Gun Dog Forum

Saying you would vote for Hillary Clinton because you don't like Donald Trump is like saying you would vote for Adolf Hitler due to the fact that Winston Churchill is rude and speaks his mind and is not politically correct. She hates what the USA stands for.

Ya know, isn't it enough that we're bombarded with this stupid garbage on the news, radio, social media, newspapers, and every other discussion? Is it too much to ask to keep the political junk (and ya, it's junk) to those venues and leave the bird dog page alone? (And no, I'm not a Hillary fan. I'm just sick of this garbage everywhere I look)

Gertie wrote:Ya know, isn't it enough that we're bombarded with this stupid garbage on the news, radio, social media, newspapers, and every other discussion? Is it too much to ask to keep the political junk (and ya, it's junk) to those venues and leave the bird dog page alone? (And no, I'm not a Hillary fan. I'm just sick of this garbage everywhere I look)

Can't argue with you and it is so easy to avoid it if you can just keep your finger from clicking on the topic. Problem solved.

ezzy333 wrote:

Gertie wrote:Ya know, isn't it enough that we're bombarded with this stupid garbage on the news, radio, social media, newspapers, and every other discussion? Is it too much to ask to keep the political junk (and ya, it's junk) to those venues and leave the bird dog page alone? (And no, I'm not a Hillary fan. I'm just sick of this garbage everywhere I look)

Can't argue with you and it is so easy to avoid it if you can just keep your finger from clicking on the topic. Problem solved.

Fair enough. It's just nice to be able to get online and have some place where this kind of thing isn't shoved down your throat. However, your point is noted. That said, the title wasn't exactly "look at another stupid meme about the election". So, if you're going to post this junk then do us all a favor and title it as such so we don't have to waste our time looking at it thinking it might actually have something to do with the forum you're posting it to.

Important subject for gun owners.
Hope all hunters are informed and vote.

I'm really getting tired of the stuff myself. Had the title suggested this was a political post, I would not have opened it.

Um, it was posted in "Off Topic."

On topic, Sanders was the gun owner's best choice.

This is a good spot for political views or messages. Can't hurt so no big deal.

Let's see. Do I want to shoot myself in the head with my right hand or shoot myself in the head with my left hand.

Seriously, in a country this size that is the best that either party can come up with to run as their candidate?

0ne more liberal supreme court judge and gun owners have some serious problems. If Hilary gets elected we will have one or two liberal judges put in place. You are tired of it and don't care, maybe you should rethink it all.

We cast aside a potentially terrific candidate for the presidency for these two clowns?

Reasonable people may disagree without considering each other an enemy.

mhprecht wrote:Reasonable people may disagree without considering each other an enemy.

Enemy refers their stance on our gun rights and not the person.

This is a very important election - do not stand idly by - get out and vote.

It is a shame that Teddy Roosevelt belongs to the ages..a dam! shame.

mhprecht wrote:Reasonable people may disagree without considering each other an enemy.

Might want to share that nugget of wisdom with the Sanders- and Clinton-backed thugs who show up at Trump rallies and rough up women.

ckirsch wrote:

mhprecht wrote:Reasonable people may disagree without considering each other an enemy.

Might want to share that nugget of wisdom with the Sanders- and Clinton-backed thugs who show up at Trump rallies and rough up women.

Thats an assumption that may not be correct.

Churchill, unlike Trump, knew how to run a country and understood politics.

ckirsch wrote:

mhprecht wrote:Reasonable people may disagree without considering each other an enemy.

Might want to share that nugget of wisdom with the Sanders- and Clinton-backed thugs who show up at Trump rallies and rough up women.

Correct. Those people are deplorable.

May I assume that you also took Joe Wilson to task for shouting down our President mid-speech?

I guess I don't recall Wilson punching anyone, burning the flag, or smashing eggs on young women's faces.

If disagreeing with Obama can only be explained as hate, your side is in a pretty indefensible position for it's semantics when Bush was in office - blaming him for masterminding 9/11, etc. How about depicting Romney pushing an old lady off a cliff? That was pretty reasonable, huh?

Trump gets shouted down at every event. Hillary receives that treatment much less frequently, and more often by Sanders supporters than conservatives.

Let's keep an eye on the opposition's behavior during the upcoming political conventions. Once they are over, we'll compare notes and see which side of the aisle is more adept at "hate".

I'm not on any side. I agreed that the behavior you outline is wrong and woefully misguided. Trump has every right to speak and should not be shouted down.

If you cannot agree that Wilson was out of line, then clearly you are on only one side.

I'm not a liberal or a conservative. I'll take each instance independently and without bias.

I'm honest enough to admit that I am indeed on one side. Wilson's behavior cannot be placed at the same level as those who perform much more vile and violent acts on behalf of leftist causes.

I've grown weary of liberals who claim a monopoly on tolerance, but administer it only when they are agreed with.

Again, watch the two groups' behavior during the upcoming conventions, then give us your "unbiased" report as to which side employs more hatred and violence.

Just one of many examples of the Left's tolerance.....

http://mediaequalizer.com/brian-maloney ... d-t-shirts

Legband wrote:Saying you would vote for Hillary Clinton because you don't like Donald Trump is like saying you would vote for Adolf Hitler due to the fact that Winston Churchill is rude and speaks his mind and is not politically correct. She hates what the USA stands for.

First of all, that's an absurd comparison, unless you're actually suggesting that Hillary Clinton intends to murder millions of people based on religious beliefs and culture.

Also, I'm pretty most of the people not voting for Trump are making that choice not because they "don't like" him, as you said, but rather because they don't believe he can lead a country. If they are sensible they recognize Trump for what he is... a narcissist who suffers from anti-social personality disorder and, at best, a borderline sociopath who has never cared about anyone or anything other than himself and his self-importance. Those traits in a leader will lead to decisions that are meant to feed or defend his ego, despite the costs, whether economic or in human lives.

Anyone that is going to vote for Hilary should package up their guns and ship them to me. Obviously they don't care about their gun rights
Their hidden agenda is to put enough liberal Supreme court justices in place to take your gun rights away. They know they can't accomplish it through congress.

Greg J

Greg, Trump doesn't care about your guns. He only cares about his own ego and prestige.

mnaj_springer wrote:Greg, Trump doesn't care about your guns. He only cares about his own ego and prestige.

You might be right and if you are it is a great reason to vote for him over Hillary whose only interest is her ego and getting more power and money.

ezzy333 wrote:

mnaj_springer wrote:Greg, Trump doesn't care about your guns. He only cares about his own ego and prestige.

You might be right and if you are it is a great reason to vote for him over Hillary whose only interest is her ego and getting more power and money.

I agree with ezzy.
Weeeewwww twice in one yr

mnaj_springer wrote:Greg, Trump doesn't care about your guns. He only cares about his own ego and prestige.

Wasn't talking about Trump. Was talking about Hillary. They will do anything to control the supreme court. Wasn't Scalia's death convenient for them.

greg jacobs wrote:

mnaj_springer wrote:Greg, Trump doesn't care about your guns. He only cares about his own ego and prestige.

Wasn't talking about Trump. Was talking about Hillary. They will do anything to control the supreme court. Wasn't Scalia's death convenient for them.

What are you implying with your comment in bold?

greg jacobs wrote:

mnaj_springer wrote:Greg, Trump doesn't care about your guns. He only cares about his own ego and prestige.

Wasn't talking about Trump. Was talking about Hillary. They will do anything to control the supreme court. Wasn't Scalia's death convenient for them.

Not at all, if Hilary wins, Garland will get pushed through before she would take office.

Loose a conservative, replace him with a liberal. Liberal biased court, interpeting the constitution as they please. Not a good thing.

ckirsch wrote:

mhprecht wrote:Reasonable people may disagree without considering each other an enemy.

Might want to share that nugget of wisdom with the Sanders- and Clinton-backed thugs who show up at Trump rallies and rough up women.

Which story are you referring to here? Also, saying those individuals who acted illegally are backed by Sanders and Hilton is like saying the Pope backed the priests who molested children, Islam backed 9/11, and Berretta (or whatever manufacturer it was) backed "bleep" Cheney shooting Harry Whittington.

And if you think that t-shirt is bad, you should read the comments on that page.

Bet she supports Hillary

Greg, a guy that calls himself the "Imperial Wizard," who is a leader in the KKK has accurately and officially endorsed Trump for President. Your meme simply shows that people with disagreeable views exist and (even though you are speculating) support either side of the aisle.

mnaj_springer wrote: Which story are you referring to here? Also, saying those individuals who acted illegally are backed by Sanders and Hilton is like saying the Pope backed the priests who molested children, Islam backed 9/11, and Berretta (or whatever manufacturer it was) backed "bleep" Cheney shooting Harry Whittington.

And if you think that t-shirt is bad, you should read the comments on that page.

Bernie Sanders had a rally here in Rapid City a month ago. His campaign had stands set up selling "F--k Trump" t-shirts. Classy. I guess that crowd would never stoop so low as to refer to a member of the opposing political party as an "enemy".

Yesterday a protester attempted to grab a law enforcement officer's gun at a Trump rally, and admitted that his goal was to kill Trump. You suppose that guy was a Jeb Bush supporter?

There's no comparison in the behavior between the two parties regarding the level of animosity and outright hatred they exhibit for the opposing candidate. There are a few bad apples on the right side, but nothing like the venom being spewed by the left. You just have to be honest enough to admit it, Springer, and it's obvious that's a stretch for you.

ckirsch wrote:

mnaj_springer wrote: Which story are you referring to here? Also, saying those individuals who acted illegally are backed by Sanders and Hilton is like saying the Pope backed the priests who molested children, Islam backed 9/11, and Berretta (or whatever manufacturer it was) backed "bleep" Cheney shooting Harry Whittington.

And if you think that t-shirt is bad, you should read the comments on that page.

Bernie Sanders had a rally here in Rapid City a month ago. His campaign had stands set up selling "F--k Trump" t-shirts. Classy. I guess that crowd would never stoop so low as to refer to a member of the opposing political party as an "enemy".

Yesterday a protester attempted to grab a law enforcement officer's gun at a Trump rally, and admitted that his goal was to kill Trump. You suppose that guy was a Jeb Bush supporter?

There's no comparison in the behavior between the two parties regarding the level of animosity and outright hatred they exhibit for the opposing candidate. There are a few bad apples on the right side, but nothing like the venom being spewed by the left. You just have to be honest enough to admit it, Springer, and it's obvious that's a stretch for you.

Haha that guy (protester as you put it) is not a supporter of anyone. He's a British citizen who cannot vote and was here illegally because his visa expired. He has no horse in this race and he still thought Trump should die... Strong convictions for someone who is not part of a US political party.

Are you sure those shirts were "approved by Bernie Sanders," and not just some guy trying to make a buck?

By the way, there has been a lot of news about Trump supporters who have threatened the lives of protesters and gotten into physical altercations that they started. So it seems those bad apples are more numerous than you'd like to admit.

Mainstream consevatives don't support the KKK. The mainstream progressives do support abortion and gun control.

greg jacobs wrote:Mainstream consevatives don't support the KKK. The mainstream progressives do support abortion and gun control.

I understand Trump changes his position day to day, but I guessing this week Trump no longer supports abortion and gun control like he use to?

nikegundog wrote:

greg jacobs wrote:Mainstream consevatives don't support the KKK. The mainstream progressives do support abortion and gun control.

I understand Trump changes his position day to day, but I guessing this week Trump no longer supports abortion and gun control like he use to?

Like I said, he will do whatever he can to feed his own ego. Even if that means saying anything to gain more power and prestige.

Haven't seen riots and flag burning by conservatives at any Sanders or Clinton events, have you?

Trump refuses to bow down to the group that controls the political system. Hillary has long since been bought and paid for.

ckirsch wrote:Haven't seen riots and flag burning by conservatives at any Sanders or Clinton events, have you?

Why would you? Who would protest against inclusion?

Decision making theory has a model they use. They use approach and avoidance as goals. Our choice in the coming election, as it stands, is avoid-avoid. There is no winning choice. Both candidates are disliked and distrusted by a majority of the electorate. Makes you wonder how they got in the lead. Listening to NPR talkers yesterday, the speaker said when presented with a choice between two evils, don't choose either. We have 310 million people. There must be somebody out there capable of doing the job but dumb enough to take it.

DougB wrote:Decision making theory has a model they use. They use approach and avoidance as goals. Our choice in the coming election, as it stands, is avoid-avoid. There is no winning choice. Both candidates are disliked and distrusted by a majority of the electorate. Makes you wonder how they got in the lead. Listening to NPR talkers yesterday, the speaker said when presented with a choice between two evils, don't choose either. We have 310 million people. There must be somebody out there capable of doing the job but dumb enough to take it.

This has to be about the worst advice a person could give but it is the way so many that can't stand criticism takes. Run and hide never solved anything.

Was watching the news tonight. The democratic sit in. One lady was on a rant. Said they wouldn't stop till there was no more guns no more victims. Wow! That's scary!

ezzy333 wrote:

DougB wrote:Decision making theory has a model they use. They use approach and avoidance as goals. Our choice in the coming election, as it stands, is avoid-avoid. There is no winning choice. Both candidates are disliked and distrusted by a majority of the electorate. Makes you wonder how they got in the lead. Listening to NPR talkers yesterday, the speaker said when presented with a choice between two evils, don't choose either. We have 310 million people. There must be somebody out there capable of doing the job but dumb enough to take it.

This has to be about the worst advice a person could give but it is the way so many that can't stand criticism takes. Run and hide never solved anything.

I didn't get "run and hide" out of this. Seems more like Doug suggested we find a solution rather than accept the status quo.

mnaj_springer wrote:

ezzy333 wrote:

DougB wrote:Decision making theory has a model they use. They use approach and avoidance as goals. Our choice in the coming election, as it stands, is avoid-avoid. There is no winning choice. Both candidates are disliked and distrusted by a majority of the electorate. Makes you wonder how they got in the lead. Listening to NPR talkers yesterday, the speaker said when presented with a choice between two evils, don't choose either. We have 310 million people. There must be somebody out there capable of doing the job but dumb enough to take it.

This has to be about the worst advice a person could give but it is the way so many that can't stand criticism takes. Run and hide never solved anything.

I didn't get "run and hide" out of this. Seems more like Doug suggested we find a solution rather than accept the status quo.

I didn't see it either, nor do can I figure out how he came to that conclusion. :roll:

Nor did I....I think it's a pretty spot-on post.

I have never been so disappointed.

NPR ? eye,yi,yi,
sorry guy's couldn't resist....

Max2 wrote:NPR ? eye,yi,yi,
sorry guy's couldn't resist....

I had that same thought....

Vote democrat and loose your guns and right to hunt! End of subject. That is what you are up against. If you like hunting, you better back a republican. A left leaning supreme court will destroy the second amendment. Send the price of your last expensive shotgun to the NRA or Donald Trump. NRA patron and sustaining life member.