The Roanoke Times was one of the few newspapers to endorse Creigh Deeds. I guess I can understand why they might want to lash out at this point. But what kind of minerals does this take to say something like this, when McDonnell’s lead has opened up to double digits.
So, fine, if the NRA wants to be an extremist organization that rests its endorsement on Deeds’ support for one, very popular issue, it is free to. But it shouldn’t make Deeds’ election sound like it would be the beginning of the apocalypse. Not, that is, if it wants to regain any credibility.
I’m not sure it’s NRA that has to worry about their credibility in this election.
Interesting that they didn’t point out that the NRA has endorsed candidates in the past that due support closing the non-existent gun show loophole.
Sounds to me like they just wanted to lash out at the NRA and didn’t know what to say.
This is the flip side of the “half a loaf” argument. Deeds is pretty good on guns for the most part, but given a choice between a guy who supports them 90% of the time and a guy who supports 100%, and is well ahead in the polls anyway, why on earth shouldn’t the NRA back the greater of two non-evils?
I’ve found that the Roanoke Times is actually a pretty accurate guide. If they endorse a candidate, I’m very probably going to want to vote for the other guy.