Get Thy Butt to the Polls

Pennsylvanians, Virginians, and New Jerseyans especially. This is your chance to get some small measure of revenge on Bloomberg. If the elections today go well for us, it will be a big defeat for Bloomberg, and if they don’t, Bloomberg will use all that money he spent and the results to try to intimidate other politicians to do what he wants. It could be your state senate district next.

So get out there. What are you waiting for? Well, if you’re like me to be done with work, but don’t forget.

19 Responses to “Get Thy Butt to the Polls”

  1. Stacy says:

    I don’t believe we have any known Bloomberg shills on a statewide ticket here in Fairfax County, but we do have the chance to replace the Sheriff who helped try to cover up the Geer shooting. Not sure how much of a belwether this is, but a very leftwing friend of mine is voting for several Is and Rs this time, and no Ds, largely because of realizing that these machine politicians have mostly come down on the side of state power, not rights. I’m going to be out of pocket all afternoon and evening, and I think it may be interesting to see what’s developed by bedtime…

  2. RetMSgt in Pa. says:

    Don’t forget to OC when voting. Unless it’s a school or court facility, it’s your right.

  3. RAH says:

    Fairfax county in Va has school board elections The same school board that forces children to be taught by trans gendered confused teachers. The same carp that Illinois school is facing that girls are to be abused to allow a male who says he is girl to be in the same bathrooms, showers and locker rooms.

  4. flatlndr says:

    I now understand that we have a vested interest in the boot which is on our collective throats. Be it the left or right we MUST NOT dwell on the boot just the side from which it claims to represents…
    As you peasants must agree there is only one government in America that claims its right to kill its owners.

  5. HappyWarrior6 says:

    Any “boots on the ground” reports from polling places in PA or VA?

    Turnout at my polling place in Lancaster County, PA appeared to be dismal at 7:30 a.m. This is par for the course on odd election years, though.

    • Joe_in_Pitt says:

      The polling site in my small borough in Allegheny County has only 3 machines, and I walked right in a little before 5PM. There was a couple other people there, one just leaving and one coming in after me. Voted for our Pro-2A candidates, but stayed out of some other races I knew nothing about.

    • Bitter says:

      I voted around 10am and was only #84 in my precinct. Sebastian will be voting shortly, so we’ll see what turnout looks like for a good part of the day.

      Also, the predominantly Democrat precinct was so empty that they were walking around. While my precinct (more GOP) was also empty the moment I walked in, the workers will still at the table.

    • Jeff O says:

      Northern part of York County, PA had light turnout this AM when I voted (#207 @ 9:30). The news is saying about 25%. And yes, I O.C.’d all day!

    • Bitter says:

      Sebastian reports he was #434, and still not one voter was seen going in, voting at, or coming out of the other predominantly Democratic precinct next to us.

  6. Alpheus says:

    I was taken aback a couple of days ago that the Elections are already near. I think part of it is that the Presidential campaigns make elections seem like they are a year away…

    In any case, now that I think about Bloomberg’s money…was it really dropped in time to have significant effect on the race? If it had been a couple of months ago, rather than a couple of weeks ago, I would suspect that the politicians would have time to spend their windfall…but how much messaging can you squeeze into a campaign when polling is two weeks away, and (if Virginia has early voting) some of the voting has already taken place?

    Of course, if Bloomberg dumped his money three months ago, and we’re only now hearing about it, that might be a different matter…

    There’s another possibility: Bloomberg may have dumped money on candidates that he knows via some means or another are going to win, so that he could make it look like Gun Control is a winning issue…in which case, it’s conceivable that (1) his efforts might backfire, if it’s not the issue he makes it out to be, and (2) he may not have accounted for how throwing tons of money into a race may have tainted the candidate…

    Gah. So many variables! The future is murky, always flowing, it is…

  7. 7pm, voter 386 in a precinct of 1477. Not good turn out.

  8. Roger Wilson says:

    Walked into my polling place about 3:00 I was the only voter in the place. I think one person was coming in as I left. I don’t know how many voted before me. My sister and husband voted later so we are -1 for my family.

  9. Skullz says:

    I voted at 8am, there were more poll workers (is that what their called?) than voters.

    My wife voted at about 7pm, she was the only voter she saw.

    Early returns – 47% reporting – don’t look good for us. The Dem candidates spent and have WAY more money than any of the Rs.

    I guess we’ll see what it looks like tomorrow.

  10. HappyWarrior6 says:

    Well, that sucked.

    • Whetherman says:

      Assuming you are talking about the Democrats’ sweep of the Supreme Court Election, in a previous thread you may recall I asked what exactly the Republican candidates had ever actually done for our firearms rights, and no one answered. I had received my NRA Orange Card, and while they told me what to do, they apparently couldn’t give me a reason to do it. On past experience I knew an NRA endorsement was no assurance of pro-gun candidates.

      I’m sure there was an answer to my question, but a few minutes of Googling couldn’t find it; only people telling me what to do. What I did find was that the Republicans appeared to be just loved to death by social conservative outfits, but since I’m not a social conservative, that came across as a negative.

      I couldn’t vote for Democrats, but pro-gun people seemed not to think it was necessary I should know why I should hold my nose hard to vote for the Republicans, so no one got my vote.

      The days when factions can expect their people just to be obedient sheep may by passing.

      • HappyWarrior6 says:

        Yes. There are still plenty of factions that expect people to be obedient sheep. It’s just that none of them are generally in the Republican camp.

        I actually do agree with your statement here: “On past experience I knew an NRA endorsement was no assurance of pro-gun candidates.” I mentioned this to one of my friends who was quite convinced that PA was sunk after last night’s election. PA has always been a state that strikes me as a terrible place to find yourself a legal dispute in for many reasons. Least of which the corrupt nature of the judiciary in the Commonwealth. That was the case before and will continue to be the case for the foreseeable future even if the GOP had gained three seats on the SC bench.

        I don’t know what characterizes a “social conservative” versus your narrative of what a single issue gun rights voter should be. I think it’s silly to distinguish a potential friendly voter by an arbitrarily chosen solitary set of issues that may or may not intersect with your own interests. Yes, I am a pro-life voter. I would vote pro-life over pro-gun as without life you really don’t have much else to hold on to, not to mention a generation to pass our pro-rights values down to.

        However, 99% of the time those two issues intersect in the choice for candidate for me, so I’ve personally never had to make that decision having lived with the candidates that we have since I’ve been 18 years old. Have you?

        I also suspect that most folks voted their wallet over their ideology. The reality of the legislative garbage coming from the likes of Sen. Scott Wagner and his ilk as relates to my livelihood makes me think of that position all the more.

        • Whetherman says:

          “I don’t know what characterizes a “social conservative” versus your narrative of what a single issue gun rights voter should be.

          I don’t want to make this an angels-on-the-head-of-a-pin philosophical debate, but it comes down to, that if people believe in authoritarian controls of Issues A, B, C, and D, it is not plausible that they really will remain non-authoritarian about Issue G. And as I have said in other threads, I have seen too much evidence (cough GOA)of firearms rights serving only as a decoy to lure people to support “other” agendas, politically.

          But, I mainly have those thoughts when no one is telling me what has made a pro-gun hero a hero, other than presumably knowing the rap. And at that, “get tough on crime/enforce existing laws” often seems to be treated as enough.

  11. Skullz says:

    The reason we needed more Rs on the bench than Ds this time was indirectly related to gun rights.

    When the redistricting challenges are brought to court, what do you think happens now?

    The the districts are redefined, it will be much easier to reduce or remove more individual rights than before – including gun rights.

    BTW – we had 3 candidates come to my gun club general meeting to ask for our vote. All Republican, all talked about their record on guns. All of them lost – including the local one.

    Judging by turnout, we just didn’t. Again.