Ugh, this reminds me of McCain va Obama.

I don't know if I can vote R here.

I'm a single issue voter and the smarter gun vote is Nelson.  But it's a long play.

Scott betrayed us.  Period. But a message to him, and the establishment, only works if it's coordinated.

At this point, the national situation comes into play as well.  Does a Nelson vote tip the Senate?

Thoughts?

The correct thing to do is leave this part of the ballet blank.

I'm writing in "2nd Amendment".

Nelson has been squatting in that seat for years. He is likely to win regardless but a vote for Scott is telegraphing to the GOP that a "little" gun control is fine, just fine.

However, we are all on the same side here in the FL-HTF so I am not going to criticize anybody's reason for voting the way they do.

Laughing at the statement about Nelson being a safe gun vote

This won't be popular but here goes. In the more than three decades of voting here in Florida I have voted only
once for a Democrat, and that was a local county commission race (the Dem won). The reason I voted for her is
because the Republican incumbent was pissed off at voters because we imposed term limits on them.

I most certainly would never, and have never voted for a Democrat for any state and federal election as noted above. Until now.

Senator Bill Nelson will be my first vote for a U.S. political race. Why would I do such a thing as for voting in a known liberal anti-gun socialist?

The answer is simple! Senator Nelson is up in age and it is a possibility this may be his last term in office because of health reasons (playing the long game).

Nelson has a Senate vote which is in itself powerful but outside of that he holds no power. In addition, Nelson is honest about his intentions whereas Scott is a poisonous snake
whom lied to us and sold us down the river, so to speak.

Here is something else you may consider; do you want to see Rick Scott's face in Washington DC for the next 12-18 years after what he just did? I don't. And I will not vote for him.
Plus if Nelson dies in office Governor Putnam or DeSantis  will replace Nelson with someone favorable (hopefully) for us.

If you leave it blank or write-in something else that means you just helped put Scott in there.

Just my two pennies worth of thoughts.

Are you referring to my post?

I never said that.

I said the smarter gun vote.

It's a vote against Scott, and as such a pro gun message.

But again, only if coordinated with others like us as a movement state wide.

What if Gwen Graham is governor?

Then she'll appoint someone similar to Nelson or a snake like Scott.

Have never voted D in my life. I either vote R or skip it.

Been solid R since high school.

Does that make closed minded?

Oh, and Scott can stick his NAVY hat and NRA stuff up his butt.

Well, he can stick the PR for state stuff up his butt also.

( Heavily edited for SBG's approval. Ha ha, caught myself before hitting submit.)

Nelson is a cling-on. I agree Scott isn't much better, but I think Nelson has been living off of Florida for long enough. He should be launched out of his seat. The only blame belongs to us (Floridians) who haven't voted him out allowing him to be voted back in.

Scott's behavior during the hurricanes was pathetic. Bodybags... what a pinhead.  His response for gun control was pathetic. Not much better of a choice, but beats a liberal leech like Nelson that has spent his whole life being a leech. If Scott pulls anything,  I'll be happily voting him out.

For me personally, I wont miss a vote again. If for no other reason than to keep those idiot's from making careers out of living in Washington while doing nothing other than their BS.

I am voting for Bill Nelson. I'm a single-issue gun rights voter and Scott does not represent my interests. I've never met Nelson, but a number of my friends know him personally and say he's a very good, genuine individual. The way I see it, if we get Scott in there, he'll be there for decades and I'd rather throw Scott back and vote for the next candidate the party sends us.

Make no mistake about it, Bill Nelson is a turd and NO friend of the 2A or the BoR. Consider a write in or an abstention (leave it blank) for that race on the ballot.

Honestly, this race for Senate is the classic choice between a Giant Douche and a Turd Sandwich

Annnnd Scott is advocating term limits.

But his 2 term governership should have limited him out.

Pot meets kettle yet again.

I will not vote and send a message that some gun control is OK. Nelson is about as useless as can be, but I know that when it comes down to it he will take my rights away if he had the power. McScott will tell you he has your back as he looks in your eyes and then will sell 2A and you down the river if it is good for his political career. I am not voting for Nelson, but I will NOT hold my nose and give my vote for McScott. I will send as much of a message as my single vote can.

I’ll probably leave it blank. I am torn between the lesser of two evils, but I don’t like being backstabbed. As someone stated, Nelson is actually pretty harmless aside from his one vote, I don’t think je has done one notable thing while in congress. I don’t think I have ever seen him on National television, except for maybe hurricane related stuff.

yes, chapperjoe,  I was referring to your reply.  I see there are others that are contemplating voting for Nelson for various reasons.  Bear in mind,  that there will be another SCOTUS Justice to pick.  The votes are very close on that,  and on a host of other issues.  Giving away a GOP vote based in problematical reasons, isn't prudent.  It's not just about single issue,  it's about the future of America.  
Nelson has a long, long history of voting contrary to America's best interests.  Scot pissed some folks off on the stupid response to Parkland, but overall, he will prove to be of more value in the effort to thwart  the radical socialism that Nelson and all dhimmicrats have as their goal.

I'm writing in Miami_JBT

+1

Sure... that'd be alright in my book.

If you are a single issue voter you still vote for any republican because reshaping the SCOTUS is beneficial to 2a. The margin for confirmation is slim enough. It is highly probable that in the next two year Breyer (81) and Ginsburg (85) will be dead. Could you imagine that super majority?  This may actually get some 2a cases heard and overturn dumb laws in other states setting a precedent for when the inevitable happens here. Do not abstain, hold your nose and vote R so we can control a meaningful branch of government for a generation.

He’s got my vote.

That's my plan.

That is simply foolish, I understand how you FEEL, but it’s NOT the smart play.  The primary is where someone like Scott needs to be defeated, he isn’t exactly anti-2a, just not nearly as solid as we like.  We KNOW how rabidly anti-2a Nelson is.  This vote is primarily about the Supreme Court and it will be SCOTUS that determines the future of 2a, big cases will likely be heard by SCOTUS within the next couple of decades.  A vote for Nelson, is a vote for a milqtoast candidate for SCOTUS because that is what Trump will be forced to nominate to get appointed, assuring a justice who will vote the wrong way on 2a issues.  A vote for Nelson is a vote to cut your nose off to spite your face.

So you dont wanna vote for Scott because "he betrayed us" but if Nelson is in with enough Democrats friends they will happily change your state beyond just banning guns. Not voting for a Republican might as well be a vote for a Democrat at this point. Take your favorite democrat slogan "impeach 45" , "america was never great" , "abolish ice", "make America socialist" and think if that sounds better then just voting for Scott and getting over him signing a order to take guns away from people whom have actually acted crazy enough to be adjudicated a problem.

I can't disregard Scott removing the right to buy a gun from all 18-21 year olds in this state.

It is unforgivable.

He won't receive a vote from either my wife or I.

Funny... I blame the crazy 18yo kid for bringing that on more then scott.

So I guess all 18-20yr olds have acted crazy enough to lose their right to purchase a firearm, good to know where you stand on firearm ownership of legal adults who have committed no crimes.

Did I say I felt that way or blamed all 18-20yo people? No I said I blamed that kid. That kid acted like a crazy ass and ruined it for everyone. How come I dont see anyone bitching about not buying beer at 18 like they did long ago? Why? Cause you got over it and realized some drunk teenagers ruined it. You think  waiting up 3 more years to buy a gun is bad? Let's see how you like a complete gun ban if Democrats gain control. How would you like that? Justice Byer said 2A does not mean you can own a gun. We need Republicans to get that scotus pick. Get over it and get on board for the team. Sometimes you let them get the 3 point chip shot so you can get the ball back and get the touchdown to win the game.

Then it's a good thing the particular  murderer in question wasn't 45 years old or he'd have ruined it for a lot more law abiding folks.

The entire fault for the removal of the gun rights of 18-21 year old Americans in The State of Florida lies not with any scumbag criminal, of which there will be more in the future, but directly at the feet of Quisling Governor Scott, who, to pander to liberals, brags about his anti-gun laws, and his political  ambitions for which he threw our rights under the bus.

Electing him to the Senate sends the unacceptable message that although liberal voters never bend on the issue of gungrabbing, gun owning Republicans will bend right over and can  therefore  be tossed aside to garner liberal votes but will still vote for those responsible for the enactment of odious anti gun laws.

I'm not going to vote in a manner that trains politicians to kick me in the ass and believe they'll  still receive my vote.

Ok so vote in a manner that will get you a outright gun ban, higher taxes and a supreme court as liberal as San Francisco can make it.

Ok so vote in a manner that's tantamount to training a dog that it's okay to bite the hand that feeds it, and teaching that exact same lesson to the rest of the pack as well.

Not me.

I hope Scott goes down in flames and the rest of the dogs learn a lesson from it.

Or you can vote in a manner that rewards those who passed gun control and therefore won't be worried about passing more gun control in the future, but as long as it's an R passing gun control it's acceptable right?

I will vote Scott because there isn't a better option to get bill Nelson out. Bill Nelson is a outright gun grabber who every time he can use the same bullshit line "you dont need a ak47 or ar15 to hunt" he will gladly say it and vote for a outright gun ban. Bill Nelson will not vote for conservative court picks. Bill Nelson will back every socialist play California or New York Democrats try. So you do what makes you feel cozy and I will do what makes me feel right. I'm just shocked there are so many short sided people that get stuck on "he did something I didn't like" and cant read the tea leaves that times are changing with or without your blessings and at this point it's time to play the big picture long game.

This right here. Lead by example.

Remember we are playing a game of chess; not checkers.  Plan several steps ahead to win in the long term.  Nelson has never gotten permanent gun legislation passed.  Scott has and will be that one apple that ruins the bunch for all Republicans for a long time.  Nelson's age and health are key factors. Many times, a pawn is sacrificed to win the game in the end.

Patience and strategy pay dividends!

I have to laugh at Scott's ad saying we shouldn't send a career politician to DC.  What exactly do you call a two term governor who wants to become a Senator, and then probably on to POTUS.  No way in hell will I vote for the back stabbing, throw us under the bus, political opportunist Scott.  I speak for the 3 other voters in the house as well.  Playing the long game here as well.  The GOP had better stop taking it's base for granted, or the party will surely become irrelevant in a few more elections.  This is why Trump was elected in the 1st place.  Folks are tired of being let down by the party.

By removing 18-21 year old Floridians from the pool of gun ownership Quisling Scott has not only denied them their innate rights, but he has also struck a huge blow against the continuity of the gun owning fraternity in our state.

Ha Ha, Scott lives here.

Maybe a terse letter in his mailbox would work better than a terse letter to his .gov website.

At least it might get read.

A politicians job is pissing off the least amount of people possible.

At least with Trump, "Wat you see is wat you get", mostly.

I can see Scott cosigning an AWB or similar legislation .

"Common sense laws worked in Florida, it will work for America."

If Scott loses, the message that will get sent is that he was too conservative, and didn't go far enough on the gun bill he signed into.  Remember, most of the dems voted against the gun bill because it didn't include an AWB, magazine limit, etc.

Let me also caution you on any "coordinated" effort.  I have no doubts that you can organize a lot of people to vote against Scott (and even for Nelson), but there will be blowback from the GOPe and moderates.  A small number of them will simply refuse to vote for DeSantis because he is "too far right".  And then we will lose both the senate race and governor's race!  A very similar thing happened in Nevada and New Hampshire in 2016.  The GOP senate candidates wouldn't support Trump, so some of their voters followed.  In response, some Trump voters didn't support the Republican for senate.  We lost both races in both states as a result.  Fortunately, Trump's midwest strategy prevailed.

The national situation is even more important.  The latest polls have the dems flipping seats in Nevada and Arizona, and the GOP flipping a seat in North Dakota and Florida.  This means without Florida, the Senate will be 50-50, with Romney having extreme leverage as the 50th vote.  Pence will be stuck in DC having to break any ties, which isn't good.

Also, the Senate map looks bad for the GOP in 2020, and even worse in 2022.  We will probably lose seats in both cycles, therefore we need to build up a buffer this election cycle.  This means every race, even ones with RINOs running, is important.

Here are the Senate scenarios:

1) Dems wins the Senate.  They control it until 2024 because of the 2020 and 2022 senate maps.  That means no more conservative judges, and none of Trump's agenda will make it through.  How frustrating would it be to unable to replace a leftist Supreme Court justice with a Trump nominee because the GOP lost the Senate?

2) GOP holds the Senate, but with 52 or so seats.  52 isn't enough to get a conservative judge seated to replace a retiring liberal Supreme Court justice.  Nor is it enough to build a wall.  It will essentially result in a legislative stalemate, until the senate flips to "D" in 2020

3) GOP has 55 or so seats.  Good enough for get any judge Trump wants confirmed, as well as tax cuts, and some immigration reform.  50/50 chance of losing the Senate in 2022.

4) GOP has 60 seats.  Close to 100% of MAGA agenda passed.  GOP holds senate until at least 2028.

I think the choice is really obvious here.

The polls actually have Nelson losing.  Scott is a strong candidate, and doing extremely well among people who moved here from Puerto Rico after the hurricane last year.

It is rare to have a chance to unseat an incumbent Senator in a swing state.  But we have a good chance here.  Trump needs every Senate seat he can get (see my post above).

You are delusional.  The "long game" is right now.  If Trump/MAGA lose, the Deep State will make sure 2016 never happens again.  "Game over" for the Republic.  Trump needs all the help he can get in the Senate.  He has asked us to support Scott, and you are telling Trump to pound sand.

This fantasy of voting for Nelson, hoping he has to resign for bad health, then having a mystery superstar Republican named that seat has to be one of the dumbest things I have ever read here.  I'm not trying to be rude, but consider the following alternatives:

1) Nelson wins and lives to be 100.  He is the deciding vote in the 2019 Senate, meaning Majority Leader Schumer and Dianne Feinstein running the Judiciary Committe.  A liberal and conservative judge both retire next year, but Trump can't get any nominees passed.  A dem wins in 2020, and promptly appoints 2 marxist judges.  We could have had a 6-3 majority for a generation, but now the left controls the court 5-4, AND they have a dem president and dem Senate.

2) Graham is elected governor.  Nelson resigns for health reasons, and Graham appoints a telegenic 40-year old leftist to the Senate.  With the power of incumbency, this Senator holds that seat for 40 years.

3) DeSantis wins, and Nelson resigns.  DeSantis appoints a Republican (maybe Rick Scott????) to the Senate seat.  Voters view this as unfair since they elected a dem to the Senate, but now a Republican is holding the seat.  The democrat wins in a special election, and DeSantis loses re-election as a result of being viewed as a partisan hack.  Florida votes for a "D" in 2020 in part because of the governor's actions.

Look, nobody on this forum likes what Scott and the Florida GOP did earlier this year.  But what do we do about it?  Vote out ALL the Republicans who voted for that crap bill?  Then the dems will have 2/3rd majorities in the state house and senate, and DeSantis can't do anything since his vetoes will be overridden.  That means we get California-style gun control, and an income tax, and the dems get 5+ US House seats because of redistricting.  Is that worth it to "teach them a lesson"?

The fact is that Scott's political career will not go higher than US Senate.  If he runs for president, he will get maybe 1% of the vote, and a big part of that will due to his vote on gun control.  Let's put him in the Senate, where he will support Trump 90% of the time.  Not a tough decision.

How can you call yourself pro-gun when you are casting a vote to make Chuck Schumer Majority Leader, and Dianne Feinstein chairwoman of Judiciary?

How may pro-RKBA judges do you think Feinstein will let pass through her committee?  She is a lot of things.  Stupid isn't one of them.

McScott?  Really? Stop being so emotional.  The FACT is that Scott supported Trump early in 2016, long before it was popular to do so.  Unlike other people, he has never gone on Sunday morning shows to bash Trump.

If elected, I have no doubt he will support Trump 90% of the time, and 100% of the time on judges.

The other thing to think about is that even if he turns out to be a RINO (which I doubt), he will still vote to organize the Senate under Republcian control.  The many pro-RKBA have a lot more leverage and power in the majority than they do in the minority.

There were lots of rumors about Thomas wanting to retire earlier this year, and two of the liberal justices are in less than stellar health.

I think Trump will have two selections in the remainder of his first term, and possibly even three.

But that is half the equation.  The GOP needs to control the Senate with around 55 or so Senators to get them confirmed.  No way a Barrett or Kethledge or Tharpar gets through a 50/50 or 51/49 Senate.  Every vote counts.

Also, don't forget about the circuit court judges.  These judges are really important since 99%+ of cases never go the Supreme Court, and the Court of Appeals is a good vetting system to pick reliably Supreme Court judges.  We need a GOP Senate to confirm them also.

If Scott loses, the only message that get sent is that GOP Florida candidates need to be more liberal.

If you guys really wanted to send a message, you should have recruited three or four strong candidates in deep red Florida state house districts, and primaried the GOPe state reps that supported the abomination of a bill.  It would have been relatively easy to concentrate resources in those state house districts, and a few thousands votes could have easily voted those clowns out in the primary without compromising control of the state legislature, OR without handing a RAT a US Senate race.

If a few incumbents lost their primaries, that would have gotten the attention of the GOPe faster than anything else (see Eric Cantor in Virginia).

But it too late for that now, as the primary is next week.  Handing President Trump several more Senate seats will send a much bigger message than anything else at this point.

I know more about this stuff than 99% of you Nelson supporters  because I read.  If I wanted to be a jerk, I could say you should be paying me for the analyses I posted earlier on this thread.

Have you looked at the 2020 Senate map?

How about 2022?

Do you have a clue about how redistricting works, and how important it is to have Republican governors and control of state legislators when that happens?

How many conservative justices do you think Trump will get confirmed if the dems control the Senate?

If the dems win the Senate and House, Trump will have to start cutting deals, and then you will be on here complaining about how Trump is turning us into a "socialist utopia".

It's not my fault you Nelson supporters lack the drive, motivation, or wherewithal, to run successful primary campaigns against a few of the state house republicans who voted for the gun control bill.  *That* really would have done something, and perhaps we would even have a chance at open carry with DeSantis as governor.  Instead, you want to come on here and boast about your support for Nelson and how "that will teach them a lesson".

Trump won 30 states, and there is no reason why we shouldn't have 60 Senators (30 X 2 = 60).  We have 50 right now, and it ain't looking good for 2018 with the attitudes of a lot of people here.