If there was one reason that Democrats have danced around gun control – calling it “gun safety” and constantly reassuring Americans “no one’s coming for you guns” – it was this: gun control is a vote loser. In other words, most Americans don’t support gun control, and punish polls at the polls who do. That calculus no longer applies. At least according to Dems quoted in the lattimes.com article Democrats campaigning aggressively on gun control, dropping longtime reticence . . .

What has changed are the demographics of presidential politics and the nation’s electoral map. Democrats no longer rely on states like Tennessee or West Virginia to win the White House. The strategy that emerged under President Obama depends, instead, on a coalition of minority voters, urban dwellers and single women — groups that look far more favorably on restricting firearms.

“The way to win as a Democrat is to energize that ‘rising America’ electorate, and being aggressive in terms of gun policy and gun safety law is a great issue to mobilize these voters,” said Tad Devine, who advises Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, once an opponent of stricter gun controls but now taking a much tougher stance.

“Rising America” voters. Heh. The article cites the election of a pro-gun control candidate in Virginia’s second district State Senate race, “a rapidly growing region an hour outside of Washington, which [gun control advocates] say more nearly reflects the booming bedroom communities that will probably decide the 2016 presidential race in swing states like Nevada, Colorado and Virginia.”

Seriously? Do all these calls for gun control – make that gun confiscation – by Dems and their assault media enablers reflect a new reality for politicians and, thus, gun owners?

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

124 COMMENTS

  1. No. They fucked up by listening to their own propaganda. Double down on stupid, dems. It only helps America.

      • Time for them to re-learn the lessons from the congressional election of 1994 (fallout from the AWB) and the presidential election of 2000 (Al Gore didn’t even carry his home state of Tennessee, which was attributed to his support for gun control; if he had won TN, hanging chads in Florida would never have been an issue).

        Bring it on, Dems; there are millions more U.S. gun owners and Concealed Carry permit holders than ever before.

      • Stop and think about that for a moment – don’t we live in an echo chamber? By the nature of our hobby don’t we tend to surround ourselves with like-minded range partners.

        Hell, we are on TTAG. Can you think of a bigger echo chamber? THR maybe… Or GlockTalk.

        But know thyself.

        • I certainly don’t live in an echo chamber; I’m bombarded by calls for gun control from the media all the time. I hear all their arguments every day. The point is that those gun grabbers probably don’t spend much time on TTAG, THR etc. hearing the opposing arguments. Your typical tell from echo-chamberism is the fact that we know what we’re talking about, and they don’t. Ask the typical anti gunner to define ‘assault weapon’ or semi auto.

          That reminds me how it’s funny how statism always attracts the most ignorant of people about a given subject to police that given thing. Ignorance usually breeds hate and hate breeds a desire to regulate.

        • We are forced to swim in an ocean of Leftism 24/7. We are constantly bombarded with the stupid ideas and proclamations from the Left. We know ALL their false arguments and how to refute them

          In contrast, the average Lefty has to purposely work and seek out conservative opinions from a tiny sliver of the media. The vast majority of them are too F’in pompous and narcissistic to bother to do that so in they end they know nothing about our arguments and typically get crushed if they ever have to face them.

        • No. Most of my friends and family are “liberal” or a political. Some gun owners, most not. My number of center right friends who own guns, I can count on one hand.

        • Simply by virtue of being gun people, we have the brains to realize muzzle report echoing back to us is not some scary gun shooting at us. IOW, we’re much more immune to the effects of it, than the half literates who think guns are running wild in the streets killing children.

      • You mean, after Seth Meyers was the most obnoxious thing in the history of SNL, he went on to get his own show? People tune in for an hour of that smirk every night? ???

    • The problem, though is that low-information voters still exist in great number, and in their case especially, propaganda works. Couple that with the incredible power of having most pop-culture entertainment and news outlets (because that’s as deep as many voters go) spreading that same propaganda at the ease of a group text and you have our current problem. Their method is simple: hammer, hammer, hammer, and keep spreading the lie until it becomes so embedded a presupposition in the public mind that few enough question its veracity. It’s the tactic they’ve used (successfully enough) in the culture wars that they are convinced it will gain traction re: the 2A as well.

      • There’s a pretty big gap between getting an idiot to agree with you (which they’ve done with the kind of people you’re talking about), and motivating him to actually get off his ass and vote for you (that’s the hard part). I don’t think gun control is a strongly motivating topic for very many on the left side of the fence. They might give a casual thought to the topic, but gun control doesn’t rank very high on their list. On the other hand, people on our side are VERY motivated to vote against anti-gun candidates. In other words, there are a lot of pro-gun single-issue voters, but very few who vote anti-gun in the same way.

        We’ll see how it shakes out, but I suspect the numbers are on our side.

      • Obama was a different type of candidate for the low information side. He energized the inner city vote like no time in recent history. I don’t see that group coming out to vote for an old white granny in a pants suit. No way.
        I hope billary keeps pounding the antigun theme. Her and the party can keep pushing that dead rotting horse all the way to the finish line, and get hammered. I don’t think she’s that stupid though. If she gets the nomination I doubt we hear much about her saying she will do something about guns. More than likely if it comes up she will be saying how much she respects the 2nd amendment and how her family has a long tradition of gun ownership.

        • >> I don’t see that group coming out to vote for an old white granny in a pants suit.

          They will come to vote against the old white dude with crazy hair, however.

        • @ int19h

          Who, Bernie Sanders?

          People generally don’t go to the polls to vote against someone. Too much effort. They only go to vote for someone or something.

        • >> People generally don’t go to the polls to vote against someone. Too much effort. They only go to vote for someone or something.

          I disagree with that assessment. If you look at the last three electoral cycles, they were largely driven by people voting against someone. For example, Obama was elected not the least because he very firmly positioned himself as “not Bush” (so, ironically, it was voting against the guy who wasn’t even in the race). Today, politics are largely partisan, and that partisanship is largely focusing on fear-mongering over what the “bad guys” will do if they get in power. You need look no further than comments here to observe how this works the right; but very similar stuff can be read in, say, HuffPo comments, with just a few names reversed.

          The prominence of that varies – it basically all depends on how unlikable the candidate makes some parts of the electorate in order to placate the other parts. And I don’t think we’ve seen a more extreme case of that than Trump for a long time now. Have a look at his unfavorability ratings – they’re through the roof. In other words, he’s the most hated candidate among the general electorate, by far (http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/08/18/432719996/why-no-one-likes-the-2016-presidential-field). And it’s even worse if you look at just Democrat voters, which is the relevant category here.

  3. What the article seems to have failed to acknowledge is that “millennials”, a group that voted overwhelmingly for Obummer, are pro gun. Natch.

    • Huh? I hadn’t heard that. What makes you think that those educated by violently anti-gun extremists for 12-16 years are pro-gun?

  4. God, I hope so. Hurt them. Hurt them bad.

    As to the millennials, some studies show they lean very libertarian while others show they line up and cheer for promises of free shit so who knows. My favorite millennial poll of late is the “The US should be fighting ISIS with boots on the ground but we aren’t going to sign up to do it ourselves” one last week.

    • Millennials just generally lean against social conservatism (as currently defined; what they believe will become conservative in another 50 years). Which means that you’ll get a mix of libertarians and liberals. Thing is, Democrats have been paying attention and adjusting accordingly to secure their side, pretty much since Obama. Republicans are still in denial, and think that pandering primarily to old white people vote can work out, or that young right-leaning people predominantly share their values. This has already cost them two presidential elections, and is all but certain to also cost this one.

  5. Young people can decide this election and most of us do not support gun control especially any kind of AWB or confiscation. I really hope Hillary comes out for confiscation, it will doom her in places like Wisconsin, Ohio, Florida, North Carolina, Nevada, etc. Do it Hillary just do it.

      • The 20 somethings Libertarian leanings end at drugs, gay sex and abortion and the Democrats are already good on those issues. Guns are a tertiary issue trumped by government handouts with Millenials.

        • I have noted that once the Millennials graduate college and start paying taxes that some of their political tunes start changing.

        • once the Millennials graduate college and start paying taxes

          They don’t pay taxes unless they have a job. Which, in the Obama economy, is not a given.

        • Agree on the female majority and beta male niche side of the Millenials.
          The truly independent and informed numbers- I just dont know. The SJWs I understand. The old feminazis I understand- the CBS/NYT poll showing “trust” as important as to candidate qualities went from 25% to 15%- in other words, the ends justify the means, and I think we have seen that in BLM and GamerGate, etc.

          The “reasonable adult” Democrats- I just dont know- are there any? Their candidate is a serial perjurer, crook and corrupt politician with astounding mendacity and verifiable abuse of power issues, with documented health issues- perhaps even mental health concerns.

          Yet, since she has a vajayjay, apparently, and is the only politician acceptable to the Deep State on the left- HRC will get the nod as Democratic contender.

          People talk about Trump being the stalking horse- what foolishness. Bernie is the stalking horse, giving HRC as way to “seem” centrist, while drawing off attention and some support from the loony libertarians.

          The Gun Control Meme is nothing but a massive well coordinated campaign to suck all the air out of the room to distract from the failures of Progressivism v2.0, which of course if examined, leads back to Democratic policy and HRC herself at State, at NY Senate, and only highlights her own incompetence along with that failed Agenda in general.

          What is disturbing is the behavior of the Reliable Party Organs, CNN and NYT, CBS and WAPO, and the variety of meme generators, TPM, Vox, PuffHos, trading outright lies up the chain, and re-echoing at the top- having signalled that they are all in.

          The NYT front page editorial the classic one, and the piling on here, and repeated talking points is proof of the collusion- I think we can guess from where- John Podesta, Bills former chief of staff, now running Soros web of shell companies, non-profits and activism groups at CAP. Bloomberg is a piker, a bumbler, a goof compared to the influence and funding there, that reaches out and back to the Ayers, and Academia, and other networks, that are deliberately vague, and quiet but deeply powerful.

          So, dont get cocky kid. Good, bad, indifferent to the NRA you would be a fool not to support it in some way, for if they are taking flak like this, in a coordinated way- they are over the target and the NRA has reach. That would be the easy way, and if you have a hard-on for them over something they arent doing per your spec, well- the easiest way to get heard is on the inside as a member.

          Tl/dr: I think we are at a turning point here, and its not entirely clear which way we will go- the NOV2016 POTUS will be the focal point that historians, if there are any left who can find and tell the truth, will look back on as that moment when America slid into the ashes of history, or remained the shining beacon on the hill.

          We shall see.

  6. I hope it destroys their party once and for all. Look at state level politics, there’s only 6 or 7 states left that have democrat majorities in both houses, and the governor’s mansion. Three solidly blue states have elected Republican governors, and in the case of Illinois, defeated a democrat running for re-election. The only state where a democrat won the governor’s mansion is Louisiana, and Edwards is pro gun, and pro life, so they didn’t pop a lot of champagne corks over that one.

    The figures estimate 1 in 3 democrats are gun owners, and they’re not all fudds. Now that the democrat leadership has made their intentions perfectly clear, they stand to lose those voters as well.

    • Instead of looking at who gets elected, look at the divergence between that and the popular vote. This will give you a trend to look at, instead of a snapshot in time. And that trend is not at all what you’ve described.

  7. I will put it in these terms. I am relatively new to the country (US) as a resident, though a citizen by birth. Now a resident. I have to say that in my personal case, understanding whether to be a Republican or a Democrat was largely influenced by the gun-debate. I chose to be a Republican.

    • A lot more is at stake besides gun control.
      The Democraps will turn this nation into some place like Scientific Socialist Venezuela or some other third world hell hole. Full spectrum issues on the table all around.

    • I am glad to hear that Dallas. People who come from overseas appreciate America more, just as American’s who have traveled overseas, appreciate our freedoms more, having had the contrast of the rest of the world, first-hand.

      The problem is just how many Americans really havent traveled, and despite their “learning” are depressingly provincial, naive, arrogant – and look how little attention the Press pays to the disaster going on in Mexico, for example.

      No, its not looking pretty- but thanks for weighing in, and documenting that alternative media, like TTAG is what is reaching thoughtful readers who want to get the facts for themselves, not whats regurgitated by NYT, MSNBC, the Daily Show, as what the cool kids think, and why you should too.

  8. I know people who hate the GOP but plan to vote for them because they love their freedom to own a gun more.

    • I’m a millennial kinda sitting on that fence. I was tempted to vote Bernie, but then he REALLY started spouting the the same anti-gun crap as the rest of his party. And I don’t trust Hillary. At all.

      But on the other hand, all of the GOP candidates do seem repulsive.

    • If the POTG are dumb enough at this critical junction in history to dilute our strength by wasting votes for third party’s then we deserve the loss of our rights and our grandchildrens rights.

      Slavery will not come to America at the hands of the dems. It will come at the ineptitude of their opponents.

    • If rinos pull their brokered convention, I could see them coming in 3rd place just behind Trump. Either way, I’ll pull the handle for my state and federal conservative republicans. I won’t support Jeb, Marco, John, Chris or any other rino in a brokered convention. Not too wild about Trump either. They all look like Mitch McConnell when compared to Cruz or Paul.

      • Your comment show a great deal of electoral illiteracy. You get to a brokered convention if no candidate has enough delegates to win on the first ballot. And the onlt RINO in the race is long term Democrat Donald Trump. The rest are real Republicans and represent a certain party faction. The reason that Hillary will probably win is because of people like you who declare anybody from amother faction a RINO and sit home or vote for a third party candidate.

        • I don’t know all the intricacies of a brokered convention process and that’s on me just as your abysmal reading comprehension is on you. I said I wouldn’t “support” your rino. I didn’t say I was going to sit home. In fact I stated exactly the opposite. Read the post again and try to understand.

        • You really need to get your head out before engaging mouth. Obviously have not been involved in the political process. The RNC is BROKEN and useless.

          The biggest RINO right now is Bush the 3rd who is going nowhere and Rubio is trying to grab the crown (see the big smokefilled shidding in DC a few days ago held to layout the brokered convention scam. Christie has his photo on the $3 RINO bill, Graham is a wannabe fool but 100% RINO. Pataki and Kasich are bother card carrying RINOs in 2016. They are ALL hear in Iowa.

          The Beltway BS insider club that has run the Rep Party for decades (except Reagan years) HATE Trump and Cruz. That EITHER of them makes RINO eyeballs bleed and heads explode it good enough reason to vote for either.

        • Since you admit you don’t know the “intricacies of a brokered convention” all the rest of you post is garbage. Cruz is a Republican. Trump is the real RINO in the race. Get it through your head. Trump is stalking horse for Hillary. He sole job is to put her office. His positions are identical to hers. He is lying about guns the way Wendy Davis did. He is lying about immigration too. A RINO is merely someone you don’t like. And get a clue if Hillary is President she will probably appoint multiple SCOTUS judges. Say goodbye to your gun rights.

        • So much fail. You really think Trump’s ego lets him hand the election to Hillary if he wins the nomination? I’m no Trump fan but he will maintain Republican majorities in the House and Senate. My hopes are in Cruz who currently has a 10pt lead in Iowa according to CNN…yes CNN. Cruz talks about and supports the 2A even when its not in the news and he’s right on immigration. Except for Cruz, Trump, Carson and maybe Rubio, all the rinos have come out in favor of more gun control and some even and AWB. Do you really see a difference between Bush, Rubio, Christie, Kasich and Clinton on immigration? Rubio can’t waits to gets him so more government surveillance.

          These are positions that make them RINOs. I voted for Dole, Bush, McCain and Romney. “Get-a-long” Republicans don’t win. You want to protect gun rights? Talk your rino buddies into throwing in with Cruz before the voting starts. You’re right about one thing though. I don’t like rinos, but its for the exact same reasons I don’t like Democrats. Its the policies….

        • Model, tdi- I hope you guys realize you are on the same side, just talking past one another.
          We are in the primary AKA silly season- this is a good place to practice reasoned debate, and help other newbs to responsible gun ownership remember what deep wisdom is embedded in many long time gun owners, and what passion for independent freedom exists in the new ones.

          Even it its not technically “all about guns” this is an excellent time for someone to post a couple of links for insight on both how the electoral process works, in theory, and on the ground. Also on how to get the facts-
          a very interesting article on an IOWA pollster, and why she is so respected- and why Cruz flipped The Donald on his back like the flailing old tortoise he would be in about a month in that job, at best…

          Lets save our harshest words for HRC and the press. We are going to need it.

          * PS, not to take sides but I tend to agree with you tdi, and deeply distrust Trumps motives. His behavior doesnt reassure me at all. Why replace one shallow bully who has nothing but personal insults, “btter clinger”, for another “bleeding from some place”?

          Not presidential, not a uniter, and not safe, in an increasingly very dangerous world that is going to need experience, statesmanship, and the ability to think to exercise American leadership in the toxic vacuum that Obama and HRC have left with their foreign policy…
          Another concept new voters forget- the POTUS has very little authority, except in foreign policy- the rest is influence, and executive authority, for which I trust HRC as far as I can fling her waddling A$$, to do with any sort of ability of integrity- we already have her track record on that, worst most corrupt lying mendacious woman in US politics yet.

    • All the news seems to be talking about how the money in the GOP is getting together to force Trump out. Carson has already stated that if that happens, he’s out, too, wants nothing more to do with that kind of corruption. Chances are, in that circumstance, Trump will run third party, and that he will win. After which, the GOP will be finished forever, a sad relic of history. To avoid that, the party should get behind a candidate once one is selected, and stop promising to fight Trump all the way. That is, on it’s face, not treating him fairly, as was his suspicion from the beginning. Party “leaders” want a nominee they can control. I don’t.

      • You hit the nail on the head. However if the party does split I fear that Trump wont carry enough votes to defeat Clinton as some republications will continue to hold to the party line.

      • You’re on smack if you think a 3rd party Trump will win. If Trump does a 3rd party run, say goodbye to the Senate and maybe even the House. It will be a Titanic loss for the Repubs and our gun rights will go down the shitter if we lose both houses.

        • It’s pretty obvious that Trump would lose as an independent (indeed, I think it’s obvious that he’d lose even as a Republican – he has a strong base, but beyond it he’s nearly universally reviled, and he’ll rally people like no other candidate to come and vote for anyone else so long as it ain’t him). But why would that affect the House and the Senate? Do you mean to imply that Republican turnout would be low in such a scenario?

        • There are not enough Senate or House seats up to change in 2016 to affect the current majority, even if an independent third party could muster the infrastructure to mount campaigns in every place needed.

          The damage that Trump could do in POTUS, by throwing the election to HRC just as HRPerot did, is obvious and the booing and hissing of the crowd on the second debate recognizes that. Just the fact that Trump would put that out there, like some sort of reality tv show negotiation, is proof enough that he is completely untrustworthy, and as corrupt and mendacious and self-serving as every other politician from the NY elite bubble.

        • Okay, then, adios MF. I will not vote for those who wish to enslave women in service to a hateful god. Drop that shit and get real, or give up to the dems forever. I can SHOOT assholes who come for my guns, my granddaughter cannot defend herself against hateful religious fruitcakes. I will not vote for anyone who promises religious tests for SCOTUS justices or anyone else. Tens of millions of others will not either. And you can’t make us!

        • Yo, Foodog, you may be correct about the Senate seats, I don’t follow that close, but ALL house seats are reelected every 2 years, the balance could absolutely change from 100% GOP to 100% Dem every time.

      • Nice threat, but how about Trump wins the nomination and is denied it by hidden powers exerting control over our electoral processes? Are we going to pay attention to exactly who is deciding our leaders, since it appears it is not us?!

        • >> how about Trump wins the nomination and is denied it by hidden powers exerting control over our electoral processes

          How exactly do you expect it to work?

  10. If — IF — gun owners and others who say that elections don’t matter and that the two parties are indistinguishable don’t vote and stay home to revel in their own pseudo-sophistication, then the Democrats’ gun control mantra will win.

    If — IF — the same gun owners, Fudds and others get off their asses and vote, then the Democrats will lose and gun control will be a non-issue for several years (but not for all time).

    If — IF — the Democrats win, it won’t be just because of minority people, women, urban dwellers or the rest of the Democrat base. I expect those people to sell out for free-sh!t, aggressive nannyism and false promises.

    I know who I’m going to blame.

    • Agreed. Always vote the “R”. I despise Trump, but giving Dems ANY edge just fecks everything up for 2A people.

      Think John Tester, cover of Time magazine and all that. Pro-gun western Dem, hero to the left. Bet anyone under 30 here hasn’t heard of him. I know I haven’t since that Time cover..

    • +100. for the record, if The Donald wins, I will vote for him, no questions asked.
      In the meantime he has done a great service by firing an RPG into the Lefts Overton Window, blowing the whole wall down, much less opening the window to what we can talk about – and brought a huge surge of attention for new voters to the issues. That is historically, going to be seen as saving our A$$es in the Long War, IMHO, that some may remember goes back to the 7th century.

      For that service alone, Trump is an American Hero, and for that alone, I would nominate him to be Secretary General to the UN, where he could do some real deals and maybe even some real good.

      Or Sec Commerce.
      Or Treasury. Well, ok, I take that one back. And not Housing either.
      We already have enough historical N.E. Democrat corruption and the 2008 meltdown/real estate crash to thank the the NY Ruling Elite for there.

      • “if The Donald wins, I will vote for him, no questions asked”

        How about if he wins but the GOP refuses to acknowledge that and manipulates the convention to nominate Hillary Clinton, instead? Or anyone else? You going to just vote that straight ticket anyhow? Or if he wins, you’ll vote for him on the GOP ticket or the independent ticket either one?

  11. On the other hand…how many people now have a gun that didn’t before 0bama took office, but still consider other issues, ones they agree with the Democrats on, more important?

    • Those are the ones (who used to say “Oh well, I got mine” and pull the lever for the Dems) that we have to make understand that if the Dems win, they WON’T “have theirs” any more. Push the confiscation angle, use the examples/quotes that certain Dems have thoughtfully provided recently to make them understand that they CAN’T accurately call themselves pro-gun/pro-gun-rights and still vote Dem. I don’t care if they stay home, vote Republican, or vote Libertarian, but a Dem vote is a vote to take our guns — make them understand it, and believe it.

      You don’t have to rant and lecture, just tell them calmly that in this area, how they vote has a direct impact on you, and you’ll take it personally if they try to put an anti-gunner who has endorsed confiscation in the White House. Then walk away.

      • Nope, not really. I’m talking about the ones actually willing to give up on gun rights for other issues, they happen to agree with the Dems on. E.g., the person with a gun who wants “free” health care too, for them and their chilluns.

  12. I think we have found the new evil leader for the new star wars movies. I wonder if she can shoot lighting out of her hands???

  13. You know how to actually stop guns from getting into the wrong hands? Start actually prosecuting straw buyers. Statistically we prosecute virtually no one who actually puts guns into the hands of criminals, and the ones we do get prosecuted usually get a fraction of the years they could.

    In terms of them not coming for our guns, that’s not what huffpo and the NYT are saying. Perhaps it’s a bit contradictory.

    Also, I think that the failures of gun control in Paris and California underscore that gun control is little more than the illusion of safety.

    • I like your idea, go after the straw buyers.

      They can start with the entire ATF leadership and Eric Holder. Dont forget Hillary, for as Sec State she would have been read in as a Principal on any gun smuggling into a Sovereign state, like Mexico from GunWalker, or Syria- from Amb Stevens deals to get Stingers out of Libya.

  14. There used to be a vocal, belligerent, and misinformed Democrat contingency here. So much nicer since they’ve left.

  15. My biggest fear is that Trump goes independent and runs away with 20% of the vote, leaving Hillary to win with something disgusting like 39%. We know Trump has no loyalties to anyone but himself. If he doesn’t get the GOP nomination he will be a spoiler so big it will make Ross Perot look like a small-time chump.

    She has some of the biggest states locked in no matter what anyone does and just needs a few key victories to secure the presidency. If anything takes the focus away from defeating her, she is actually likely to win.

    • >>> this in spades. I still go with Trump do a favor for his friends the Clintons. At the very least I expect that he will nice things about Hillary when doesn’t get the nomination. And his hardcore “true conservative” supporaters will vote for her.

      • heh. I see three main Trump supporters, and some of the evidence of their hysteria in places like PJMedia comments, or Breitbart especially-

        1. S’Trumpets- these are the die hard fan-boi’s, new to poliltics, mad as hell and not going to take it anymore. Mean well, but strident, and as willing to shoot other conservatives in their passion. Thats all good, but it takes time to get educated, and thankfully we have time with primaries, and we arent in as bad shape as 1930s germany, so the mob mentality isnt quite so powerful.

        2. Trump-bots. These are the hired kids clicking for pay, the useless OFAtards, ex Occupy WallSt tent dwellers and bong suckers, when they arent out getting per diem to shout “All Pigs Must Die”, or something equally intelligent, for BLM. You can tell them for the typical emotionally stunted 15 year old troll behavior, which involves stirring the pot, personal insults and so on. They are there to sow dissension, create opportunities for Alinskyite Interns in the press to post things like “see Trumps Followers are all crazy”, like TeaParty 3% Militia Terrorists, hoping to trade it up the chain.

        3. Moderates and Conservatives who have been paying attention, and agree with the concepts if not the tone, on immigration and government reform. I dont have much hope for The Donald becoming a foreign policy expert, nor do I care- thats what State Dept and the Joint Chiefs are for. I think he knows how to hire people, and has the good sense not to treat the military with the rank contempt that the Clintons and Obamas are noted for, when the press pays attention.

    • “If anything takes the focus away from defeating her, she is actually likely to win.”

      Agreed. So why is the focus of the party on defeating Trump, instead?

      • Because Trump is a lifelong, anti-liberty, anti-gun, anti-Constitution Democrat. You’re not supposed to vote for the *greater* of two evils.

        Oh, right, last week he “discovered” gun rights and now he supports the Second Amendment. If you believe that, then you’re probably one of those guys who believed the Democrats when they said “Nobody wants to take away your guns”.

        It sure is convenient that the guy went from left-wing on nearly every position to right-wing *after* he started running for President, eh? It’s not possible that he’s lying in order to draw off enough conservative voters for a third party run to hand the White House to his long-time friends the Clintons, is it?

        Naw, politicians never lie. Neither do sleazy businessmen or reality TV “stars”.

        • A man who gets it.

          After watching the rise of the Donald I have to admit the perhaps there is merit to some the left’s claims that opposition to Obama is partially race based. I mean look at all the so-called conservative who now support single payer because Trump does. I bet Obama is thinking that “wow, I should have built the wall. They would have elect President for life and support socialism. I shouldn’t have listened to Valarie.”

  17. Just a question, not looking to start a debate or argument. When folks in here talk about low information voters is that dems and repubs? Seems to me there’s a whole gang of them across the political spectrum. Except, of course, for us anarchists ???☕️

    • Its Dems 101%. Anything else I say and Id be called something Im not.
      But there are those who get and will continue to vote for the free shit. And those who are from non English speaking countries that are also looking for more of the free shit. I have people who live near by that are so stupid they still have Obslama in 08 bumper stickers on their falling apart 15 year old Toyotas. They still expect the Dims to pay their mortgages and get a free tank of gas along with a free check every month.
      They will never vote for a Republican. Republicans want to take all the free stuff away as far as they are concerned.

      • I know more than a few people (mostly millenials with kids) who hate Republicans because they think the GOP will make them pay taxes, take away their WIC subsidies, Obamaphones, and Obamacare “benefits”. Any attempt to educate them otherwise, no matter how subtly it’s done, is met with instant derision & profanities.
        And there are enough of them that they’re going to hand the election over to Clinton, because free stuff.

        • Most Dems I know simply think the Republican party is racist, and…that’s basically the end of their thought process. That the entire organization, nearly 50% of the voting electorate, are racist and nothing else. Completely moronic. I hate the Dems and what they stand for as much as anyone, but even I won’t implicate the entire party as being solely for ‘free shit’ or ‘despising America’ or ‘hating white people,’ or even all being ‘anti gun’ (though after this election cycle, I’ll be wondering mightily on that last one)

      • Actually, as someone who identifies most with the Republican party, I DO want to take away all the free stuff. Or, more to the point, to distribute the free stuff equitably. I like Interstate Highways, everyone should get to use them. I like National Parks, everyone should get to enjoy them. Food stamps? Fine, so long as every taxpayer receives the same amount. Welfare? OK, just send a check to every American! Which means, no more wealth redistribution, if it is a government benefit then EVERY American gets it. That equals, free stuff is gone.

        • If you’re doing things this way, you might as well not bother with specific welfare programs. Just write everyone a check for the same exact amount, and call it good.

          It’s actually not as silly as it sounds, and as a scheme – called “universal basic income guarantee” – has some growing popularity lately, not just among liberals, but also among the more moderate libertarians (who recognize the need for welfare in a stable society, but don’t like the bureaucracy and overhead that comes along with that). Let me explain why.

          First, the obvious. If everyone just gets a check, you don’t need all the paper pushers figuring out who’s eligible or not. No mandatory drug tests, no “submit these 15 forms in triplicate” etc. If you are a citizen, that’s all the entitlement that you need. Furthermore, because this would replace the existing welfare programs, you no longer need to maintain all those separate departments for social security, Medicare etc, each with their own rules and regulations and processes.

          Less obvious is that such an approach renders a bunch of other stuff redundant. For example, if your basic income is untaxed, then it allows you to drop progressive income taxation and use a single flat rate without downsides – the untaxed basic income part will effectively make it progressive where it matters (lower income levels). Furthermore, you could also get rid of all minimum wage laws – basic income is your minimum wage, and anything above and beyond that you earn is what the market will pay for the job that you do.

          And all these things, in turn, reduce legal and bureaucratic complexity – taxes become much simpler, there’s no need to enforce minimum wage laws – so you have fewer govt paper pushers on this count, as well.

          There have been some real-world experiments to see how feasible this all might be. I’m not aware of any failures. Here’s one interesting example:

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mincome

  18. They won’t get the House this time around.

    That’s an initial limit on what the left can do.

    They can still grievously infringe in other ways…

    • 1) If Trump runs third party to help out his long-time friends the Clintons win the White House, then the Republicans will feel it in down ticket races. Losing the House is quite possible.

      2) Having the House for the last 5 years has not stopped Obama’s tyranny. And Obama ran as a moderate. Hillary’s running as full-on Stalin. Can you imagine how far she will push things?

      3) We are already living in an un-Constitutional, quasi-dictatorship where the President simply ignores the people, the Congress and the courts and does what he likes. They’re going to have to do gun confiscation soon, or else the Marxist gravy train will derail. They cannot have armed citizens capable of resisting what they want to do to us.

  19. Here’s how it’s going to play out. Jeb or Rubio is going to be the nominee for the Republicans. Of course the Hildabeast is already the Democrat’s nominee for all intensive purposes, unless she has a stroke from a brain aneurysm.

    Florida is in the bag for the Republicans, so all they need is Ohio to win the electoral college. Do you really think Ohio is going to vote for gun confiscation? Gun control is a loser in most if not all swing states.

  20. If those of us that that own firearms were as bad as we’re being made out to be, they’d all be dead.

    Fortunately, we’re much more mature than the gun grabbers ever could think to be.

  22. Stopped by my LGS here in NJ this morning and it was packed. The guys and gals behind the gun counter have told me that it’s this way in all the gun stores they know.

    Keep in mind, this is in stupidly liberal NJ.

    If people of the gun get out and vote, the Dems will have a hard time in 2016.

  23. Sadly, all it will take for a Republican landslide in 2016 to occur is if we have a few more San Bernardino’s or Furguson’s in the next few months. I pray to God that it doesn’t go down that way but it does look like matters are coming to a boil. If the Democrats and anti’s are hanging their hats on “THIS IS OUR MOMENT!!” for comprehensive gun control, under the present climate, I believe they’ll find themselves badly mistaken. But then logic and reason have never been their strong suits

    A casual, visual survey of yard signs and bumper stickers in my very liberal, urban neighborhood would say that Bernie is going to give Hillary a thorough drubbing. Despite how the press is shilling for her I get the sense that, from many conversations I’ve had with many liberal folks around here, is that she I not much liked and not trusted. And from there it would seem that much of the country isn’t ready for the first cranky, geriatric socialist president.

    • I don’t want violence at all, but a few small terrorist attacks or race riots are preferable to what will happen with Hillary in the White House. We’re facing a full-scale civil war here, with millions dead and no guarantee that the Marxists will lose.

      If the Marxists prevail in a civil war, they will do what the Left has always done when it has absolute power: prison camps, “re-education” and genocide.

    • How many people in your neighborhood are white?

      So far, Bernie seems to be a candidate of choice for two categories of liberals: relatively rich, well-educated white adults, and young people with at least some college. However, he has relatively little support among minorities and the poor, largely due to lack of exposure in the media, and his dislike of pandering and media circus. The problem is that the latter is where a significant proportion of the votes come from for Democrats.

      On the other hand, the first category is more likely to be registered and to participate in the primaries. We’ll see.

      As far as how Sanders would do in the general election; I wouldn’t be so rash. It largely depends on who would be the opponent, anyway. Against Trump? A turnip could win; a prospective of Trump as president would drive the minority vote like nothing else, and they wouldn’t care who they’re voting for, if it’s not him.

      Against someone else it would be more interesting. The problem is that aside from Trump, everyone else on the Republican side seems to be on the traditional “free market solves everything, and if it doesn’t work for you, it’s your problem” economic bandwagon that GOP has been riding since Reagan. That doesn’t actually work for a lot of people, including many voters who’d otherwise be solidly Republican (socially conservative white workers). Ironically, this category is exactly the one that Trump has tapped in his campaign, and which has significantly contributed to his success (it’s those “missing white voters”: http://www.vox.com/2015/12/10/9882762/trump-missing-white-voters) – note his populist anti-Wall Street stance. These people are pragmatists, not idealists – they like Trump because he promises bread and circuses, in exactly the way and the fashion they desire, in very non-abstract way; and they couldn’t care less about abstract notions such as constitutional rights, or economic freedom.

      So if the Republican candidate ends up being someone like Rubio instead, don’t expect these voters to vote for him in droves; some might just decide that a little extra cash and benefits is better than yet another round of tax cuts for the rich and a lot of words that don’t translate to any deeds, and cross the party line to vote for Sanders.

  24. ‘The article cites the election of a pro-gun control candidate in Virginia’s second district State Senate race, “a rapidly growing region an hour outside of Washington, which [gun control advocates] say more nearly reflects the booming bedroom communities that will probably decide the 2016 presidential race in swing states like Nevada, Colorado and Virginia.”’ This is BS. I live in VA and despite Bloomberg pumping $2.3 million into that Senate campaign and one other, he only hit one out of two and the state’s Senate balance remains the same as it was, 21 to 19 for the Republicans. Even the liberal papers called that a huge defeat for Gov. McAulliffe, who is a Bloomberg baby himself and is well known to be angling to be Hillary’s running mate.

  25. The strategy that emerged under President Obama depends, instead, on a coalition of minority voters, urban dwellers and single women ….groups who usually are not very reliable voters.
    Republicans lose because many of their candidates are RINOs which suck.

  26. POTG need to get off their lazy,self-righteous,fudd and Rino azzes and vote R-even if they have to hold their nose. I’m not a one-issue guy but guns are way up there with me. And no one can make the excuse that dems “aren’t coming for your guns” anymore. Let’s have a massive victory like last year. Ted Cruz for president…

    • Amen, brother. Hillary is worse than anyone in the Republican field. That is saying a lot, but it’s true. We have to defeat her, period.

      I happen to like Cruz and he is expected to win the Iowa Caucus, which is of course the first “primary” event in the election cycle.

      • It’s pretty awesome; even worst-case scenario, the most liberal (R) candidate that could plausibly be elected is Rubio. And while I am fully pulling for Cruz at this point, Rubio is still a much more conservative (in the policy areas that count) presidential candidate than we’ve had since at least Reagan. Cruz would be the most conservative since Coolidge, most likely.

        And from my perspective as an observer, it’s all thanks to Trump for being the obnoxious boy crying that the emperor has no clothes. That’s what he said he entered to do, and having done it, I suspect he’ll drop out after the first few caucuses have secured a popularly-representative candidate rather than a Bush installed by power brokers. The only reason he’s ever claimed a third party ticket is in the context of an RNC defeating him & installing their own kid; I doubt he has much interest in pursuing a failed run a year from now if Cruz (the only guy he’s had some form of understanding with so far) is still doing well within the party.

        • Best case, Trump behaves and when he’s being crushed by Cruz and Rubio he’ll bow out gracefully.

          But since when has he ever been graceful?

          He’s as likely as not to throw in as an Independent and screw the Republicans to help out his old friends the Clintons.

  27. I don’t think it will hurt or help her. The lines are drawn and everybody knows what side they are on. She’s just spittin’ out words to hear them splatter (Stole that from John Wayne in The Alamo).

    I believe the decisive issues will be the economy and the stance on terrorism.

    This is where anti gunners will give up social issues for a chance to earn a better living and feel like the feds are aligned with them to meet terrorists attacks with equal force. I’m not endorsing pipe bombs but I am endorsing assault weapons. And, by the way, an “assault weapon” is any weapon I can get my hands on when a terrorist wants to start a “dialogue”.

  28. It’s still primary season. Hillary! is still watching her back for Bernie and Bernie is still trying to catch her. so they are both playing up their anti-gun creds right now. She will be anti-gun as ever, but will probably try to avoid the issue after the convention. Either that or she will recognize that anyone who cares already knows what a gun-grabber she is, and with nothing to lose will continue to try to get mileage out of the anti-gun rants. Might work with some of the addle-brained soccer moms and neutered males who otherwise wouldn’t like her.

  31. If the Republicans had a damn bit of sense, they’d be enlisting gun stores as voter registrations centers right about now…

  32. No, the only person it helps is Hillary against Sanders, it’s the only thing she has that was her position more than two months ago.

    Dems need to stop letting the Republicans give them their talking points, and gun control is a great example, Reagan made opposition a Republican thing, it worked for them, and the Demos took the other side.

  33. When Obama ran for reelection, they made fun of the NRA’s warning that he was going to push for gun control in his second term. In fact, they pointed out that the only gun bill he signed was an expansion of carry into National Parks. So his “record” was pro-gun. How can the dems glean the reelection as support for gun control?

    • Just remember, for progressive democrats facts have no use- dont waste anytime trying to figure it out- truth doesnt matter for Alinskyites, the only use is when making $hit up, or mis-applying them, as in the Big Lie.

      Remember the discredited 90% of guns from LGS in border states, originally misconstrued from fbi stats and constantly spun by Brady, et al, until demolished in the press, including here? HRC herself was saying the same in a speech before Mexican Parliament just two weeks before Agent Terry was gunned down, breaking F&F wide open.

      Funny how some facts disappear into the memory hole for the Reliable Party Organs.
      Others just keep getting spun and spun, like HRCs 90% of Americans want gun control, a tidbit out of a general Quinnipaic poll done among 1000 registered voters in the liberal north east states two weeks after Sandy Hook, CT. That has been exploded numerous times, but the Reliable Party Organs prop her up, like the stuffed own she is beginning to resemble, and let her lie, without remorse, and cheerfully pass it along as truth, just as before.

  34. Minority voters… I can’t speak for Blacks or Hispanics but I can speak for Asians since I am one. The majority that I have met, from the large Vietnamese community I lived around when I was in TX to the Japanese and Chinese that I now know here in Seattle, that most of us are pro 2nd.

Comments are closed.