A couple of days ago Hillary endorsed Australia-style gun confiscation. Today her mouthpiece is backing away from it:
Question: Why would a candidate walk away from an issue with such popular support?
Answer: When the polls aren’t true.
He’s going to learn alright
Last week Sen. Liz Kruger suggested gun control advocates join to NRA to undermine it from within.
Brooklyn Assemblyman Walter Mosley took her advice:
“… Assemblyman Walter Mosley, a second-term Brooklyn Democrat, says that “it’s important to read the publications they get and the articles they read.” He also plans on attending the annual NRA convention in Kentucky in May. “If we can see where their position is coming from, it gives us a better way to counter their position and how we can help those who are on the front lines still trying to thwart illegal gun trafficking and crimes that take place from that industry,” he said … “If we can see where their position is coming from, it gives us a better way to counter their position and how we can help those who are on the front lines still trying to thwart illegal gun trafficking and crimes that take place from that industry,” he said. “I have to go where the debate is, where the conversations and the narratives that are counterintuitive to what my position is are being shaped,” he added …”
Giving credit where it is due, it took balls to make a statement like that. It is exceedingly rare for a NYC politician to even consider the notion that some people may have different ideas and beliefs from their own, let alone try to investigate them.
“… One Assembly Democratic insider called it a “bad move” for Mosley to pay money to the NRA, even if it’s a nominal $35 annual membership fee. He also dismissed Mosley’s contention that joining the organization will help him learn its playbook. “We already know what they think,” the source said …”
No, they don’t as most live inside the arrogance, elitism and ignorance of the NYC/beltway bubble. The first thing Mosley is going to learn is that the Daily News does not tell the truth on the issue and unless there is a national toilet paper shortage, there is no reason to buy that newspaper.
“… “I hope this will allow for other legislators to be more proactive,” he said. “We have to have the audacity to step out of our comfort zones and step into places that make us feel uncomfortable. That level of discomfort brings growth and opportunity.” …”
Good for him. However, the second thing Mosely is going to learn is that the last thing many of his colleagues want is any sort of discomfort. They were elected by the Tammany machine specifically because they will do little but vote with the party leadership and keep their seats warm.
Media welcomes Democrat gun debate
This op-ed in the NY Times needs additional commentary, “Democrats Welcome the Gun Debate to the Campaign“:
“After 15 years of a virtual gag order on guns in presidential politics, Democrats are talking again. President Barack Obama is considering more executive action on gun control …”
More like a handful of the nuttiest Democrats are talking about gun control. Most know it is a political stinker, especially for their party. If the majority of them in Congress were hot about it Obama would have a lot more political leverage on the issue and put up more than the lame effort he is right now.
“… At the Democrats’ first debate in the presidential season, candidates jockeyed for bragging rights over who had the lowest rating from the National Rifle Association …”
“… Democrats say support for new gun laws is broader now and the politics of the issue have shifted enough to make the push for tougher measures a political winner, even if there remains almost no chance for success in Congress …”
The only broad support for gun control is coming from crap media outlets like the Times. If there was genuine support among the general public Congress would take note of it.
“… Republicans are eager for Democrats to test the theory. They watched the Democratic debate and saw fodder for advertising aimed at rural voters and gun owners still firmly opposed to putting more restrictions on gun purchases. Those voters have tended to retain their passion on the issue and have been motivated to vote, long after a shooting recedes from the headlines …”
Which is true. Where is the energy and passion from the antis?
“… The White House has been upfront that it plans to keep attention on the issue …”
Probably true in so far as it draws attention away from more serious issues like the fact that Vladimir Putin thinks Obama is a joke.
“… “You see such strong support all across the country for proposals like closing the gun show loophole,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest said, urging Congress to act. “There’s ample public data to indicate that even a majority of gun owners support something like this.” …”
This is more baloney Bloomberg bought and paid for. The general public is most certainly not urging Congress to act.
“… It was hard to imagine Democrats picking a fight with the NRA in past presidential contests. Democrats’ electoral losses after the 1994 passage of the ban on assault-type weapons had a chilling effect on the debate. President Bill Clinton posited that Vice President Al Gore lost the 2000 election because of opposition to Gore’s gun stance … Democrats have since all but taken the issue off the table in national campaigns …”
Why would they do that if indeed what Josh Earnest said were true?
“… Advocates of tighter gun laws are heartened by the fact the debate even exists …”
Even if it largely exists only in their own minds.
Not a winning strategy
Over at Hot Air is an op-ed, “Hillary’s gun confiscation proposal is going to backfire in a big way.”
I agree. Pushing gun control is a bad idea for the general election. What I don’t agree with is this:
“… this is a winning strategy for Clinton in the primary because her base has largely been sold on the idea of things like expanded background checks at the federal level and a national gun registry …”
It isn’t for several reasons:
- As I have said many times before, the antis do not have an ability to turn out people to vote on their issue. There is a huge difference between having a person agree with an idea and going out and acting on it. Show me where there is a serious effort by the antis to get people to register and vote for candidates based upon their gun control stance.
- Anything Hillary says during the primary will come back against her in the general election.
- By opening her mouth now, she has given time for gunnies to raise money and organize people in opposition to her. Unless she is expecting Mayor Bloomberg to personally cut her a $100 million check, why bring up the issue now? All she has done is raised millions of dollars for the NRA.
Cuomo admits it
Gov. Cuomo finally admits gun control cost him politically:
“… Cuomo focused largely on Sanders’ 2005 vote in favor of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which first extended the immunity to firearms manufacturers. Lehrer asked Cuomo if it was acceptable for Sanders to support the bill … Cuomo said it wasn’t, pointing to his own popularity dip … “Not when Bernie Sanders looks at the camera and says this is about doing what’s right and doing what’s tough, even if it’s not politically popular at the polls, blah blah blah,” Cuomo said. “I know the politics of this. I represent New York state. Upstate New York and Vermont and rural communities, I know the political price because I’ve paid it, Brian.” …”
The price being ending his presidential aspirations, not to mention bad karma in the form of Preet Bharara.
Good for him
Former Senator Jim Webb isn’t likely to win the Democrat nomination for president, but he didn’t back down from his previous NRA rating at last nights debate:
It just might work
If only the antis had more than astroturf:
“Manhattan State Senator Liz Krueger today laid out a novel strategy to undermine opposition to new restrictions on firearms—having gun control supporters join the pro-gun National Rifle Association and act as a Trojan horse … “I might propose another cultural approach: all of us who actually care about gun violence might want to join the NRA, and create our own forum within the NRA to say ‘we don’t agree with their current policy,’” she said … “I actually think we outnumber them, by the way. And if, maybe if we all join, and created our own platform, we could switch the dialogue, even within an organization who I think has done so much harm,” she said …”
Krueger has never expressed any interest in having a dialogue about New York’s gun laws during her time in Albany.
Soon after she was first elected, she hooked up with then Senator Eric Schneiderman and I always had the impression she was jonesing for a leadership position. Reading this article reminded me that she is not bright enough for that.
Maloney Happens
Nobody is speculating on this
No:
“Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-California) withdrew from the race for House Speaker on Thursday afternoon, causing some to speculate whether Rep. Peter King (R-New York) might emerge as the next front-runner for the position vacated by John Boehner …”
This is the least serious story I’ve read in some time.
Endorsement for Paul Czajka
Paul Czajka is running for re-election as District Attorney in Columbia County.
We endorsed him for re-election. Here is one of the reasons why: