-> If what you say is true, and what Guy says is true, then we lost
-> this battle in the primaries.
I think this is basicly true.
As I understand it, the NRA didn't endorse any of the candidates during
the primaries.
(Apparently, they feel that if they endorse the wrong candidate, they
will have little or no influence with the winner. This position may
need to be re-thought.)
Very few gun owners were enthusiastic about Dole, but we were split
between several candidates.  I, myself, was a Phil Gramm supporter.  I
eventually ended up voting for Steve Forbes in the NY Primary,
principally as a protest against Dole.
And yes, I'm aware that Phil Gramms positions on the 2nd aren't
"perfect".  I dislike some parts of them myself.  I simply considered
him the best "electable" candidate.  Plus, many of his other positions
appealed to the small-l libertarian in me.
Pat Buchanon certainly had the "purest" position on the 2nd.  And
there's no doubt that he says what he means and means what he says.
Which is certainly refreshing in politics.
Trouble is, in my judgement, he would have been unelectable. He simply
scares too many people. It would have been Johnson-Goldwater all over
again, with, I fear, a coat-tail effect that would have lost us
Congress, too.
At least, with the Clinton-Dole race, we have a fighting chance to keep
control of Congress even if Clinton wins . . .
If Dole does lose, I expect the RNC will take a long, hard look at the
primary process.
But that's THEIR problem.  OUR problem is:  how can we effectively unite
gun owners into an effective force that can influence the primaries so
that someone as weakly committed to our rights as Bob Dole is CAN'T win
the nomination?
It's not too early to start kicking this question around.
Any ideas?
Regards
John
--- WILDMAIL!/WC v4.12 
---------------