Skip to main content

View Diary: Poll: It turns out supporting gun safety legislation is also smart politics (63 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I've wondered why people like Ayotte (0+ / 0-)

    and Pryor and Begich voted "no" when the polls show overwhelming support.  

    I think what it comes down to, for them, is counting votes.  Yes, only 10% of the people out there are very pro-gun and very anti-regulation of any kind.  But I think that those 10% are pretty much one-issue voters.  In other words, they will cast their vote based on that one issue:  guns.  

    There are a couple of issues like that, where a small percentage of the voters will vote on that one issue, regardless of the stand the politician takes on other things.  

    The 90% or so who say they support the expanded background checks are not so much "one issue voters."  In other words, once election time comes around, other issues will also factor into their votes.  They support expanded background checks, but they also support a bunch of other things.  Democrats, for example, are going to vote for Pryor or Begich over a Republican in the next election despite this vote, because Pryor and Begich vote with Democrats on a number of other issues that Democrats care about.  

    That's the only thing I can figure out.  It's not a matter of sheer numbers.  It's a matter of which types of voters are inside those numbers.  

    •  and that 10% (5+ / 0-)

      is voting republican anyway.

      The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

      by Laurence Lewis on Fri Apr 26, 2013 at 08:30:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Right, it makes sense for Ayotte, (4+ / 0-)

        but not Begich.  OTOH, all of the sensible folk in Alaska will vote for Begich anyway, in spite of that.  

        I guess he didn't want any of that Bloomberg money for some reason.

        I'm at the point where I don't want to primary Mark Pryor necessarily for being a blue dog in a red state (a circumstance for which I generally extend sympathy); I want to primary him because he's dumb as a bag of hammers, without the hammers, and that ex Lt. Gov. who ran against Lincoln seems ok.

        Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

        by Loge on Fri Apr 26, 2013 at 08:40:18 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  halter (4+ / 0-)

          is looking at the statehouse. but a recent poll also showed strong support for background checks in arkansas, so none of these votes makes sense, on policy or politics.

          The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

          by Laurence Lewis on Fri Apr 26, 2013 at 08:42:46 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  what fascinates me about the polling (3+ / 0-)

            is they ask about the policy of comprehensive background checks, it gets overwhelming support.  If they ask about "new gun regulations," it drops a lot, and the reason is people think that the laws are a lot tougher than they actually are.  (Other areas where this belief is common is regulation of mortgage lending and limitations on the ability to fire workers "at will.")  

            It is therefore the job of the legislature to check the democratic tendency of being uninformed  (not necessarily a criticism: there's a lot of information to not know) and pass the laws people already have wanted.  Pryor almost makes a virtue of pandering to the lowest common denominator, to justify his own lack of policy chops by misunderstanding that the role of a "representative" is sometimes to represent the interests of voters as they should be, not as they are.  He doesn't even rise to the level of cynical.

            Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

            by Loge on Fri Apr 26, 2013 at 08:53:00 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  ignorance and apathy...they depend on it... (5+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              FogCityJohn, Miggles, Loge, a2nite, TheFern

              and it's a winning strategy...

              To dig deeper into this confusion, we introduced a new series of questions. We asked this same group of voters whether or not specific laws were already on the books. Of the 50 percent of people who prefer enforcement over new laws — over half of whom are gun owners — 48 percent told us that federal laws prohibit the purchase of a weapon privately or at a gun show without a background check, while 10 percent simply admitted not knowing the rules. In other words, about 6 out of 10 people who believe we just need to do a better job of enforcing existing laws don’t realize that those laws are far weaker than they think. And just under half of those who want better enforcement don’t know that military-style assault weapons are, in fact, legal.


              We are not broke, we are being robbed.

              by Glen The Plumber on Fri Apr 26, 2013 at 09:26:32 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  About 35-40% of hard core gun-rights voters (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        noway2, Very Long Range

        are Democrats and frequently reside in states that can go either way.  That is why some Democrats in the Senate do not support the gun safety changes.

        The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

        by nextstep on Fri Apr 26, 2013 at 10:30:18 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site