INGO IN Senate Straw Poll

[xd9]

Those opposing Marlin Stutzman for his voting record to support my 2nd Amendment right, has not shown me 1 point on who else to vote for. Hell, Dan Coats voted for the Feinstein Amendment to ban the purchase of certain rifles and supported the Brady Bill to impose a national waiting period for handgun purchases. Your criticizing Marlin Stutzman for offering me a lifetime gun permit versus a guy like Dan Coats with this track record? I'm not voting for Marlin just because he is winning most every poll out there, those days are gone for me. I know with Marlin he will stand up for my 2nd Amendment once he gets elected.

 

[melensdad]

Dear New Member 'xd9'

This is a gun related discussion forum. To date all your posts are about politics. Seems to me you are not here to discuss guns, gun rights, gun ownership, shooting, etc. Seems to me you are probably a campaign plant. I'm just saying....

...I'm not voting for Marlin just because he is winning most every poll out there...

Of course you're not voting for him because he is winning polls because he is NOT winning them!!!

Stutzman will lose but he is a great choice, I do agree with that, but based on professional polling data, with a history of accuracy, he is going to lose. And he is going to lose big time. He may win the little 'straw' polls, but those have historically been proven to be terribly inaccurate.

I'm sticking with all the data on this, a vote for anyone other than HOSTETTLER is actually a vote that will put DAN COATS into office.

I've made that statement about a dozen times, to date there has been NOBODY who has been able to refute it with any data that indicates that ANY other candidate even has a slight chance of winning. I presented every state and national poll's data on this, all agree. And at least two of those polling companies have a proven track record of being accurate. So if anyone wants to dispute them then post up data that proves them wrong, but tossing up your opinions about polls is just silly when we need to deal with facts.

• Facts are we have 2 excellent choices in this race. HOSTETTLER and STUTZMAN.
• Facts are that only 1 of those 2 is statistically capable of passing Dan Coats and that one is John Hostettler.
• Facts are that we are fractured, and just like John McCain won the primary because the conservative vote splintered in the national primaries and split their votes between a half dozen candidates, leaving RINO McCain the only man standing, so will go the Indiana primary as the conservatives split up their votes between Hostettler, Stutzman, Bates and Behney.

 

[dburkhead]

Oh... and the guy who stole even more of our liberties than Coats - The Patriot act has affected both the 1st and 4th amendments - is not worthy of my vote just to keep Coats out of office.

You've been corrected on that issue repeatedly. Defeating Darth Dan with a candidate just as bad is not a win for Liberty or for our Country.

Sigh. I gave it another try. You are not worth talking to.

Good day to you sir.

 

[melensdad]

Sigh. I gave it another try. You are not worth talking to.

Good day to you sir.

Just go to your UserCP and choose to add him to your ignore list. His posts make very little sense.

Further, you may notice that he spends all his time tearing down other conservative candidates rather than building up his own candidate. Why?

We are all here pretty united that Dan Coats is the wrong man to send to Washington. We all here have some differing opinions on the other 4 real conservatives. But most folks here support their candidate rather than tearing down the other conservatives. He chooses to simply attack another conservative who is probably in agreement with his candidate on 98% of the issues. If someone agrees with me 98% of the time then I think that guy is probably a FRIEND and not someone that I'd want to try to pick apart or disparage.

 

[dburkhead]

Just go to your UserCP and choose to add him to your ignore list. His posts make very little sense.

Further, you may notice that he spends all his time tearing down other conservative candidates rather than building up his own candidate. Why?

We are all here pretty united that Dan Coats is the wrong man to send to Washington. We all here have some differing opinions on the other 4 real conservatives. But most folks here support their candidate rather than tearing down the other conservatives. He chooses to simply attack another conservative who is probably in agreement with his candidate on 98% of the issues. If someone agrees with me 98% of the time then I think that guy is probably a FRIEND and not someone that I'd want to try to pick apart or disparage.

Oh, it's not his shilling for Behney that's the problem (based on what CarmelHP said that's to be expected) but his continued misrepresenting of other people's positions, his conflating disagreements on either tactics or policy with an attempt to remove his "rights".

And if he will lie about what folk here have said despite repeated corrections, how can anyone trust anything he has to say about Behney or any other candidate?

 

[photoshooter]

Gentlemen: I disagree with your stance that putting John Hostettler ahead of Dan Coats is a good thing.

You tell us that we need to vote for 6 term Congressman Hostettler because he's the only one close enough to Mr. Coats to overtake him.

Yet, when I look at Former Senator Coats, and Former Congressman Hostettler, all I see are two peas in a pod - they've both voted to remove our liberties.

Fact: Mr. Hostettler has stated that he served on the committee that drafted the house version of the Patriot Act.

Fact: Provisions of that bill have been found in violation of our Constitutional rights by a federal judge.

Fact: Mr. Hostettler continues to be an apologist for the Patriot Act, and finds ways of arguing for it's constitutional basis by providing excuses such as "Justice Joseph Story didn't write about ________ in his commentary on the constitution."

Yet, you continue to peddle a man whom I deem to be against our liberties based on his own words and actions (Remember, Mr. Hostettler is BIG on looking at his record - he even had a plant in the audience ask a question about it at the Candidate debate in New Castle last week).

Do you still stand by your choice to support Mr. Hostettler in light of his shilling the Patriot Act? Or, are you willing to move your support to a more liberty minded candidate who you say has a shot at overtaking Mr. Coats?

I presented evidence to you that Mr. Hostettler is not the good for our liberties candidate that his campaign makes him out to be based on his support of the biggest takeover of our liberties by the federal govt (at least until Obamacare) - and you continue to promote him as the only candidate capable of wiping out Dan Coats.

You ignore his past record - but continue to harp on my insistence that we actually vote for a candidate that we like.

I ask you this: in light of Congressman Hostettler's support/drafting of/apologist for the Patriot Act - do you still support him for the position of Senator - where he will not have to answer to voters again for 6 years?

No hemming and hawing about who to vote for. Just a simple question: Do you support John Hostettler based on his record of support for the Patriot Act?

 

[erowe1]

Gentlemen: I disagree with your stance that putting John Hostettler ahead of Dan Coats is a good thing.

You tell us that we need to vote for 6 term Congressman Hostettler because he's the only one close enough to Mr. Coats to overtake him.

Yet, when I look at Former Senator Coats, and Former Congressman Hostettler, all I see are two peas in a pod - they've both voted to remove our liberties.

Fact: Mr. Hostettler has stated that he served on the committee that drafted the house version of the Patriot Act.

Fact: Provisions of that bill have been found in violation of our Constitutional rights by a federal judge.

Fact: Mr. Hostettler continues to be an apologist for the Patriot Act, and finds ways of arguing for it's constitutional basis by providing excuses such as "Justice Joseph Story didn't write about ________ in his commentary on the constitution."

Yet, you continue to peddle a man whom I deem to be against our liberties based on his own words and actions (Remember, Mr. Hostettler is BIG on looking at his record - he even had a plant in the audience ask a question about it at the Candidate debate in New Castle last week).

Do you still stand by your choice to support Mr. Hostettler in light of his shilling the Patriot Act? Or, are you willing to move your support to a more liberty minded candidate who you say has a shot at overtaking Mr. Coats?

I presented evidence to you that Mr. Hostettler is not the good for our liberties candidate that his campaign makes him out to be based on his support of the biggest takeover of our liberties by the federal govt (at least until Obamacare) - and you continue to promote him as the only candidate capable of wiping out Dan Coats.

You ignore his past record - but continue to harp on my insistence that we actually vote for a candidate that we like.

I ask you this: in light of Congressman Hostettler's support/drafting of/apologist for the Patriot Act - do you still support him for the position of Senator - where he will not have to answer to voters again for 6 years?

No hemming and hawing about who to vote for. Just a simple question: Do you support John Hostettler based on his record of support for the Patriot Act?

Speaking only for myself, I disagree with the Patriot Act. But I also think it tends to get sensationalized, and I don't think it's nearly as serious of a violation of liberty as scores of other laws passed by Congress every year. I also don't really care what a federal judge has to say based on some living document approach he takes to the Constitution. I also don't put any stake in Behney's opposition to it. Once you try to get him to go deeper than bumper sticker slogans, Behney has nothing to offer. He couldn't tell you what's actually in the Patriot Act, or what part of the Constitution he thinks it violates or why. The same thing is true with every other issue. He went to sleep on November 3rd 2008 neither knowing nor caring one bit about the loss of liberty and growth of government this nation has seen over his entire lifetime, and woke up the next morning a conservative activist with a knack for telling other conservative activists what they like to hear. If he ever got into a 6-year term in the Senate he'd be just as susceptible to having new epiphanies and changes of heart every year or so there, and be putty in the hands of lobbyists and party leadership. I'm sorry, but I can't take that guy seriously.

I enthusiastically support Hostettler because of his lengthy record, not comprised of a single litmus test issue, but on issue after issue (with only certain minor points where I disagree), is among the very best and most strictly constitutional of anyone who has held any federal office in my lifetime. No one else in this race has that kind of proven track record.

If the Patriot Act is a deal breaker for you, I get that, and I respect it. You demand greater libertarian purity of the candidates you support than I do, or than other Patriot Act opponents such as Ron Paul and the Republican Liberty Caucus do.

 

[irishfan]

Gentlemen: I disagree with your stance that putting John Hostettler ahead of Dan Coats is a good thing.

You tell us that we need to vote for 6 term Congressman Hostettler because he's the only one close enough to Mr. Coats to overtake him.

Yet, when I look at Former Senator Coats, and Former Congressman Hostettler, all I see are two peas in a pod - they've both voted to remove our liberties.

Fact: Mr. Hostettler has stated that he served on the committee that drafted the house version of the Patriot Act.

Fact: Provisions of that bill have been found in violation of our Constitutional rights by a federal judge.

Fact: Mr. Hostettler continues to be an apologist for the Patriot Act, and finds ways of arguing for it's constitutional basis by providing excuses such as "Justice Joseph Story didn't write about ________ in his commentary on the constitution."

Yet, you continue to peddle a man whom I deem to be against our liberties based on his own words and actions (Remember, Mr. Hostettler is BIG on looking at his record - he even had a plant in the audience ask a question about it at the Candidate debate in New Castle last week).

Do you still stand by your choice to support Mr. Hostettler in light of his shilling the Patriot Act? Or, are you willing to move your support to a more liberty minded candidate who you say has a shot at overtaking Mr. Coats?

I presented evidence to you that Mr. Hostettler is not the good for our liberties candidate that his campaign makes him out to be based on his support of the biggest takeover of our liberties by the federal govt (at least until Obamacare) - and you continue to promote him as the only candidate capable of wiping out Dan Coats.

You ignore his past record - but continue to harp on my insistence that we actually vote for a candidate that we like.

I ask you this: in light of Congressman Hostettler's support/drafting of/apologist for the Patriot Act - do you still support him for the position of Senator - where he will not have to answer to voters again for 6 years?

No hemming and hawing about who to vote for. Just a simple question: Do you support John Hostettler based on his record of support for the Patriot Act?

BE CAREFUL!!!! You are making to much sense for anything involving politics.

 

[melensdad]

And once again Photoshooter chooses to tear down a very viable candidate.

Pretty much all the other political threads and posts by others talk about positive aspects but not Photoshooter, he goes negative, and pretty much on 1 issue.

 

[Bobby]

Speaking only for myself, I disagree with the Patriot Act. But I also think it tends to get sensationalized, and I don't think it's nearly as serious of a violation of liberty as scores of other laws passed by Congress every year. I also don't really care what a federal judge has to say based on some living document approach he takes to the Constitution. I also don't put any stake in Behney's opposition to it. Once you try to get him to go deeper than bumper sticker slogans, Behney has nothing to offer. He couldn't tell you what's actually in the Patriot Act, or what part of the Constitution he thinks it violates or why. The same thing is true with every other issue. He went to sleep on November 3rd 2008 neither knowing nor caring one bit about the loss of liberty and growth of government this nation has seen over his entire lifetime, and woke up the next morning a conservative activist with a knack for telling other conservative activists what they like to hear. If he ever got into a 6-year term in the Senate he'd be just as susceptible to having new epiphanies and changes of heart every year or so there, and be putty in the hands of lobbyists and party leadership. I'm sorry, but I can't take that guy seriously.

I enthusiastically support Hostettler because of his lengthy record, not comprised of a single litmus test issue, but on issue after issue (with only certain minor points where I disagree), is among the very best and most strictly constitutional of anyone who has held any federal office in my lifetime. No one else in this race has that kind of proven track record.

If the Patriot Act is a deal breaker for you, I get that, and I respect it. You demand greater libertarian purity of the candidates you support than I do, or than other Patriot Act opponents such as Ron Paul and the Republican Liberty Caucus do.

BE CAREFUL!!! You are making too much sense for anything involving politics.

 

[millsusaf]

I'm ashamed of the people who are back to the very same path that got us to where we are now. Pulling the handle for that straight R ticket, looking for the name they know, voting for whom ever the media tells them has the best chance to win REGARDLESS if they are the right person for the job.

Stupidity like that IS WHAT GOT US TO WHERE WE ARE NOW!!!!!!!

Either people are ignorant or they have a deep down desire to turn this Republic into a socialist country. What happened to doing the right thing and voting for the person who best reflects your values and shares in your beliefs?

When I vote I will be voting for my values and beliefs. That isn't necessarily going to be the person who has raised the most money, has the best chance of winning, is the best speaker or the person who has been there before. It WILL be for the person who I think most often reflects what I believe.

 

[Cheapdiesel]

I'm ashamed of the people who are back to the very same path that got us to where we are now. Pulling the handle for that straight R ticket, looking for the name they know, voting for whom ever the media tells them has the best chance to win REGARDLESS if they are the right person for the job.

Stupidity like that IS WHAT GOT US TO WHERE WE ARE NOW!!!!!!!

Either people are ignorant or they have a deep down desire to turn this Republic into a socialist country. What happened to doing the right thing and voting for the person who best reflects your values and shares in your beliefs?

When I vote I will be voting for my values and beliefs. That isn't necessarily going to be the person who has raised the most money, has the best chance of winning, is the best speaker or the person who has been there before. It WILL be for the person who I think most often reflects what I believe.

AMEN preach it brother! The voting for the most viable candidate crap is what got us John McCain for a presidential candidate and look what the got us.

 

[dburkhead]

AMEN preach it brother! The voting for the most viable candidate crap is what got us John McCain for a presidential candidate and look what the got us.

Actually more conservative people splitting their vote among the various more conservative candidates is what gave us John McCain. The RINO end of the party all voted for John McCain, the more conservative end voted (rightly or wrongly) some for Ron Paul, some for Fred Thompson, some for Mike Huckabee, and so on.

When one side is willing to get behind a single candidate, even if that candidate is less than perfect by their views and the other is not but instead splits their votes among a bunch of others, the results are eminently predictable.

 

[LCPer]

I've not decided who I will cast my vote for as yet. Mean while it seem many are either Hostettler or Stutzman. It seems as though the Stutzman folks are just saying who they intend to vote for and why. The Hostettler folks seem to be trying to convince everyone to join them and get behind ONE conservative candidate. Why can't Stutzman be the ONE conservative candidate? Just asking a simple question. What makes one so much better than the other? I will vote my conscience on May 4th and the person that best reflects my beliefs. I have at least narrowed it down to a couple.

 

[chraland51]

I saw an article on Dan Coats' voting record while he was previously in office the other day. The only thing that he and I agree on is his being pro-life. Almost everything else of any matter, we are diametrically opposed.

 

[CarmelHP]

Coats Money News

April 27th, 2010 at 3:30 pm by Jim Shella under Jim Shella's Political Blog GOP Senate candidate Dan Coats loaned his campaign $200,000 last week. Coats earlier loaned it $25,000, money he promised to provide as start-up funds.
State Democratic Chairman Dan Parker sees the new loan as a sign of trouble for the presumed frontrunner in the GOP primary. Coats spokesman Pete Seat, meantime, says it’s a bridge between pledges and deposits.
Coats filed the required paperwork to report the loan on time. He still hasn’t filed his overdue personal financial disclosure forms but Seat has news there, too. “The form has been filled out,” he says. “It is now being checked thoroughly to ensure its accuracy and completeness before filing prior to the primary.”
Will it show that Coats has $200,000 fewer assets than if he reported on time?

 

[CarmelHP]

I've not decided who I will cast my vote for as yet. Mean while it seem many are either Hostettler or Stutzman. It seems as though the Stutzman folks are just saying who they intend to vote for and why. The Hostettler folks seem to be trying to convince everyone to join them and get behind ONE conservative candidate. Why can't Stutzman be the ONE conservative candidate? Just asking a simple question. What makes one so much better than the other? I will vote my conscience on May 4th and the person that best reflects my beliefs. I have at least narrowed it down to a couple.

Marlin is a good candidate, but he has not had the same traction as John Hostettler, its easier to shift a smaller number of people than a larger number, And believe it or not, Hostettler has been reliably conservative, and refusing to loot the government, for example, he opted out of ever receiving a federal pension from his Congressional service. He didn't leave Congress and jump into lobbying, he went back home, something very rare and revealing these days.

 

[T-rav]

So Hostettler is tied into the Patriot Act, Stutzman is opposed to subsidies but has no problem taking them, Coats is all for gun control. Now there are good thinks these guys have done and more bad things IM POSITIVE. They are part of the system that we are trying to kill. So where is any dirt on Behney or Bates where are some horrible laws they have supported where are the good laws they have wrote and/or voted for? Im just sayin there are other out there that have not been in the system its a perfect time to get fresh blood in there and hold their feet to the fire this time around.

 

[txgho1911]

Stutzman has not lived in DC.
Most of thread is a train wreck.

 

[melensdad]

... the Stutzman folks are just saying who they intend to vote for and why. The Hostettler folks seem to be trying to convince everyone to join them and get behind ONE conservative candidate. Why can't Stutzman be the ONE conservative candidate? ...

Actually I have posted many times why I support Hostetter.

And as for why can't Stutzman be the ONE, well honestly he can. But he doesn't seem to have the support. So that sort of leaves him out. Personally I think both Stutzman and Hostettler are excellent choices. The ONLY reason I favor Hostettler over Stutzman is because Hostettler stands a REAL chance.