Interesting GD thread worth scanning for gun related commentary

[jimmy the one]

50. ~half a million calif dem gunowners opposed DiFi...

icon: 46. Yeah, I did- because I knew Emken had no chance. What's your excuse for Begich?

I did not attack begich prior to his election, I remember actually hoping he'd win; I believe I was unaware of the Bloomberg/Watts controversy then. You once again work from a false premise.
So under certain conditions you concede it's ok to attack a democrat in election year, due their gun control stance.

icon: After a close race, he defeated Begich in the general election by 47.96% to 45.83%, a margin of 6,014 votes out of 282,400 cast. The people you steadfastly defend helped torpedo him

Not according to begich himself, since he considered Bloomberg or 'Moms' MDA endorsement a kiss of death:

6/2013: In an interview, Mr. Begich, who faces re-election next year, said he was unbowed by the threat of a Bloomberg-led attack. Indeed, he seemed to almost relish the thought of one. “In Alaska, having a New York mayor tell us what to do? The guy who wants to ban Big Gulps?” Mr. Begich asked incredulously. “If anything, it might help me,” http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/12/nyregion/bloomberg-urges-no-gifts-to-democrats-who-blocked-gun-bill.html

I have posted this numerous times, so stop posting your unsupported twaddle.

icon: Nor did I defend those seeking to defund her camapaign.

.. I didn't either (not that they were trying to 'defund') until 2015, so you foot stick again (DGS/MDA withheld support, which is their prerogative, and they did not support the republican opponents).
.. your false premise above rests on EGS/MDA being obliged to fund a candidate's campaign. MDA & EGS were not obliged to fund begich or pryor's campaigns, or anyones; if anything they were giving donations, and it is their prerogative to donate to whom they want.

icon: You, sir, defend those who attack Democrats seeking reelection. Your own words demonstrate this

There are perhaps 8 or 9 million gun owners in California, perhaps 3 or 4 million of them democrat. Amongst those 4 million dems, there are likely hundreds of thousands of them who attacked Diane Feinstein during her 2012 election campaign. Some of them did not support Feinstein with donations. Some criticized others for donating to Feinstein's campaign. Some didn't even vote for her, either abstained or voted republican. Are you saying all those democrat gun owners in California who acted this way were despicable or something?
You argue the ABSURD. You will stand there & type that you yourself have never defended someone who previously attacked a democrat seeking reelection? you hoist on your own petard, I would think most people would have, either intentionally or inadvertently.