National Let's go Brandon (Herrera)!

[TTSX]

May I suggest you watch his YouTube site for a deeper understanding?

Suggestion noted, I'll pass at this time, though. Not interested in over the top you toobz as is my impression.

 

[1775usmc]

Not everyone is a single issue voter…..

 

[CamoDeafie]

Not everyone is a single issue voter…..

I'd say most everyone is. It just depends on which single issue is the priority and it is abundantly clear that 2A, or even the Constitution/Bill of Rights is just not the #1 priority for a vast majority of voters across the board

 

[1775usmc]

I'd say most everyone is. It just depends on which single issue is the priority and it is abundantly clear that 2A, or even the Constitution/Bill of Rights is just not the #1 priority for a vast majority of voters across the board

True. Everyone has their top priorities. That's a better way of saying it. And the 2A is not everyone's top priority. Lucky for me my main priorities/values fall in line with the same politicians that "claim" to be Pro 2A. So I get that as a gimme even if it's not at the top of my list. Even though I don't expect them to follow through on any of their "promises."

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

May I suggest you watch his YouTube site for a deeper understanding?

Poe's Law has entered the chat!

 

[lucusloc]

You aren't wrong, at this time it is clearly a partisan issue, and that is literally my point and all you did there was spell out exactly what I was saying and layout why we need to do all we can to make it a nonpartisan issue

We make it a nonpartizan issue by making it a partizan issue that can win. When the Democrats see that they are actually losing votes they would otherwise win due to their stance on the issue they will consider changing their policy position on the issue. They will not do that while their main base is rabidly anti-gun and they can only hope to court a tiny faction of voters who would not otherwise consider them.

What this means is that we need to show that anyone with a pro-gun stance is a viable candidate, not just "clean and respectable" candidates that would be viable anyway (exactly like Tony Gonzales was, despite voting pretty anti-2A). The more fringe and outside the mainstream they are the harder this point is driven home.

On that issue Brandon is actually a less than ideal candidate, as he is indeed pretty mainstream. He is one of the most popular "GunTubers" with over 4 million subscribers, a huge social media following, highly active, known and respected in the gun industry itself, known and active in charity spaces, and overall widely known as a great person. Compare that to actual edgelords like FPS Russia, who were not exactly a good look for gun ownership and actually wound up with legal issues as a result of it. To the point, when characters like FPS Russia become viable candidates simply because we are so fed up with anti-gun bullbubblegum and will take anyone with a pro-gun stance over the alternatives, then we will have given the Democrats a reason to rethink their stance on gun control. In short when our own pro-gun idiot politicians like the AOCs and Crocketts of the left start winning is when we have actually won, not before.

Until we can do that there is no reason in hell for the Democrats to change their stance. They already win with far-left loonies, and their anti-gun brand is seen as helping with that, not hindering. As long as people like Brandon Herrera are considered "too spicy" for some segment of the gun owning community the Democrats will be safe knowing their anti-2A position is effectively unassailable.

 

[PNW_Dove]

I hope he continues his fight for 2A

 

[CamoDeafie]

I hope he continues his fight for 2A

If he can get more of his fellow Reps to get behind him on 2A legislation (like maybe, repeal NFA and Hughes Amendment?), it'd be great. Simply sponsoring such bills and putting the news out to a wider audience may be good.

 

[raftman]

The post you were quoting was about me, so I took it, by extension, that your comment was at least in part directed at me, so mea culpa if I got that wrong


I guess I'll have to take your word for that, I don't hang out on any forums were anything like that tends to come up, I'm just here to do my part in bringing people together in support of the 2nd Amendment.


You aren't wrong, at this time it is clearly a partisan issue, and that is literally my point and all you did there was spell out exactly what I was saying and layout why we need to do all we can to make it a nonpartisan issue

I think in general, you are indeed an example of the kind of person I characterized. For example in this thread you've reflexively attacked Herrera by misrepresenting out-of-context quotes, but in other threads, you've dutifully come to the defense of Ilhan Omar.

Does it not illustrate my point when one opposes a very pro-2A candidate on a such an insubstantial basis as "I don't like his immature humor" while defending a virulently anti-2A candidate at the same time?

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

but in other threads, you've dutifully come to the defense of Ilhan Omar.

So in your world "not attacking" is exactly the same as defending?

I'm not sure why this is so hard for anybody to understand but let me try one more time:
We will lose on 2a if we don't get more people on board and that "immature humor" that you seem to be OK with is something that will not only cost us votes it ads absolutely nothing to the defensive of 2a
If you want to change my mind on that all you have to do is show me that we have people that appreciate that level of sense of humor that would not vote for 2a friendly candidate if they didn't talk like that
To keep you from going overboard, let me stress that I am not saying that a 2a friendly candidate needs to be "work" have purple hair or piercings where God never intended there to be holes, all they need to do is not talk like an ill mannered 13-year-old boy trying to impress other 13 year-old boys

Probably like most issues there's 30% on one side and 30% on the other that will never change their mind or vote differently than they ever have and it's the people in the middle that we need to move to our side
But if you are ok with continuing to lose just because you like defending that kind of talk I guess that's where we're at

 

[lucusloc]

We will lose on 2a if we don't get more people on board and that "immature humor" that you seem to be OK with is something that will not only cost us votes it ads absolutely nothing to the defensive of 2a

This won't happen no matter who the candidate is if you choose to adopt the talking points of their opponents. You can whine all you want about his sense of humor, the fact remains that he is popular because of it. His latest Darwin Awards video is a perfect example of this;

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AhrNTQvZa4


Over 1 million views in 1 day, that is the kind of visibility the 2A needs to become mainstream. And for all your whining about his humor, this type of video is also what the 2A needs to keep up an exemplary safety track record, as Brandon explains throughout the video.

In summary, no candidate is good enough when you adopt the language of our enemy, Brandon has a well established track record that is in direct contradiction to any criticism you have put against him and trying to couch anti-2A rhetoric against one of our best candidates as "looking out for the interests of 2A advocacy" is not fooling anyone.

 

[raftman]

So in your world "not attacking" is exactly the same as defending?

…

No, defending means actively defending.

But if you are ok with continuing to lose just because you like defending that kind of talk I guess that's where we're at

There have been pretty much zero examples of any progressive "pro-2A" people ever having helped with any "wins" for the exact reasons I've already provided. They tend to support progressive candidates despite their strongly anti-2A positions and oppose right-leaning candidates despite their 2A position. This means anti-2A candidates have zero reason try and appease ANY pro-2A people… some will vote for them anyways no matter what, and others will vote against them no matter what… so what exactly is the point?

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

Jesus Christ on a cracker!!!
Why is reading comprehension so hard? Are you all just so intent on attacking me that you don't even read what I say? I specifically said they DO NOT have to adapt the "language of the enemy"

This is the stupidest Purity Spiral that I have seen on here, where I'm not a True Believer because I refuse to accept the juvenile humor is part and parcel of being a REAL 2a supporter

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

No, defending means actively defending.

OK, cool so then you must've been thinking about somebody else because I never actively defend her

 

[bradsteen]

FWIW, Herrera makes it very clear when he's being serious and when he's joking in his videos. I think some of his humor is a little over the top, and I disagree with some of his positions on non-2A subjects. That said, he is very good at clearly articulating his positions, backing them up with specific examples and facts, and describing potential impacts of various related decisions. In my opinion that skill is much needed when it comes to 2A, as most of our "pro-2A" representatives don't know the first thing about guns or the gun industry. That knowledge comes across more powerfully than hand-wavy emotional outbursts from anti-gun candidates.

 

[lucusloc]

I specifically said they DO NOT have to adapt the "language of the enemy"

And yet that is exactly what you have done on this very thread, and there are many more examples of you doing just that elsewhere on this forum as well. You say one thing, yet do another.

 

[raftman]

OK, cool so then you must've been thinking about somebody else because I never actively defend her

I've known of maybe three or four legitimately honest progressives, ever. This is proof positive you aren't one of them.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

Sometimes....
It ain't so much , what is said...it is more of how it is said.

From my perspective...the above is why I don't really care for the fella in the OP....
As in someone who represents me and what I like.

The above also applies to many posts I have read here at NWFA.

However...
If...what is said or posted...honest....Even if I disagree with it...
Then I'll take that any day over a message that I may like for how it was said...
And what was said ...but full of lies and other assorted B.S.

Andy

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

I've known of maybe three or four legitimately honest progressives, ever. This is proof positive you aren't one of them.

Well, I never claimed to be a progressive so I guess, cool story, bro

 

[raftman]

Well, I never claimed to be a progressive so I guess, cool story, bro

Ah, so you just come to their defense and attack their detractors for no reason at all? See what I mean about dishonesty?