Texas Democratic Party - what would make it successful statewide?

[NotActuallyALonghorn 4975]

13 minutes ago, BillyBadAss said:

I think most here are arguing that the Texas Dem Party should NOT focus on gun control as an issue. Recognize you're not going to win on that right now, and focus on things you can possibly do something about. 

And if gun control is your thing, maybe attack it from a different angle - focus on mental health services and care instead. 

A democrat can't run in Texas without addressing gun control. There is too much baggage associated with being a Democrat not to. So you can't just ignore it and assume it will go away. And you can't just say you favor no restrictions or you will get blacklisted by the party. Of course, if you favor restrictions that are actual reasonable you will get blacklisted anyway, which is the whole reason we have to have discussions like this.

[Brisketexan 105077]

5 minutes ago, NotActuallyALonghorn said:

A democrat can't run in Texas without addressing gun control. There is too much baggage associated with being a Democrat not to. So you can't just ignore it and assume it will go away. And you can't just say you favor no restrictions or you will get blacklisted by the party. Of course, if you favor restrictions that are actual reasonable you will get blacklisted anyway, which is the whole reason we have to have discussions like this.

But it's an easy side-step.

"When it comes to guns, what worries most Texans is the idea of sending your family to school or the store, and them not coming back.  That's why the most important gun safety measure is better mental health protections.  Blah blah blah."

It's namby-pamby bullshit, but that's how you win -- or more importantly, it's how you stop losing.

[NotActuallyALonghorn 4975]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

But it's an easy side-step.

"When it comes to guns, what worries most Texans is the idea of sending your family to school or the store, and them not coming back.  That's why the most important gun safety measure is better mental health protections.  Blah blah blah."

It's namby-pamby bullshit, but that's how you win -- or more importantly, it's how you stop losing.

Not disagreeing. But I think it is important for them to have a firm concrete stance with a record of actually being a gun owner and sportsman, because vague rhetoric like that has usually become "hell, yeah! I'm coming for your guns!"

[Brisketexan 105077]

3 minutes ago, NotActuallyALonghorn said:

Not disagreeing. But I think it is important for them to have a firm concrete stance with a record of actually being a gun owner and sportsman, because vague rhetoric like that has usually become "hell, yeah! I'm coming for your guns!"

I'm dead serious that a Dem candidate needs some real, authentic shots/footage of him/her using a firearm.  Doesn't need to be front and center.  But it needs to be real.  If I was campaigning, an ad would just have a few seconds of footage about how "as a lifelong outdoorsman, Brisket wants to make sure that our parks and resources are around for future generations."  Show a still photo of me as a kid out hunting with my dad.  Show a short clip of me out dove hunting with the guys today, maybe me fishing with my kids as we get to the "future generations" line.  That's it.  That's all you need.

You can't sell a "Brisket is coming for your guns," because the voters have already seen that I HAVE guns.  I'm innoculated against the "gun grabber" label.  That's all you need to do as a Dem.

[wildcat09 29347]

6 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

But it's an easy side-step.

"When it comes to guns, what worries most Texans is the idea of sending your family to school or the store, and them not coming back.  That's why the most important gun safety measure is better mental health protections.  Blah blah blah."

It's namby-pamby bullshit, but that's how you win -- or more importantly, it's how you stop losing.

I dunno, namby pamby bullshit doesn't have a great track record. BT is right that people want candidates who don't equivocate and will fight for things.  I think you've got to find a way to go on the offensive with it. A majority of Texans support "reasonable" gun control, so let's pick some shit that most people will consider reasonable but the GOP will oppose and run specifically on that (when asked about guns, not as the basis for your campaign). E.g. support a bill that would prohibit anyone convicted of domestic violence from purchasing a gun and ask why Republicans want wife beaters to have guns, or support red flag laws and ask why the GOP seems to want more school shootings. Shift the terms of the conversation away from government tyranny to the insanity of the GOP's positions.

[DonkeyCigars 144]

2 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

I dunno, namby pamby bullshit doesn't have a great track record. BT is right that people want candidates who don't equivocate and will fight for things.  I think you've got to find a way to go on the offensive with it. A majority of Texans support "reasonable" gun control, so let's pick some shit that most people will consider reasonable but the GOP will oppose and run specifically on that (when asked about guns, not as the basis for your campaign). E.g. support a bill that would prohibit anyone convicted of domestic violence from purchasing a gun and ask why Republicans want wife beaters to have guns, or support red flag laws and ask why the GOP seems to want more school shootings. Shift the terms of the conversation away from government tyranny to the insanity of the GOP's positions.

I think 99% of what you think and who you are is a travesty, but this is genius. Excellent stuff, you wild cat.

Edited February 1, 2021 by DonkeyCigars

[Brisketexan 105077]

1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

I dunno, namby pamby bullshit doesn't have a great track record. BT is right that people want candidates who don't equivocate and will fight for things.  I think you've got to find a way to go on the offensive with it. A majority of Texans support "reasonable" gun control, so let's pick some shit that most people will consider reasonable but the GOP will oppose and run specifically on that (when asked about guns, not as the basis for your campaign). E.g. support a bill that would prohibit anyone convicted of domestic violence from purchasing a gun and ask why Republicans want wife beaters to have guns, or support red flag laws and ask why the GOP seems to want more school shootings. Shift the terms of the conversation away from government tyranny to the insanity of the GOP's positions.

I don't disagree.  But any gun proposal has to stand on easy and relatively unassailable high ground.  These are my 1-2 priorities to make Texans safer.  That's it.

[fattyflattie 4639]

On 1/29/2021 at 2:52 PM, Born to Run said:

Plenty of reasonable gun owners are turned off by the freaks who open carry ARs on city streets, but they are also turned off by " hell yeah I'm gonna take your gun" as meaning siezing all your guns.

Raises hand. Open carry is fucking stupid. 
 

On 1/29/2021 at 2:52 PM, Born to Run said:

No one is coming to seize All your guns.

I felt much better about this until I found some news clips from NOLA during Katrina.  Pretty unsettling shit if we are being honest.  Check out gun owners thread on hobby board if you’re curious. 
 

On 1/29/2021 at 2:52 PM, Born to Run said:

We have data base. I don't own any guns that I purchased, all were gifts, inherited or won at informal group hunts.

And this. This is what I don’t understand. All but 10 or so long arms I have (inherited) are in that database from when I purchased, went thru FFL, etc.  75% or better of what I own is easily found by the govt.  Am I worried about that? 0%.  
 

On 1/29/2021 at 7:43 PM, atomheartbevo said:

Have some hat hair, instead of looking like you just walked out of some $100 hair salon.

Have a truck that looks like an actual human drove it around, instead of it being hauled around on a flatbed.

I thought he did that pretty well. Drove around in a pickup and was sweating like an aggy at a spelling bee. 
 

On 1/29/2021 at 3:00 PM, bad_teammate said:

Why do we let the Republicans pick the playing field?

Because, if you haven’t noticed, Texas isn’t your playground.  One of the brightest and most charismatic personalities, with a blue wave behind him due to the fuckface in the Whitehouse, running against a Canadian beta, during a time Rs were pushing thru a justice that made every woman from center right to far left sick and ashamed, still lost. 
 

36 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Let's keep high-capacity firearms out of the hands of people who have demonstrated that they want to hurt people, or who are mentally unstable. 

Absofuckinglutely. Who is against that (besides the crazies)?   The problem, is that the goal is keeping them from everyone, per his words. Then he took it a step further by saying we’re going to come retroactively get what you’ve already got.   Nahfuckthat.gif

[wildcat09 29347]

2 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

I think 99% of what you think and who you are is a travesty, but this is genius. Excellent stuff, you wild cat.

A travesty of what?

[FondrenRoad 4378]

20 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

But it's an easy side-step.

"When it comes to guns, what worries most Texans is the idea of sending your family to school or the store, and them not coming back.  That's why the most important gun safety measure is better mental health protections.  Blah blah blah."

It's namby-pamby bullshit, but that's how you win -- or more importantly, it's how you stop losing.

The real problem with the gun issue is that its just an excuse. There isn't a single "Dems are gonna take your guns" voter who would even vote for a Dem that was so pro gun that they wanted to get rid of all background checks and allow nationwide open and concealed carry. Pro-gun people use guns as an excuse so they can just punch that R ticket without having to think about actual issues.  And they will continue to do that no matter what the Dem candidate thinks about guns.  Sometimes, there is an underlying issue they dont want to admit drives them, like white supremacy. But most times, it is just simple laziness or the desire to stick it to "libs."  

In a way, this is why the GOP has gotten so shitty. Their voters don't ask for any accountability at all, and don't really give a fuck what they do with power as long as they keep that R by their name. An R could vote to ban guns and still win the pro gun vote. 

Edited February 1, 2021 by FondrenRoad

[Brisketexan 105077]

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

Raises hand. Open carry is fucking stupid. 
 

I felt much better about this until I found some news clips from NOLA during Katrina.  Pretty unsettling shit if we are being honest.  Check out gun owners thread on hobby board if you’re curious. 
 

And this. This is what I don’t understand. All but 10 or so long arms I have (inherited) are in that database from when I purchased, went thru FFL, etc.  75% or better of what I own is easily found by the govt.  Am I worried about that? 0%.  
 

I thought he did that pretty well. Drove around in a pickup and was sweating like an aggy at a spelling bee. 
 

Because, if you haven’t noticed, Texas isn’t your playground.  One of the brightest and most charismatic personalities, with a blue wave behind him due to the fuckface in the Whitehouse, running against a Canadian beta, during a time Rs were pushing thru a justice that made every woman from center right to far left sick and ashamed, still lost. 
 

Absofuckinglutely. Who is against that (besides the crazies)?   The problem, is that the goal is keeping them from everyone, per his words. Then he took it a step further by saying we’re going to come retroactively get what you’ve already got.   Nahfuckthat.gif

Setting aside the fact that I think Beto stepped on his dick in Texas with that ultimate position, I agree with pretty much everything you said.  My whole family shoots (literally, my entire family, male and female).  None of us oppose reasonable regulation, the fact that our guns are mostly registered purchases, and having a legal process to keep guns out of the hands of nutbars who have openly talked about how they want to go shoot up a synagogue and shit.

[hornmpa96 2618]

49 minutes ago, NotActuallyALonghorn said:

From the text you used, "at a shooting range or in a shooting gallery or other area designated for the purpose of target shooting;" is the only place such a transfer can take place. So that pretty much means you are full of shit. There is no way I could loan a rifle or shotgun to someone for the weekend or whatever unles we are at something that complies with that text, which doesn't even encompass most hunting situations.

First, I acknowledged that specific issue in my very first post on the subject:

1 hour ago, hornmpa96 said:

I agree that some of the language isn’t perfect, as arguably there is an issue with transport of the shotgun between the target shooting/hunting location. However, they did try and include some reasonable exceptions in the bill and if the Senate had ever actually allowed consideration of the Bill, maybe this issue could have been fixed.

Second, let's look at the entire exception provided in the Bill:

“(F) a temporary transfer if the transferor has no reason to believe that the transferee will use or intends to use the firearm in a crime or is prohibited from possessing firearms under State or Federal law, and the transfer takes place and the transferee’s possession of the firearm is exclusively—

“(i) at a shooting range or in a shooting gallery or other area designated for the purpose of target shooting;

“(ii) while reasonably necessary for the purposes of hunting, trapping, or fishing, if the transferor—

“(I) has no reason to believe that the transferee intends to use the firearm in a place where it is illegal; and

“(II) has reason to believe that the transferee will comply with all licensing and permit requirements for such hunting, trapping, or fishing; or

“(iii) while in the presence of the transferor.

They attempted to put in place reasonable exceptions to the requirements for background checks for temporary transfers which included your original example. With respect to the hunting example I utilized, I believe its reasonably necessary for someone to transport the gun from the gun's location to the hunting location. 

So, who's being fucking disingenuous here?

The Midland/Odessa shooter in 2019 specifically acquired his gun in a person to person transfer not subject to federal background checks. If we don't get this fixed, it will eventually come back to bite responsible gun owners in the ass. This was a reasonable bill and one which had bipartisan support in the house. Would I prefer it fix the issue you described? Of course I do.

[fattyflattie 4639]

6 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I'm dead serious that a Dem candidate needs some real, authentic shots/footage of him/her using a firearm.  Doesn't need to be front and center.  But it needs to be real.  If I was campaigning, an ad would just have a few seconds of footage about how "as a lifelong outdoorsman, Brisket wants to make sure that our parks and resources are around for future generations."  Show a still photo of me as a kid out hunting with my dad.  Show a short clip of me out dove hunting with the guys today, maybe me fishing with my kids as we get to the "future generations" line.  That's it.  That's all you need.

You can't sell a "Brisket is coming for your guns," because the voters have already seen that I HAVE guns.  I'm innoculated against the "gun grabber" label.  That's all you need to do as a Dem.

This is great.  Do you want to know why they couldn’t find any from their childhood?  Lean in here...they don’t exist.    Brisket for Texas would be great, if you could back up off the ledge a bit. But there’s a reason theres no pic of them in a chili hat with a .22 and a dead cougar out in west Texas.

ANd  this isn’t specifically a D thing by any means.  I’m certain there’s PLENTY (most) of R’s that fall into the same shit. But they aren’t trying to get an underdog win.  

[Brisketexan 105077]

1 minute ago, FondrenRoad said:

The real problem with the gun issue is that its just an excuse. There isn't a single "Dems are gonna take your guns" voter who would even vote for a Dem that was so pro gun that they wanted to get rid of all background checks and allow nationwide open and concealed carry. Pro-gun people use guns as an excuse so they can just punch that R ticket without having to think about actual issues.  And they will continue to do that no matter what the Dem candidate thinks about guns.  Sometimes, there is an underlying issue they dont want to admit drives them, like white supremacy. But most times, it is just simple laziness or the desire to stick it to "libs."  

In a way, this is why the GOP has gotten so shitty. Their voters don't ask for any accountability at all, and don't really give a fuck what they do with power as long as they keep that R by their name. 

I think you're right about the people who would DESCRIBE themselves as "pro gun."  But that's actually 1) a smaller slice of voters than you think, and 2) those folks are NEVER voting Dem.

There's also a large group of gun owners and people who want to continue to own guns who will support a candidate who acknowledges the right and value to firearms, but proposes some tight, common-sense proposals to reduce random gun violence.  Those are the people we're talking about.

The "any restriction on guns is communism!" crowd is always going to vote R.  The "I don't know why anyone needs to own an instrument of death!" crowd is always going to vote D.  The huge chunk in the middle is what's in play.

[fattyflattie 4639]

3 minutes ago, hornmpa96 said:

The Midland/Odessa shooter in 2019 specifically acquired his gun in a person to person transfer not subject to federal background checks. If we don't get this fixed, it will eventually come back to bite responsible gun owners in the ass. This was a reasonable bill and one which had bipartisan support in the house. Would I prefer it fix the issue you described? Of course I do.

F2F needs to get fixed. If you can’t afford the $25 FFL fee then you definitely can’t afford ammo for the thing. And fuck, make the FFL available at a county office or something for free then.  But completely agree, skimping registry is bullshit.  I think I’ve only got 1 F2F firearm, a 20 ga 870 youth I bought from a college roommate.  

[Brisketexan 105077]

2 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

This is great.  Do you want to know why they couldn’t find any from their childhood?  Lean in here...they don’t exist.    Brisket for Texas would be great, if you could back up off the ledge a bit. But there’s a reason theres no pic of them in a chili hat with a .22 and a dead cougar out in west Texas.

ANd  this isn’t specifically a D thing by any means.  I’m certain there’s PLENTY (most) of R’s that fall into the same shit. But they aren’t trying to get an underdog win.  

1) I have googled it several times, and it doesn't look like they make that chili hat anymore.  I really want one, and would happily call it my "Cajun hat" in homage to the originator.  That pic is so badass.

2) There actually are, more than you think.  People on this board who are solid dems who have exactly the same kind of pics I was talking about == @Kyrie Eleison, @Pescado_Rojo as just a couple of examples.   I mean, both of them are clearly disqualified from office, because they are from Port Arthur, but setting that aside, there are plenty of Dem thinkers and voters who are "real Texans."  And that includes some hispanics and black people, too.

[Brisketexan 105077]

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

F2F needs to get fixed. If you can’t afford the $25 FFL fee then you definitely can’t afford ammo for the thing. And fuck, make the FFL available at a county office or something for free then.  But completely agree, skimping registry is bullshit.  I think I’ve only got 1 F2F firearm, a 20 ga 870 youth I bought from a college roommate.  

I've got a number of family heirloom guns, as well as two I bought from a neighbor who inherited them and wanted to unload them.  I'd have been fine with doing paperwork on each set.  Whatever, no skin off my nose.  For such transfers, it should be relatively smooth and streamlined, but if the point is to make sure your neighbor isn't a convicted felon before selling him the guns, that makes good sense.

[fattyflattie 4639]

8 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Pro-gun people use guns as an excuse so they can just punch that R ticket without having to think about actual issues.

Hate to break this to you, there are single issue voters on...gasp, both sides.  
 

I know in your mind every D is someone who’s reads every candidates plans, and weighed them out, and chose his guy because it’s right. Similarly every R could be replaced with one of those idiots storming the capitol.  But that shit is fantasy.  People vote for whatever party butters their particular biscuit.  

[fattyflattie 4639]

4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

There actually are, more than you think.  People on this board who are solid dems who have exactly the same kind of pics I was talking about == @Kyrie Eleison, @Pescado_Rojo as just a couple of examples.   I mean, both of them are clearly disqualified from office, because they are from Port Arthur, but setting that aside, there are plenty of Dem thinkers and voters who are "real Texans."  And that includes some hispanics and black people, too.

That’s not what I meant. I know that, and know a few myself.  I’m saying it wouldn’t surprise me if Ted Cruz grew up playing golf and tennis in lieu of duck hunting. Or Cornyn. Or whomever.   R/=/ Someone who actually personifies what his electorate does.   
 

That’s why I don’t really fault Beto for his view on it, he just lost my vote.  And contrary to what the usual fuckheads think, he was closer to having it than anyone before. Because I’m really, really not a fan of lying Ted.  

[bad_teammate 13192]

18 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

... so let's pick some shit that most people will consider reasonable but the GOP will oppose ...

I agree. Beto is already onto it with the buybacks of ARs and AKs.

And before the usual suspects who are just substituting their own selves and extremely narrow life experiences for data respond, look up how mandatory buybacks actually poll.

We have to stop basing "reasonable" off of what Republicans say, but instead off of what the moment demands.

If Beto is the guy we have no choice but to back his play if we want to win. You can piss yourself and dream of some kind Golden Dem who a picture of him skinning an elk at 9 years old, but it's a tiresome and dead hope. He's not walking through that door, so shut the hell up about it. (not talking to wildcat here, of course, but to Brisket and NAAL and the like).

Or just be a god damned Republican again already. The suspense isn't killing me.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I think you're right about the people who would DESCRIBE themselves as "pro gun."  But that's actually 1) a smaller slice of voters than you think, and 2) those folks are NEVER voting Dem.

There's also a large group of gun owners and people who want to continue to own guns who will support a candidate who acknowledges the right and value to firearms, but proposes some tight, common-sense proposals to reduce random gun violence.  Those are the people we're talking about.

The "any restriction on guns is communism!" crowd is always going to vote R.  The "I don't know why anyone needs to own an instrument of death!" crowd is always going to vote D.  The huge chunk in the middle is what's in play.

Very little of that chunk in the middle sees unrestricted gun ownership as their number one issue.  Once you decide to put guns over other issues, you are a locked in R voter, or D voter if you support gun control as your number one issue.  Once you say, "I care more about owning this AR-15 than I do about Americans having Healthcare, humane treatment of undocumented immigrant children, or a competent pandemic plan," you were never going to vote D.

Never pander to single issue voters. Whether the single issue is a real belief or an excuse, they simply don't cross over even if you cave. 

When you look at the adult population of Texas, there aren't that many CHL licensees nor are there that many hunters. Old school Texans like yourself still think of that old school Texas, but the population boom is made up largely of people that don't hunt. They may have a handgun in their home, but don't carry it around, and will still keep it no matter how they vote on gun control. But they also didn't move from Ohio to the Dallas burbs to be around minorities, and will use the little white lie to avoid saying that. 

[Brisketexan 105077]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

I agree. Beto is already onto it with the buybacks of ARs and AKs.

And before the usual suspects who are just substituting their own selves and extremely narrow life experiences for data respond, look up how mandatory buybacks actually poll.

We have to stop basing "reasonable" off of what Republicans say, but instead off of what the moment demands.

If Beto is the guy we have no choice but to back his play if we want to win. You can piss yourself and dream of some kind Golden Dem who a picture of him skinning an elk at 9 years old, but it's a tiresome and dead hope. He's not walking through that door, so shut the hell up about it. (not talking to wildcat here, of course, but to Brisket and NAAL and the like).

Or just be a god damned Republican again already. The suspense isn't killing me.

Cool, piss away the moderate voters that the Dems need to win in Texas.  THAT'S a winning plan.

[fattyflattie 4639]

8 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

For such transfers, it should be relatively smooth and streamlined, but if the point is to make sure your neighbor isn't a convicted felon before selling him the guns, that makes good sense.

Well further, I’d be freaking sick if someone I sold it to used it for a nefarious purpose.  At least if the FBI or whomever does the clearance at FFL says it’s OK, it *should* be OK (I know they fucked up with one of the major tragedies, can’t remember which). 
 

Shifting gears for a minute.  We touched base upthread on this.  I *think* there’s plenty of D in Texas that still haven’t made the jump to “progressive”.  What does a candidate need to do, or should/shouldn’t do, to get the AOC stink off of them?   Or should they?  This is more geared towards congressional candidates.  I understand many here hate it but there’s a whole lot of us here in the “center”.  

[bad_teammate 13192]

Just now, Brisketexan said:

Cool, piss away the moderate voters that the Dems need to win in Texas.  THAT'S a winning plan.

What has catering to this mythical "moderate" gotten the Democrats in Texas in the last 30 years? Please answer.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

10 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Hate to break this to you, there are single issue voters on...gasp, both sides.  
 

I know in your mind every D is someone who’s reads every candidates plans, and weighed them out, and chose his guy because it’s right. Similarly every R could be replaced with one of those idiots storming the capitol.  But that shit is fantasy.  People vote for whatever party butters their particular biscuit.  

Who said there aren't?  It does help that for single issue Dem voters like pro-choice voters, the GOP is less progressive on pretty much every other issue as well. The Dems aren't perfect for progressive issues, but they are better than the alternative on every single one. They dont have to hold their nose and vote for a white supremacist because they want to keep abortion legal. 

And right now, the Dem party is tearing itself apart based on policy disagreements.  The Rep party is tearing itself apart based on a cult of personality. One driven by the fact that GOP voters simply didn't care if Trump took over the party. 

And also, I dont trust the judgment of anyone who would vote for Trump for any reason really. 

[Brisketexan 105077]

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

What has catering to this mythical "moderate" gotten the Democrats in Texas in the last 30 years? Please answer.

They haven't catered to them.  They haven't catered to ANYONE.  The first glimmer of a coherent Dem message in the past 30 years came in the past few years, and it was that they finally found a message that resonated with suburbanites and such.  It's a start.  It's not a finish.

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

12 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

 

2) There actually are, more than you think.  People on this board who are solid dems who have exactly the same kind of pics I was talking about == @Kyrie Eleison, @Pescado_Rojo as just a couple of examples.   I mean, both of them are clearly disqualified from office, because they are from Port Arthur, but setting that aside, there are plenty of Dem thinkers and voters who are "real Texans."  And that includes some hispanics and black people, too.

You drive over to Navasota and you can find plenty of Democratic hispanic and black cowboys who own and shoot guns and ride horses and wear boots. Politicians don't necessarily spend much time talking to them. People might be surprised about what appeals to folks once they talk to them. Some of the blue collar folks I talk to, really worry about: small business assistance--there is a need in the trades for skilled workers but a gap in being able to get training and once a worker has gained experience, some have said (away from the boss) how they'd like to hang out their own shingle but the steps to do so (taxes, wages, etc) are very intimidating. Texas did away with some licensing requirements, but that wasn't what they were complaining about so much (perhaps because consumer confidence can be higher with certification/licensing).

They hear lower taxes and vote R instead of here is what Texas taxes can pay for that you may need (now or in the future).

[Snake Diggity 4620]

I tried coming up with the perfect Texas Democrat campaign ad:

 

(Ranch scene, white man in Carhartt jacket, wranglers, boots, and cowboy hat holds a Remington 870.) 

"Hi, I'm Blanco McGomez, and I'm running to be your Senator.  Pull!"

(Kisses cross on rosary hanging from his neck, then takes skeet shot, drops 2 clays with one shot.  Picks up piece of bacon off skillet on campfire, takes a bite.)

"I think it's about dang time people starting taking care of themselves...and each other."  

(Hands shotgun to Mexican-American ranch hand, kindly gives directions to hand in fluent Spanish.)

"We need lower taxes on the middle class and for everybody to pay their fair share.  We need to make sure folks can go to the doctor when they need to without going belly up.  We need our kiddos to be in good schools so they can grow up and help fix this messed up werld.  We need to make sure folks ain't being put in jail for no good reason.  Mostly, we need werkin people to be able ta make a good livin, provide for their family, and for the dang ol' gubment to stay out of their bedrooms, churches, gun safes, and pocketbooks.  And if you vote for me, I promise ta look out for Texans, like you."

(Pulls 9mm out from boot, shoots rattlesnake.  Pan out, show Blanco walking toward his family that includes 3 children with his Mexican-American wife, plus 1 black child and 1 asian child.)

[Ojo Rojo 1957]

Just now, Snake Diggity said:

I tried coming up with the perfect Texas Democrat campaign ad:

 

(Ranch scene, white man in Carhartt jacket, wranglers, boots, and cowboy hat holds a Remington 870.) 

"Hi, I'm Blanco McGomez, and I'm running to be your Senator.  Pull!"

(Kisses cross on rosary hanging from his neck, then takes skeet shot, drops 2 clays with one shot.  Picks up piece of bacon off skillet on campfire, takes a bite.)

"I think it's about dang time people starting taking care of themselves...and each other."  

(Hands shotgun to Mexican-American ranch hand, kindly gives directions to hand in fluent Spanish.)

"We need lower taxes on the middle class and for everybody to pay their fair share.  We need to make sure folks can go to the doctor when they need to without going belly up.  We need our kiddos to be in good schools so they can grow up and help fix this messed up werld.  We need to make sure folks ain't being put in jail for no good reason.  Mostly, we need werkin people to be able ta make a good livin, provide for their family, and for the dang ol' gubment to stay out of their bedrooms, churches, gun safes, and pocketbooks.  And if you vote for me, I promise ta look out for Texans, like you."

(Pulls 9mm out from boot, shoots rattlesnake.  Pan out, show Blanco walking toward his family that includes 3 children with his Mexican-American wife, plus 1 black child and 1 asian child.)

Do one for the perfect Republican!

[bad_teammate 13192]

Just now, Brisketexan said:

They haven't catered to them.  They haven't catered to ANYONE.  The first glimmer of a coherent Dem message in the past 30 years came in the past few years, and it was that they finally found a message that resonated with suburbanites and such.  It's a start.  It's not a finish.

You're generalizing a specific conversation. Lazy.

For the last 30 years, the Democratic Party as a whole, but especially in Texas, has been continuously attempting to promote "common sense gun control" and "reasonable gun control". Name one who has not, if you can.

[Snake Diggity 4620]

6 minutes ago, Ojo Rojo said:

Do one for the perfect Republican!

(Blurred screen, zooms out, pubic hair becomes discernable.  Zoom out further, a tongue under the pubes.  Zoom out further, woman with fake tits is sucking Donald Trump's balls.  The woman looks up.)

(Garbled voice, still sucking balls and trying to speak) "I'm Karen Rednecky, and I'm running to be your Senator.  There's pedophiles everywhere in the gubment.  Vote, even though it'll likely be a fraud.  I hate ****ers." (Goes back to sucking Trump's balls furiously.  Trump smiles and gives a thumbs up.)

[bad_teammate 13192]

Just now, Snake Diggity said:

(Blurred screen, zooms out, pubic hair becomes discernable.  Zoom out further, a tongue under the pubes.  Zoom out further, woman with fake tits is sucking Donald Trump's balls.  The woman looks up.)

(Garbled voice, still sucking balls and trying to speak) "I'm Karen Rednecky, and I'm running to be your Senator.  There's pedophiles everywhere in the gubment.  Vote, even though it'll likely be a fraud.  I hate ****ers." (Goes back to sucking Trump's balls furiously.  Trump smiles and gives a thumbs up.)

College Station erupts in a single "WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOP!"

The vibrations of this group ejaculation crumble even their tallest buildings, bringing all 2 stories to the ground

[89Horn 1514]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

You're generalizing a specific conversation. Lazy.

For the last 30 years, the Democratic Party as a whole, but especially in Texas, has been continuously attempting to promote "common sense gun control" and "reasonable gun control". Name one who has not, if you can.

 

[Hagbard Celine 10852]

lbj's last interview by walter cronkite 10 days before he died

 

[Brisketexan 105077]

10 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

You're generalizing a specific conversation. Lazy.

For the last 30 years, the Democratic Party as a whole, but especially in Texas, has been continuously attempting to promote "common sense gun control" and "reasonable gun control". Name one who has not, if you can.

Messaging is all that matters.  Messaging is what wins elections, and loses elections.  IDGAF what any Dem believes, or has "attempted to promote."  I only care about what they can sell and have sold.  And they haven't had any coherent message until recently, on anything.  They have absolutely lost the messaging war on guns in Texas.  You can pretend it's otherwise, but that only keeps us in the hole.

[Born to Run 6569]

I tried coming up with the perfect Texas Democrat campaign ad:
 
(Ranch scene, white man in Carhartt jacket, wranglers, boots, and cowboy hat holds a Remington 870.) 
"Hi, I'm Blanco McGomez, and I'm running to be your Senator.  Pull!"
(Kisses cross on rosary hanging from his neck, then takes skeet shot, drops 2 clays with one shot.  Picks up piece of bacon off skillet on campfire, takes a bite.)
"I think it's about dang time people starting taking care of themselves...and each other."  
(Hands shotgun to Mexican-American ranch hand, kindly gives directions to hand in fluent Spanish.)
"We need lower taxes on the middle class and for everybody to pay their fair share.  We need to make sure folks can go to the doctor when they need to without going belly up.  We need our kiddos to be in good schools so they can grow up and help fix this messed up werld.  We need to make sure folks ain't being put in jail for no good reason.  Mostly, we need werkin people to be able ta make a good livin, provide for their family, and for the dang ol' gubment to stay out of their bedrooms, churches, gun safes, and pocketbooks.  And if you vote for me, I promise ta look out for Texans, like you."
(Pulls 9mm out from boot, shoots rattlesnake.  Pan out, show Blanco walking toward his family that includes 3 children with his Mexican-American wife, plus 1 black child and 1 asian child.)

A-

Needs Freddie Fender or George Strait and tacos.

[wildcat09 29347]

It should be pointed out that, until 2018, the Democratic party for all intents and purposes didn't exist in Texas.

[NotActuallyALonghorn 4975]

It should also be pointed out that 30 years ago we had a Democrat governor.

[NotActuallyALonghorn 4975]

1 hour ago, hornmpa96 said:

First, I acknowledged that specific issue in my very first post on the subject:

Second, let's look at the entire exception provided in the Bill:

“(F) a temporary transfer if the transferor has no reason to believe that the transferee will use or intends to use the firearm in a crime or is prohibited from possessing firearms under State or Federal law, and the transfer takes place and the transferee’s possession of the firearm is exclusively—

“(i) at a shooting range or in a shooting gallery or other area designated for the purpose of target shooting;

 

“(ii) while reasonably necessary for the purposes of hunting, trapping, or fishing, if the transferor—

“(I) has no reason to believe that the transferee intends to use the firearm in a place where it is illegal; and

 

“(II) has reason to believe that the transferee will comply with all licensing and permit requirements for such hunting, trapping, or fishing; or

 

“(iii) while in the presence of the transferor.

They attempted to put in place reasonable exceptions to the requirements for background checks for temporary transfers which included your original example. With respect to the hunting example I utilized, I believe its reasonably necessary for someone to transport the gun from the gun's location to the hunting location. 

So, who's being fucking disingenuous here?

The Midland/Odessa shooter in 2019 specifically acquired his gun in a person to person transfer not subject to federal background checks. If we don't get this fixed, it will eventually come back to bite responsible gun owners in the ass. This was a reasonable bill and one which had bipartisan support in the house. Would I prefer it fix the issue you described? Of course I do.

The language isn't perfect, but hey, you can hand your gun to someone else as long as you are at a range or competition shooting event? The language is straight up unreasonable to anybody who actually hunts or participates in shooting sports. It's clear the people drafting this have no clue about any of this. Most gun owners would welcome a way to ensure they aren't selling a gun to a felon wife beater, but requiring all that nonsense to lend a gun to someone they know well is straight up going to be a loser every time if you are trying to get support of moderate gun owners. And if you can't do that competently then you are probably not competent enough to do much else.

[Brisketexan 105077]

24 minutes ago, NotActuallyALonghorn said:

It should also be pointed out that 30 years ago we had a Democrat governor.

Was a last gasp for the party, and she won only because the GOP candidate repeatedly shot himself in the dick.  The state had actually turned red by then, but she was a popular enough candidate and he was enough of an idiot that it tipped the scales.

These days?  His idiocy would win in a landslide.

[bad_teammate 13192]

58 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

They have absolutely lost the messaging war on guns in Texas.  You can pretend it's otherwise, but that only keeps us in the hole.

Pretend otherwise? Of course we have lost the messaging war on guns. That's my entire point.

We lose the messaging because we just use Republican messaging and tone it down and act scared of being on the wrong side of it. Our platform on guns is just asking Republicans permission to get reforms.

Texas Dem messaging on guns has always been, "Oh gee we're not going to take your guns we just want some common sense reasonable gun control but I really like guns I promise! I'm a Real Texan!"

Which is read as dishonest because it IS dishonest.

I know you guys are allergic to polling and statistics on this, but the vast majority of Texans aren't gun owners at all and our voting base WANTS gun control.

Statistically, a REAL Texan is someone who doesn't own a gun. A REAL Texan is someone who doesn't care at all about gun control. A REAL Texan is someone who would actually be nervous if they saw someone open-carrying at Target.

To stop losing, we have to say (either directly or through FEARLESS advocacy), "I, like the vast majority of Texas, have no connections to gun culture and I'm tired of that narrow slice of the population sentencing the rest of us and our children to death."

Make zero effort to reassure anyone. Just lead.

39 minutes ago, NotActuallyALonghorn said:

Most gun owners would welcome a way to ensure they aren't selling a gun to a felon wife beater, but requiring all that nonsense to lend a gun to someone they know well is straight up going to be a loser every time if you are trying to get support of moderate gun owners. And if you can't do that competently then you are probably not competent enough to do much else.

Democrats need to stop chasing these myths.

"moderate" is a label people self-apply to make it seem like their personal views are actually universal truths

[Satchel 6934]

There are millions of Texans who don’t love guns. It’s time somebody talked to them.

[Frank Erwin 203]

The answer to the original post is when this moron primaries Abbott in 2022

[Bookman 4638]

I don't think he'll live that long. I was in an elevator with him a few years ago and he sounded like he was fixing to have a heart attack.

[bonnieblue 542]

3 hours ago, Snake Diggity said:

I tried coming up with the perfect Texas Democrat campaign ad:

 

(Ranch scene, white man in Carhartt jacket, wranglers, boots, and cowboy hat holds a Remington 870.) 

"Hi, I'm Blanco McGomez, and I'm running to be your Senator.  Pull!"

(Kisses cross on rosary hanging from his neck, then takes skeet shot, drops 2 clays with one shot.  Picks up piece of bacon off skillet on campfire, takes a bite.)

"I think it's about dang time people starting taking care of themselves...and each other."  

(Hands shotgun to Mexican-American ranch hand, kindly gives directions to hand in fluent Spanish.)

"We need lower taxes on the middle class and for everybody to pay their fair share.  We need to make sure folks can go to the doctor when they need to without going belly up.  We need our kiddos to be in good schools so they can grow up and help fix this messed up werld.  We need to make sure folks ain't being put in jail for no good reason.  Mostly, we need werkin people to be able ta make a good livin, provide for their family, and for the dang ol' gubment to stay out of their bedrooms, churches, gun safes, and pocketbooks.  And if you vote for me, I promise ta look out for Texans, like you."

(Pulls 9mm out from boot, shoots rattlesnake.  Pan out, show Blanco walking toward his family that includes 3 children with his Mexican-American wife, plus 1 black child and 1 asian child.)

No mention of trains, mama or getting drunk 

[TexasEd 8066]

7 hours ago, Snake Diggity said:

I tried coming up with the perfect Texas Democrat campaign ad:

 

(Ranch scene, white man in Carhartt jacket, wranglers, boots, and cowboy hat holds a Remington 870.) 

"Hi, I'm Blanco McGomez, and I'm running to be your Senator.  Pull!"

(Kisses cross on rosary hanging from his neck, then takes skeet shot, drops 2 clays with one shot.  Picks up piece of bacon off skillet on campfire, takes a bite.)

"I think it's about dang time people starting taking care of themselves...and each other."  

(Hands shotgun to Mexican-American ranch hand, kindly gives directions to hand in fluent Spanish.)

"We need lower taxes on the middle class and for everybody to pay their fair share.  We need to make sure folks can go to the doctor when they need to without going belly up.  We need our kiddos to be in good schools so they can grow up and help fix this messed up werld.  We need to make sure folks ain't being put in jail for no good reason.  Mostly, we need werkin people to be able ta make a good livin, provide for their family, and for the dang ol' gubment to stay out of their bedrooms, churches, gun safes, and pocketbooks.  And if you vote for me, I promise ta look out for Texans, like you."

(Pulls 9mm out from boot, shoots rattlesnake.  Pan out, show Blanco walking toward his family that includes 3 children with his Mexican-American wife, plus 1 black child and 1 asian child.)

This and he looks and sounds like Sam Elliott

[Nivek 16923]

You can't go hunting for photo ops, outdoorsman will smell the fraud a mile away. You have to start enjoying the sport, then have the photo ops.

Have you seen Senator John with his fringes, brisket and old tyme’ ranch truck that is fully restored?

[BillyBadAss 189]

B_T, you have me curious. Beto had about as much momentum as I could imagine in 2018. He was pretty damn progressive, he mostly came across as genuine, he was charismatic, women loved him. He campaigned very hard statewide.  Hell, willie nelson publicly supported him.  He got more press than any statewide candidate that I can remember.  He was running against Ted fucking Cruz with Trump in the WH.

You think he wasn't progressive enough to motivate more potential D voters?  

I appreciate your view points, but i just can't buy it.

Who are these potential D voters who weren't motivated to turn out in 2018 just waiting to be wooed? 
 

[TexasEd 8066]

10 hours ago, BillyBadAss said:

B_T, you have me curious. Beto had about as much momentum as I could imagine in 2018. He was pretty damn progressive, he mostly came across as genuine, he was charismatic, women loved him. He campaigned very hard statewide.  Hell, willie nelson publicly supported him.  He got more press than any statewide candidate that I can remember.  He was running against Ted fucking Cruz with Trump in the WH.

You think he wasn't progressive enough to motivate more potential D voters?  

I appreciate your view points, but i just can't buy it.

Who are these potential D voters who weren't motivated to turn out in 2018 just waiting to be wooed? 
 

Exactly, there is a population distribution equation in there somewhere.  The Texas population skews more right than other states and to get a plurality of the vote you have to start close enough to the center to get in the top of the bell curve or you will not have a large enough pool to draw from no matter how motivated they are. Moving left for smaller pool is a losing strategy because for every 1 left end vote you move to add you are dropping 5-10 on the moderate side of the curve. 

 

[bad_teammate 13192]

11 hours ago, BillyBadAss said:

You think he wasn't progressive enough to motivate more potential D voters?  

People don't sit down with a list of policy positions and graph out their closest match. Trump didn't win because he triangulated a bunch of positions, he won on enthusiasm and momentum and charisma.

The issue isn't how progressive Beto was/is, it's how good he was/is at motivating potential voters.

His charisma is huge. His retail politics are elite. He gave Cruz a scare as a nobody and his failed presidential candidacy boosted his profile even higher.

And then, of course, there are the actual results...

2006 - Hutchison v Radnosky: Hutchison 25.7
2008 - Cornyn v Noriega: Cornyn +12 (McCain +11.7)
2012 - Cruz v Sadler: Cruz +15.9 (McCain +15.8)
2014 - Cornyn v Alameel: Cornyn +27.2
2018 - Cruz v O'Rourke: Cruz +2.6
2020 - Cornyn v Hegar: Cornyn +9.6 (Trump +5.6)

26 minutes ago, TexasEd said:

Exactly, there is a population distribution equation in there somewhere.  The Texas population skews more right than other states and to get a plurality of the vote you have to start close enough to the center to get in the top of the bell curve or you will not have a large enough pool to draw from no matter how motivated they are. Moving left for smaller pool is a losing strategy because for every 1 left end vote you move to add you are dropping 5-10 on the moderate side of the curve. 

You're just regurgitating tired political punditry. The same platitudes that have guided failed Democratic politics for 3 decades.

It doesn't make sense logically and it doesn't have any evidence to back it up. Just an article of faith.

Edited February 2, 2021 by bad_teammate