Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

applegrove

(118,785 posts)
Tue Nov 3, 2015, 09:48 PM Nov 2015

Hillary Clinton isn’t afraid of guns

Hillary Clinton isn’t afraid of guns

by Paul Waldman at the Washington Post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/11/03/hillary-clinton-isnt-afraid-of-guns/

"SNIP.............



Hillary Clinton’s campaign just released an ad advocating action on guns, and it seems clear that she’s going to continue talking about this issue. In fact, she could be the first Democratic nominee in a long while to treat the issue of guns without fear, and it shows that she has figured out a couple of key things about it that Democrats haven’t realized before.

One might see Clinton’s continued discussion of the gun issue (and the agenda on guns she released a month ago) as aimed primarily at Bernie Sanders, whose record on the issue is a mixed one. But from the beginning, Clinton has been simultaneously running a primary and general election campaign, knowing that anything she says now could be used against her later. Clinton employs a small army of pollsters, and you can be sure that they have thoroughly tested this issue in the context of both the primaries and a potential general election to determine what might be a good or bad idea for her to advocate.

It isn’t as though Clinton desperately needs the gun issue in order to become the Democratic nominee. At most, it might make a marginal difference here or there. So why risk incurring the wrath of gun advocates? That’s the first thing Clinton seems to have realized: the National Rifle Association and their allies will come after her no matter what.

It doesn’t matter if she talks about guns, or doesn’t talk about guns. It doesn’t matter if she advocates specific restrictions, or doesn’t advocate specific restrictions. It doesn’t matter if she goes hunting a couple of weeks before election day, like John Kerry did. The NRA will scream “She’s coming for your guns!”, just like they did with Barack Obama, and Kerry, and Al Gore, and Bill Clinton. Keeping gun owners in a constant state of fear is essential to maintaining their membership and keeping sales strong for the gun manufacturers who are the NRA’s partners, and they’ll do it no matter who the Democratic nominee is and what he or she says.



................SNIP"
21 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

upaloopa

(11,417 posts)
1. I like to call it talking past the gun lobby
Tue Nov 3, 2015, 09:56 PM
Nov 2015

It is like gun control folks getting together and taking a stand no matter what the gun lobby wants.
No fear.

Fred Sanders

(23,946 posts)
3. Give your applause for gun control and to the post by clicking on the link to the author. Well said!
Tue Nov 3, 2015, 10:01 PM
Nov 2015

"When you mention that - gun control as a net losing election issue for Democrats - someone is likely to retort, “But didn’t Al Gore lose his home state because of guns, and doesn’t that prove Democrats shouldn’t touch this issue?”

This is a myth that’s been circulating for years, encouraged by gun advocates and spread by timorous Democrats. But it’s not true.

Al Gore didn’t lose Tennessee because of the gun issue, he lost Tennessee because he was a Democrat. The state had been trending Republican for years, and continued to do so afterward (Mitt Romney beat Barack Obama there by 20 points in 2012). There is precisely zero evidence that the gun issue hurt Gore in Tennessee, and what evidence there is suggests that his position on guns helped him win other states with large urban and suburban populations like Pennsylvania and Michigan (I discussed that election, and the concomitant myth that the NRA won Congress for Republicans in 1994, at greater length in this article)."

oasis

(49,408 posts)
4. Because Hillary's a fighter.
Tue Nov 3, 2015, 10:05 PM
Nov 2015
Take note anti-Hills. Start reading these pro-Hillary facts and educate yourselves.
 

Armstead

(47,803 posts)
14. Yes a profile in courage
Wed Nov 4, 2015, 08:41 AM
Nov 2015
"Clinton employs a small army of pollsters, and you can be sure that they have thoroughly tested this issue in the context of both the primaries and a potential general election to determine what might be a good or bad idea for her to advocate."

I wonder if she'd be as passionate abut guns if the pollsters had told her "Hillary, I'd stay away from this one because only 49.5 percent of the potential voting demographic in the general elections wants to hear about it."

oasis

(49,408 posts)
17. Hillary's furious about how our country has been plagued by unrestrained
Wed Nov 4, 2015, 12:05 PM
Nov 2015

gun violence. She's no different on that issue than any other clear thinking American would be.

aikoaiko

(34,183 posts)
5. Well, there is a difference between NRA distorting the truth and being able to quote HRC's policies
Tue Nov 3, 2015, 10:12 PM
Nov 2015

Prorestrictionist Democrats are already going to vote for her.

Being a vocal anti-gun Democrat won't help her and could hurt her. Bill made the some mistake and said in his book.

Skidmore

(37,364 posts)
15. Seriously, what year is this?
Wed Nov 4, 2015, 08:42 AM
Nov 2015

Time is linear and events happen in a linear progression. Are you exactly the same person you were 10 years ago, 25 years ago, when you were a child? Are people ever allowed live in the present and allow events to inform their decisions in Bernieworld? What you presented is something that occured in an election years ago. Since then, how many school massacres and mass shootings have we had? Are you willing to suspend any concerns you may have about the victimization of people by gun violence to score a cynical political point based on a cheap card trick? Now you see it now you don't. Do you see those deaths?

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
21. I heard some years ago you can't change your childhood, the last ten years or even yesyerday
Mon Nov 9, 2015, 12:43 AM
Nov 2015

But tomorrow can be the best day of your life. We can't change the past gun violence but we can sure make a better tomorrow.

Skidmore

(37,364 posts)
16. Someone needs to step forward
Wed Nov 4, 2015, 08:54 AM
Nov 2015

and I am glad she is willing to do so. What the gun industry has done to this nation is reprehensible.

MineralMan

(146,331 posts)
18. Good for her. It's a very important issue.
Wed Nov 4, 2015, 12:43 PM
Nov 2015

And she's right to take on the NRA and the gun lobby directly and emphatically.

Another way she's earned my support.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Hillary Clinton isn’t afr...