Skip to main content

View Diary: Gun Control vs Social Security (160 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  correlation does not equal causation (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    poco

    Stated as unquestioningly, and as devoid of substantiation, as gospel:

    when Dems passed the AWB during Clinton's presidency, it gave the GOP control of the House for the first time in 40 years
    Please provide evidence that that law was the sole, or even primary, agent for that event and that no other cause existed that could have explained, or at least played a major role in, this observed outcome.

    Please don't forget, for example, the peaking influence of Rush Limbaugh and the other elements of the vast right wing conspiracy.

    And this:

    Then there are states like mine, Oregon, which never fails to deliver for Dems in Presidential elections.  But if you look more closely, you realize that it's entirely Multnomah County (Portland), Lane County (Eugene), and Benton County (Corvallis).  That is to say Portland freaks and college kids keep the state blue like that.  But the rest of the state -- and I do mean the rest of it -- is red, red, red.
    Is, as one might say, false.  Wrong.  Incorrect and misleading.

    In addition to the three counties you mentioned, these others also went for team blue:

    Clackamas
    Clatsop
    Columbia
    Hood River
    Lincoln
    Tillamook
    Washington

    And, while it is true that, except for Hood River County, the rest of the counties outside the coast and the Willamette Valley typically vote Republican, these counties have very small populations. Statewide, the people of Oregon gave the president an 11.8 percent margin over Mr. Romney.

    Remember, acres don't vote. People vote.

    •  And -- to add (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      poco

      Here's an article from the NY Times about the tone of advertising in the 1994 election.

      The assault weapons ban certainly didn't seem to be a major factor -- it was only mentioned in the context of Michael Huffington's attempt to unseat Sen Feinstein -- and it was mentioned as a positive; an accomplishment.

      Rather, polling indicated that health care was of primary importance.:

      Health care was rarely mentioned, although preliminary results of a post-election poll for the Kaiser Family Foundation show that voters ranked it the most important issue in their Congressional vote. (This buttresses the theory that the 18-month struggle over the Clinton health plan was critical in feeding voters' anxiety over big government and thus entered into the election in a powerful, albeit subterranean, way.)
      Could it be the assertion that the AWB "gave" the Congress to the Republicans is just a myth?
    •  yes, people vote (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rockhound, FrankRose, kestrel9000

      how populous is hood river county compared to multnomah?  clackamas and washington are portland suburbs and almost don't count as separate counties, but you are right; i should have been more precise with my language in describing oregon.  i'll update.

      as for the correlation, of course it's hard to be 100% certain.  i suppose the best one might could do is look at who lost, what their districts looked like, and how they voted on the AWB.  

      but clinton was there and he is convinced the AWB was directly responsible for losing 20 seats.

      Please don't dominate the rap, Jack, if you got nothin' new to say - Grateful Dead

      by Cedwyn on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 10:09:30 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  In response to: (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KVoimakas, Cedwyn
      Please provide evidence that that law was the sole, or even primary, agent for that event and that no other cause existed that could have explained, or at least played a major role in, this observed outcome.
      I can't, at least off the cuff, but there are a couple of things to consider.  1) guns ownership, and especially permits to carry firearms in public are both higher now than they were in 1994, despite what some anti-gun organizations try to say.  One simply has to look at the explosion in issuance of concealed carry permits to determine this.  2) the 1994 AWB passed by only two votes, suggesting that it wasn't politically popular even back then.  3) in response to the ban of 1994, manufacturers simply changed designs to get around the ban as well as increased traffic in the black market.  Why would this one be any more effective?

      If it were responsible, even in part, for a major mid term loss, give the two things above, is this really something that is worth risking?

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (170)
  • Baltimore (86)
  • Community (84)
  • Bernie Sanders (66)
  • Freddie Gray (59)
  • Civil Rights (54)
  • Elections (41)
  • Culture (38)
  • Hillary Clinton (36)
  • Media (35)
  • Racism (32)
  • Law (31)
  • 2016 (31)
  • Labor (26)
  • Education (26)
  • Environment (25)
  • Republicans (23)
  • Politics (23)
  • Barack Obama (22)
  • Police (20)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site