Another problem with HIllary as nominee

[cali]

To be honest, I'm sure all of the dems will have this problem, but I think it will be magnified in Hillary.

She has a terrible rating from all the pro-gun organizations. And gun enthusiasts or 2nd amendment diehards, or whatever you want to call them, are voters, and often single issue voters.

I happen to be one of those that think that federalizing most gun laws is a bad stance for dems to take. In my very liberal state, gun laws are extremely lax, and people are very concerned with politicians that they perceive as "gun grabbers". Not that Hillary wouldn't win here if she's the nom, but unless Rudi's the nominee for the repukes, her position on guns will get a lot of play.

[cleveramerican]

1. I think the anti-gun ownership stance is overplayed.

there is no middle ground for some folks on this, and they will always be pissed.

We need to admit that gun ownership in rural areas is very different than gun ownership in urban areas. I have no idea how to do that but there must be a way.


I am not sure how but somehow your zip code should be part of the equation.

[MADem]

2. Well, as an undecided voter, I'm not so sure of that

It depends on who she runs against, if she even ends up winning the primaries and going on to be our candidate in the general.

There's no distance between her and Giuliani on this issue, for example. From seven years ago, during her first Senate campaign:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9503E4DC1E38F933A25756C0A9669C8B63&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/People/C/Clinton,%20Hillary%20Rodham

Mrs. Clinton stopped short of saying that all guns should be registered, describing that proposal as unrealistic. The measures have been introduced, in various forms, in Congress, but they have faced strong Republican opposition.

Gun control is a frequent point of division between Democratic and Republican candidates in Congressional races, and it has proved to be a particularly strong issue in New York races. Charles E. Schumer, a Brooklyn Democrat, repeatedly attacked Senator Alfonse M. D'Amato for opposing gun-control measures when he defeated Mr. D'Amato, the Republican incumbent, in 1998.

But the contrast is not as sharp in Mrs. Clinton's expected contest with Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani. The mayor and the first lady hold almost identical views on gun control, which could complicate any effort by Mrs. Clinton to draw a contrast. Mr. Giuliani's campaign manager, Bruce J. Teitelbaum, said, ''As a senator, New Yorkers will know exactly what Mayor Giuliani will do because he doesn't just talk about gun control, he actually has a record of taking an historic number of guns off the streets.''

Mrs. Clinton went out of her way to praise a proposal by Mr. Pataki that would require new guns to be fired before they are sold to make a record of their ballistic fingerprint, or the marks left on a bullet that are unique to each weapon. Mrs. Clinton's praise was notable because the governor has been mentioned as a potential candidate for Senate if Mr. Giuliani, who has prostate cancer, decides to skip the race.

''I applaud Governor Pataki here in this state, who showed real leadership in proposing a state-based ballistics program, and I think it's something that needs to be done on a national level,'' Mrs. Clinton said.

Under the other proposals supported by Mrs. Clinton, prospective gun buyers would have to obtain a photo license, which would be issued only after they had undergone a criminal record check and passed a gun safety examination. Also, all sales of new guns, or transfers of guns, would be recorded in a national registry.

[cali]

3. Yes, and I made sure to point out that Rudi as nominee would

nullify Hillary's weakness in this matter. But I do think it would be an issue that she'd be pounded with if anyone else from the repuke side is nominated.

[MADem]

5. How does she compare/contrast with the rest of the field?

Is Obama that far from her on this? I'd guess Edwards and Richardson have some distance.

[MH1]

11. Richardson will be okay with rational gun ownership supporters

http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Bill_Richardson_Gun_Control.htm

I qualify the statement because he is in favor of improving gun control, but in ways that most legit gun supporters are okay with, and legit dealers would be happy with (like "instant" background checks).

Unfortunately the quotes at the link don't reveal whether he supports urban areas having the right to institute stricter controls (which I think is very much needed) but given that diplomacy is his strong suit, I would expect that he could support that to some degree. Hopefully the question will be asked and answered at some point.

Disclaimer: I haven't made a decision who I'm supporting for prez, I'm just posting this for information. Honest. (But I do kind of like what Richardson offers - c-o-m-p-e-t-e-n-c-e!)

[PATRICK]

17. Guilani has less

of a chance of getting nominated than Hillary, but as Dems we are not into their strange and phony process of selection. It is much easier for the power circles to rearrange the current circumstances than the actual primary voters in their party. They can also pick the time and manner with much more ease than ever they interfere in our chancier process.

It won't be Rudy. It might be a surprise, but the implanted Bush team in the various campaigns will forge a ticket in which the least hated will emerge covered with power. I still see Romney/Thompson as the most likely combo once Guilani takes a dramatic fall in such a way as to lift their boats. If they have to resort to riskier plan "B"s that would be the sole victory for democracy within their wasted party. Who knows WHAT the ultimate plan is or if the names of the stooges matter. I just think, in the darkest speculations, they want Thompson in as a removable Veep to be replaced later by Jeb who might even be a high cabinet member by then. Or with a deceased POTUS Thompson, the promoted Veep Romney could appoint Jeb as his Veep successor.

If this scenario remains viable this is a clear signal that the Bushes firmly intend to retain power. If Guiliani and Ron Paul ravage the electoral votes then the GOP has simply given up 2008 for the "dump the dumnped on Dem" next term.

[MADem]

21. Well, if we're talking 'anointed' from BushCo, that's still McCain. NT

[PATRICK]

24. IMHO

I think He and Guiliani were both "popular' and independent stalking horses to act as rabbits for more dependent Bush stooges. As much as they were forced to kiss up they were stalking horses for even more controlled and less personally charismatic stooges. The Bush boys have too much at stake to trust to an independent president, no matter how little they have to fear- even from a Dem win.

My take may be wrong with all the miserable choices they have. Hagel and Gingrich both have been kept out. Independents know that without the machine they have no chance, but even personal ambition to run anyway has been crushed in favor of the two irrepressible sure losers, McCain and Guiliani. I think with all their necessary knockdown of their own fretful rubber stamp GOP Congress this has to be an equally arrogant display of the raw power the Bush team has to decide on even the candidates and how the public will view them before the vote stealing even starts. Behind the secret machinations they are grinding everyone's face into the dirt and even their eventual surrogates will have to eat it with a smile.

[MADem]

25. Well, a Bloomberg-Hagel ticket could still fuck up the works!

Eleven billion can buy a LOT of tv time!

Newt doesn't have a prayer, and really, he never did--there are too many 'holier than thou' moments in his career, and too many documented blowjobs (under the Speekah's desk), screwings on the Speeeekah's desk, conference room table, xerox machine...with his now-staid wife Calista. You'd look at her, and picture her doing a humana-humana-humma with Newt. And it's hard to run without yer First Lady on the stump! See, if she hadn't been on his stump before they married.....!!!!!

Newt's little foray onto the Presidential stage was more hubris than anything else. He sounded good briefly, but the more his own BASE saw him, the more they remembered his faults--his martinet-like attitude, his smarminess, his dismissive and insulting attitude...and they just weren't buying. The Calista Blowjobs were really just the icing on a very bad cake (of course, it's the icing you see first!).

It's still early, though--and way too hard to tell yet who they'll settle on. It won't be boring, though, I'll wager....!

[ChairmanAgnostic]

4. my numbers are -6.5 and -5.9 on that weird poli scale

so, I am no Birch society member.

But, a divorce client did not like the advice I gave him. so he threatened to kill my wife.

I now own a gun, loaded, locked but easily unlocked for those who know where I hid the key, (Not a logical place, yet, available) within reach of my home office's desk.

[cali]

6. I too own a gun, though not for any particular

reason like you. And I really don't like the federalizing of gun laws.
Scary story about the threat to your wife.

[Perry Logan]

7. It's an asset for Hillary, not a problem. Most Americans want MORE gun control.

[cali]

8. OK, provide some evidence that most registered voters

want more gun control, and that those voters have more impact on elections than the pro-gun bloc of voters.

And in Vermont, Bernie Sanders would never have been elected to the House had he not eschewed gun control.

[Captain Hilts]

10. Actually, the numbers are strongly in favor of more gun control. I was in polling for 8 yrs. nt

[cali]

12. That's a personal assertation, not evidence.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. No...Mookie Was Making An Assertion That Can Be Independently Verified

http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm

[DemocratSinceBirth]

13. I Think

I think the argument would be those who are pro gun are more likely to be single issue voters than those who are anti-gun.

IMHO, it's hardly a cardinal issue...

[iamjoy]

16. Irrelevant

Because NRA people are more likely to automatically vote against anyone who suggests that MAYBE we need to CONSIDER better ways to keep guns and cop killer bullets out of the hands of criminals. Meanwhile, people who favor stronger gun control laws will not automatically vote against some one who does not advocate the same.

[Captain Hilts]

22. The NRA has meshed rifle and handgun laws. They should be governed differently.

They have very different uses and use patterns.

[johncoby2]

9. The vast majority of people believe in common sense control

But....it is not going to be an issue this session.

Why make it one? Really?

The Democratic candidate doesnt have to worry about the far right, they will NEVER vote for a Democrat. They need to court the middle. Those who swing, and there are a lot of them!

The middle is NOT opposed to common sense control. It is not an issue for them at this point either.

[MH1]

18. "Common sense" has different meanings to different people

and what seems "common sense" for gun control has implications in other areas.

For example, as I noted above, Richardson supports "instant" background checks. (Which I do as well.) But that would require some massive data collection on individuals, wouldn't it? Well, maybe not, but certain "events' in an individual's life would have to be submitted somehow to some sort of system. I think if some really smart minds with an eye to protecting individual privacy and the security of the data were asked to, they could come up with something workable. But privacy protection lobby groups will be all over it! And many people will not wait to know the details of the system, or will not believe that it is really safe and secure and reasonable.

So, there's one common sense solution that will have a tough battle.

Then there is the common sense idea that urban areas should be allowed to impose stricter controls. But many will claim that violates the 2nd amendment, so even though it's needed, tough.

I think there are single-issue gun rights people who would look at the Democratic candidate if they weren't worried about their gun rights (ah, perceived "rights") being taken away. By definition, that is a rational, persuadable voter, who just happens to have gun control as their number one issue. I have no idea how many there are, but I have spoken to people who claim that.

[jmp]

15. Correct. The NRA will be on the war path.

Bill's assault weapon ban will be morphed into a repeal of the 2nd Amendment by the NRA.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

19. Yeah

I think every child, male and female, should get a glock for his or her eighth birthday...

[Maribelle]

20. She has a terrible rating from all the pro-gun organizations because they are brainless and ...

they are not hardly single issue voters. Their forked tongues have many tines.

Don't ever forget these NRA folks are the same people that want to force young girls to receive the HPV vaccination on one side of their forked tongue, want to prevent poor children from receiving health insurance on another side of their forked, want to plaster our highways with pictures of fetuses 1,000 times the actual size, but all the while these very same people want to prevent you from talking about a two year old child's brains being blown all over the living room floor of the child's home.

[Captain Hilts]

23. She should support treating handguns and rifles differently.

They have different uses, use patterns and different abuse patterns as well.

Rifle violence is not a problem in this country.