TexasCHLforum.com

There will always be political opportunists like John McCain - willing to wear which ever party's cap helps them get elected, and remain in office.

Having spent more than half of my working life either in the military, or as a federal employee - I would confess to having some "socialist" conditioning. The U.S. military is in fact a socialist enterprise, so it's not surprising that many retired military politicians lean to the left. Col. Allen West is one of the few exceptions.

As for as the Democratic Party goes- that issue has been settled in my mind. The "progressives" ( Neo-Marxists) have pretty well taken over the " party of the working class".

Democrats like Harry Reid (NV), Kenneth Salazar (CO), and I suspect every other Democrat with an NRA "A" rating is "pro-2A" up until the time that they are given the opportunity to play an active role in the "fundamental transformation" of the U.S. of A. into a soviet-style socialist dictatorship.

The only good Democrat elected officer holders - in my opinion - are like the guy in Louisiana the other day who became a Republican.

House Rep. Joe Pickett holding the Public Safety Committee Chair comes to mind.

Cedar Park Dad wrote:Historically Texas was a Democratic state. It was a Democratic state in my lifetime and will be so again.
Historically the Second Amendment was not the purview of a specific party. None of the Bill of Rights were. To reduce it to a party specific concept makes it vulnerable.

Between immigration from South of the Boarder, the Left Coast and Yankees, I will be very surprised if Texas isn't a Blue State in the 2020 elections. I aim to be gone before that happens but I would stick out like a sore thumb in Montana and Alaska is too cold unless global warming heats up.

Ameer wrote:

Cedar Park Dad wrote:Historically Texas was a Democratic state. It was a Democratic state in my lifetime and will be so again.
Historically the Second Amendment was not the purview of a specific party. None of the Bill of Rights were. To reduce it to a party specific concept makes it vulnerable.

Between immigration from South of the Boarder, the Left Coast and Yankees, I will be very surprised if Texas isn't a Blue State in the 2020 elections. I aim to be gone before that happens but I would stick out like a sore thumb in Montana and Alaska is too cold unless global warming heats up.

After what went on last night in a special session public hearing, its not going to take until 2020.

Cedar Park Dad wrote:Historically Texas was a Democratic state. It was a Democratic state in my lifetime and will be so again.
Historically the Second Amendment was not the purview of a specific party. None of the Bill of Rights were. To reduce it to a party specific concept makes it vulnerable.

Texas Democrats of past decades were/are nothing like the Democratic party today. I'd even go as far as saying Texas Democrats were more aligned with what people consider conservative today but in most cases more reasonable.

A man who would stand by and let women be raped on campus to advance his political career, instead of allowing us to carry a gun to protect ourselves, is not someone who deserves my vote no matter who runs against him.

TrueFlog wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

suthdj wrote:

TrueFlog wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

suthdj wrote:

GrillKing wrote:

suthdj wrote:How I look at it, he may have signed all the gun bills in front of him, that is easy he just signs what they hand him. Now for him to not do something when he has the power that is failure on his part and the only way I have to punish him is by voting against him, See so simple. Yes this may make some upset because it is against what they want but that is why or system is so great we can voice our displeasure at the ballot box.

And that is exactly how Bill White (or similar) would become the next Governor of Texas.

Then maybe Perry should have stepped up to the plate when he was called.

You'd rather have proven anti-gun former Houston Mayor Bill White as Governor?

Chas.

But, of course, that's a false dichotomy. I've seen several posts lately saying that would should continue to support Perry because he's not anti-gun, he's not as bad as White, etc. But that's simply not true - we're not limited to choosing between Perry and White. There are plenty of other candidates we can support - particularly those whith Tea Party or Libertarian views. Perry was challenged in the primaries last time around, and I'm sure he will be again. We can rally together behind someone like Medina or Abott. Can you imagine what would happen if the TSRA endorsed someone other than Perry in a primary and was up-fornt about why? Perry might still win, but at least he'd know that he can't run on past victories forever. The same holds true for the Lt. Governor and legislative offices.

Yep

Then you are an enemy of the Second Amendment and Texas gun owners.

Chas.

Do you care to back up that personal attack? Can you explain to me why I'm an enemy? Is it because I think we can do better than Perry or because I questioned your almighty wisdom?

Some people (Texas Tribune ) seem to think that Perry is handing off the reins anyways. That would explain some of the give up we've seen out of the Governors office lately. Greg Abbott is obviously gearing up for a run at the position. Do people really think that a large number (or any) of those who voted for Perry are going to vote for Bill White (or some other Dem) if Perry's not on the ticket?

Enemy of the Second Amendment and Texas gun owners?? I don't get it...

Perry's actions for this special session ( adding abortion restrictions, and not adding gun rights) indicate he is preparing for a national campaign rather than a Texas campaign. I fully expect him to not run for reelection and to launch another run for President.

Dewhurst will have to decide if he wants to be thrashed by Abbot (Gov.) or Patterson (Lt. Gov.)

paperchunker wrote:Perry's actions for this special session ( adding abortion restrictions, and not adding gun rights) indicate he is preparing for a national campaign rather than a Texas campaign.

Ding ding ding!

After he chose not to support CHL in the special session, he chose not to get my support for any office. Not national. Not state. Not even local dog catcher.

If gun owning friends in other states ask me about Perry in the future, my answer will be a lot less complimentary than it was in 2012.

hillfighter wrote:After he chose not to support CHL in the special session, he chose not to get my support for any office. Not national. Not state. Not even local dog catcher.

If gun owning friends in other states ask me about Perry in the future, my answer will be a lot less complimentary than it was in 2012.

So you would not vote or would vote for Hillary for President over Rick Perry? Again, that is how Bill White becomes Governor or Hillary becomes President. That may make you feel good, but if enough choose this route and 'feel good', we lose the war.....

hillfighter wrote:After he chose not to support CHL in the special session, he chose not to get my support for any office. Not national. Not state. Not even local dog catcher.

If gun owning friends in other states ask me about Perry in the future, my answer will be a lot less complimentary than it was in 2012.

His actions are aimed at Republicans in Iowa and New Hampshire. The primary in Texas is too late to matter. I will vote Perry over Hillary or any other Democrat

I'd be more worried about Perry winning the primary and a large number of conservative voters staying home in disgust.....

I don't see Perry running for president again. I think he realized after this run that he can't win on the national stage. Of course, any Republican will have a better chance in 2016 than they did this time, but I really don't see him running (or winning if he does). I do see him trying for a higher federal office, but more as helping the party choice get elected and being rewarded by an appointment, maybe cabinet. His record in Texas would certainly make him look qualified for Commerce, for example.

I also don't see Dewhurst running again. I don't think he is done in politics or running for office, but I think he will take a cycle to figure out what happened between him and Cruz.

Between those two positions, it opens up a lot of specification for 2014. I personally see Patterson running for governor and Abbott for Lt Gov. I am not sure yet about Staples running but my call would be Patterson and Abbott as the winners. I think the party will encourage someone fairly high level but young enough to want more later to run against Debra Medina for Comptroller. The office has a lot more power (especially through publicity) than most people realize. It does control the budget more than a lot of people think because it sets the income estimate for spending.

I don't see the Dems getting a statewide office until after 2016, but there are a few they could go for and win. Judges are especially vulnerable since no one really pays attention to those campaigns. I do see the state going back to the Dems for some things, and going "purple" (as the media likes to call it). But when that happens, it will be because the Democratic party in Texas has distanced itself from the national party somewhat and moved much more conservative than even the state party is now.

Obviously, all of this is just my personal call on what will happen. I am not a political consultant and lost any election I ever participated in so I am not really an expert at this either.

GrillKing wrote: that is how Bill White becomes Governor

Rick Perry took a gamble we asked him not to take. If he loses that's on him.

srothstein wrote:
Between those two positions, it opens up a lot of specification for 2014. I personally see Patterson running for governor and Abbott for Lt Gov.

Patterson has already announced he is running for Lt. Gov. Web site and Facebook.. Bumper stickers etc..