Poor prospects for gun control in the next Senate

Moderators: admin, Inquisitor, ForumModerator, WebsiteContent

Post Reply
User avatar
wings
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 1482
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:24 am
Contact:

Poor prospects for gun control in the next Senate

Post by wings »

An interesting piece in Politico arguing that there is little taste for major gun control legislation among the Democratic candidates running for the Senate - and notes that several oppose ending the filibuster. If the filibuster remains in place for legislation - as opposed to nominations, where it's been gutted by McConnell already - then there is zero chance of major gun reform. Or much of any reform, short of a Senate landslide.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/ ... ers-392604
Gun control advocates may be particularly excited about the prospects for the Democratic challenger in this year’s Arizona senate race, Mark Kelly. He is the husband of former House member and gun violence victim Gabby Giffords. Together they founded a gun violence prevention group, which is now named after her.

However, Kelly is not running hard on gun control. Not one of Kelly's TV ads even mentions guns. And when discussing his views on his campaign website, Kelly is careful with his language. He is quick to note that he is a “gun owner and a combat veteran.” And he sticks with measures and phrases that poll strongly such as, “universal background checks” and keeping “guns out of the hands of stalkers and domestic abusers.” He does not use the word “ban,” not even for semi-automatic assault weapons, even though such a ban is a focal point for many gun control advocates.

Other promising Democratic candidates tread even lighter than Kelly on guns. Montana’s Steve Bullock, Maine’s Sara Gideon, Kansas’ Barbara Bollier and South Carolina’s Jaime Harrison don’t even include a gun section in their platforms. Iowa’s Theresa Greenfield, North Carolina’s Cal Cunningham and Kentucky’s Amy McGrath are in line with Kelly and steer clear of mentioning an assault weapons ban on their websites, though Cunningham does explicitly back a ban on high-capacity magazines.

The relatively daring Democratic Senate candidates who specify support for an assault weapons ban on their websites are Colorado’s John Hickenlooper, Georgia’s Jon Ossoff and Texas’ MJ Hegar. Nevertheless, none of them are highlighting their gun control views in TV ads.
But in recent days, Senators Manchin, Kyrsten Sinema, Jon Tester and Dianne Feinstein have reiterated their opposition to eliminating the legislative filibuster. And any incoming Democrats from red and purple states, several of whom are running as independent-minded, bipartisan problem-solvers, will not be inclined to take one of the most partisan acts imaginable in their first year in office.

Why the resistance? Probably so they aren’t forced to take up-and-down votes on culturally polarizing legislation like an ambitious gun control package.
Confiscation isn't gonna happen.

User avatar
YankeeTarheel
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 12370
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 10:01 pm
Location: The Jughandle State
Contact:

Re: Poor prospects for gun control in the next Senate

Post by YankeeTarheel »

Well, if the idiots at DNC and DSCC would smarten up, they'd be in a full-court press to pick up 13 or 14 seats...get to 60 or 61 votes and you don't NEED to end the filibuster--if you can maintain party discipline and prevent guys like Manchin from going "rogue". Which means, unfortunately, using both lots of carrots and a big stick with them.
""If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you." -- LBJ

User avatar
highdesert
Carpal Tunnel
Posts: 17779
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2010 4:54 pm
Location: Biggest state on the Left Coast
Contact:

Re: Poor prospects for gun control in the next Senate

Post by highdesert »

I agree with the article, it wouldn't be popular with many existing Senate Democrats and any seats they might pick up, but also those 40 seats Democrats picked up in the House in 2018 to give them a majority, aren't in deep blue districts. Coastal liberals, big city Democratic politicians and Bloomberg will push it, but it doesn't seem to be a winning issue for politicians who want to be reelected. Deep blue districts are a minority not a majority. And if Biden's smart he'll let it die, it's still a tossup election and he should be focused on getting Independents.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bisbee and 10 guests