If I-1639 Passed Because of Lazy Voters, What Would It Take To Turn Them Out?

[Boss]

Yes, it is important to remember there were almost 1.2 MILLION No votes. Those aren't the problem. The problem was the ~2 Million registered voters that didn't return a ballot. If ~ half (1M voters) were for 'our' side, and could have gotten their ballots in, that could have been enough for the win.

There's big republican $$ out there (Super PACS, etc), tapping into it is the problem. And finding conservative folks willing to stop being 'inherently conservative' for a couple weeks and help encourage/enable others to vote. Time, effort, energy.

But the elections are over...the clock can't be turned back.

Efforts would be much better served to focus on what can be done in the future...1639 lawsuit, outreach efforts, peaceful rally in Olympia...imagine if even just 10% of the NO voters showed up for a peaceful show of solidarity. THAT would make the news...(tho the MSM would try to show up at early when people were just staring to arrive and claim there were only 'a few' camo-clad demonstrators ).

BOSS

 

[kenjo]

Voter turnout for this election was about 62%. I-1639 passed with only 39% of eligible voters casting a yes vote. Getting our side to vote is the problem. If the NO votes were 40% of the registered voters the initiative would have failed. Our rights are being taken away by less than half the voters.

 

[LaVbRef]

Agreed with King County voters ruling the state. And it has turned into a tyranny of the majority with little to no room for any dissent.

 

[arakboss]

Voter turnout for this election was about 62%. I-1639 passed with only 39% of eligible voters casting a yes vote. Getting our side to vote is the problem. If the NO votes were 40% of the registered voters the initiative would have failed. Our rights are being taken away by less than half the voters.

I am no campaign expert but 62% turnout seems like a very healthy turnout, especially for a midterm election. Since I-1639 passed by a 60/40 margin, it would be difficult to imagine where those no votes would have come from. Gun rights supporters had much to loose in this election so we would expect the turnout to be very high among them. If the turnout was not high among gun rights supporters, why wasn't it? How can we reliably estimate the turnout among gun rights supporters? In todays world looking at registered republicans won't be an accurate measure of gun rights supporters. It is important that we get a grip on how the numbers broke down so we can direct our efforts to places where they will have the most impact.

edit my bad math %

 

[oli700]

California rust has covered the west coast. 30 years ago I remember my Dad and Gramps having this discussion on numbers of voters vs numbers of gun owners in California , gramps in California was a big gun guy.......It happens slow and by just enough to give you hope for the next election cycle .......just make sure to hide some so when the left thinks they have us disarmed and come for the rest , we have an answer for those commies

 

[Stomper]

I'll tell you what the problem is with the citizenry in this country....(roughly speaking) slightly less than 1% of citizens serve in the armed forces. That means 99% have no "mental" skin in the game and tend to take the BLESSING of living in this country for granted.

Now I'm not saying you can't be a responsible patriot unless you serve, but the point is "something given is not valued", "something earned is priceless"... few are willing to "put their shoulder to the plow" and would rather have someone else do the heavy lifting.



You don't know peace until you've had suffering.

 

[Boss]

^^ But I donated $20 to the NRA/SAF/etc...

Those days are kinda done.

They're engaging, in part, in tried & true divide & conquer...and it's an effective tactic. Get the non-gun owners on their side of course. Then do things like divide a wedge between fudds and other gun owners who believe the 2A isn't about hunting. Regulate into oblivion the 'icky, scary' gun owners and then go back and legislatively take out the fudds (they'll easily roll over...they already are).

It's part of the boiled-frog 'long game.'

Because, once 1639 is put into effect...*poof* we'll all start seeing massive improvements, particularly in Seattle and King Co. The drug and homeless problem (a genuine epidemic) will just start clearing up. Mercer mess...gone. Affordable housing...presto...done. And most importantly, all criminals will see the err of their ways, reform and start leading fully productive lives...heck maybe even coach the little league team.

Yep, it'll be a gosh darn Utopia.

And if it doesn't, well...proof then that 1639 didn't go far enough and with solemn faces 'more must be done.'

Sorta like the last two initiatives...funny how the other side isn't singing the praises of all the successes and crime reduction from those. (largely irrelevant...the main point is that it slowly gets people conditioned to the idea of forthcoming steps).

Boss

 

[ma96782]

IMHO....

WA needs to get away from initiative legislation and voting by mail.

Think about it. The LEFT has just been able to "infringe" on my RIGHT to keep and bear arms, without changing the Constitution of the USA. Done. Under the disguise of the "reasonable and common sense" mantra. Rrrrright......reasonable and common sense according to the likes of the Brady Bunch* and other gun grabbers. But I know, it's just the "start".

*READ the statute.....it mentions the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (18 U.S.C. Sec. 921 et seq.) many times.

It's time to get the big money manipulators out of the initiative process.

As for voting by mail.....it's not hard to imagine ways to cheat an election. IMHO, it's ripe for fraud.

Aloha, Mark

 

[Boss]

^^The extremists don't care about the 2A, and wish to abolish it. So violating it doesn't bother them. At.All.

BOSS

 

[kenjo]

Since I-1639 declares that anyone under the age of 21 is not responsible enough to possess firearms, even though they can enlist or be drafted into the military and can vote, it shouldn't be much of a stretch for a defense lawyer to demand that his gang banger client who is on trial for some violent crime must not be tried as an adult. According to I-1639 he/she/zit does not have the Constitutional rights of an adult. Therefore, he/she/zit must be tried as a juvenile and criminal record purged upon reaching the age of 21.

 

[ma96782]

kenjo,



LOL....ever tried using LOGIC with a LIBERAL during a debate?



La, la, la, la, la.....talk to the hand.



YOU got me soooooo.......




Aloha, Mark

 

[Boss]

^^ Silly, it doesn't work that way. It's all selective. Sub-21 year olds (you know, like all those operating multi-thousand lb vehicles on the highway at 60 mph+ in the rain at night) are only immature/unfit/minors when it suits their needs. But when it benefits them, like voting for their causes...you had better RECOGNIZE THEIR RIGHTS!!

Yes, it's confusing when trying to have a rational, logic based discussion. You just have to accept you don't understand and get with their program.

Boss

 

[ma96782]

IMHO, I figure that it has more to do with.....how we (the ROYAL WE) raised them (kids).

So speaking of me .....I'm happy and proud that mine joined the USMC when he graduated from HS. Though, when you think about it.......

WA state has just moved to prevent him from owning a firearm and/or ammunition. Rrrrright......old enough to fight and possibly die for his country. But, not old enough (responsible enough) to own a firearm?

What did the kids learn in school?

Yes, the infection was widely spread.

When my son was in HS, there were many totally clueless individuals (including teachers) who knew little to nothing about gun ownership issues. OK, Ok, ok.....my concerns didn't exactly match his concerns all of the time (video games, girls, cars, etc.....) but, we did agree on firearm ownership issues.

Aloha, Mark

 

[Caveman Jim]

IMHO....

WA needs to get away from initiative legislation and voting by mail.

Think about it. The LEFT has just been able to "infringe" on my RIGHT to keep and bear arms, without changing the Constitution of the USA. Done. Under the disguise of the "reasonable and common sense" mantra. Rrrrright......reasonable and common sense according to the likes of the Brady Bunch* and other gun grabbers. But I know, it's just the "start".

*READ the statute.....it mentions the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (18 U.S.C. Sec. 921 et seq.) many times.

It's time to get the big money manipulators out of the initiative process.

As for voting by mail.....it's not hard to imagine ways to cheat an election. IMHO, it's ripe for fraud.

Aloha, Mark

I've been harping on this from the start, who can trust the Fox in the hen house? I sure as Bubblegum's don't!!!

I have checked my vote with the county for years & today, over 1 week after, they still have not shown my actual vote just that it has been recieved & tabulated!!!

 

[ma96782]

I've been harping on this from the start, who can trust the Fox in the hen house? I sure as Bubblegum's don't!!!

I have checked my vote with the county for years & today, over 1 week after, they still have not shown my actual vote just that it has been recieved & tabulated!!!

I "lost" my voting ballot.


Please sir, may I have another?

Mind you that I wouldn't break the law. But then.....if someone wanted to vote more than once. I am convinced that it's not really that hard to do. I mean.....how do they ensure that my "lost" ballot is taken out of the pile?

Aloha, Mark

 

[Slobray]

In all honesty I think they cheated.
I think gun owners DID turn out, Especially with what was at stake.

I think the pro gun residents of Washington were robbed with this election and those bills.

100% agree. I even mentioned it before the votes were "counted"- No on 1639 SW Washington Organization and messaging


Ray

 

[awshoot]

This got me to thinking about my own family. While not religious, all solidly conservative and Republican. By no means anti-gun, but not "enthusiasts" and I'm pretty sure my gun-owning, retired cop Dad would have been okay with l-1639 if he lived here. Mom and Big Sis too... we can all get together, have a good laugh and shake our heads over the antics of liberals and SJWs, but in the end I think they would have voted for 1639 even if I asked them not to and explained what it is.

I think those people are legion and unreachable... it's why "common sense" infringements shouldn't be put on the ballot. There's no accountability.

This is a good assessment. For example, the Seattle Times has a heavily slanted article about the SAF/NRA lawsuit against 1639. First comment:



Article link: Gun-rights advocates file lawsuit to block I-1639, the gun regulations measure approved by Washington voters

Or take a look at the Spokane County results: 107,791 FOR vs 104,084 AGAINST. Walla Walla? 11432 FOR, 12783 AGAINST. When we can't even get 50%, or just barely break 50%, in E. WA, there's no hope to counter King county and at least some of that has to do with gun owners who don't give a shirt about the 2A (they don't even have the usual excuse of not wanting to be a single issue voter and thus voting for an Anti2A candidate because of other issues -- a ballot initiative is a direct question on one topic).

Honestly, I'm pessimistic about the future of the Bill of Rights in general. The initiative process should not be allowed to touch on Constitutional matters -- too much risk of a tyranny of the majority over fundamental human rights.