search
top

Attempts at Gun Voter Suppression in North Dakota

The North Dakota Democratic-NPL Party created a Facebook page on Halloween to stir up some election tricks.

They created a “Hunter Alerts” page to use as a platform for buying Facebook ads to target at hunters and gun owners. As you can see in this image from NRA created from screenshots of the page details and ads they are running, they are trying to convince any hunter who might hunt out-of-state that they will lose those licenses if they show up to vote.

If these tactics show any sign of working at all – if there is any drop in gun owner participation in the North Dakota election whatsoever – this will be copied around the country to try and keep gun owners from turning out to vote. They know that we turn out in very high numbers to protect our rights, so now they are trying to use our rights and lawful activities against our voters to convince them not to vote.

Also, if you see any paid ads like this at all in your social media feeds, make sure to get screenshots and drop a message to the NRA page. They can take a look to investigate further. Getting the word out to the voters they are lying to can hopefully give NRA & local gun rights leaders the chance to respond so that the goal of keeping these voters home doesn’t work.

12 Responses to “Attempts at Gun Voter Suppression in North Dakota”

  1. Patrick Henry, the 2nd says:

    That is unbelievable. I would expect some sort of state action against them.

  2. Joe says:

    Lies and Deceit out in the open regarding North Dakota, however, I’d like to here from you guys more about what is going on in PA regarding the current and projected future State of Gun Politics.

    I’m very concerned for the State of The 2nd Amendment at the State Level of our Country’s Politics more so than not.

    Out here in Ohio, the Democrats and their Media Lackeys are just outright silent on their intentions and are running very vocally on issues outside and away from gun-politics entirely. They’re really not even touching it, and that concerns me and my inner circle, very much. However, my biggest fear of Richard Cordray is that he is a clone of former NJ Democrat Governor, Jon Corzine, and I’m praying to God that DeWine beats him.

    • Jonathan says:

      Same here. Cordray is being very silent about his past or his plans… If he becomes governor, I would expect the momentum on constitutional carry, fireworks/ tannerite, Shockwave type weapons, and other related issues to stop.

  3. National Observer says:

    For a second there I thought I was still in the “Was it wrong when your guys did it?” thread.

    Thank God our guys only try to suppress voting by bad people!

    • Alpheus says:

      I’m sick and tired of efforts to try to limit fraud being characterized as voter suppression. Is it *really* a bad thing to require an ID to vote? Or to find ways to remove names of people from the rolls who have likely moved?

      When I was in New York State, I knew of one person who showed up to vote, only to find that someone had already voted for him.

      Why do we want a vote system that will be left susceptible to voter fraud? How is that supposed to instill confidence that our system isn’t manipulated?

      And these efforts to prevent fraud are a *far* cry from discouraging people from voting, by insisting that they can lose another right by doing so!

      • Richard says:

        It’s a Democrat talking point and that is what NO is. Their goal, of course, is to reduce obstacles to vote fraud. After all 110% of dead and non-existent people vote Democrat.

      • Joe says:

        He’s a Leftist, Democrat Troll.

        Ignore his nonsense.

        • National Observer says:

          “He’s a Leftist, Democrat Troll. Ignore his nonsense.”

          Heh. :-)

          I am not now and never have been a member of the Democrat Party.

          I have been a member of the Republican Party for short periods as required to support the candidacies of personal friends or other people I liked.

          I never worked in a Democrat campaign.

          I have worked in Republican campaigns.

          I never donated to a Democrat campaign or candidate.

          I have donated to Republican campaigns and candidates.

          I do not expect to ever again do any of those things for any political party for the rest of my life.

          The old HCI (remember them?) used to quote things I wrote, as the worst imaginable examples of “what gun owners think.” For example, I think the Second Amendment means we have the right to be equal in arms with our government. All arms, of all types. If I can acquire it honestly, I have the right to possess it.

          But somewhere along the line the “gun rights movement” crossed the line from being a “cause” to a “cult.” A cult in the sense of, if I wanted to participate, there was a whole panoply of things I was required to not only believe, but never to question, if I was going to be allowed to participate. Much like other cults, one of the requirements became that I had to believe in the holiness of a Dear Leader, no matter what the evidence of my senses was telling me.

          And on the day, whenever it was, that the “cause” transitioned to the “cult,” it left me.

          That doesn’t mean I became “anti-gun.” It means that tactically I was not going to defer to a cult as it careened my cause toward disaster. Perhaps I can’t stop that juggernaut, but that does not mean I have speak well of it, and pretend everything is going to be OK. Because I don’t think it is. I think disaster is on the horizon.

          I know better than to think I can persuade cult members of anything. Cults do not tolerate dissenters, at all. But I’m still a pro-gun individual, and my comments are intended to send signals of hope to any of the other Remnant who may still be out there, who see what’s happening, but are peeking in now and then. God knows, we need hope. I’ll speak what I believe.

          If that comes across as “trolling,” I guess that’s just Tough Shit.

        • Richard says:

          All of his stuff below is just more lies from a Democrat. They do that, you know. No one wants to take your guns away. Right.

      • Patrick Henry, the 2nd says:

        Absolutely agree. I don’t understand the desire to not ensure its only one person per vote.

        And they’re argument implies that minorities are too dumb to vote:: its not hard to get an ID.

        • Alpheus says:

          I have heard of one person who is voting against a voter ID proposition because it doesn’t specify what would be considered valid ID — it would be determined after the law is passed. I would vote against that proposition in a heartbeat, because who knows what will be considered a valid ID? If it’s too loose, then there’s too much room for shenanigans, and if it’s too tight, disenfranchisement is bound to occur eventually.

          And how hard could it be to simply say in the proposition, “Driver’s License or US Passport, or any of the supporting documentation requirements used to get a Driver’s License or a Passport”?

          • Patrick Henry, the 2nd says:

            I’d vote against that too. It should be defined for sure- and I like your examples.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. The Democrats are desperate - […] Dirty election tricks in North Dakota.Abuse of campaign funds to help people enter the country illegally. Y'know, if you…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

top