• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Aren't there any democrats left in the NRA?

swing_voter said:
Did the NRA mismanage the situation?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure they "mismanaged" the situation, in that it probably wasn't possible for them to keep working with Democrats much longer.

One major driver is not the NRA's doing, which is the increasing polarization of the political bases of both parties. Even though most people support gun ownership, so many other issues involving guns are so contentious that it was going to get polarized either way. I'm reasonably sure that today, most Democratic voters don't care about NRA ratings anymore; and anyone deeply invested in gun rights won't vote for a Democrat regardless of their NRA rating.

A second issue, albeit more recent, is that the NRA is imploding. That is in part because gun owners have mostly relaxed during the Trump administration (thus leading to shortfalls in memberships and revenues), and in part because of their own corruption. NRA management was up to all sorts of financial shenanigans, including out of control spending on its ad agency (Ackerman McQueen) and NRA-TV (which no one watched).

A third is that after years of NRA and Congress doing nothing even remotely effective about gun violence and mass shootings, as well as ignoring how the vast majority of Americans want universal background checks, and now with the NRA imploding due to its own internal abuses, the gun control lobby has finally gotten a bit more organized. It also had a huge influx of cash from Mike Bloomberg, as well as effective martyrs like Gabby Giffords.

That said, the NRA enthusiastically went all in on the polarization. They've burned multiple Democratic elected officials, including ones that had "A" ratings. Ann Kirkpatrick, for example, sided with the NRA for a decade; but despite getting an A, the NRA sided with her opponents in 2008 and 2010. (She didn't lose her A rating until long after the 2010 election.) The NRA went from funding 20% of Democrats in 2010, to only two by 2018.

They also torched Manchin (D) and Toomey (R) after they both worked with the NRA on possible legislation in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook shooting.

Another should be the obvious and constant signaling to the right wing -- e.g. repeatedly sending NRA presidents to the Republican National Convention; appointing Oliver North as president; letting NRA-TV go full wingnut; opposing any and all gun control legislation, including ones they were helping to craft (e.g. Manchin-Toomey), the list goes on.

Maybe it wasn't possible for the NRA to bridge the growing partisan chasm, but yeah, they didn't even try.
 
Visbek said:
I'm not sure they "mismanaged" the situation, in that it probably wasn't possible for them to keep working with Democrats much longer.

One major driver is not the NRA's doing, which is the increasing polarization of the political bases of both parties. Even though most people support gun ownership, so many other issues involving guns are so contentious that it was going to get polarized either way. I'm reasonably sure that today, most Democratic voters don't care about NRA ratings anymore; and anyone deeply invested in gun rights won't vote for a Democrat regardless of their NRA rating.

A second issue, albeit more recent, is that the NRA is imploding. That is in part because gun owners have mostly relaxed during the Trump administration (thus leading to shortfalls in memberships and revenues), and in part because of their own corruption. NRA management was up to all sorts of financial shenanigans, including out of control spending on its ad agency (Ackerman McQueen) and NRA-TV (which no one watched).

A third is that after years of NRA and Congress doing nothing even remotely effective about gun violence and mass shootings, as well as ignoring how the vast majority of Americans want universal background checks, and now with the NRA imploding due to its own internal abuses, the gun control lobby has finally gotten a bit more organized. It also had a huge influx of cash from Mike Bloomberg, as well as effective martyrs like Gabby Giffords.

That said, the NRA enthusiastically went all in on the polarization. They've burned multiple Democratic elected officials, including ones that had "A" ratings. Ann Kirkpatrick, for example, sided with the NRA for a decade; but despite getting an A, the NRA sided with her opponents in 2008 and 2010. (She didn't lose her A rating until long after the 2010 election.) The NRA went from funding 20% of Democrats in 2010, to only two by 2018.

They also torched Manchin (D) and Toomey (R) after they both worked with the NRA on possible legislation in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook shooting.

Another should be the obvious and constant signaling to the right wing -- e.g. repeatedly sending NRA presidents to the Republican National Convention; appointing Oliver North as president; letting NRA-TV go full wingnut; opposing any and all gun control legislation, including ones they were helping to craft (e.g. Manchin-Toomey), the list goes on.

Maybe it wasn't possible for the NRA to bridge the growing partisan chasm, but yeah, they didn't even try.
Click to expand...

why do you think that every single candidate for the DNC nomination supported a gun ban of some sort?
 
TurtleDude said:
why do you think that every single candidate for the DNC nomination supported a gun ban of some sort?
Click to expand...

All you have to do is go through the entire list, present each and every DNC's candidate's public, documented proclamation/stance on this issue, and you will have the answer to your own question. Are you willing and prepared to go through that list, and post the 'specifics' of each of those candidate's public stance on the issue ? If so, that would eliminate any 'speculation' others may have. You supply the documented data yourself, eliminating the need to ask others to speculate on your very own query.
 
Last edited:
Logician Man said:
All you have to do is go through the entire list, present each and every DNC's candidate's public, documented proclamation/stance on this issue, and you will have the answer to your own question. Are you willing and prepared to go through that list, and post the 'specifics' of each of those candidate's public stance on the issue ? If so, that would eliminate any 'speculation' others may have. You supply the documented data yourself, eliminating the need to ask others to speculate on your very own query.
Click to expand...
I stand by my statement. every one of them supported some sort of gun ban. Klobuchar wanted mandatory buy backs. Biden was the leader of the senate for the Clinton Gun ban. Spartacus wanted gun bans. Beta wanted to seize guns, Bernie now supports banning some guns. Warren and Harris and Mayor Pete all supported bans of commonly own guns. Now I cannot recall if minor leaguers who didn't hold prior office and who never had any real chance of winning the nomination agreed with gun bans but every single Democrat who held prior office does
 
TurtleDude said:
I stand by my statement. every one of them supported some sort of gun ban. Klobuchar wanted mandatory buy backs. Biden was the leader of the senate for the Clinton Gun ban. Spartacus wanted gun bans. Beta wanted to seize guns, Bernie now supports banning some guns. Warren and Harris and Mayor Pete all supported bans of commonly own guns. Now I cannot recall if minor leaguers who didn't hold prior office and who never had any real chance of winning the nomination agreed with gun bans but every single Democrat who held prior office does
Click to expand...

Are you conflating background checks for gun bans again?

Anyway, provide a link supporting that assertion.
 
TurtleDude said:
I stand by my statement. every one of them supported some sort of gun ban. Klobuchar wanted mandatory buy backs. Biden was the leader of the senate for the Clinton Gun ban. Spartacus wanted gun bans. Beta wanted to seize guns, Bernie now supports banning some guns. Warren and Harris and Mayor Pete all supported bans of commonly own guns. Now I cannot recall if minor leaguers who didn't hold prior office and who never had any real chance of winning the nomination agreed with gun bans but every single Democrat who held prior office does
Click to expand...

You can stand by your statement if you so choose, but until/unless you produce a link for each and every DNC candidate publicly professing what you are attributing to them, your statement is non-validated, and is easily dismissed on that basis alone. Positive claims in debate forums require meeting Burden of Proof. Clearly you have failed to meet that B of P.
 
calamity said:
Are you conflating background checks for gun bans again?

Anyway, provide a link supporting that assertion.
Click to expand...

feel free to try to prove me wrong



Where do Democratic 2020 candidates stand on gun control? - Los Angeles Times

Biden-wants to reinstate the clinton gun ban

Bernie wants to ban "assault weapons" and force existing owners to be harassed with onerous licensing provisions

Here’s where every 2020 candidate stands on guns - Vox

The Democratic candidates are in general agreement on at least two proposals: universal background checks and an assault weapons ban.
 
calamity said:
No way that's true.

Link?
Click to expand...

The Democratic candidates are in general agreement on at least two proposals: universal background checks and an assault weapons ban.

which one of the major candidates did not support a gun ban?

Bernie does
Biden does
Warren does
Klobuchar does
Mayor Pete does
Booker does
Harris Does
Beta does
Yang does
 
TurtleDude said:
The Democratic candidates are in general agreement on at least two proposals: universal background checks and an assault weapons ban.

which one of the major candidates did not support a gun ban?

Bernie does
Biden does
Warren does
Klobuchar does
Mayor Pete does
Booker does
Harris Does
Beta does
Yang does
Click to expand...

Am I somehow not seeing the links you were asked to provide?

BTW: You missed Tulsi Gabbard. Last I looked, she was still in the race.
 
calamity said:
Am I somehow not seeing the links you were asked to provide?

BTW: You missed Tulsi Gabbard. Last I looked, she was still in the race.
Click to expand...

if you actually had bothered to read my links you would have seen this

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard: Gabbard’s campaign website includes a section on gun safety legislation. She supports universal background checks, closing loopholes in laws regarding domestic violence and suspected terrorism, and an assault weapons ban.

why demand links and proof when you obviously didn't bother to read such things?
 
TurtleDude said:
feel free to try to prove me wrong



Where do Democratic 2020 candidates stand on gun control? - Los Angeles Times

Biden-wants to reinstate the clinton gun ban

Bernie wants to ban "assault weapons" and force existing owners to be harassed with onerous licensing provisions

Here’s where every 2020 candidate stands on guns - Vox

The Democratic candidates are in general agreement on at least two proposals: universal background checks and an assault weapons ban.
Click to expand...

Those items in bold are good things. No wonder I am happy to vote for a Democrat.
 
TurtleDude said:
if you actually had bothered to read my links you would have seen this

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard: Gabbard’s campaign website includes a section on gun safety legislation. She supports universal background checks, closing loopholes in laws regarding domestic violence and suspected terrorism, and an assault weapons ban.

why demand links and proof when you obviously didn't bother to read such things?
Click to expand...

I addressed the last post before reading the one further up the page.
 
TurtleDude said:
The Democratic candidates are in general agreement on at least two proposals: universal background checks and an assault weapons ban. which one of the major candidates did not support a gun ban?
Click to expand...

Welcome back, now I would have thought some one with so distinguished and lengthy a legal career has a much more precise use of terms and the English language.

There is a vast difference between wanting to end the SALE (but not ownership) of a certain class of firearms, as vague as it may be, and a 'gun' ban.

But let's not just vilify Democratic politicians, I'm sure you are familiar with the Harvard CAPS-Harris poll where 61% of the people are ok with an assault weapons banned from purchase. Now we have had a couple of generations of all volunteer Army and no longer is a large portion of the population exposed to military weapons.

GI's of the past fondly remember their carbines, M1s, old 1911s... and the last 'real' rifle the M14...

Now the M16/4 is firmly a part of a very small group who serve and an even smaller group who never served.

It might come to pass within our lifetimes that a majority of Citizens no longer want to give carte blanche to owning whatever semi suits someone's fancy... :peace
 
Rich2018 said:
No to protect citizens (honest or otherwise) who may or may not own guns.
Click to expand...

gun control laws only disarm honest people. Laws against harming people protect citizens when they are enforced
 
TurtleDude said:
if you actually had bothered to read my links you would have seen this

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard: Gabbard’s campaign website includes a section on gun safety legislation. She supports universal background checks, closing loopholes in laws regarding domestic violence and suspected terrorism, and an assault weapons ban.

why demand links and proof when you obviously didn't bother to read such things?
Click to expand...

Oh no, universal background checks and an assault weapons ban?! The horror...
 
Irredentist said:
Oh no, universal background checks and an assault weapons ban?! The horror...
Click to expand...

If weapons that are almost never used in crime can be banned, all other firearms can be banned. Which is exactly the goal of the gun banners. The guns they are trying to ban have very little crime use but are the most useful for civil insurrection. Not surprisingly, those who want big government are trying to disarm citizens
 
There's plenty of Democrats that are gun owners and NRA members. They may be geographically concentrated in red states, some of which were/are current battleground states, but they certainly exist. Sometimes Democrats forget that and step on their own toes when fielding candidates in those areas.

But as gun ownership and gun control became an increasingly partisan issue (as had geography), those divides began to expand into the gun owner identity. Over the last several years the NRA has increasingly shed the pretension of being a non-partisan single-issue advocacy organization in favor of embracing more of a right-wing populist identity and the issues that typically follow.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom