It's nice to see a Democrat with a good head to go along with her good intentions

[dank69]

Didn't really know much about her before this article.

Against assault weapon ban
Realizes economy should be #1 priority instead of climate change and gun control
Intends to vote on behalf of the people of her state rather than just go along with Obama's agenda

I think this is the result that a heavily red state has on their elections. It forces the Democrats to really think about what the people need in order to connect with them. It also helps keep them grounded.

Hopefully she and others like her can help turn the D's focus to the economy instead of getting sidetracked with all these pet projects. I know it's a long shot, but I can dream, can't I?

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Against assault weapon ban
Realizes economy should be #1 priority instead of climate change and gun control
Intends to vote on behalf of the people of her state rather than just go along with Obama's agenda

This alone makes me raise an eyebrow and ask "Can it be?!"

I'll admit, those stats alone is enough for me to ask if she isn't simply one amongst the circle jerk passing around a bong.

 

[nehalem256]

Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D., defied the odds in November when she won the closest senate race in the country, and now that she's arrived in Washington, she's defiant as ever

I think that explains a lot.

 

[Ausm]

I think that explains a lot.

It explains she was outspent 3 to 1 like most Dems were and still won!

 

[Genx87]

It explains she was outspent 3 to 1 like most Dems were and still won!

It explains democrats from ND are conservative. afaik ND has sent democrats to DC for the past 20 years in the house and 30 years in the senate.

 

[dank69]

It explains democrats from ND are conservative. afaik ND has sent democrats to DC for the past 20 years in the house and 30 years in the senate.

I don't consider these to be conservative positions, even though conservatives like to claim them as their own. I think of them more as centrist positions, or "common sense" as it used to be known. If Democrats would be willing to stay focused and prioritize we would all be better off. The economy has to be priority #1.

 

[philipma1957]

Didn't really know much about her before this article.

Against assault weapon ban
Realizes economy should be #1 priority instead of climate change and gun control
Intends to vote on behalf of the people of her state rather than just go along with Obama's agenda

I think this is the result that a heavily red state has on their elections. It forces the Democrats to really think about what the people need in order to connect with them. It also helps keep them grounded.

Hopefully she and others like her can help turn the D's focus to the economy instead of getting sidetracked with all these pet projects. I know it's a long shot, but I can dream, can't I?

I am pro gun. I just don't understand why people want Assault weapons with clips of 33 or 50 rounds.

Here me out on this. You can get a bushmaster rifle with clips of 10. Now if I felt my home was in danger and I wanted to defend it with a bushmaster rifle. I would want 3 rifles and dozens of clips of ten. My kid would be the reloader and I could fire endless rounds in defense of my home. So why do I need a clip with 33 or 5o rounds of ammo? Hmmm lets see what are these called "Assault weapons"

So personally I have zero issues with a guy having 3 ,4, 5, 6 bushmasters with dozens of clips of ten. Since carrying all that to do an assault would not be to easy. Using all that to defend your home would be easy.

 

[diesbudt]

Didn't really know much about her before this article.

Against assault weapon ban
Realizes economy should be #1 priority instead of climate change and gun control
Intends to vote on behalf of the people of her state rather than just go along with Obama's agenda

I think this is the result that a heavily red state has on their elections. It forces the Democrats to really think about what the people need in order to connect with them. It also helps keep them grounded.

Hopefully she and others like her can help turn the D's focus to the economy instead of getting sidetracked with all these pet projects. I know it's a long shot, but I can dream, can't I?

This is how all politicians should run, try their best to follow what their state wants, and less on what their party wants.

Even if i am completely against something, if the majority of this country want it. So be it.

 

[irishScott]

Yep, from what I can tell she's one of the good ones. We need more like her.

 

[dank69]

I am pro gun. I just don't understand why people want Assault weapons with clips of 33 or 50 rounds.

Here me out on this. You can get a bushmaster rifle with clips of 10. Now if I felt my home was in danger and I wanted to defend it with a bushmaster rifle. I would want 3 rifles and dozens of clips of ten. My kid would be the reloader and I could fire endless rounds in defense of my home. So why do I need a clip with 33 or 5o rounds of ammo? Hmmm lets see what are these called "Assault weapons"

So personally I have zero issues with a guy having 3 ,4, 5, 6 bushmasters with dozens of clips of ten. Since carrying all that to do an assault would not be to easy. Using all that to defend your home would be easy.

I don't really want to turn this thread into yet another gun debate thread. Suffice it to say you are entitled to your opinion and I just don't happen to agree with it.

 

[Incorruptible]

Couldn't find too much about her views but good for her for taking a stand against the obama agenda and refusing to attack the 2nd Amendment. I need more information about her views to make an accurate judgement

In that article it says she supports the XL Pipeline which obama will definitely be against due to his cronies and special interests

Hopefully she stands her ground and and takes a stand for the people.

 

[irishScott]

I am pro gun. I just don't understand why people want Assault weapons with clips of 33 or 50 rounds.

Here me out on this. You can get a bushmaster rifle with clips of 10. Now if I felt my home was in danger and I wanted to defend it with a bushmaster rifle. I would want 3 rifles and dozens of clips of ten. My kid would be the reloader and I could fire endless rounds in defense of my home. So why do I need a clip with 33 or 5o rounds of ammo? Hmmm lets see what are these called "Assault weapons"

So personally I have zero issues with a guy having 3 ,4, 5, 6 bushmasters with dozens of clips of ten. Since carrying all that to do an assault would not be to easy. Using all that to defend your home would be easy.

Alright, not to be an ass, but that kid-as-a-reloader thing.. yeah I don't think that would work. Namely because I'd think you'd want your kid as far away from the shooting as possible, and you'd be trusting a kid to be stable enough under lethal stress.

But in any case, the Virginia Tech shooter, for the worst shooting in US history, carried one handgun of 10 round capacity and one of 15, with 19 reloads in a backpack. The weight of the magazines didn't stop him. Ammunition/magazine weight only really matters if you're hiking long distances or are severely out of shape.

As for why people want them, there are numerous arguments, practical and philosophical. The practical argument is in a self defense scenario, with adrenaline pumping and shots being fired, you want to reload as little as possible. Those 2 seconds make a difference when someone's shooting at you. The philosophical argument is that the 2nd amendment was put in place so the states could rebel if the federal government became tyrannical. Given that the military issues 30 round magazines, giving civilians access to that same capacity fulfills the proper role of a counterweight. Note that there's a difference between arms and ordnance, I'm not arguing civilians should be allowed to own anti-tank rockets.

But agree or disagree, let's not derail the thread too much.

 

[thraashman]

Realizes economy should be #1 priority instead of climate change and gun control

Intends to vote on behalf of the people of her state rather than just go along with Obama's agenda

For the first one I think that's remarkably a stupid thing to say. Just because there are also OTHER issues doesn't mean that the economy is being ignored. Human beings have the remarkable ability to multitask. Just because a football team has Peyton Manning and their passing game is super important, doesn't mean they have to then ignore the run game, kicking game, and defense.

And the second one is amusing to see considering that the GOP is consistently ignoring the wishes of the American people to go lock in step with the party. Hell they're now looking at trying to rig the election system rather than fix their party platform.

 

[irishScott]

For the first one I think that's remarkably a stupid thing to say. Just because there are also OTHER issues doesn't mean that the economy is being ignored. Human beings have the remarkable ability to multitask. Just because a football team has Peyton Manning and their passing game is super important, doesn't mean they have to then ignore the run game, kicking game, and defense.

And the second one is amusing to see considering that the GOP is consistently ignoring the wishes of the American people to go lock in step with the party. Hell they're now looking at trying to rig the election system rather than fix their party platform.

Are you for real?

1. You're either saying that the economy is taken care of (lol) or that gun control and climate change are more important than the economy.

No one's saying we should focus on the economy and nothing else, but the precedence that gun control and climate change are getting over the economy is pathetic.

2. Because two wrongs make a right? Liberals play partisan football just as much as conservatives, they just have a different play-style.

 

[thraashman]

Are you for real?

1. You're either saying that the economy is taken care of (lol) or that gun control and climate change are more important than the economy.

No one's saying we should focus on the economy and nothing else, but the precedence that gun control and climate change are getting over the economy is pathetic.

2. Because two wrongs make a right? Liberals play partisan football just as much as conservatives, they just have a different play-style.

They're constantly talking about the economy. You hear about it all the time. But you seem to think that because you EVER hear about anything else that they're not talking about the economy, or because in one speech the economy isn't brought up that it's been forgot about. In the middle of the gun control debate right after Sandy Hook you had the news shift to be dominated by the fiscal cliff. Then immediately after that talk about the debt ceiling. And climate change is one of those things that gets like a week or two worth of attention a year. By that logic the GOP hasn't cared about the economy since September because you can't stop hearing about Benghazi from them.

And while liberals also play partisan politics, to say they play it as much as conservatives is just flat out wrong. They don't play that game anywhere near as much. Anyone without their head up their ass can see that clearly.

 

[irishScott]

They're constantly talking about the economy. You hear about it all the time. But you seem to think that because you EVER hear about anything else that they're not talking about the economy, or because in one speech the economy isn't brought up that it's been forgot about. In the middle of the gun control debate right after Sandy Hook you had the news shift to be dominated by the fiscal cliff. Then immediately after that talk about the debt ceiling. And climate change is one of those things that gets like a week or two worth of attention a year. By that logic the GOP hasn't cared about the economy since September because you can't stop hearing about Benghazi from them.

And while liberals also play partisan politics, to say they play it as much as conservatives is just flat out wrong. They don't play that game anywhere near as much. Anyone without their head up their ass can see that clearly.

Yes, I hear about the economy about as much as I hear about Mali, more than I hear about climate change, and less than I hear about gun control. Even during the fiscal cliff it was about 50/50 fiscal cliff/gun control.

The politicans and media alike are mostly doing what they do best, focusing on secondary, emotionally stimulating issues and saving the meaty problems until the 11th hour. Anyone without their head up their ass can see that clearly.


Wait until the next Republican gets elected, and we'll see just how the lefties choose to vote.

 

[Mursilis]

This is how all politicians should run, try their best to follow what their state wants, and less on what their party wants.

That's fair up to a point, but when your state wants something that isn't so hot for the other 49 states (for example, farm subsidies), I take issue. I think members of Congress should put the whole nation first, and the demands of their individual state or district second (although that could be political suicide).

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Democrats run right in red states; Republicans run left in blue states.

The major difference seems to be that Democrats used to be a little more tolerant of their politicians leaning to the other side than the Republicans, whereas now Democrats are a lot more tolerant of that. You don't see too many right-leaning Democrats successfully primaried from the left, while the opposite is routine among Republicans.

 

[HumblePie]

If she follows through as what she claims she will, I wish her a long political career. Maybe even pres? Maybe.

 

[dank69]

For the first one I think that's remarkably a stupid thing to say. Just because there are also OTHER issues doesn't mean that the economy is being ignored. Human beings have the remarkable ability to multitask. Just because a football team has Peyton Manning and their passing game is super important, doesn't mean they have to then ignore the run game, kicking game, and defense.

That isn't really the point. I know congress can multitask. That's why I said "#1 priority" and not "the only priority." I will say this, though: the surest way to hand power back over to the GOP is to stick with pushing more gun control.

And the second one is amusing to see considering that the GOP is consistently ignoring the wishes of the American people to go lock in step with the party. Hell they're now looking at trying to rig the election system rather than fix their party platform.

It's important that the Democrats do not do the same thing, otherwise they will prove the naysayers correct when they say there is no difference between the two parties.