Could Obama’s gun-control push cost Democrats the Senate?

posted at 11:21 am on April 18, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

So far, we’ve heard a lot of bluster coming from Barack Obama and his allies on Capitol Hill about how the voters will punish Republicans for opposing a series of gun-control measures that didn’t even keep all the Democrats in the fold.  The real problem with “the audacity of mope,” as National Hotline’s Josh Kraushaar writes today, is that voters may end up punishing Democrats in key 2014 Senate contests.  Obama and the Democrats just learned the wrong lesson over their spectacular and embarrassing failure, and may lose the Senate as a result:

If this doesn’t demonstrate the limitations of the president’s political muscle and the influence of his newly minted Organizing for Action lobbying group, I don’t know what does. Yet, despite the embarrassing setback, Obama nonetheless argued that he still held the upper hand, politically: “If this Congress refuses to listen to the American people and pass commonsense gun legislation, then the real impact is going to have to come from the voters.”  That couldn’t misread the political environment heading into 2014 anymore. That’s the audacity of mope.

Put simply, the 2014 Senate elections will be fought predominantly on the very turf that is most inhospitable to gun control–Southern and Mountain West conservative states. It’s no coincidence that three of the four Democrats who opposed the Toomey-Manchin bill are facing difficult reelections in 2014 and presumably are attuned to the sentiments of their constituents. Blame the National Rifle Association for the bill’s failure, but the lobby is feeding into already deeply held opposition to gun regulations and a broader sense of anxiety about the president’s and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s intentions–particularly given the president’s past publicized remark about “bitter” rural voters who “cling to their guns and religion.”  It doesn’t take much for the gun-rights crowd, significant in these states, to jump to inaccurate conclusions given that history.

And how do the White House or allied groups plan on punishing gun-control opponents? The notion of challenging the Second Amendment is as fanciful as it is self-defeating. Democratic primary voters in the deep South have significantly different views on gun rights than their coastal counterparts. Even if they support expanded background checks, the chance of landing a candidate running a one-issue campaign against brand-name Democrats like Mark Pryor and Mark Begich defies common sense. Three years ago in Arkansas, liberals poured their money and manpower in to defeat former Sen. Blanche Lincoln in a primary with the state’s lieutenant governor. Even though Lincoln was unpopular in the state–later losing reelection to Republican Sen. John Boozman by 21 points–she fended off the challenge.

In fact, Kraushaar wonders if Obama is signaling to Democrats who abandoned him that he won’t be doing much to stave off Republican challengers next year:

Surely the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, which has its hands full with the competing interests of its incumbents, doesn’t want to see the type of internal conflict that’s riven their Republican counterparts over the last four years. They’ve encouraged their vulnerable Southern members up for reelection to cultivate independent brands, to show they don’t follow the president blindly. That’s what Pryor, Begich, and Sen. Max Baucus of Montana did in opposing the background-check compromise. Obama didn’t say it outright, but he came awfully close to suggesting he won’t be supporting members of his own party who deserted him at a key moment of his presidency.

Kraushaar later concludes that Obama’s impotence on gun control will damage the chances for a White House win on immigration reform.  Perhaps, but the two issues don’t line up all that closely; there are different constituencies in gun rights and immigration reform, and the problem in the latter issue is clearly a lack of government action for people on both sides of the issue.  It might lessen the influence that Obama has on the outcome (if any) for immigration reform, but Obama hasn’t really been part of that effort in any significant degree anyway.  That wasn’t the case on gun control, where Obama pulled his party into a fight it had long avoided, and for good reasons.

Kraushaar’s colleague Jill Lawrence claims that Democrats will continue fighting for gun control, blaming an “intensity gap” for Obama’s loss. But is that what really happened?  Even her own analysis seems to argue otherwise:

Many blame the intensity gap for what Giffords describes as a Senate in thrall to the gun lobby. How intense is the NRA? Here’s an example from former Sen. Ted Kaufman, who was Vice President Joe Biden’s chief of staff in 1994,when Biden was the lead senator on a crime bill that included a 10-year assault-weapons ban. During Biden’s 1996 campaign, Kaufman told me, a fellow from Biden’s office was going fishing in rural southern Delaware. He drove down a dirt road, got out, and walked another mile, to a stream, “and some guy comes by and hands him an anti-Joe Biden leaflet from the NRA,” Kaufman said. “These are incredibly dedicated folks.”

But …

Bloomberg was the first to play hardball in campaigns through his super PAC, Independence USA. The other group he founded, the bipartisan Mayors Against Illegal Guns, announced this week it is scoring senators on their gun votes–just like the National Rifle Association. Obama is urging Americans to “sustain some passion about this” and tell members of Congress that if they don’t support expanded background checks, “you will remember come election time.” There’s no doubt that Organizing for Action, the political group dedicated to his agenda, will remember.

So will Giffords, the former congresswoman who was shot in the head two years ago in Tucson, Ariz., and now leads gun-safety efforts through her group Americans for Responsible Solutions. “Mark my words: If we cannot make our communities safer with the Congress we have now, we will use every means available to make sure we have a different Congress, one that puts communities’ interests ahead of the gun lobby’s,” she wrote Wednesday night in a gut-wrenching New York Times op-ed.

A day before the Senate vote, Mark Kelly–Giffords’s husband–said they will try to oust Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., a longtime Giffords friend, if he opposed sensible gun-safety measures. His vote Wednesday helped kill the bipartisan compromise that would have expanded background checks to online and gun-show sales. Yet Flake is not up for reelection until 2018, and therein lies the challenge: Will anyone remember this issue, and the impact of these votes, by then?

Combine that with the massive grassroots efforts from Obama’s OFA and the media blitz that overwhelmingly favored gun-control legislation, and you have to wonder how anyone could believe that the NRA was winning an “intensity gap.”  Morning Joe, the most moderate of MSNBC’s shows, and CNN’s primetime host Piers Morgan went on full-time campaigns for the assault-weapons ban and universal background checks, for instance.  All of this took place in the immediate aftermath of a horrific massacre of the most innocent of victims. And yet, Gallup showed that only 4% thought gun control was the most important issue facing the nation, even after all the hysterical coverage and rhetoric.

Obama lost because he miscalculated the mood of the nation, and the danger to Democrats in pushing gun control.  And that may make him a very lonely Democrat in DC by 2015.

Update: Matt Lewis sums up the “90% support” issue nicely:

I’m not saying that the polls were skewed, but rather, that they are easily misinterpreted. The fact that 90 percent of Americans favor something is largely irrelevant. Most Americans probably favor chocolate over vanilla, but that doesn’t mean they are intent on doing anything about it.

When measuring polls, it’s important to weigh intensity versus preference. According to Gallup, just 4 percent of Americans see guns as the most pressing problem to be addressed. So the support for gun control is an inch deep and a mile wide.

Why does this matter? It tells us that while Americans might prefer background checks, but it’s not an issue that will drive them to the polls. Meanwhile, the minority of Americans who want to defend the 2nd Amendment are likely much more passionate.

The experts agree. Consider this quote from Dan Balz’s column: “If you ever wanted a textbook example of intensity trumping preference, this is it,” said Ross K. Baker, a political science professor at Rutgers University.”

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

how could this cost them the senate if 90% of Americans, 80% of gunowners, and 70% of NRA households favor it?

the cowards who voted no, on the other hand, may be in for a surprise when reelection comes

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:23 AM

Let’s hope.

I’m not saying that the polls were skewed, but rather, that they are easily misinterpreted. The fact that 90 percent of Americans favor something is largely irrelevant. Most Americans probably favor chocolate over vanilla, but that doesn’t mean they are intent on doing anything about it.

When measuring polls, it’s important to weigh intensity versus preference. According to Gallup, just 4 percent of Americans see guns as the most pressing problem to be addressed. So the support for gun control is an inch deep and a mile wide.

I was thinking that myself as I watched the freakout on FB and Twitter, thinking “Really, 90%? Even if that’s so, there is no groundswell of actual support, just a bunch of activists failing to stir people up and running with iffy numbers as some sort of mandate to DO SOMETHING!!!”

thebrokenrattle on April 18, 2013 at 11:25 AM

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:23 AM

Cite your sources, now.

kingsjester on April 18, 2013 at 11:25 AM

Yes…Yes…Yes!!!

trs on April 18, 2013 at 11:25 AM

4% important issue at this point

Conservative4ev on April 18, 2013 at 11:25 AM

Well, Obama does have the Midas touch when it comes to other people’s elections. That’s why they all want photo ops with him while they’re campaigning.
LOLZOMATIC!!!

Marcola on April 18, 2013 at 11:26 AM

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:23 AM

Cite your sources, now.

kingsjester on April 18, 2013 at 11:25 AM

listen to the President’s speeches

also been on many news programs

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:27 AM

Because dumbass, real elections are still more honest than liberal media polls.

slickwillie2001 on April 18, 2013 at 11:28 AM

Cite your sources, now.

kingsjester on April 18, 2013 at 11:25 AM

Hell, don’t scare him. You know how he runs off. It took hours to catch the little basset last time.

katy the mean old lady on April 18, 2013 at 11:28 AM

lib4life on April 18, 2013 at 11:27 AM

ROFLMAO..you are the definition of stupid.

HumpBot Salvation on April 18, 2013 at 11:28 AM

It’s even worde than that. I know people who are now convinced that the gov’t is planning some type of bolshevik style mass violence. As if obamacare and amnesty aren’t enough to do the job.

abobo on April 18, 2013 at 11:28 AM

“If this Congress refuses to listen to the American people and pass commonsense gun legislation, then the real impact is going to have to come from the voters.”

Obama here is absolutely right, but in the wrong way.

unclesmrgol on April 18, 2013 at 11:29 AM

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:27 AM

The president lies.

Link us the actual source of those poll numbers please. Or, shuddup.

kingsjester on April 18, 2013 at 11:29 AM

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:23 AM

Source, please.

Limerick on April 18, 2013 at 11:29 AM

The correct answer is no. The people are stupid.

listen to the President’s speeches

also been on many news programs

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:27 AM

So that’s a no on citing sources. Meanwhile, gun people control is put on the back burner.

nobar on April 18, 2013 at 11:30 AM

listen to the President’s speeches

also been on many news programs

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:27 AM

Oh yea, that proves it right there. You’re an idiot.

VegasRick on April 18, 2013 at 11:31 AM

Could Obama’s gun-control push cost Democrats the Senate?

Have to say it. Given the prevalence of Democrat vote fraud, I don’t think that they are worried.

Subotai Bahadur on April 18, 2013 at 11:32 AM

the cowards who voted no, on the other hand, may be in for a surprise when reelection comes

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:23 AM

The cowards who voted no are actually Senators representing their constituents (for fear of losing their jobs). Your ideology just happens to be in direct conflict with their jobs and preservation of the 2nd.

antipc on April 18, 2013 at 11:32 AM

Is the longlegged mackdaddy pouting?

davidk on April 18, 2013 at 11:32 AM

listen to the President’s speeches also been on many news programs

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:27 AM

LOL!

a capella on April 18, 2013 at 11:32 AM

According to these often cited polls, 10% of Americans have cleared the shelves of most gun stores and almost all the ammo of certain types…The gungrabbers have a hard time tying their laws to prevention of mass shootings. Emotional, kneejerk responses rarely work.

d1carter on April 18, 2013 at 11:34 AM

Why isn’t anyone talking about the Republican’s response bill. Why didn’t that pass?
The one Cruz and Rubio supported. Did Democrats vote against it?

AmeriCuda on April 18, 2013 at 11:34 AM

*crossing fingers *

cmsinaz on April 18, 2013 at 11:34 AM

“We can hope!” says everybody here.

DTTS on April 18, 2013 at 11:35 AM

I enjoy seeing the petulant Community Organizer stamp his foot for all Americans to see…

d1carter on April 18, 2013 at 11:35 AM

listen to the President’s speeches

also been on many news programs

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:27 AM

Gullible much?

antipc on April 18, 2013 at 11:35 AM

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:23 AM

Because non-itelligent, when you make up your facts, like you just did, you are wrong. On everything.

cozmo on April 18, 2013 at 11:36 AM

Don’t forget Obamacare.

Vote out every Senator who voted for it!

22044 on April 18, 2013 at 11:37 AM

1 of many upcoming failures of the worst leader in American history

Conservative4ev on April 18, 2013 at 11:37 AM

davidk on April 18, 2013 at 11:32 AM

Nope.He had a full-blown temper tantrum.

kingsjester on April 18, 2013 at 11:38 AM

Could Obama’s gun-control push cost Democrats the Senate?

No. The only thing that will cost the left anything anymore is some type of population paradigm shifting event which causes massive numbers of individuals to do a 180 on their indoctrinated belief systems. This might be spiritual in nature, like a revival, or political or economic in nature, like the collapse of the dollar or the confiscation of private assets, like in Cyprus. That’s my opinion FWIW.

samuelrylander on April 18, 2013 at 11:39 AM

how could this cost them the senate if 90% of Americans, 80% of gunowners, and 70% of NRA households favor it?

the cowards who voted no, on the other hand, may be in for a surprise when reelection comes

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:23 AM

Two reasons. First, your statistics are BS. Second, even if they’re accurate, that 4% figure from Gallup is what you need to keep your eye on. The fact that we’re already 3 months into Obama’s 2nd term and all we’ve heard about is gun control and amnesty when the economy is still in the crapper won’t sit well with midterm voters.

Doughboy on April 18, 2013 at 11:40 AM

listen to the President’s speeches

also been on many news programs

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:27 AM

Are those credible sources?

esr1951 on April 18, 2013 at 11:40 AM

If we keep sending RINOS to the Senate like Juan McCain and his girlfriend Lindsey, Kelly Ayotte, Susan Collins, Rob Portman, and Marco Rubio, no, Obama won’t REALLY lose control of the Senate.

wildcat72 on April 18, 2013 at 11:40 AM

Editorials Seethe with Anger over ‘Shameful’ Gun Control Defeat

– In that^ collection is an article:

“Rural America vs. Sensible Gun Control” (Bloomberg)

1. The “rural America” sneering elitism.

2. “Sensible.”

From the Jill Lawrence post-it, above:

A day before the Senate vote, Mark Kelly–Giffords’s husband–said they will try to oust Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., a longtime Giffords friend, if he opposed sensible gun-safety measures.

“Sensible.”

This is just one big . . . herd hissy fit.

Axe on April 18, 2013 at 11:40 AM

Obamageddon begins.

Watch Captain Thinskin lose his super coolness and turn into angry toddler without his binkie.

fogw on April 18, 2013 at 11:41 AM

It tells us that while Americans might prefer background checks, but it’s not an issue that will drive them to the polls.

We already have background checks.

Giffords, the former congresswoman… “Mark my words: If we cannot make our communities safer with the Congress we have now, we will use every means available to make sure we have a different Congress, one that puts communities’ interests ahead of the gun lobby’s,” she wrote Wednesday night in a gut-wrenching New York Times op-ed.

Yeah, right. Giffords “wrote” that. From what I understand, her husband does all of her thinking for her.

Vince on April 18, 2013 at 11:41 AM

kingsjester on April 18, 2013 at 11:38 AM

kingsjester, I noticed this in your ‘blog’ post:

“It would be disrespectful not to follow their example.

And, that would be shameful.

Until He Comes,

KJ”

Until he comes…are you wishing for the president’s death?!

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:42 AM

No. The only thing that will cost the left anything anymore is some type of population paradigm shifting event which causes massive numbers of individuals to do a 180 on their indoctrinated belief systems. This might be spiritual in nature, like a revival, or political or economic in nature, like the collapse of the dollar or the confiscation of private assets, like in Cyprus. That’s my opinion FWIW.

samuelrylander on April 18, 2013 at 11:39 AM

It’s going to be forced on everyone whether they want it or not once the dollar collapses under the weight of our massive and growing debt, deficits, and unfunded mandates.

The future IS conservative, limited government, if for no reason other than the progressive welfare state is too expensive, and the economy unable to pay for it.

wildcat72 on April 18, 2013 at 11:42 AM

partisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:42 AM

Diggin’ a hole. Stop digging!

22044 on April 18, 2013 at 11:43 AM

Thus why Oblammo is pushing so hard to get 11 million new Dem voters via amnesty. If you can’t beat them by corruption, outnumber them by fiat. We need to let Rubio, Boehner, and all the other RINOs know that we do not want amnesty, in any form!
This isn’t rocket science and you would think they would understand what the agenda is. Gun control is a power grab as is amnesty, Oblamacare etc…An armed populace is the only thing standing between us and Emperor Obama and he knows this. Don’t think for one minute that these Dems care about you and me, they care about power and how to seize it.

neyney on April 18, 2013 at 11:43 AM

Until he comes…are you wishing for the president’s death?!

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:42 AM

NO, bufoon. I’m referring to Someone above your false messiah’s pay grade. Waaay above.

kingsjester on April 18, 2013 at 11:43 AM

Yeah, right. Giffords “wrote” that. From what I understand, her husband does all of her thinking for her.

Vince on April 18, 2013 at 11:41 AM

From what I’ve read of her condition Gabby Giffords can’t even go to the bathroom unaided.

She’s certainly not mentally competent to make national policy.

wildcat72 on April 18, 2013 at 11:43 AM

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:23 AM

From your link:

But the National Rifle Association (NRA) edged out President Barack Obama in the poll, with 46 percent saying the pro-gun lobby better reflects their views on guns, versus 43 percent for Obama.

Woops.

alwaysfiredup on April 18, 2013 at 11:44 AM

Until he comes…are you wishing for the president’s death?!

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:42 AM

Ignorant on all matters.

No-brain is a more fitting name.

nobar on April 18, 2013 at 11:44 AM

listen to the President’s speeches

also been on many news programs

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:27 AM

Thank you for the laugh of the day. “Listen to the president.” You crack me up! “Also been on many news programs” Priceless. Just like all that in depth detailed coverage of that little abortion doctor trial going on in Philly.

Oh,… wait. Well, maybe just like all that in detph and accurate reporting by CNN up in Boston. Oh …, wait. Just saw Jon Stewards take on that, Human Centipede, nevermind.

parke on April 18, 2013 at 11:44 AM

From what I’ve read of her condition Gabby Giffords can’t even go to the bathroom unaided.

She’s certainly not mentally competent to make national policy.

wildcat72 on April 18, 2013 at 11:43 AM

Her husband is a ghoul.

22044 on April 18, 2013 at 11:45 AM

NO, bufoon. I’m referring to Someone above your false messiah’s pay grade. Waaay above.

kingsjester on April 18, 2013 at 11:43 AM

imo, ‘until he comes’ sounds like a threat.

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:46 AM

Could Obama’s gun-control push cost Democrats the Senate?

Well, I will work hard as hell to make sure that happens!!!!

Amnesty as well…..Rubio is not even safe….we need some back-up in Florida….

redguy on April 18, 2013 at 11:46 AM

Thank you for the laugh of the day. “Listen to the president.” You crack me up! “Also been on many news programs” Priceless. Just like all that in depth detailed coverage of that little abortion doctor trial going on in Philly.

Oh,… wait. Well, maybe just like all that in detph and accurate reporting by CNN up in Boston. Oh …, wait. Just saw Jon Stewards take on that, Human Centipede, nevermind.

parke on April 18, 2013 at 11:44 AM

Yeah, “it’s true because I heard it from the president”

is even less credible than “it’s true because I saw it on the internet”

22044 on April 18, 2013 at 11:46 AM

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:46 AM

Damn you’re stupid.

alwaysfiredup on April 18, 2013 at 11:47 AM

Obama is showing himself more and more to be a one-trick pony.

Look at the Obamacare debates. His modus operandi is to appeal to emotion rather than reason, to exploit individuals shamelessly (accuracy and even truth don’t matter-remember his mother’s battles on her deathbed with the evil insurance companies?) and to impugn the motives of anybody who dares oppose him.

Since those are standard liberal techniques, this comes as no surprise, but it might be starting to wear a little thin with the so-called “moderates.”

I’ll argue that other recent presidents could have actually gotten this bill passed. Obama will never recognize that he is the major reason this failed.

Drained Brain on April 18, 2013 at 11:47 AM

I just wish The Petulant One was as angry about the Marathon Bombing as he was about his personal loss on gun control…

d1carter on April 18, 2013 at 11:47 AM

imo, ‘until he comes’ sounds like a threat.

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:46 AM

I believe he must have reached China.

nobar on April 18, 2013 at 11:48 AM

imo, ‘until he comes’ sounds like a threat.

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:46 AM

Your opinion means 2 things, Skippy: “diddly” and “squat”.

kingsjester on April 18, 2013 at 11:48 AM

The NRA is continually referred to as if it’s a bunch of snidely whiplashes in an office building.

American voters are the force behind the NRA. Without them, Wayne Lapierre has nothing.

It’s just delusional to believe the NRA has magical powers.

NoDonkey on April 18, 2013 at 11:48 AM

From what I’ve read of her condition Gabby Giffords can’t even go to the bathroom unaided.

She’s certainly not mentally competent to make national policy.

wildcat72 on April 18, 2013 at 11:43 AM

Her husband is a ghoul.

22044 on April 18, 2013 at 11:45 AM

Shouldn’t his ass be in jail for killing the baby seal?

Conservative4ev on April 18, 2013 at 11:48 AM

This is why I joined the NRA in December.

Yeah, baby!

Winning is a lot better than losing and giving my moola to the NRA has provided better return on investment than giving money to the GOP.

Bruno Strozek on April 18, 2013 at 11:48 AM

imo, ‘until he comes’ sounds like a threat.

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:46 AM

“Hello” probably sounds like a threat to you.

katy the mean old lady on April 18, 2013 at 11:48 AM

imo, ‘until he comes’ sounds like a threat.

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:46 AM

Which proves you are a partisan idiot. Looking for boogymen in everything.

cozmo on April 18, 2013 at 11:48 AM

This is why I joined the NRA in December.

Yeah, baby!

Winning is a lot better than losing and giving my moola to the NRA has provided better return on investment than giving money to the GOP.

Bruno Strozek on April 18, 2013 at 11:48 AM

Winnah!!!!!

Conservative4ev on April 18, 2013 at 11:49 AM

Drained Brain on April 18, 2013 at 11:47 AM

When more people trust the NRA on guns than the president, the president has issues.

I can guarantee you that on the issue of abortion, more people would have trusted Bush than PP to make policy. and that’s as it should be. Our elected officials should be less partisan than national advocacy orgs devoted to that issue.

alwaysfiredup on April 18, 2013 at 11:49 AM

listen to the President’s speeches

also been on many news programs

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:27 AM

Jeez! I am amazed at the gullibility of Obama voters! This is just nuts!

Vince on April 18, 2013 at 11:50 AM

Yeah, “it’s true because I heard it from the president”

is even less credible than “it’s true because I saw it on the internet”

22044 on April 18, 2013 at 11:46 AM

harry red’s imaginary friend told him so.

VegasRick on April 18, 2013 at 11:50 AM

Shouldn’t his ass be in jail for killing the baby seal?

Conservative4ev on April 18, 2013 at 11:48 AM

Good question, I hadn’t heard about that.

22044 on April 18, 2013 at 11:50 AM

Uh huh, and Romney’s got this in the bag, right?

Unless the GOP can win women and minorities they won’t win. I have no idea how they can get those votes though. I don’t think anyone else does either.

happytobehere on April 18, 2013 at 11:50 AM

imo, ‘until he comes’ sounds like a threat.

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:46 AM

Then you should be very afraid.

Electrongod on April 18, 2013 at 11:50 AM

imo, ‘until he comes’ sounds like a threat.

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:46 AM

Then you better run away.

HumpBot Salvation on April 18, 2013 at 11:50 AM

the cowards who voted no, on the other hand, may be in for a surprise when reelection comes

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:23 AM

The Dem Senators that voted no just did their House colleagues a great favor by killing this steaming pile. Gun control laws won’t pass because the mood of the country demands that it won’t. The empty ammo shelves and gun racks attest to that. The biggest problem for Dems going forward is that they’ve tipped their had and used the word “confiscation” once too many times. Their intent is clear and their plans couldn’t be more obvious. However, I will say that at least they’re being honest now as to their endgame.

Unlike Obamacare when “history” was on their side Democrats remember full well (see 1994) what happens when they diminish our 2nd Am. rights. They’re looking at losing additional seats next year in the Senate if not full control and despite Obama’s lecture they know that he’s next to worthless in off year campaigns. Obama is now officially a lame duck. Thank God.

volnation on April 18, 2013 at 11:51 AM

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:46 AM

Damn you’re stupid.

alwaysfiredup on April 18, 2013 at 11:47 AM

Glad you stopped me. I was going to type that and three more letters. Anyway, unreal.

Axe on April 18, 2013 at 11:52 AM

Yeah, “it’s true because I heard it from the president”

is even less credible than “it’s true because I saw it on the internet”

22044 on April 18, 2013 at 11:46 AM

Well, you see that is why Mr. Obama is one up on the rest of us (as per nonpartisans’ opinion) because Mr. Obama gets all his information from the Telepromptor and not that unreliable entity called the Internet. Smart power.

parke on April 18, 2013 at 11:52 AM

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/91-percent-americans-support-gun-background-checks-poll-144348180–politics.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/07/us-usa-guns-poll-idUSBRE9160LW20130207

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:32 AM

Actually, this is the source of the 90%. The actual poll by Quinnipiac. This is what it also said, but has not been mentioned even once in any article. I wonder why? Any thoughts NP?

American voters say 48 – 38 percent that the government could use the information from universal background checks to confiscate legally-owned guns

Expecting gun confiscation are Republicans 61 – 25 percent and independent voters 51 – 36 percent, while Democrats say 54 – 32 percent there will not be confiscation. Men say confiscation is likely 52 – 37 percent and women agree 45 – 38 percent.

As for the 90%, here is the question that was posed:

Do you support or oppose – requiring background checks for all gun buyers?

Personally, I don’t agree with the background check for ALL sales. The bill also made the seller retain the background check to the seller, and if he didn’t, it would be a crime. Instant database.

Patriot Vet on April 18, 2013 at 11:52 AM

Unless the GOP can win women and minorities they won’t win. I have no idea how they can get those votes though. I don’t think anyone else does either.

happytobehere on April 18, 2013 at 11:50 AM

I do not understand your logic. The GOP gets a sizeable minority of the women’s vote and manages to win elections without the minority vote on a regular basis. Do not be deluded by the talk of future Democratic hegemony, that’s just lib wishcasting.

alwaysfiredup on April 18, 2013 at 11:52 AM

Here comes Barry’s next marquis moment.

Limerick on April 18, 2013 at 11:52 AM

Then you should be very afraid.

Electrongod on April 18, 2013 at 11:50 AM

:) Didn’t think of that. Maybe it does sound like a threat.

Axe on April 18, 2013 at 11:52 AM

The failed king is doing what all commie Democrats do when the goofey ideas they have and try to force down on U.S. from on high,

blame some one else,

change the subject,

stomp their feet and pout,

try something worse like amnesty and then push the CO2 Al Gore , Hockeystick tax and spend fraud.

It is what he is, what his supporters are.

Look close at this look of hate.

Real Danger there within that one.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on April 18, 2013 at 11:54 AM

Axe on April 18, 2013 at 11:52 AM

They will tell you Whom they fear.

kingsjester on April 18, 2013 at 11:54 AM

Jeez! I am amazed at the gullibility of Obama voters! This is just nuts!

Vince on April 18, 2013 at 11:50 AM

just to be clear, I did not vote for obama

and I would’ve been happy with romney ias president

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:55 AM

Whether the cost is loss of control doesn’t matter. Barry will find a way to have his bidding done and he will always cast blame on those who thwart him.

hawkeye54 on April 18, 2013 at 11:56 AM

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:55 AM

Yeah. A abortion supporter, gun grabbing, no-war-on-terror, big government, search-me-feds supporter could easily have chosen Romney over Obama.

Limerick on April 18, 2013 at 11:59 AM

just to be clear, I did not vote for obama

and I would’ve been happy with romney ias president

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:55 AM

Translation: I’m defeated, but I’m going to chime in randomly.

Defeatisan.

nobar on April 18, 2013 at 11:59 AM

listen to the President’s speeches also been on many news programs

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:27 AM

Like I have nothing better to do than listening to King Narcissus throwing temper tantrums on live TV.

jimver on April 18, 2013 at 11:59 AM

I’m not saying that the polls were skewed, but rather, that they are easily misinterpreted. The fact that 90 percent of Americans favor something is largely irrelevant. Most Americans probably favor chocolate over vanilla, but that doesn’t mean they are intent on doing anything about it.

I would agree that the polls are being misinterpreted but I think that is largely on purpose by supporters of additional gun control measures. If I remember correctly, the survey question simply asked if the person supports gun control.

That could literally mean anything. We have gun control laws already in place. What percentage of that 90% support the existing gun control laws but not additional laws? What percentage of that 90% supported this particular Senate gun law that was defeated?

The constant parroting of 90%! 90%! 90%! is nothing but pure political propaganda banking on an ill-informed public.

Queasy on April 18, 2013 at 12:02 PM

Translation: I’m defeated, but I’m going to chime in randomly.

Defeatisan.

nobar on April 18, 2013 at 11:59 AM

um it wasn’t random dood

I was responding directly to someone accusing me of being an obama voter

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 12:02 PM

how could this cost them the senate if 90% of Americans, 80% of gunowners, and 70% of NRA households favor it?

the cowards who voted no, on the other hand, may be in for a surprise when reelection comes

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:23 AM

If that were even remotely true, Obama would have his bill, wouldn’t he, but the fact is, the no votes DID hear from their voters, they just didn’t say what you’re parroting.

You lost, because most people already know that there are background checks in place, and over 50% see the federal government as their greatest obstacle on individual freedom.. over 50% think the government is to big and too quick to interfere in their lives..

but you don’t care, your prez had his hissy fit, and you’ll screech along with him, crying towel in hand, as you join in on his two minute hate of the day.

You leftists have no grace at all, bad winners, and very very ugly losers, who command the Heavens strike us down for our heresy against your boy-God-King..

wah flippin wah..

mark81150 on April 18, 2013 at 12:02 PM

It’s going to be forced on everyone whether they want it or not once the dollar collapses under the weight of our massive and growing debt, deficits, and unfunded mandates.
The future IS conservative, limited government, if for no reason other than the progressive welfare state is too expensive, and the economy unable to pay for it.
wildcat72 on April 18, 2013 at 11:42 AM

I agree with you. Eventually the USSR fell apart. That takes decades, though.

samuelrylander on April 18, 2013 at 12:03 PM

O Jeez! I am amazed at the gullibility of Obama voters! This is just nuts!

Vince on April 18, 2013 at 11:50 AM

Obamavoters aren’t gullible. They are voting for a party and President who promise to punish “the rich” and give them more and more of their money. A Conservative works for a living. A Democrat VOTES for a living.

wildcat72 on April 18, 2013 at 12:05 PM

90% of the people may support Universal Background Checks, but only about 2% of the people think Congress can pass such a bill without screwing it up.

They don’t want background checks. They want registration. I don’t trust them.

Haiku Guy on April 18, 2013 at 12:05 PM

I won’t spend too much time worrying about the balance of power in the Senate in 2015, when it’s still April of 2013.

This issue may be an issue for some candidates. But the cost and implementation issues of Obamacare will likely be a bigger one. As will the unemployment rate (whether high or low, it’s an issue), the economy, and probably at least 3 or 4 things that haven’t even happened yet.

Chris of Rights on April 18, 2013 at 12:06 PM

A perfectly neutral bumper sticker: “GUN CONTROL – a Democratic party core value.”

What could incumbent Democrats say?

PersonFromPorlock on April 18, 2013 at 12:06 PM

Jeez! I am amazed at the gullibility of Obama voters! This is just nuts!

Vince on April 18, 2013 at 11:50 AM

just to be clear, I did not vote for obama

and I would’ve been happy with romney ias president

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:55 AM

Ok! I’ll take your word for it but really, do you actually believe that 90% of the country is on Obama’s side on gun control?

As for the 90%, here is the question that was posed:

Do you support or oppose – requiring background checks for all gun buyers?

Most people would answer that question yes as we already have background checks on gunbuyers. Not all buyers but people don’t read that into the question.

Vince on April 18, 2013 at 12:07 PM

Whether the cost is loss of control doesn’t matter. Barry will find a way to have his bidding done and he will always cast blame on those who thwart him.

hawkeye54 on April 18, 2013 at 11:56 AM

sadly, you’re probably right. His history of dubious executive orders borders on lunacy, and Boehner should be booted as Speaker for never calling him on his power grabs, his stonewalling investigations, his obvious outrageous lies to the people..

But Boehner is the old fashioned polite establishment type, and he’s not got the stones to deal with the vile thing the democrat party has become.

mark81150 on April 18, 2013 at 12:07 PM

IF I live in a red state, and my D- Senator gave me sleepless nights worrying how he/she’s going to vote this time, I will simpley make sure my next Senator have a stronger backbone.

But that’s just me.

Sir Napsalot on April 18, 2013 at 12:10 PM

I agree with you. Eventually the USSR fell apart. That takes decades, though.

samuelrylander on April 18, 2013 at 12:03 PM

True, but to the bitter end, the USSR was trying NOT to fall apart. Even Gorbachev’s reforms were intended to save the USSR, not transform it.

Obama and the democrat party are different. They aren’t like the Soviet Communist Party trying to preserve a fascist state that IS, they are trying to COLLAPSE a non fascist state so they can CREATE ONE.

Thanks to Obama pushing things into HYPERDRIVE with his trillion-plus ANNUAL budget deficits (Under Bush they were averaging $200-$300 billion a year) he’s on a pace to add GENERATIONS worth of debt in just 8 years. It’s already starting to come apart. At $300 billion, the budget deficit can be BORROWED in bonds which is bad. At 1.1 Trillion, last year alone only 39% of that could be sold in bonds. Which is also bad. What is worse, FAR worse: 61% of it just simply ROLLED OFF the Fed dollar press.

In other words, we, as a nation, are already TECHNICALLY bankrupt, and our dollar technically WORTHLESS. It won’t be long before reality catches up with that.

That is the moment Obama or someone like him intends to “fundamentally transform” us into something NOT a Constitutional Republic. That is coming not in decades, but could actually come AT ANY TIME!

wildcat72 on April 18, 2013 at 12:13 PM

just to be clear, I did not vote for obama

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:55 AM

Wasn’t old enough.

CurtZHP on April 18, 2013 at 12:13 PM

Democrats love to sniff their own farts and call it a mandate. This just proves the point again.

SteveInRTP on April 18, 2013 at 12:16 PM

how could this cost them the senate if 90% of Americans, 80% of gunowners, and 70% of NRA households favor it?

the cowards who voted no, on the other hand, may be in for a surprise when reelection comes

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:23 AM

Look, I support SSM, but it is NOT an issue that would make me drop what I’m doing and go to a polling station to vote, if it were the only issue on the ballot. ON THE OTHER HAND, if gun control was the ONLY thing on the ballot, I would be at the polling station bright and early.

It really is just that simple…so, even a simpleton like you, should be able to understand.

Resist We Much on April 18, 2013 at 12:16 PM

The intensity gap is a big factor, but the whole 90% favor background checks was a skewed poll. It had to be a very general question.

It sounds like a result if you asked people if they want “world peace.” Once you fill in questions with specific proposals, suddenly not everyone is in favor of world peace anymore. Everyone wants the Adam Lanzas of the world to be kept away from guns, but it is a lot more sticky when you propose how to get there. A national registry guns bumps all sorts of people away the 90% into the against category.

mwbri on April 18, 2013 at 12:17 PM

As for the 90%, here is the question that was posed:

Do you support or oppose – requiring background checks for all gun buyers?
Personally, I don’t agree with the background check for ALL sales. The bill also made the seller retain the background check to the seller, and if he didn’t, it would be a crime. Instant database.

Patriot Vet on April 18, 2013 at 11:52 AM

And this question is only about the vague concept of background checks – NOT about the Dems “background check” bill. Big difference.
There are a lot of people who just don’t understand what the current laws already cover regarding background checks – such as those who believe there are no checks run for gun buyers at gun shows.
I work in a DoD office with a retired AF officer who has no clue what the current laws and processes are for background checks, doesn’t believe the Dems will push for a national registry, and doesn’t believe that would lead to eventual confiscation – so he’s bought the Dems’ story hook, line and sinker.

dentarthurdent on April 18, 2013 at 12:18 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3