search
top

Gun Control Has Never Worked for Democrats

Really, for most Dem politicians, gun control is preening virtue signaling meant to make sure the right people know they support right kind of people values. For Dems in safe urban districts, this doesn’t come at much of a cost. But what the Democratic Party faces today is that it’s been reduced to those safe urban districts. In order to come back, it’s going to have to appeal to people in the suburbs and exurbs. This is how the Dems came back strong in 2006.

Salena Zito argues that women with guns are the next threat to the Democratic Party.

A very important nugget from the poll: Like every woman interviewed at the outdoor show, an overwhelming 80 percent of them support the goals and objectives of the NRA.

So they represent a large chunk of white, suburban, conservative, pro-Second Amendment women who didn’t particularly like Trump but couldn’t vote for Clinton. They kept their opinions to themselves at dinner parties and pulled the lever for Trump in the voting booth.

Croney said that definitely described her.

Remember the Hillary Clinton that ran ads against Barack Obama in Pennsylvania for being too anti-gun? Yeah, if that Hillary Clinton had run for President, maybe she’d be in the White House.

I keep telling Dem friends, “Look, Hillary was a uniquely awful candidate. How bad is Hillary Clinton? She lost to Donald Trump.” It’s often a tough pill to swallow, but it’s true. Hillary did literally nothing to have broad appeal. Her girl power campaign was alienating to men. That’s bad news when you need Black and Hispanic men to turn out for you in numbers that rival Barack Obama’s if you’re going to win.

Making gun control the centerpiece of her campaign only scared off voters who might have been open to her in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin. That virtue signaling works for Dems in safe districts. It’s bad news in a nationwide race. Barack Obama ran both times downplaying his support for gun control. It was only after he didn’t have to face voters any longer that we saw his true colors on the issue.

28 Responses to “Gun Control Has Never Worked for Democrats”

  1. stephana says:

    When Hillary stated that she was going to ban hunting I just laughed, because I just realized that she probably just lost PA and MI and any small chance in OH. And this was on top of all of the anti gun rhetoric she was spewing.

  2. Brad says:

    I remember that months before the election, when it was obvious the Democrats had no intention of toning down the anti-gun rhetoric during the general election, I wondered how much difference it might make in the election for President.

    So I looked up all the ‘swing states’ from 2012, and low and behold virtually every one of them were pro-gun States. How well would the anti-gun rhetoric play in those States when they voted for President?

    And now we know.

    The thing is, the Democrats seem stuck on stupid. They have always been anti-gun (at least since the 1990s), but since Newtown in December 2012 they really ramped up the anti-gun efforts and vitriol. It’s like now that they have gone this far they can’t back down, even temporarily for a tactical advantage during election season.

    I mean, Governors Cuomo and McAuliffe even just vetoed bi-partisan bills to reform the knife laws of New York and Virginia. What the hell?

    • dollup15 says:

      “The thing is, the Democrats seem stuck on stupid.”

      I think a huge part of the problem is what was mentioned in the original post – “But what the Democratic Party faces today is that it’s been reduced to those safe urban districts.”

      What the Democrats are proposing on guns is popular in their safe urban districts. At the moment, those are essentially their only constituents, and if they go against the party line, they face the very real possibility of losing in a primary challenge.

      Basically, stay anti-gun and likely continue losing suburban and rural votes, or become pro-gun and definitely lose urban votes.

  3. Whetherman says:

    “the Democrats seem stuck on stupid. They have always been anti-gun (at least since the 1990s”

    Remember when Rep. John Dingell (D) voted for the Clinton AWB while he was an NRA Board Member?

    The next day he was hanging out at Fairfax Rod and Gun Club, where he was a member, and excused it to an NRA Tech Staff member that “there are just some things you’re not going to stop.” I reflected, no, not when you vote for them, you’re not.

    • Sebastian says:

      The Clinton AWB was a Senate Amendment by Diane Feinstein. I don’t think the House ever voted on it directly, except to accept the report of the Conference Committee, which they did by voice vote. What was Dingell’s history here? I only know what I read. I technically lived through it, but wasn’t paying attention to this issue at the time.

      • Whetherman says:

        I’ll have to review the process, myself. But, I know Dingell resigned from the NRA Board immediately after.

        BTW, telling the story was not intended to be an attack on the NRA, only the recitation of a puzzling historical incident; why really did Dingell do what he did?

        The NRA Tech Staff member, who shall remain nameless, sympathized with Dingell’s excuse, but Tech Staff wasn’t part of the political loop.

        • Whetherman says:

          According to the book Gun Rights War by Neal Knox, page 209, Dingell did cast a vote for the AWB.

          That is as I remember it.

          • Sebastian says:

            Thanks. I’ve read that book and didn’t remember that bit. Though, that makes me wonder if he was instructed to fall on his sword in order to get those changes in. I’m guessing Dingell was part of the conference committee, to reconcile the differences between the House and Senate version

    • Brad says:

      Speaker of the House, Democrat Tom Foley proved that Party came before principles when he supported the 1994 AW ban.

  4. Richard says:

    Follow the money. Especially Bloomberg and Soros and Gates.

  5. Ken says:

    One point that needs to be made:

    Trump won a tough election based on the promise to support the RKBA.If he betrays that promise, he will lose his reelection bid. It doesn’t matter if the betrayal is something relatively small, with fake poll numbers claiming it’s popular. One slip and he’s done. Ask GWHB about reading lips.

    For that matter,he really ought to make gun rights a priority. After all, if he’s considered a failure in four years, a Democrat can easily lie about supporting 2A. Having a solid record of accomplishments for his pro-gun supporters could squeak him across the finish line in a close race; alternatively, if he is already popular, they could give him a historic landslide.

  6. Dave says:

    Well, gun voters breathed a huge sigh of relief when Trump was sworn in, but If you’re old enough to remember recent presidents back to the first Bush, you will see that the game has been changing every election cycle recently.

    Just look at the Wayback machine for a minute or 2.

    Congress had not been in Republican hands for 4 decades before 94 (both houses). That was thanks to Clinton overreach.

    But, Team R ran a weak, and voted for the AWB candidate, Dole. His war service was heroic. His congressional service… He was the wrong candidate to oppose a very charismatic Bill Clinton.

    2000, Bush won the electoral college, but not the popular vote. He won Floriduh too, and would have won by a SUBSTANTIALLY larger margin had the media not called the race for Gore early, sending people in line at panhandle voting centers home in frustration. after Katherine Harris stepped in, FL was back in play and the real winner won out, despite Gore’s attempt to steal the 2000 presidency.

    Libs litigated that race in court for weeks all the way to the supreme court.

    9/11 happened and helped sustain GWB. Heller happened, then McDonald and Team R nominated yet another candidate for the last election, McCain. He was destined to lose and lose big. I’m sorry Sarah Palin had to go down with his ship.

    Obama won to the stark dismay of libertarians, republicans, conservatives and ‘Bama won huge – veto proof majorities in both houses of Congress.
    ‘Bama overreached but not on guns. The Tea party was born, subjugated and died within an election cycle.

    The Tea party was necessarily decentralized, disorganized and fell apart.
    Socialists on the left learned from their undoing.

    Trump won in a complete surprise. Now, in response we have an organized resistance, who didn’t wait around to foment outrage, they started on day 2! They are everything the Tea Party was not and now we face a genuine, credible threat to freedom here.

    The enemy has ALL of the USA population centers, and they are not quite – ALMOST, but not quite to the point where they can run the electoral college table with ONLY a few key blue states.

    Gun control has never worked for the Dems is true.

    Until it’s not.

    That day is coming and it’s coming a lot sooner than most of us want to think. If the dems lose senate seats at the mid terms and fail to take control of the house, I expect them to start shooting. Seriously. Their outrage, false as it may appear to us is genuine to them and a large contingent of them have NEVER been “out of power”.

    If they do get control of the House, then the jig is up and things will begin to revert back to establishment hands. That means a slower, but steadier march towards total control.

    Once the Dems have enough votes – turning NC solid blue for example, along with VA(already blue), and pulling one more state, it’s basically over at the electoral college. Unless states begin to apportion votes by district instead of winner take all.

    Once the Dems have this ability, gun control will win for the dems because the urban dems want it.

    No matter how “good” on guns any den candidate is, he or she will caucus with Pelosi and must answer to her. It’s really that simple.

    • Richard says:

      A clear and present danger. This is why we need to encourage CA secession and start talking about a larger partition effort. The US is not one country any more and pretending that it is will get us oppressed if not killed.

    • dollup15 says:

      “Obama won to the stark dismay of libertarians, republicans, conservatives and ‘Bama won huge – veto proof majorities in both houses of Congress.”

      I know it is a small point of your post, but it is important that we keep our facts correct. What you have said here is flat-out wrong.

      A veto-proof majority is a 2/3 majority, 67 in the Senate and 291 in the House. Since 2000, the Democrats reached the peak of their Congressional strength in 2008 with 59 seats in the Senate (57 Dems + 2 independent Dems) and 257 seats in the House. Nowhere near veto-proof majorities in either chamber. Not ever filibuster-proof in the Senate.

      • Ian Argent says:

        The 2008 election resulted in a 58/41 Senate (including the 2 independents who caucus with the dems), due to the delay in certifying a Senator from Wisconsin. Snarlin’ Arlen Specter then changed parties, and Al Franken was sworn in, bringing the Senate to a 60/40 partisan balance, and a filibuster proof (not veto proof – they didn’t need that, having the White House) majority. This lasted until the special election subsequent to the passing of Senator Edward Kennedy put Scott Brown on the Acela to DC in Jan 2010.

  7. Whetherman says:

    “If he betrays that promise, he will lose his reelection bid.”

    First, I have made it clear I am not a Trump supporter, so you can take the following in that vein as you will.

    But, one of the most astounding things to me about our current political scenario is the capacity of Trump supporters to ignore, or make excuses for, or sometimes not even hear about, his shortcomings. And when I say astounded, that is not hyperbole.

    As a result, I have no doubt whatsoever that anything anti-gun Trump could do, short of perhaps door-to-door arms searches and confiscations, would be forgiven or forgotten; and I have some experience and memory of how effective the NRA can be at covering anti-gun activities.

    • mike says:

      Russia strikes again!!

    • RAH says:

      I read that Trump may do an executive order requiring rifles like AR 15 with 30 round magazine, a militia weapon thus doing an end round the 4 th Circuit. Paul Ryan is preparing a bill that destroys DC registration and carry permit rules. Basically it says DC can not regulate guns. So far Trump has been better on guns than any GOP President. So I have no reason to bitch about Trump. I am quite happy so far

  8. Ian Argent says:

    I’m beginning to wonder if the passage of the Twenty-Second Amendment was actually a good idea – it removes the stick (and carrot) of having to face the voters after the second term…

  9. RAH says:

    Actually I take issue with the idea that Trump would be easy to beat The 16 GOP candidates found otherwise. Trump was very tenacious No other GOP could withstand that fire Especially the Access Hollywood tape. Still it was very close due to the number of idiots that have been programmed to be progressives from the schools . An entire generation had been indoctrinated from elementary school thru college
    Hillary was easy to beat but the Democratic ideology was a lot harder. It helped they started just to indulge in insult us. That PO enough people to come out and vote who normally do not.

  10. Jacob says:

    Democrats do get something for supporting gun control in the form of campaign contributions from rich, city liberals/progressives. It is also a useful excuse for urban politicians to explain why cities like Chicago are on fire. In terms of an election issue, it doesn’t help them get votes and won’t swing elections.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. SayUncle » Yet, they keep trying - […] Gun control has never worked for the democrats. […]
  2. Sebastian Makes A Point | Extrano's Alley, the facts about gun control, guns, and more - […] I see ling time gun blogger Sebastian makes the point gun control has never worked for Democrats. […]
  3. National Concealed Reciprocity - Is It Finally Possible? - Free Market Shooter - […] for one am optimistic this can get done.  As Sebastian of PA Gun Blog points out, gun control has…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

top