Philosophical hypothetical question 1:

[Amimnoch]

4. For a little background..

I reside in Texas District 7.

For the first time in my lifetime, this district has a Democratic Party Representative, Lizzie Fletcher.

Last night, several of my neighbors and I who canvassed together for her and Beto in 2018 got together for a casual dinner.

Of course, with everything that just happened in El Paso and Dayton, discussion about gun legislation was a topic.

This group, including myself are 100% for at the LEAST bringing back the assault weapons ban that WORKED. However, the question arose on how Lizzie should vote if it goes before the House.

If she votes with the Democratic Party, it will be extremely unpopular in my district, definitely used against her during the campaign season, and likely return to us another f'n tRumpublicon in 2020, even if it really is the best thing for the constituency by beginning the removal of these weapons of war from the public.

If she votes against the Democratic Party, she would be voting with the will of the majority of her constituency, can be used to argue that she isn't anti-2nd amendment (yes, I know that notion is ridiculous, but that's the reality of politics in my district).

It brought up the question does the will of the constituency override ones own conscience and voting based off of what is actually better even if it isn't what most in the district would want.

And, I was curious what many here might think about a conundrum like this.