Very, Very Blue Districts can Still be Pro-Gun

You know, there’s one nice thing about living in Pennsylvania. We have seats that have been Democratic for not only my lifetime, but the entire life of my mother as well. Yet, amazingly, pro-gun candidates can still win. It’s so nice when gun rights really can be bipartisan.

So with that, I started a fundraising page on the bluest of the blue sites for solidly pro-gun Democrats – using their tools to advance our cause. For now, I’ve posted one candidate because he has the earliest and most competitive race coming up of those who are currently on the service.

I can’t tell you how much I’m in love with ActBlue’s capabilities for fundraising & promoting candidates. The right has nothing remotely close to this since SlateCard never went anywhere, and more importantly, can’t fundraise for state candidates.

Anyway, I thought of the issue again because a new report shows that in 2007-2008, state legislative candidates had to raise more than $1 billion for the first time. I’m only going to feature state pro-gun Democrats who need help on the site, so you don’t have to worry about other issues like ObamaCare and bailouts. It’s not even a factor in these races. I’m also going to focus on those who need help because they are being challenged by anti-gunners at this point.

So, if you’re really supportive of keeping actual pro-gun lawmakers in office and willing to step over the partisan divide, consider giving a few bucks. The guy up there now is being challenged by another Democrat who wants the government to control how many guns you buy and make your concealed carry license worthless. And if this isn’t a step across the partisan divide for you, then yay! Open your wallet to show your support for the pro-gun guys and send a message to those who are running on a gun ban platform in your party.

If I have volunteer researchers, I’d also be happy to set up a national page that features pro-gun Democratic campaigns from around the country. If that interests you, just email me bitter -at-

12 thoughts on “Very, Very Blue Districts can Still be Pro-Gun”

  1. Even is there is no chance a race could be won by the stupid party, it’s tough to imagine helping a candidate for the evil party.

    Alarm bells go off when I think, “What could possibly go wrong?”

    Learn their tactics; learn their vulnerabilities, but tread softly on the blue side.

    The best-case scenario for helping Dem candidates in blue states would be they have agreed to flip from D to R after election. After all, “War is deceit” – Sun Tzu

    Unless we Citizens regain representation to counter the rapid slide into socialism – by regaining the majority, the Dems in power can hurt us in many worse ways than by trying to infringe on our 2A rights.

    We can fight the gun battles, but the war is for the preservation of society and economic freedom.

    1. Here’s the problem I see with that outlook: These seats don’t cease to exist simply because you don’t like the fact that they are blue. Someone is going to fill them. In this case, you can have a Democrat who has a consistent record of voting with us and who has signed his name to a statement that he supports our rights with detailed questions that related to the state’s gun laws, or you can have a Democrat who has vowed to limit the number of guns you can buy and make your concealed carry permit worthless, not to mention open the door for local governments to ban rifles or enact other crazy gun control. You have a choice between those two, and some other Democrats who have no record at all, but at least haven’t publicly attacked us yet.

      Why do you not want to support the Democrat who has pledged (and voted) to stand with us over the other Democrats? That is your choice in these seats. In some cases, there will be no other party on the ballot. So how far do you let that fear over what they could do overtake you? The seat has to be filled, you have your choice – they just all happen to be Democrats.

      Another way to look at it is that there are major primary races, and maybe a Republican decides to wage a write-in campaign to get on the ballot between now and May 18. You can support a pro-gun Democrat now in the Democratic primary over an anti-gun Democrat and HOPE you have choice in November between candidates of different parties, or you can stay out of the race, let an anti-gun Democrat win and watch as the same Brady Dream is elected in November – knowing you could have stopped him in May.

  2. Generally speaking, I don’t like Democrats either. But there are a lot of seats in this state that are just never going to go Republican. If I can swing the seat on the gun issue, that’s still at least a small victory for freedom, even if it’s not a huge one. And this is a state where you can make gun control an issue in a Democratic Primary, at least outside of Philadelphia, which is where these races are.

    1. Recognizing reality, it’s not just that Republicans would have a tough time, there are some of these seats that can’t even find a Republican to run. I don’t know why it makes sense to ignore these races when we can make sure the Democratic nominee – and likely ultimate winner – will be pro-gun.

  3. Well, if you’re stipulating that there is no way a Republican can win in PA, then it makes sense to vote for the least bad Democrat in general, and the most 2A-friendly in particular.

    What if you had equally NRA-rated Republican and Democrat in the general …. what then?

    I’m not faulting you for your grasp of reality, just curious.

    1. Packetman, you’re assuming that some of these races have any Republican running at all.

      The other point I would make to that is that it is worth investing in the pro-gun Democrat now while he’s facing an anti-gun Democrat right now. Get him through this primary race so that in November you can choose between pro-gun candidates in November.

  4. There are actually a large number of pro-gun Democrats not just at the state level but also in Congress. Gov. Brian Schweitzer of Montana (no surprise) is as strong a supporter of gun rights as anyone, and more than most. Sen. Begich (D-AK), and folks like Oregon’s Peter Defazio in the House lead the way for RKBA. Whatever faults you may find with Harry Reid, his position on gun rights is rock solid. Hmm…seems to be a western thing going on here…except for the odd choice the NRA made in the recent VA gov’s race, where both the D and the R had “A” ratings but the NRA threw in hard behind the R (keeping with their tradition of backing likely winners to boost their “success” story numbers–the D in that race was 20 points down for most of the campaign.)

    Point is, it’s important to look at the individual running–and the district, as Bitter said–and get to know who you’re dealing with beyond the campaign image. A Democrat from Nebraska isn’t going to think the same as one from San Francisco; likewise, a Republican from D.C. isn’t going to be in sync with one from Wyoming. In some of the recent local state legislative races in Northern VA, for instance, the Ds have fielded the only pro-gun candidate in some districts.

    As for the Democrats = evil comments above; well, that just seems like gratuitous smoke-blowing to me. If that’s your real perspective that’s your business, but it’s not the best place to expect to start a political dialog from which to start converting opinions to your own point of view. It’s also an attitude that can let Republican candidates take the pro-gun vote for granted if you tell them they’re the only game in town for you. Nobody is guaranteed my vote; and my advice is to sell yours dear as well.

    1. Actually, it wasn’t an odd choice for the Virginia Governor’s race. Deeds switched his position on some gun issues once he found out he had primary challengers. More importantly, he voted according to those new positions. That meant it was no longer just political rhetoric. If he had not done that, NRA likely would have stayed out of the race. Deeds had the NRA endorsement in his statewide race.

      But, I think you’ll like my rebuttal to the critics, Zak. It’s very thorough. :)

  5. I’ve added a response post to those who think that supporting this candidate is somehow unwise.

    I’m open to a serious discussion about how the facts of the race – and two others that I picked out – prove that I’m being flippant or otherwise not cautious about political races that have an impact on gun owners.

Comments are closed.