This is how you know the gun control crowd is in trouble

When the campaign season fired up, Democrats were convinced that gun control was not only going to be a huge issue but a winning one for them. Candidates laid out their anti-Second Amendment credentials and they started pushing for things like universal background checks and assault weapon bans.

Uvalde, in theory, should have sealed the deal.

However, what happened in Texas turned out to have just as much, if not more to do with school security than firearm laws, and the public has, for the most part, moved onto more pressing issues.

This is especially true after Bruen. That decision pretty much laid the groundwork for dismantling gun control and everyone knows it, so running on new rules isn’t likely to be a winning strategy. Even if you pass them, what are the odds they’ll hold up?

And if you had any doubt that’s true, then maybe the fact that gun rights are looking to gain ground in Illinois should remove those doubts.

With some on the campaign trail saying there needs to be more gun control, a gun rights group sees legal victories in the future.

Candidates like incumbent Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker have been on the campaign trail saying the state must pass stricter gun control following several mass shooting events.

“In the aftermath of Highland Park, I grieved with the families and called for an assault weapons ban and a ban on high capacity magazines,” Pritzker said at a recent campaign stop with gun control advocates.…

[Guns Save Life Executive Director John] Boch expects a challenge against the state’s Firearm Owner’s Identification Card to succeed, something he says will do away with the state-issued ID for gun owners.

“Gun control does not impact the ability of criminals to carry guns, it only impacts the ability for law abiding citizens to have guns and use guns to protect their families from violent crime,” Boch said.

Now, this isn’t quite as good as Illinois voters turning against gun control. That would be far preferable, to be honest.

But any repeal of the unconstitutional FOID requirement is huge, and it’s likely to create ramifications across the nation since Illinois isn’t the only state with a permit-to-purchase requirement. That gets especially interesting if Oregon passes Measure 114, which would require a permit to purchase a firearm for that state’s residents as well.

At least, it will eventually.

Right now, it kind of feels like we’re in this weird place. Politicians are pushing for gun control left and right, eager to strip us of our rights and our ability to defend ourselves, all in the name of doing it “for your own good,” but the court decisions are dropping in our favor, also left and right.

If Illinois residents see profound gun rights gains, as Boch believes, then it will be a clear sign that no matter what the politicians say, our rights will be preserved, at least for now.

It also becomes clear that every election going forward matters because that majority on the Supreme Court cannot be allowed to become endangered.

Do Democrat Gun Owners Believe Democrat Politicians?

Most democrat gun owners support the right to keep and bear arms. There was a time when the Democrat party did too. Unfortunately, that changed decades ago. Today, gun-control and civilian disarmament is all but the official Democrat party position. Do gun-owning democrats believe their own politicians? Even if their particular candidate hasn’t asked to confiscate guns today, he will vote with a party that champions “compensated confiscation” and adding more gun-control to the tens-of-thousands of firearms regulations we already have.

Arizona- Democrat Senator Mark Kelly said “It is fu##ing nuts” not to pass more gun-control laws after the murders at a grocery store in New York and at a school in Texas. Kelly didn’t comment on the fact that the sites of those attacks were “gun free” zones where ordinary citizens were disarmed by law. Kelly says that the police should be armed and we should not. Senator Kelly ignored that hundreds of police officers stood outside an unlocked classroom door while children were being murdered in Uvalde, Texas. Senator Kelly didn’t comment on the hundred-thousand times a year that honest citizens use a long gun to defend themselves.

Georgia- Democrat Senator Raphael Warnock voted to ban modern rifles. Fortunately, that provision did not have enough support to pass the US Senate. The bill he supported would fund cameras in schools, but money could not be spent to put more armed police officers or armed school staff on campus. Senator Warnock wants armed security for himself and for his family, but denies it for our children. Warnock received a “strong endorsement” by the Giffords gun-control organization.

Nevada- Democrat Senator Catherine Masto was a co-sponsor of the bill that encouraged states to enact “red-flag” laws. The idea behind these “red flag” laws is that concerned family members can ask the police to take a relative’s firearms. Most red-flag laws remove a person’s firearms before the individual is represented by legal counsel in court proceedings. Sadly, these laws will allow confiscation without providing mental health treatment. For the last two decades, some states have had mandatory background checks and mental health laws that allowed involuntary confinement and firearms confiscation.  Senator Masto didn’t mention that those states did not reduce their rate of suicide.

Pennsylvania- Lieutenant Governor John Fetterman has said a lot about gun-control. He wants to ban modern rifles. As a US Senator, Fetterman would outlaw both the sale of modern rifles and the possession of existing guns. He doesn’t say how he would remove the 25-million modern rifles that are owned by the public today. He also doesn’t say how disarming honest citizens will stop criminals and the few people who commit mass murder in order to receive worldwide publicity. He wants to make the rest of the US have the gun-control laws found in California, the state which recently had the most mass-murders.

Wisconsin- Senate candidate Mandela Barnes pushed for background checks and red-flag laws. After the attack by ISIS terrorists at a concert in France, Barnes said that people who believe in “God, country, and guns is as dangerous of a rhetoric here as it is over there.” Lieutenant Governor Barnes supported a ban on homemade firearms, bans on modern rifles, and making firearms manufacturers and distributors financially responsible for the actions of criminals who use a gun. Barnes also proposed to ban ammunition magazines that hold more than 20 rounds, though President Biden proposed to lower that limit to 8 rounds. Barned does not say how this would affect the millions of people who legally use a firearm in self-defense each year. Mandela Barnes is endorsed by the Giffords gun-control group .

Utah- Evan McMullin is an independent candidate for the US Senate. His campaign brochure proposed more “sensible gun-safety legislation.” It is hard to tell what that means beyond the fact that McMullin encouraged Utah Senator Mike Lee to follow the example of Senator Mitt Romney and vote with Democrats to move more gun-control legislation through the Senate. McMullin was a CIA operations officer until 2010. McMullin’s previous political experience consists of running against President Donald Trump as an independent in 2016.

Michigan- Democrat Governor Gretchen Whitmer said we need more gun-control. She did not explain which of the existing 23-thousand gun-control regulations failed when a teenager stole his fathers gun and murdered his classmates in a Michigan Highschool. Some county clerks and police departments in Michigan stopped processing firearms applications after 2019. Some counties imposed over a years delay in processing the state required paperwork. Whitmer vetoed legislation that would require government officials to process firearms related permits during “emergencies”. Whitmer called “gun violence” a public health emergency. She did not explain how most counties will not have a murder of any kind, yet more than half of our murders occur in just 2-percent of our counties, mostly in our failing cities.

New York- Governor Kathy Hochul has little use for armed citizens, other than as her security guards. Hochul said, “This whole concept that a good guy with a gun will stop the bad guys with a gun, it doesn’t hold up. And the data bears this out, so that theory is over.” She ignores the 1.7-2.5 million times an armed citizen uses a firearm for legally justified self-defense. She called for and signed the sweeping new gun-control bills that made most of New York state into a “gun-free” zone. Somehow, Governor Hochul ignored the fact that mass murderers perfer “gun-free” zones.

Massive amounts of gun-control have been tried for decades. We are told that that mountain of laws didn’t stop violent crime, but the next gun-control law is sure to work. After missing the target 23-thousand times, I’m skeptical that the next gun-control law will work any better than the rest. Do Democrat gun owners believe that?

 

Another Church in New York files suit

New York Church Challenges State Ban on Firearms in Houses of Worship

New York Church Challenges State Ban on Firearms in Houses of Worship
First Liberty Institute, Clement & Murphy, and Ganguly Brothers challenge law adopted by NY legislature just days after Supreme Court struck down numerous state restrictions on firearms

Rochester, NY—First Liberty Institute and the law firms Clement & Murphy PLLC and Ganguly Brothers PLLC filed a federal lawsuit against the state of New York challenging the state’s prohibition on firearms at houses of worship.  The suit was filed on behalf of His Tabernacle Family Church, a nondenominational Christian church in Horseheads, New York, founded by Pastor Micheal Spencer.

You can read the complaint here.

Erin Murphy, Partner at Clement & Murphy said, “No American should be forced to sacrifice one constitutionally protected freedom to enjoy another.  Houses of worship have a constitutionally protected freedom to decide for themselves whether to allow otherwise legally possessed firearms into their facilities.”

“Singling out houses of worship for total disarmament demonstrates hostility toward religion, leaves them defenseless to rebuff violent attacks, and defies at least two recent Supreme Court rulings against New York.  Religious leaders are no less qualified than secular business owners to determine whether to allow carrying a firearm for self-defense, and New York should end its defiant assault on First and Second Amendment freedoms,” added Jordan Pratt, Senior Counsel at First Liberty Institute.

In late 2020, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo, chiding New York for singling out religious groups and restricting how they worship in violation of the First Amendment.  And in June 2022, the Court issued its opinion in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, invalidating New York’s unprecedented effort to limit individuals’ ability to carry a firearm outside the home.  Just days later, New York enacted expansive new laws restricting the carrying of firearms outside the home, including a total ban on carrying in houses of worship.  New York now imposes criminal liability on any person who carries a firearm into a place of worship regardless of whether that person possesses a license to carry a firearm under New York law, and regardless of whether the religious community would prefer to authorize congregants to carry a firearm.  Secular business owners, by contrast, are allowed to choose for themselves whether to allow firearms on their premises.

“Those decisions,” the complaint states, “should have taught New York to proceed with extreme caution where First or Second Amendment rights are at stake going forward.  Instead, the state recently doubled down on its rights-denying tendencies—by infringing two fundamental liberties at the same time.  New York now puts houses of worship and religious adherents to an impossible choice:  forfeit your First Amendment right to religious worship or forfeit your Second Amendment right to bear arms for self-defense.”  The complaint adds, “New York’s attempt to force houses of worship and their parishioners to choose between their First Amendment rights and their Second—an outlier policy shared by no other state in the Nation—stands as an act of defiance to the Supreme Court’s recent and emphatic holdings protecting both.”

A historian 50 years from now, if historians are allowed to write in this country and if there are still free publishing houses and a free press, which I’m not certain of. But if that is true, a historian will say, what was at stake tonight and this week was the fact whether we will be a democracy in the future, whether our children will be arrested and conceivably killed. We’re on the edge of a brutal authoritarian system, and it could be a week away.

Michael Beschloss
Presidential historian
November 3, 2022
NBC historian warns of a future where ‘our children will be arrested and conceivably killed’ if GOP wins

[Interesting…

Is this the same GOP which (sometimes) wants to:

  • Reduce government power
  • Require presidents to get approval of congress to change the law
  • Enable ordinary people to own and purchase weapons to protect themselves from individual criminals as well as criminal governments
  • Enable free speech on social media

It would appear one or more of the following is true about Mr. Beschloss:

  1. He is living in an alternate reality and only makes guest appearances here
  2. He is using some military grade mind altering drugs
  3. He is deliberately engaged in a “The Big Lie” propaganda effort
  4. He is engaged in the projection of his and his fellow political travelers intentions toward the GOP.

I considered adding “extreme hyperbola” to make a point, but multiplying realty by 10, 100, or 1,000 times only results in a larger vector pointing in the wrong direction from what he claims.

This is the kind of rhetoric used to justify mass killings and even genocide.

The election is only four days away. Prepare and respond appropriately.—Joe]

These are called “Palestinian Work Accidents”

It’s always “the end of democracy” when demoncraps are about to lose an election. That’s because “democracy” is just their term for “unchallenged demoncrap power.”

If there was ever a real ‘GOP dictatorship’, these yammerheads wouldn’t be yammering.

BLUF
Republicans need us more than we need them. That’s because, say the Democrats get their supermajorities and pass whatever citizen disarmament edicts they want, appoint judges to uphold them, and equip functionaries to enforce them. There’s one thing no one wants to talk about:

We will not disarm. Surrender our guns? No. Your move. Seriously.

If Republicans want to stay relevant, they’d best realize that, and strap ‘em on so it doesn’t come to that on a large scale. With a growing resigned TINVOWOOT sentiment among gun owners jaded by past betrayals, GOP leadership had best realize they need us fired up if they don’t want that to be a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Republican ‘Commitment to America’ Must Not Take Gun Voters for Granted

U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)- “The Commitment to America represents a new direction and better approach that will get our nation back on track,” House Republicans declare in a plan “Preamble” on Kevin McCarthy’s “Republican Leader” website. “Starting Day One, we will work to deliver an economy that’s strong, a nation that’s safe, a future that’s built on freedom, and a government that’s accountable.”

You can read it in English or watch it in Spanish. The “commitment” itself is divided into four parts:

  • An Economy That’s Strong: (Make America Energy Independent and Reduce Gas Prices; Strengthen the Supply Chain and End Dependence on China)
  • A Nation That’s Safe: (Secure the Border and Combat Illegal Immigration; Reduce Crime and Protect Public Safety; Defend America’s National Security)
  • A Future That’s Built On Freedom: (Make Sure Every Student Can Succeed and Give Parents a Voice; Achieve Longer, Healthier Lives for Americans; Confront Big Tech and Demand Fairness)
  • A Government That’s Accountable: (Preserve Our Constitutional Freedoms; Hold Washington Accountable; Restore the People’s Voice)

Do you know what you have to look hard to find any mention of? The main reason gun owners have for voting Republican is that they will defend the Second Amendment and pledge to repeal infringements. You have to go to the reverse side and the bottom half of their “Commitment to America” pocket card to find a statement that couldn’t be more tepid and equivocal:

“Preserve our Constitutional Freedoms: Uphold free speech, protect the lives of unborn children and their mothers, guarantee religious freedom, and safeguard the Second Amendment.”

With even the most rabid gun-grabbers claiming “You can be in favor of the Second Amendment and also understand that there is no reason in a civil society that we have assault weapons around communities that can kill babies and police officers,” what does “safeguard the Second Amendment” —  with no specifics as to how — even mean?

With the GOP leadership unwilling to use its bully pulpit to defend and educate on the right to keep and bear arms (probably because most of them don’t know how, have a shallow surface understanding, and basically do what their staffers and focus groups tell them will play best to the masses and minimize attacks), it’s no wonder individual candidates are keeping their mouths shut and hoping nobody calls on them to take a position.

Continue reading “”

Biden Midterms Closing Argument: Trump And “Extreme MAGA Republicans” Are “Un-American”.

Compared to Biden’s rage-filled Red Speech, which was infuriatingly insulting, Biden’s speech tonight at Union Station in D.C. was more sad and pathetic. Yes, Biden used a lot of the same rhetoric, but it was more hollow, more disassociated from reality, more bizarre.

An old man shouting at the clouds, while Democrats face a potential electoral catastrophe next week because inflation is out of control, and people are suffering. Instead of addressing what he will do about it, his speech was name calling. And Trump. Again.

“As I stand here today, there are candidates running for every level of office in America — for governor, for Congress, for attorney general, for secretary of state — who won’t commit to accepting the results of the elections they’re in,” he said.

Biden said election deniers have been inspired by Trump, who is pondering a run for president in 2024 just as Biden works to decide if he wants to seek another four-year term.

Biden said “American democracy is under attack” because Trump will not accept the results of the 2020 election that he lost to Biden.

“He refuses to accept the will of the people, he refuses to accept that he lost,” Biden said.

Trump is an obsession for whoever wrote the speech:

The Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol was committed by a mob “whipped up into a frenzy by a president repeating over and over again the big lie that the election of 2020 had been stolen,” he said.

Now, “extreme MAGA Republicans” aim to question not only the legitimacy of past elections, but elections being held now and into the future, Biden warned. They are “trying to succeed where they failed in 2020 to suppress the right of voters and subvert the electoral system itself,” Biden said.

Who is Biden trying to convince? The half of the electorate who voted against him, and the more than half who currently disapprove of his performance? Apparently not, it was a speech to a base that already is going to vote for Democrats.

The disconnect was creepy and in some ways chilling. What does Team Biden have up their sleeve? They can’t be THIS disconnected from reality.

With States Hands-Off, Homeschooling Takes Off.

South Dakota epitomizes the rapid growth of homeschooling in America.  Guided by the principle that parents, not the government, have the right to determine what and how their kids are taught, homeschooling families have overturned existing rules and batted down attempts over the last decade to impose new ones in many states, including South Dakota. 

What’s left in much of the United States today is essentially an honor system in which parents are expected to do a good job without much input or oversight. The rollback of regulations, coupled with the  ill effects of remote learning during the pandemic, have boosted the number of families opting out of public schools in favor of educating their kids at home.  

Reflecting a national trend, the number of children homeschooled in South Dakota rose more than 20% in both of the last two school years. 
Homeschoolers in the Mount Rushmore state advocated for a new law that strips away key pieces of the state’s oversight and eases the way for parents leave public schools. Last year Senate Bill 177 ended the requirement that parents provide annual notice to a district of their intent to homeschool their child. More significantly, homeschool students no longer must take standardized tests, as public schoolers do, or face possible intervention by the school board if they fail.

“It was a big win for parental rights,” says Dan Beasley, then a staff attorney at the influential Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA), which helped craft and pass the legislation. “It cut out unnecessary regulation and streamlined the process so parents can invest their time in providing the best education they can for their children.” 

This freedom stands in contrast to outraged parents who feel powerless over how their  kids are taught in public schools. In high-pitched battles at school board meetings, some take aim at the easing of admissions standards, others at what they see as the promotion of critical race theory and transgender rights, and still others at segregated classrooms and the presence of police officers on campus. And almost everyone is concerned with the sharp decline in already low reading and math scores of students in nearly every state during the pandemic, according to the National Assessment of Educational Progress released in late October.  

For a growing number of parents, homeschooling is the answer to the institutional barriers to the education they believe in. Beyond requirements that homeschooling parents teach a few core subjects like math and English, they are free to pick the content. 

American history, for example, can be all about the glory of the Founding Fathers and the prosperity of free markets, or the oppression of Native Americans and people of color and the struggle for equality. For many homeschoolers, history is taught through a Christian lens, while others follow a standard public school curriculum. 

Home School Legal Defense Association
The regulatory burden on homeschooling, by state.
Home School Legal Defense Association

Parents’ Rights vs. State Control

Continue reading “”

Partially blind man shoots home intruder in buttocks

FRANKLIN, Ohio (WKRC) – A burglary attempt sent a man first to the hospital and then to jail in Franklin early Wednesday morning.

Police say they were called to a home on Park Avenue at about 3:30 a.m. after a homeowner said he shot at a burglar.

“I got a shot off him. He was coming right towards me,” the victim told 911 dispatchers.

The victim’s nephew tells Local 12 that his uncle is partially blind and had just gotten home from the hospital Tuesday evening.

Police, with the assistance of a K-9, followed a trail of blood down an alleyway and found Jeffery Carl, 36, hiding in a shed around the corner. That shed is owned by Joe Lewis, who happens to be a friend of Carl’s.

“My reaction was, ‘Damn, somebody shot that boy in the a**,’” said Lewis.

Carl is no stranger to the victim either and told police the victim was an “uncle, pretty much.” He said he broke into the victim’s house when he did because he thought the victim would still be in the hospital.

“He ain’t a dangerous person. He just got issues like all of us do,” said Lewis. Those issues include a history of drug and weapons charges. The victim’s family says that before he was shot, Carl stole guns and music equipment from the victim.

“I’d have never suspected that because he’s never touched nothing here, ever. And we got $1,000 sticks in there. Huge,” said Lewis.

Carl was taken to Atrium Medical Center and then to jail. Carl will be charged with burglary, according to police. Jail records show he also had a warrant for domestic violence.

“I’m hoping he get it right. Hoping he get his life right,” said Lewis.

Carl is locked up on a $50,000 bond.

BLUF
The bottom line is that it looks like the free ride for some 3,700 Twitter employees is over. Dems like AOC, who’ve enjoyed having the power of the Big Tech censorship lords on their party’s side, are obviously super triggered because Musk intends to transform into Twitter to the even playing field of free speech that it should have always been.

Elon Musk to Pull a Trump-Level ‘You’re Fired!’ on HALF of Twitter’s Workforce.

Even for a guy like Elon Musk, $44 billion is quite a chunk of money to spend on anything, even for the most valuable and influential social media platform in the world.

As often happens in the business world, cost-cutting measures are typically deployed upon acquiring a new business. According to a bombshell Bloomberg report Wednesday night, it appears the first money-saving cuts could come Friday in the way of firing roughly half of Twitter’s entire workforce.

That would be about 3,700 jobs, according to the report. Musk is also set to require a majority of whichever workers are left standing to actually come to work at the office, as we did back in the good ol’ days, effectively ending the work-from-home situation that became the new normal over the course of the pandemic.

Musk, as of this writing, hasn’t commented on Bloomberg’s report, but one Twitter user perfectly summarized why such a massive round of layoffs is probably the logical move at this point. Too many useless managers, and not nearly enough workers.

Bloomberg:

Continue reading “”

Sheriff Judd isn’t a perfect Sheriff, but he’s pretty darn close

Sheriff defends Stand Your Ground law following arrests

Florida’s Stand Your Ground law has been met with controversy for quite some time. A lot of people don’t really understand what’s covered under the law and what isn’t.

The problem is that a lot of those who don’t understand it like to talk about the law as if they do. That leads to a lot of confusion.

And I can’t help but think that’s part of what happened in this case:

A Florida sheriff is justifying his encouragement of residents to shoot intruders “like grated cheese” after two men were charged with opening fire at a woman who they thought was trying to burglarize their home.

Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd said in an interview with the The Orlando Sentinel published Tuesday that he stood by urging his constituents to use lethal force to defend their homes in the wake of Hurricane Ian. Other Florida officials have offered similar advice to residents. But Judd said two of his constituents took it too far…

Two weeks later, Judd announced at an October 17 news conference that Winter Haven resident Gino  Colonacosta, 73, and his 15-year-old son Rocky Colonacosta had been charged with attempted murder, accused of firing seven times at a woman parked outside their home.

Sheriff Judd went on to explain that the two didn’t understand the Stand Your Ground law, which is completely accurate.

The law in question makes it so you don’t have to retreat if faced with a threat to your life. What it doesn’t do is allow you to shoot someone who is simply in the wrong place at the wrong time but no threat to you.

This whole thing started because some medication was misdelivered. The two accused then reportedly freaked because their Ring doorbell told them someone was there, so they started hunting the intruder, then saw the victim sitting in her car and opened fire. Thankfully, they missed her.

Look, people, here’s how it goes. If someone illegally enters your home when you’re there, that’s usually a safe use of the Stand Your Ground law. If someone threatens you with a weapon, that falls under it, too.

What doesn’t, however, is freaking out because your doorbell tells you someone is outside, so you start blasting the first person you see.

Further, someone sitting in their car and doing nothing is. Not. A. Threat.

If they’re trying to run over you? Sure. If they’re just sitting there? Nope.

Can it be suspicious? Absolutely, especially if they just sit there. After all, they might be casing your house or another for robbery. If they’re just hanging there, call the police and let them investigate.

But they could also be a private investigator checking out one of your neighbors. They could be stopped to make a phone call or check their phone for something. They might be waiting for someone and just got the address wrong.

There are a thousand good, lawful reasons to sit in your car outside of a home. None of them warrant shooting at the driver and trying to use a Stand Your Ground defense.

“I’m scared” or, “I thought they were up to no good” isn’t covered under the law. It’s not about your impressions of the situation so much as what any reasonable person would believe.

No one is going to look at this situation and assume that the person in the car means anyone harm based on the facts as we know them.

Florida’s Stand Your Ground law isn’t to blame for this. People not understanding the law is, though.

I was going to say…’battle‘?

BLUF
As of August 2022, three independent election forecasters rated the general election as Solid Republican or Safe Republican, according to Ballotpedia.
If Missouri’s open senate seat is to flip to the Democratic party, it would take an upset by Trudy Busch Valentine on Election Day

The battle for Missouri’s vacant Senate seat
Polls and a look at prior elections would suggest this race is already settled before Election Day.

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. — Barring an election night surprise, there appears to be a well-defined path from the Missouri Attorney General’s office to U.S. Senate.

The current Attorney General, Republican Eric Schmitt, is leading by double digits in most polls ahead of his Democratic opponent, Trudy Busch Valentine, a nurse and heiress to the Anheuser-Busch brewery fortune.

His commanding lead comes just four years after the former Attorney General, Republican Josh Hawley, beat the incumbent two-term Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Missouri, for a spot on Capitol Hill.

Hawley was the first Missouri Attorney General to ascend directly to the U.S. Senate since then-AG John Danforth, also a Republican, was elected to the Senate in 1976. Other big names in Missouri politics have also used the AG’s office as a stepping stone to the U.S. Senate, like Republican John Ashcroft and Democrat Thomas Eagleton, but both held other offices before becoming a senator.

That path may be trodden again on Nov. 8, partly due to the retirement of two-term Republican Sen. Roy Blunt. His surprise announcement in March of last year that he wouldn’t seek re-election left a wide-open field of candidates vying for his job. A crowded and often-times nasty Republican primary brought Schmitt to the top of the field for his party.

Sen. Roy BluntU.S. Sen. Roy Blunt of Missouri will not run for reelection in 2022
Trudy Busch Valentine announced her candidacy less than five months before the August primary and beat out the populist candidate and prolific fundraiser Lucas Kunce for the nomination.

This race is one of many that will determine the balance of power in the U.S. Senate, but a democrat win would certainly surprise many political observers. Missouri hasn’t sent a democrat to Senate in 10 years, when Sen. McCaskill won her re-election bid in 2012, easily beating Republican Todd Akin, who was ahead in the polls until his infamous “legitimate rape” comments.

Continue reading “”