660
submitted 5 months ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 181 points 5 months ago

Biden is doing this to drive a wedge into Republicans. The gun nuts and the ones that don't care about guns will have differing opinions because now gun violence affects them directly. It's really smart.

Biden looks presidential. Trump has three choices:

  1. Come out against AR-15s, for obvious reasons. This makes gun nuts less likely to vote for him.

  2. Come out in favor of AR-15s. He looks insane to Republicans who don't care about guns.

  3. Trump ignores the issue or waffles and looks unpresidential.

Number 3 is most likely. Of course the correct answer is number 4: propose a competing policy that is nuanced. But that's impossible for trump.

[-] tiefling@lemmy.blahaj.zone 81 points 5 months ago

How many Republicans don't care about guns?

[-] foggy@lemmy.world 105 points 5 months ago

The ones that are republicans for tax purposes.

[-] EleventhHour@lemmy.world 28 points 5 months ago

Is that enough to matter? And is this issue enough for them to change their vote, given the tax stuff? All the other shit Trump does certainly doesn’t matter.

[-] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 17 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

The richest places in America are pretty solidly blue. A lot of rich people like good public schools and colleges, clean water, the arts, etc. and understand that taxes and charity are how those things are paid for.

Other rich people like gated communities and stopped reading books^1^ when someone stopped assigning them. They’re the Republican rich people.

^1^ Some will read a book about war or some shitty airport bookstore thing that’s 80% out-of-context quotes about how to be a leader.

[-] iheartneopets@lemm.ee 20 points 5 months ago

Rich people don't give a fuck about public schools, lmao, they send their kids to private ones.

[-] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

Private schools often suck. Rich people aren’t smarter. They just have more money. There’s plenty of districts where the best public high school is way better than whatever private schools exist. Half the private schools are for weird religious groups or kids who got expelled.

There’s almost always good public schools in cities. That’s why there’s always loopholes that allow rich people’s kids to go to them.

And in colleges, Harvard isn’t better than UC-Berkeley or the honors programs at most state flagship institutions. It’s just older. (There have been studies that compared students who got into an Ivy League school and ultimately chose a public flagship and the Ivy grads only did better in the first few years after graduation. But then the public flagship attendees caught up.)

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] EleventhHour@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I wonder how many of those hedge fund billionaires down on Wall Street are Democrats. I doubt that it’s many of them. Bankers? Nah. Media and Telcom? Not likely. They’re all based in NYC, the bluest of the blue cities.

They all like tax cuts and deregulation. Trump is the one who’s promising that, whereas Biden promised and already delivered more of both to them all.

[-] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago

I don’t have any desire to defend hedge fund or VC billionaires so I’ll concede the point. There’s a reason San Francisco has NIMBY policies and New York City can’t elect mayors for shit.

[-] EleventhHour@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Yeah, because the people who own all of the businesses and real estate constantly battle those who work at the businesses and live in all that real estate, which just goes to show what a fucked up and unbalanced role money plays in our so-called democracy.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Eatspancakes84@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

EVERY group is big enough to matter. Reminder that the last two elections were determined by around 10,000 votes.

[-] MagicShel@programming.dev 14 points 5 months ago

Those republicans already know he's fucking crazy and they don't give a fuck what his stance is on guns.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

And the ones that are Republicans to fuck over everyone but the rich. They'd definitely prefer "poor folk" didn't have guns at all.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 25 points 5 months ago

Lots of them. Do you know any Republicans? None of them care about issues that don't affect them and their families. Even other "conservative" issues. They are not driven by policy.

Only Republicans with guns care about guns. And only 50% of Republicans have guns.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/264932/percentage-americans-own-guns.aspx

They don't care about each other. Liberals care about what other liberals think. Stop thinking like someone who cares about policy.

[-] 5C5C5C@programming.dev 20 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I've had to explain this to a lot of people who naturally assume that any organization of people will be organized around some kind of shared values. Most of the time that's true, but not for Republicans.

Republicans are just a mish mash of obsessive single-issue voters, and by in large they just don't care about the other single issues that their fellow party members are going on about.

At the head of the Republican party it's people who want to minimize their tax burden, eliminate regulations on corporations, and cannibalize as much of the US government as they can into for-profit institutions. You could say that's three issues instead of one, but the overarching theme is to cater to personal greed, no matter the harm to society. These are the ones who are primarily pulling the strings in the party, at least historically.

Just below them is the military industrial complex and gun manufacturers who just want to sell guns no matter the harm to society. They like to rile up 2A fanatics with conspiracy theories that the government is out to steal all their guns so they'll be defenseless, paving the way for King Biden to ascend to his throne. The industry only cares about selling guns and the fanatics only care about having guns, and neither care about any kind of harm to society.

Then there's the radical Christians whose obsessions cover an eclectic mix of social reactionary positions and literal death cult worship (e.g. Christians who give absolute support to genocide in Palestine because they think Israel's conquest is a crucial step towards the rapture, which they believe is imminent). Broadly speaking the people in this group just want to hoist their religious doctrines onto everyone they can by any means available and no matter the harm it causes to society. They literally only care about "God's Kingdom" in the afterlife.

Then there's people who just lack any capacity for adaptation or learning. Their obsession is to feel like things are staying the same, or even reverting back to a past that they only know how to view through rose tinted glasses. They can't be bothered to comprehend the problems we're facing as a society or how the past was not the idyllic utopia that they mistakenly remember, nor can the old way of doing things sustain a growing and transforming society. These people just want to exist in comforting ignorance by feeling like they get to remain in familiar surroundings, no matter the harm to society.

There's really only one thing that truly unites them: Each one wants one specific thing no matter the harm to society, and that one specific thing that they each want IS HARMFUL to society. But they work well together because none of them care about the harm being caused by any of the others, and as long as they all tow the same line, each one gets what they want.

[-] RaoulDook@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

I've never met any Republicans that were pro-gun-bans. I really don't believe you'll be able to find a single one either.

This is dumb as fuck timing by Biden, but I'm sure he can't help himself because he's been super anti-gun for decades so it's probably just like a reflex at this point for him to to off about banning guns after a shooting.

[-] CaptainSpaceman@lemmy.world 9 points 5 months ago

Trump, for one

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago

How many of them will stay home or change their vote because the head of the party they're still a part of despite all the gun nuts continues acting like a gun nut?

If Biden is trying to use guns as a wedge issue for Republicans, he's the person we saw at the debate all the time.

[-] niucllos@lemm.ee 3 points 5 months ago

Not a lot but every wedge is probably worth it

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] TunaCowboy@lemmy.world 55 points 5 months ago

Gun control, especially banning the most popular and utilitarian platform, is a massive political loser. This is incredibly poor timing for a struggling campaign.

load more comments (21 replies)
[-] 14th_cylon@lemm.ee 37 points 5 months ago

Trump ignores the issue or waffles and looks unpresidential.

and that is what's gonna get him. because up until now, he looked soooo presidential 😂

[-] Fester@lemm.ee 35 points 5 months ago

Any of those options will work fine for Trump. He doesn’t need to have policies, strategies, or responses to anything. His voters can’t remember it anyway. You think they remember that he banned bump stocks in the first place? He could promise to ban AR-15s one day, then criticize his own proposal the next day, and he’ll just get cheered by both sides. Voters are fucking stupid.

All that matters is that he keeps the steady supply of hateful buzzwords flowing. You can’t win chess against an opponent who’s playing hungry hungry hippos.

[-] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 7 points 5 months ago

All of that wastes trump's time and makes him look unprofessional to swing voters. He can't win with just his fans. That's why he lost big time in 2020. The swing voters saw him failing to respond to an actual issue.

[-] EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 5 months ago

Correction: He lost big time because of mail-in votes. Trump in 2020 got the record high for votes for a Republican candidate at something like 67.2 million, which was just about a million votes less than what Obama got during his first election (which was a record-breaking turnout). Biden got around 80 million votes in 2020, breaking every voter turnout record ever.

Swing voters are still crucial because that's how Hillary lost despite having only 100,000 less votes than Obama did in his second election, but I feel like swing voters have probably more or less already made up their minds. If you don't see Trump for what he is already, the odds of his reaction here being the final straw seems unlikely. I think if people had better access to voting, we'd easily see a repeat of 2020 even if we were to vote right this minute.

[-] PythagreousTitties@lemm.ee 19 points 5 months ago

Trump already said he'd take away everyones guns, no questions asked, years ago. No one that supported him even blinked. This means nothing to them.

[-] Plasma@lemmy.ml 2 points 5 months ago

I'm pretty sure the NRA had a heart attack when they heard that 🤣

[-] RaoulDook@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

That's just bullshit, he did not. He said the one stupid thing about ignoring due process for red flag law situations. This is pretty far and away from "everyone's guns"

[-] PythagreousTitties@lemm.ee 6 points 5 months ago

You made me curious, thank you. The actual quote is "take the guns first, go through due process second."

[-] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 15 points 5 months ago

Trump will go with number 5: "Did you know socialist immigrant windmills causing cancers kill more Americans than guns?"

[-] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 11 points 5 months ago

He will do #2, and his base will cheer. Not a single person from that camp will think he's crazy.

This is the kind of Democrat logic that makes me cringe...

[-] mctoasterson@reddthat.com 8 points 5 months ago

He can just say nothing. His position is already clear and he just selected a VP candidate who was pictured in social media with an AR15 recently, and openly suggested the ATF doesn't need to exist.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Biden is doing this to drive a wedge into Republicans. The gun nuts and the ones that don’t care about guns will have differing opinions because now gun violence affects them directly. It’s really smart.

Or... he just doesn't want to get shot himself. Just saying. not wanting to get shot is a powerful motivator...

Not that it's perhaps prudent. or you know, god forbid, actually a good fucking idea.

[-] natebluehooves@pawb.social 5 points 5 months ago

Option 4: trump and the GOP in general still views his assassination attempt as the danger you have to live with to live in a “free nation”. It’s the cost of freedom. Something something “just because i got shot doesn’t mean taking everyone’s rights away is a good idea”

Growing up in texas, this is a very common view.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Scubus@sh.itjust.works 5 points 5 months ago

I guarantee that he will say that the attack wouldn't have happened if more of his followers had ar 15s there

[-] oxideseven@lemmy.ca 3 points 5 months ago

2 and 3 only matter if reality matters to you. Most people being trump don't care how insane things look, or if trump "looks presidential".

[-] Empricorn@feddit.nl 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

What you're arguing would make sense with logical voters. So of course it doesn't apply here. When have Republican voters marked 'D' or stayed home instead of voting for a pro-gun candidate!? It just doesn't happen.

And "wedge" issue?? Come on, Republican voters are either all-in on Trump or they reluctantly mark the 'R'...

load more comments (9 replies)
this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2024
660 points (94.4% liked)

politics

19248 readers
2198 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. 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 another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple 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.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS