Cross-posted from Castle Bansalot, since we can discuss this here but not there
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12621Ignoring All Evidence, NRA Decides Gun Policy Determined The 2016 Presidential Election
The National Rifle Association is claiming in a post-election message that the gun issue decided the election in favor of President-elect Donald Trump. But all available evidence indicates that voters actually showed a strong preference for gun safety measures and that the election was decided on other grounds. In a November 14 video released on NRATV, NRA executive vice president and CEO Wayne LaPierre claimed “Hillary Clinton made her hatred for the Second Amendment a central issue of this campaign and as a result of that fatal mistake, she’s on permanent political vacation”:
But the NRA’s framing of the election outcome doesn’t make sense, even assuming the election was decided on policy grounds (which it apparently wasn’t). The pro-gun safety presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, received substantially more votes than NRA-endorsed President-elect Donald Trump.
Setting that aside, all available data indicates Democrat, Republican, and Independent voters overwhelmingly supported the types of gun safety measures that Clinton advocated for.
According to polling released just before Election Day, measures including “expanding background checks on gun purchases; barring those convicted of a hate crime from buying a gun; and prohibiting those convicted of stalking or domestic abuse from buying guns” received widespread support among voters polled by Public Policy Polling in Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. The Center for American Progress noted that the polling shows “anywhere from 80 percent to 93 percent of Democrats in these states support them, along with 58 percent to 86 percent of critical independent voters, and even 64 percent to 80 percent of Republicans.”
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/11/17/ignoring-all-evidence-nra-decides-gun-policy-determined-2016-presidential-election/214517
But of course the right-wing, NRA-supporting, gun nut crowd among us steadfastly claims that if it weren't for that damned "grabber" part of the Democratic Party platform, Democrats would have won by a landslide. Not true, and remains untrue even after the election.
The entire country (except for the old red necked white men who hoard guns) is in favor of more stringent gun control measures. Yes Wayne and Ted, the tide has turned and there is very little that can change that momentum. And yes, Trump and the Tea Party gundamentalists can take a heavy toll on the progress that has already been made -- but not at the local level, and that is where we are gaining the most ground.
=====================
Yes, a few more wins at the local level like we've had the past few election cycles means gun control is right around the corner.
= new reply since forum marked as read
like it or not there are at least 80,000,000 gun owners in our nation. A high percentage of those gun owners vote and they usually vote for Republicans.
In recent years the Democratic Party has pushed for strong gun control including another federal assault weapons ban and limits on the amount of rounds a magazine can hold.
In that same time frame the Democratic Party has lost elections at the local, state and national levels.
Is this loss simply a conincidence or could much of it be due to the Democratic Party's push for gun bans?
My suggestion is that our party simply outlaw the word "ban" and concentrate only on improving current gun laws to make them more effective and enforcing those laws.
Last edited Sat Dec 17, 2016, 01:18 PM - Edit history (1)
of those 80,000,000. It would turn a loss into a decisive victory.
But some would rather remain pure and lose (or even support Republicans by voting "single issue over party"
They will sit in their club house and talk of the 'victory' while quoting old poll figures that were not represented by actual votes. Of course polls showing much lower support for various bans are studiously ignored...
Not worth paying any attention to, IMO.
As for the MM article, it seems that everyone in the post election days is eager to prove that their main issue won (or would have won) the race. The NRA may be overstating, but it would not surprise me at all if a more moderate/rational gun control tone from the Democrats could have peeled away the requisite ~100k votes in those swing states (all else being equal). 
Gun control advocates crow over local victories, but it seems to me that some ever-more-stringent regulation in places like California--additional regulation unlikely to have any affect at all on crime or safety--is a poor trade for losses at the national (and by extension USSC) level...
Oh FFS ---- just shoot me. No, it's not possible at all that Clinton's.........
.......non-stop bullshit about "assault weapons"........
..........her lies about "gun show loopholes".........
.........her maddening reliance on cliches such as "common sense" gun control when she's proven that she has no sense w/regard to gun violence........
...........her infuriatingly dishonorable attempt at back-door gun control in attempting to bankrupt gun companies for the actions of criminals...........
.........her hypocrisy on support of gun rights when she attacked Obama for his position on gun control when he was a political adversary........
.............her co-signing of the "epidemic of gun violence" LIE...........
.............NONE OF THIS had any effect on the outcome of this close race. Citizens in the "Rust Belt" don't care about their gun rights!!!
