primary?   

Most delegates are bound by their states for at least the first ballot, and [Sleezebag] wins. I suppose they might be able to thwart him with lack of a quorum or by having delegates pledged to him miss the first ballot...

That sounds like the only way I know. Abraham Lincoln and four other state legislators once famously vetoed legislation in Illinois by jumping out the window of the state capitol. So for a Republican, it would be an honorable thing.

That would be difficult to orchestrate, though, because the GOP convention not only has delegates, but alternates who sit in the back or the balcony and mostly cheer, usually. But their dream is to stand in. I can't imagine pulling anything like that off secretly. So it would have to be done suddenly. A rousing Lincoln speech before the roll call.

NOW THAT WOULD BE A NEWSWORTHY CONVENTION!

But [Sleezebag]'s nomination is as inevitable as his defeat at this time.


Or as Gary Johnson phrased it - "I'm it."