politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
This is one of the main reasons people don't vote blue. They care a lot about their firearms. If the red start going after them, grab some popcorn because things will go down. Maybe this is whats needed to get them to open their eyes.
“The dems want to take away your firearms!”
“That may or may not be true, but the GOP WILL just kill you and label you a terrorist if they find out you have a firearm.”
That's been true for a long time in police interactions. Possessing a firearm in public alone has been justification for detainment, arrest and use of force including lethal force countless times.
Yes, but now it’s true for white male conservatives who just happen to be in the right place at the wrong time.
Not an equality they’re used to.
Disagree. They're fine with it if the person doing it claims to be red.
Guarantee no die hard 2FA MAGAt changes their mind over any of this.
Trump voters have literally lost their business, their jobs, have had to relocate due to lifestyle collapse, and they still say voting for him is better than the alternative.
single issue gun voters are lost to trump now
Yeah, I doubt very much this will matter to them. See: all the campaigning and crying they did over Epstein and now how they are good with covering that shit up, or making insane executes. The hypocrisy does not matter to them at all
I disagree. I really think you are underestimating how much Americans, especially American men, especial rural men who hunt and don't like being bossed around by a government that's far away, want to buy whatever weapons they want without extra regulation.
For many people, they vote just based on the NRA's selection. If the Democrats became a more pro-gun party, they would gain a substantial amount of power in the US.
Maybe, or they will just make it political: registered dems can’t own guns or something else insane. I guess we will see, I would have thought oedophilia would be the line, but if they are ok with that and suddenly 2a is the breaking point …. I mean I’m disgusted but if we get there we get there.
They can now if they want to.
The left has always been pro firearm regulation. Not removing them.
Fox News did a marvelous job at convincing them that anyone to the left of them was a pacifist and wanted no weapons.
Like you talk to any hardline 2A supporter, and they will straight up agree with you that some people really shouldn't have firearms.
You know a country is deeply fucked when their guns are more important than literally everything else.
Healthcare? Nah.
Education? Nah.
Human rights? Nah.
Pew Pew Machines I can shoot cans with? Only thing that matters!
Nah. There isnt some huge group of people who would give their vote to Dems if Dems were pro-gun. The Dems would lose more support than they would gain. The Dems' gun control positions are mostly pretty moderate and have majority support in swing states.
I see this pro-gun hysteria on the Virginia sub on Reddit all the time. They're so massively out of touch with real life. They actually think that hardcore pro-gun positions are popular when they're not, polls consistently show that large majorities of the electorate support gun control measures.
Before the election they were all screaming about how Dems were losing votes because of gun control, and then Spanberger proceeded to win by 15 points and the legislature now has the largest Dem majority since the 1970s.
I think its dependent on their base. I firmly believe Beto O'Rourke would have unseated Fled Cruz if there wasn't an emotional sound bite of him saying "Hell yeah we're taking your guns!" After a WalMart in his hometown was shot up.
Ted Cruz (and Greg Abbott in the ensuing gubnatorial election) both played the FUCK out of that clip, and Beto lost both elections but only by a slim margin.
I'm not a 2A person, but I personally think if there was someone progressive like AOC or Bernie Sanders AND they touted gun ownership, they would be a winning candidate every single time.
Way too many people are "Anything but the D". And then complain they're incels.
They did do that but they weren't the last. Clinton passed the AWB, which was essentially a "scary looking guns" ban. Guns that were functionally the same could be legal or illegal based on meaningless cosmetic features. It was dumb ineffective pandering, the worst kind of 2A violation.
Actually the last admin to go after gun rights was Trumps first term where he said, "take the guns first, go through due process second".