President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

Why do I think that if Trump was doing something similar you would simply argue that it was a deal making technique to ask for more than you want?

 

They should be more conversant on the issue, I agree. But that doesn't mean that your side isn't deploying a rhetorical device right now intended to shut down debate until the storm blows over. If Democrats propose a flawed bill, then they can continue to work to improve it. But Chuck Schumer could talk like Chris Kyle, and the NRA, Rush Limbaugh, and right-wing Twitter would find some arcane point to skewer him about for being a know-nothing.

 

It would take the Democrats about a minute to find, and work with, a like minded gun expert, like @Inky_Wretch, who could help them with this stuff.

But, part of the problem is that their base isn't actually for "common sense gun reform".

 

Does MSNBC think a killer can outrun a handgun's bullets?

 

I don't even really understand what this means.

@Neutral Corner seems to know his way around a firing range, as well.

 

You're thinking of Ben Carson.

 

A. It means that a Dem who proposes anything short of what is in the current proposal would face the base's wrath. The base wants to ban guns, not implement some reforms that would potentially work to stop mass shooting, or other gun violence.

2. Sure. The Dems could hire @Neutral Corner or any number of folks who knows something about guns. That they haven't is astounding.

It would really benefit them to actually listen to gun owners, and enthusiasts. Even if, as @RickStain insists, changing minds isn't the goal, they would be able to craft better legislation if they could see the argument from their opponent's side.

 

And, btw, I don't know what Ben Carson would do, but Donald has a record of rushing toward(s) a confrontation!

 

Some guns, yes, the purpose being to "implement some reforms that would potentially work to stop mass shooting, or other gun violence."

The notion that people want to "ban guns" for any other purpose is nonsensical, and another rhetorical sleight of hand. There is no reason to "ban guns" independent of the fact that they are used to slaughter other humans.

 

I still don't think your heart's in this. You are just playing a particularly challenging hand of "Outsmart the Liberals."

 

Got to start lining the war chest ASAP.

 

When was the last time a president who didn’t assume power after a death didn’t run for re-election? This is not news. Re-election campaigns start the day after inauguration these days.