The rest of the ballot

[Beezil]

just curious how you folks are leaning on the other contests......

 

lt. gub?

senator?

house rep?

comptroller?

how bout the cook country board for the chicagoland folks?

 

anyone running uncontested that you'll check the box for anyway? any boxes that you purposely will leave unchecked

[GENE]

These dems have got to go, and any one votes for them must like the high taxes, I do not

[junglebob]

I see that Teri Newman running for representative in Congress 12th Congressional district says that she has a LTC from her native state and supports national reciprocity. Not sure what her native state is.

[pyre400]

lt. gub?

Plummer

 

senator?

25th District Lauzen

 

house rep?

50th District Wheeler

 

comptroller?

Jim Dodge

[abolt243]

lt. gub?

Plummer

 

senator?

25th District Lauzen

 

house rep?

50th District Wheeler

 

comptroller?

Jim Dodge

 

Hey Pyre!! Here's two we can agree on!!!!! Plummer and Dodge. Actually, it's Plummer and anybody but JBT!!!!

 

AB

[Tvandermyde]

Pyre --

 

ok What the hey!!!?

 

Hatcher is our rep and she's pro-gun??

 

You know how hard it is to keep suburban pro-gunners when you bail on others?

 

I just don't get it. We get a better rep than the last one, and you don't want to support her.

 

where's that brick, I feel a headache coming on.

[Lou]

Pyre --

 

ok What the hey!!!?

 

Hatcher is our rep and she's pro-gun??

 

You know how hard it is to keep suburban pro-gunners when you bail on others?

 

I just don't get it. We get a better rep than the last one, and you don't want to support her.

 

where's that brick, I feel a headache coming on.

 

 

I have to agree with Todd on this one. I knew Kay Hatcher from long ago and she is not only pro-2A but she is a Conservative in almost all of the ways that count. She's got a voting record to prove her bonifides and you want to go with an unknown quantity that might or might not throw us overboard once he gets our vote? To quote Vandermyde - "What the hey!!!?"

[pyre400]

Pyre --

 

ok What the hey!!!?

 

Hatcher is our rep and she's pro-gun??

 

You know how hard it is to keep suburban pro-gunners when you bail on others?

 

I just don't get it. We get a better rep than the last one, and you don't want to support her.

 

where's that brick, I feel a headache coming on.

 

 

I have to agree with Todd on this one. I knew Kay Hatcher from long ago and she is not only pro-2A but she is a Conservative in almost all of the ways that count. She's got a voting record to prove her bonifides and you want to go with an unknown quantity that might or might not throw us overboard once he gets our vote? To quote Vandermyde - "What the hey!!!?"

 

 

Hatcher has an A - I already took that into consideration back in November.

 

I like Wheeler, his stance on 2A and RTC, and he supports SB600 which Hatcher doesnt. This is Kendall Co, we are pro gun here. Some of the other counties, I could see your concern.... I have other issues with Cross and Kay is going to help us out there. FWIW its not a personal attack on her, its just how I'm voting this time around.

 

My vote for Wheeler is a vote to clean up the party - he's willing to do what Kay was not - same reason why I'm for Adam.

 

Before you guys go AWOL on me, do you even know anything about Keith Wheeler?

 

Boy oh boy... Anyone for a conversation on religion?

[abolt243]

Pyre --

 

ok What the hey!!!?

 

Hatcher is our rep and she's pro-gun??

 

You know how hard it is to keep suburban pro-gunners when you bail on others?

 

I just don't get it. We get a better rep than the last one, and you don't want to support her.

 

where's that brick, I feel a headache coming on.

 

 

I have to agree with Todd on this one. I knew Kay Hatcher from long ago and she is not only pro-2A but she is a Conservative in almost all of the ways that count. She's got a voting record to prove her bonifides and you want to go with an unknown quantity that might or might not throw us overboard once he gets our vote? To quote Vandermyde - "What the hey!!!?"

 

 

Hatcher has an A - I already took that into consideration back in November.

 

I like Wheeler, his stance on 2A and RTC, and he supports SB600 which Hatcher doesnt. This is Kendall Co, we are pro gun here. Some of the other counties, I could see your concern.... I have other issues with Cross and Kay is going to help us out there. FWIW its not a personal attack on her, its just how I'm voting this time around.

 

My vote for Wheeler is a vote to clean up the party - he's willing to do what Kay was not - same reason why I'm for Adam.

 

Before you guys go AWOL on me, do you even know anything about Keith Wheeler?

 

Boy oh boy... Anyone for a conversation on religion?

 

Look at it from a Lobbyist's viewpoint. The biggest thing a lobbyist can promise a lawmaker is the support of his/her organization, whether that's the NRA, the IUOE, or the IEA. I'm miles away from the 50th, but it appears here that we have a rep that is supportive of our cause here which is 2A. If that rep does not get our support and gets beat, the next rep from another district that Todd approaches for the 59th vote on RTC may not think too much of Todd's promise for support in the next election. He/she will say "Yeah, I remember how you supported poor old Kay Hatcher. She was pro-gun through and through. Look what happened to her!!

 

I've been more and more involved in politics over the last 2-3 years. I once voted for only the people that were 100% aligned with my principles. Sometimes I didn't make many marks on the ballot. Then I figured out that we'll never get 100%. We have to make a few concessions in some areas to make progress in others. We may have to promise something to a Rep or Senator that really doesn't have a position to gain their vote on our issue. There's nothing more that a politician likes than to have a promise of votes.

 

Is it the political utopia that we'd like to think we want?? No. Will we ever achieve that utopia. Not anytime soon. But, it's the system that we have and we have to work it to get the things that we want. We need to keep the legislators that have proven themselves to us on our issue, even though they may not be perfect. Concentrate on dumping some of those that have proven to us that they aren't on our side. Then when we get those replaced, we can work on refining the others. Kinda' like culling a livewell full of fish to get the heaviest limit. Tournament fishermen will appreciate that analogy.

 

Too long a response, and you're going to vote however you want anyway, I respect that. But at some point, we need to listen to the folks that work with the legislators to further our cause. Those folks talk to the legislators every day. They know who they can count on and who may walk. If we want to win, we must give the Todds of the world the tools to work with.

 

JMHO.

 

Rumor has it there's an election tomorrow. Anybody know what that's all about???

 

AB

[abolt243]

Hatcher won. Beat her nearest opponent by 6 points. Another one saved.

[Tvandermyde]

Abolt has it about right but...

 

for a number of years pro-choice repubs have helped us out in the collar counties. It drives the pro-life crowd nuts that we won't dump someone who is with us 85% of the time for a promise. They made the votes so we stick with them.

 

If our guys get bogges down in say well Wheeler is pro-gun too, but hes also XXXX then guns and loyalty don't mush matter cuase your guys areally part of the "christian right"

 

We may work with other groups when we have a common interest. But we don't owe anyone else our support on other issues.

 

If you choose to turn your back on someone who has given us every vote we asked for, cause you have an issues with them on something else, then you weaken our position at the capitol. I won't let the others bring their issues into our debate. I've had it out with those groups a number of times over candidates. If you walk away from a pro-gun legislator becuase of another issue, then;

 

1. dont tell me how impotant RTC or the 2A is to you. Becuase you justy showed me that it's oneof several issues on your list and not the top one.

2. when that legislator takes a walk on a vote and goes the toher way cuase they felt the need to give the otherside a vote, becuase you din't support them after they did what you asked them to, don't complain about it. You did it tot them first.

[ilphil]

Abolt has it about right but...

 

for a number of years pro-choice repubs have helped us out in the collar counties. It drives the pro-life crowd nuts that we won't dump someone who is with us 85% of the time for a promise. They made the votes so we stick with them.

 

If our guys get bogges down in say well Wheeler is pro-gun too, but hes also XXXX then guns and loyalty don't mush matter cuase your guys areally part of the "christian right"

 

We may work with other groups when we have a common interest. But we don't owe anyone else our support on other issues.

 

If you choose to turn your back on someone who has given us every vote we asked for, cause you have an issues with them on something else, then you weaken our position at the capitol. I won't let the others bring their issues into our debate. I've had it out with those groups a number of times over candidates. If you walk away from a pro-gun legislator becuase of another issue, then;

 

1. dont tell me how impotant RTC or the 2A is to you. Becuase you justy showed me that it's oneof several issues on your list and not the top one.

2. when that legislator takes a walk on a vote and goes the toher way cuase they felt the need to give the otherside a vote, becuase you din't support them after they did what you asked them to, don't complain about it. You did it tot them first.

 

As a lobbyist, I guess you feel that you have to take that position. That is what you are paid to do.

But, I think it is a cheap shot to question anyone's committment to the 2nd Amendment because they have the audacity to take other "life and death" matters into consideration when deciding who to support.

[Tvandermyde]

Pyree brought up SB600. Making that an issue over someone who has voted pro-gun tells me that other issues get equal treatment or cloud the issue.

 

For years I have had the Jack Roser types complain about pro-choice republicans and us unwilling to toss someone overboard becuase they didnt' fit their agenda and thought that gun guys should be good little conservitives and play follow the leader with the right wing.

 

When I hold out my hand and ask for a vote on a bill or a number of bills all I have is the promise that if you support us, we'll support you. With legislators in suburban districts, it can be tough. But when they do as we ask, then I believe that we OWE them the respect and to pay back their vote with ours.

 

If you wish to say that with a person who has never voted on a gun bill is equal to someone who has given us 5 or 8 votes, because of a promise and other issues then the 2A isn't the most importnat thing on your list in my opinion. You won't reward someone for doing what you called and asked them to do, becuase you now have an excuse over another issue.

 

You can't have it both ways. You don't go ask them for a vote then decide that you got a better promise from someone else and you'll go that route. If a legislator did that to us you'd call them every name in the book.

 

We hate it when guys like Peter Fitzgerald run progun then turn their backs on us. We look at them and say we got you elected and you repay us how? So why is it any different when we ask a legislator for a vote and then decide not to support them. In this case not two equal legislators, but a legislator with a record and a new candidate.

 

Kay Hatcher is my rep. So I keep real close eyes on this area. She is better than her predicessor. She earned our support.

 

Spare me the sermons of how important RTC is or killing of semi-auto bans are to you if you won't reward the people that stand by us and help do it.

[bob]

Spare me the sermons of how important RTC is or killing of semi-auto bans are to you if you won't reward the people that stand by us and help do it.

 

Amen.

 

Politics is about getting what you can, when you can, how you can. You sometimes have to make deals with people you would prefer not to and agree to things you would rather not so you can win on a more important issue. It is just the way things are and always will be in politics. Its not pretty and if you don't have the stomach for it you will fail and get nothing.

 

You can get rid of some of it by throttling government back to a more reasonable level, but you will never eliminate the need to negotiate with people you do not agree with on every issue to get their support on things they don't necessarily agree with.

[abolt243]

Spare me the sermons of how important RTC is or killing of semi-auto bans are to you if you won't reward the people that stand by us and help do it.

 

Amen.

 

Politics is about getting what you can, when you can, how you can. You sometimes have to make deals with people you would prefer not to and agree to things you would rather not so you can win on a more important issue. It is just the way things are and always will be in politics. Its not pretty and if you don't have the stomach for it you will fail and get nothing.

 

You can get rid of some of it by throttling government back to a more reasonable level, but you will never eliminate the need to negotiate with people you do not agree with on every issue to get their support on things they don't necessarily agree with.

 

True dat Bob. And, in order to get that support, you may have to give them some support on things that you don't necessarily agree with. Negotiations is give and take, not demanding that everyone agree with you 100%. Everyone has a very few core values that they won't compromise on. But, in the political world, those are VERY few and everything else is negotiable.

[Lou]

Hatcher won. Beat her nearest opponent by 6 points. Another one saved.

 

 

Kay has been a friend of the Second Amendment for a long time. I know her from way back when we both worked for the same company and our desks were about 25 ft. apart.

 

We still trade e-mails occasionally. She is good people.

 

When you people who are in her district drop by her office during IGOLD to say HI! ask her who gave her the IGOLD shirt she has hanging on her wall next to the ABATE shirt.

[Ashrak]

Pyre --

 

ok What the hey!!!?

 

Hatcher is our rep and she's pro-gun??

 

You know how hard it is to keep suburban pro-gunners when you bail on others?

 

I just don't get it. We get a better rep than the last one, and you don't want to support her.

 

where's that brick, I feel a headache coming on.

 

 

I have to agree with Todd on this one. I knew Kay Hatcher from long ago and she is not only pro-2A but she is a Conservative in almost all of the ways that count. She's got a voting record to prove her bonifides and you want to go with an unknown quantity that might or might not throw us overboard once he gets our vote? To quote Vandermyde - "What the hey!!!?"

 

 

Hatcher has an A - I already took that into consideration back in November.

 

I like Wheeler, his stance on 2A and RTC, and he supports SB600 which Hatcher doesnt. This is Kendall Co, we are pro gun here. Some of the other counties, I could see your concern.... I have other issues with Cross and Kay is going to help us out there. FWIW its not a personal attack on her, its just how I'm voting this time around.

 

My vote for Wheeler is a vote to clean up the party - he's willing to do what Kay was not - same reason why I'm for Adam.

 

Before you guys go AWOL on me, do you even know anything about Keith Wheeler?

 

Boy oh boy... Anyone for a conversation on religion?

 

Look at it from a Lobbyist's viewpoint. The biggest thing a lobbyist can promise a lawmaker is the support of his/her organization, whether that's the NRA, the IUOE, or the IEA. I'm miles away from the 50th, but it appears here that we have a rep that is supportive of our cause here which is 2A. If that rep does not get our support and gets beat, the next rep from another district that Todd approaches for the 59th vote on RTC may not think too much of Todd's promise for support in the next election. He/she will say "Yeah, I remember how you supported poor old Kay Hatcher. She was pro-gun through and through. Look what happened to her!!

 

I've been more and more involved in politics over the last 2-3 years. I once voted for only the people that were 100% aligned with my principles. Sometimes I didn't make many marks on the ballot. Then I figured out that we'll never get 100%. We have to make a few concessions in some areas to make progress in others. We may have to promise something to a Rep or Senator that really doesn't have a position to gain their vote on our issue. There's nothing more that a politician likes than to have a promise of votes.

 

Is it the political utopia that we'd like to think we want?? No. Will we ever achieve that utopia. Not anytime soon. But, it's the system that we have and we have to work it to get the things that we want. We need to keep the legislators that have proven themselves to us on our issue, even though they may not be perfect. Concentrate on dumping some of those that have proven to us that they aren't on our side. Then when we get those replaced, we can work on refining the others. Kinda' like culling a livewell full of fish to get the heaviest limit. Tournament fishermen will appreciate that analogy.

 

Too long a response, and you're going to vote however you want anyway, I respect that. But at some point, we need to listen to the folks that work with the legislators to further our cause. Those folks talk to the legislators every day. They know who they can count on and who may walk. If we want to win, we must give the Todds of the world the tools to work with.

 

JMHO.

 

Rumor has it there's an election tomorrow. Anybody know what that's all about???

 

AB

Something similar could be said about Brady, right? What you talk about is why I oppose group endorsements and media presented polls. Both cause more problems than they solve.

 

At some point, legislators and lobbyists are going to have to listen to us and adhere to the Constitution itself. At some point, we have to realize that each and every one of us are the "todds" of the world. Shifting our responsibilities to others, relying on others to do things for us, is what has manufactured so many sheep who blindly follow.

 

As you said - JMHO.

[Tvandermyde]

Ash --

 

the differance between Brady and the Hatcher races is night and day.

 

Hatcher was running against someone with no record and she was an incumbent.

 

Dillard vs Brady had two progunners. Brady had not scored anywhere near double digits while 1 anti-gunner and 1 softy where in the lead. We gave Bill every chance to turn the polls around and made an educated guess as to what to do. Brady caught lightning. Now we just have to see if he can pull it out.

[Ashrak]

Ash --

 

the differance between Brady and the Hatcher races is night and day.

 

Hatcher was running against someone with no record and she was an incumbent.

 

Dillard vs Brady had two progunners. Brady had not scored anywhere near double digits while 1 anti-gunner and 1 softy where in the lead. We gave Bill every chance to turn the polls around and made an educated guess as to what to do. Brady caught lightning. Now we just have to see if he can pull it out.

Looks to me like more attention should be paid to the one poll that actually matters and a good bit less to those polls that don't.

 

There is no "lead" until votes are being counted. Brady didn't catch lightning, he got votes that the "polls" said he wasn't going to get. The "polls" were wrong - again. Why are they so trusted again?

 

We were supposed to get behind Dillard, but now we just sit back and wait and see? Huh?

 

 

"Pro gunners" abound and they do not hide from or tamp down their support depending on who is watching. Fence sitters, like Obama, do that.

[abolt243]

Ash,

 

I don't see your point. Those that chose Dillard, did so. Not much was said about Brady on this board, it seemed that Adam A had as much support as any. Where did he finish in the "poll that counts"? And you're correct, only one poll counts. But, in order to determine where support is needed or where it is not justified, some "predictions" are needed. Scientific polls have been around for a long time and used to good effect. The "good" polls, those with a reasonable sample size and sampling across segements had shown that Dillard would run strong. They were right. The very latest polls before the election showed Brady moving up. They too were right. He just moved much quicker in real life, albeit not until the end of the vote counting. Google the 1948 presidential race, Dewey vs. Truman, you'll see that people have been fooled before.

 

You question "sitting and waiting". What should we do?? Nothing that we do right now will have any effect on the outcome of the ® primary for Governor. Until we know the candidate, it's hard to make plans for that race. Let's let all the votes get counted, see who wins and then move on. I suspicion that unless things are very close, like less than 100 votes, not much further action will be taken. At least that's what I hope happens.

 

Instead of beating each other up over that, let's move on to the legislature and get some things done there. We have HB 180 to turn back. A few good bills that have been posted to get behind. Yes, we are all the "Todds" of the world. But until I can spend 16 hours a day, and 20 weeks a year in Springfield, I'll do my lobbying from a computer screen or phone. I'll depend on Todd, Richard and their counterparts to make the all important personal calls on the legislators that need it.

 

I don't think you'll find many "Pro-gunners" hiding or tamping down their support, whatever you mean by that. We have many fronts that we must defend and many fronts on which we can attack. We just have to be smart enough to pick the right ones at the right times. Right now, its time to work on the legislative process. The election in November can wait until all the players are in place.

 

AB

[Ashrak]

Ash,

 

I don't see your point. Those that chose Dillard, did so. Not much was said about Brady on this board, it seemed that Adam A had as much support as any. Where did he finish in the "poll that counts"? And you're correct, only one poll counts. But, in order to determine where support is needed or where it is not justified, some "predictions" are needed. Scientific polls have been around for a long time and used to good effect. The "good" polls, those with a reasonable sample size and sampling across segements had shown that Dillard would run strong. They were right. The very latest polls before the election showed Brady moving up. They too were right. He just moved much quicker in real life, albeit not until the end of the vote counting. Google the 1948 presidential race, Dewey vs. Truman, you'll see that people have been fooled before.

 

You question "sitting and waiting". What should we do?? Nothing that we do right now will have any effect on the outcome of the ® primary for Governor. Until we know the candidate, it's hard to make plans for that race. Let's let all the votes get counted, see who wins and then move on. I suspicion that unless things are very close, like less than 100 votes, not much further action will be taken. At least that's what I hope happens.

 

Instead of beating each other up over that, let's move on to the legislature and get some things done there. We have HB 180 to turn back. A few good bills that have been posted to get behind. Yes, we are all the "Todds" of the world. But until I can spend 16 hours a day, and 20 weeks a year in Springfield, I'll do my lobbying from a computer screen or phone. I'll depend on Todd, Richard and their counterparts to make the all important personal calls on the legislators that need it.

 

I don't think you'll find many "Pro-gunners" hiding or tamping down their support, whatever you mean by that. We have many fronts that we must defend and many fronts on which we can attack. We just have to be smart enough to pick the right ones at the right times. Right now, its time to work on the legislative process. The election in November can wait until all the players are in place.

 

AB

I am not exactly sure why you point Ada's numbers to me. If you recall(or searched) you would see that I took issue with him not answering questions. Now, to be sure, I have written about candidates targeting Liberty based groups in the specific, something Dan and Adam both did. That voting block demonstrated it's seriousness, seriousness which was dismissed as unworthy.

 

Scientific polls have been used to steer elections, nothing more and nothing less. People have been fooled election after election. None more so than 2008!

 

No candidate on the Rep side of the ticket ran strong, they all ran about even - when the poll that matters was taken. What w do now is stand on principle Abolt. I have no problem taking that action to the legislature - both sides of the aisle. After what I witnessed during the sessions before the State of the State (not to mention during it) appalled me. The disrespect shown to the process, to the elected positions they all hold, was astounding and something all folks should be made aware of. Bones don't need to be thrown to them, they need to be thrown at them!

 

You say we have to be smart enough to pick the proper battles. But at the same time you speak of deferring that decision to a select few. I submit to you that deferring that decision to the select few is what has us all in the situation we are in ( and I do not mean that limited to firearms).

 

As for waiting until November, do you realize that a great many voters feel that way before the Primary?

 

So there is no misunderstanding, if it suits you well enough, I would like to talk with you at greater length about this Wednesday. Would you find that agreeable?

[Tvandermyde]

Ash --

 

our members ask for guidance and who they should support.

 

Given all things being the same, and with the same info, I'd make the same call again.

 

with a 26% turnout in an election it doesn't take a lot to win -- 20% did it here. But at some point in time a decision has to be made. And there are deadlines to make that happen and be effective. The gtwo guys that targeted the "consitutional" voters came in last and next to last.

 

Brady was pragmatic but played on downstate. The pools didn't start to break for him until sunday night. We can't wait till 48 hours out to make a decision. And with just 400 votes being the margin this was ours to loose.

 

I hope Brady runs a better campaign and the elctorate's mood stays where it is. If not, it's going to be a long 10 years.

[abolt243]

Ash --

 

our members ask for guidance and who they should support.

 

Given all things being the same, and with the same info, I'd make the same call again.

 

with a 26% turnout in an election it doesn't take a lot to win -- 20% did it here. But at some point in time a decision has to be made. And there are deadlines to make that happen and be effective. The gtwo guys that targeted the "consitutional" voters came in last and next to last.

 

Brady was pragmatic but played on downstate. The pools didn't start to break for him until sunday night. We can't wait till 48 hours out to make a decision. And with just 400 votes being the margin this was ours to loose.

 

I hope Brady runs a better campaign and the elctorate's mood stays where it is. If not, it's going to be a long 10 years.

 

Have I missed something?? Has there been an official announcement??

 

And Ash, I think you're hearing things that I'm not saying. Sure, if everything works out Wednesday night, I'd love to talk for a bit. I don't want to defer decisions to a "select few". I will however base my decisions on the recommendations of those that have a broader and at the same time more detailed sense of the whole situation, rather than just one small point. Although it may see so to my wife, I don't live in this political world 24/7. I don't have a detailed history in my grasp for the last 20 years. My "amateur enthusiasm" must be tempered with shots of reality and reasonable expectations from time to time or my demands for instant gratification will be met with even more resistance.

 

See you Wednesday if everything works out.

 

AB

[Ashrak]

Ash --

 

our members ask for guidance and who they should support.

 

Given all things being the same, and with the same info, I'd make the same call again.

 

with a 26% turnout in an election it doesn't take a lot to win -- 20% did it here. But at some point in time a decision has to be made. And there are deadlines to make that happen and be effective. The gtwo guys that targeted the "consitutional" voters came in last and next to last.

 

Brady was pragmatic but played on downstate. The pools didn't start to break for him until sunday night. We can't wait till 48 hours out to make a decision. And with just 400 votes being the margin this was ours to loose.

 

I hope Brady runs a better campaign and the elctorate's mood stays where it is. If not, it's going to be a long 10 years.

The time for decision is when we have a ballot in our hand. Maybe elections would turn out better if people took their own vote seriously instead of having someone else make up their mind for them. Sheeple are the problem Todd. Claiming the not being able to heard them well enough is also part of the problem.

 

Again you dismiss some of the voters - some that you now would have vote for a candidate of your choice. Careful with that. Many broke from the "endorsement" and they will again. See Mark Kirk. Or would you see him endorsed by the ISRA now......so "it won't be a long 10 years"? I realize you said that in terms of Brady, and I understand the difference. But the voters are one in the same.

 

What do you mean by "ours"? Gun rights advocates?

 

Like all other forms of art, one kind eventually gives way to another. The art of steering voters with endorsements is giving way. It is fine if you dismiss this, as it is your choice. Much of the politicians, and yes lobbyists, along with the mainstream media has chosen to do so. Yet the Liberty based movement so called the TEA party movement grows none the less. That the R side of the governor's race in Illinois went as it did is evidence of it.

 

Let me ask you a straight up question for you to answer with straight up opinion. Had Adam and Dan not been in the race, do you honestly think Dillard would have gained those votes? I would offer to you that he would not. Just as I opine that a great many will not vote for Kirk.

 

Here is something to chew on. After the voting was in, in the poll that does matter, I read quite a few comments like, "whomever ends up with the most votes between Dillard and Brady is fine by me". What would be wrong with saying such a thing before the vote and watching the people decide? It sure would lead to less uncomfortable situations like the one that exists now, would it not?

[Ashrak]

Ash --

 

our members ask for guidance and who they should support.

 

Given all things being the same, and with the same info, I'd make the same call again.

 

with a 26% turnout in an election it doesn't take a lot to win -- 20% did it here. But at some point in time a decision has to be made. And there are deadlines to make that happen and be effective. The gtwo guys that targeted the "consitutional" voters came in last and next to last.

 

Brady was pragmatic but played on downstate. The pools didn't start to break for him until sunday night. We can't wait till 48 hours out to make a decision. And with just 400 votes being the margin this was ours to loose.

 

I hope Brady runs a better campaign and the elctorate's mood stays where it is. If not, it's going to be a long 10 years.

 

Have I missed something?? Has there been an official announcement??

 

And Ash, I think you're hearing things that I'm not saying. Sure, if everything works out Wednesday night, I'd love to talk for a bit. I don't want to defer decisions to a "select few". I will however base my decisions on the recommendations of those that have a broader and at the same time more detailed sense of the whole situation, rather than just one small point. Although it may see so to my wife, I don't live in this political world 24/7. I don't have a detailed history in my grasp for the last 20 years. My "amateur enthusiasm" must be tempered with shots of reality and reasonable expectations from time to time or my demands for instant gratification will be met with even more resistance.

 

See you Wednesday if everything works out.

 

AB

 

Amateurs are the deciders.

 

I didn't mean to imply a closed door meeting Abolt. Sorry for my misleading statement, but then that is why I said that in the first place. Many times, in text, things are missed or perceived in ways not meant. I had hoped to relay that such a discussion would be more fruitful in open spoken conversation.