elkduds
Well-known member
Gun ownership does not automatically equate to GOP/NRA fidelity. For example, many gun owners want to see more legal enforcement to keep high capacity semi autos from being used against civilian targets. Including me.
Gun Owners Don't Vote
- Thread starter bucdoego
- Start date
elkduds
Well-known member
For those that don't bother to vote, how likely are they to advocate with legislators between elections for their values and priorities? Not too. Hopefully HT advocates' encouragement mobilizes readers here to vote, and then to keep after legislators through commenting and supporting advocacy groups. That's a large part of why I value HT.
bayoublaster7527
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2017
- Messages
- 828
This is a very important point and I have asked myself this question numerous times. I believe that hunters and gun owners don't vote at a very high rate, along with rural citizens. Once upon a time, the NRA did a decent job getting gun owners to the polls. Their recent loss of credibility and leadership scandals have likely diminished their ability to mount any major voter registration/turnout campaigns. Here in Colorado, we have seen very successful multi-million dollar urban voter registration/turnout campaigns from major progressive PACs, such as ProgressNow and New Era Colorado. They have successfully shifted Colorado state government from purple-moderate-centrist to far-left progressive in very short order. Complete control of all levers of state government through a super-majority emboldens the most extreme factions of the party, regardless of what side of the aisle.
FairWeather
Well-known member
Gun owners aren’t a monolith.
When we’re talking about initiatives, it’s pretty cut and dry. When we’re talking about candidates, there’s a long list of issues that are more important to me than gun rights, and their stances on those issues are going to be what drives my vote.
When we’re talking about initiatives, it’s pretty cut and dry. When we’re talking about candidates, there’s a long list of issues that are more important to me than gun rights, and their stances on those issues are going to be what drives my vote.
FairWeather
Well-known member
I don’t understand how/why any eligible voter isn’t voting. In Oregon it could not be easier! Most times I return my ballot the same day it arrives, weeks before its final due date.
I wish we’d adopt Australia’s model, and impose a small fine for NOT voting. It’s one of only 2 real duties we have as citizens. That, and jury duty. Just do it!
BuzzH
Well-known member
Voters might be more excited about voting if there were better candidates to choose from.
Wouldn't hurt if congress actually did their jobs as well.
Wouldn't hurt if congress actually did their jobs as well.
SAJ-99
Well-known member
The data on gun owners says otherwise (see link). When I hear a narrative with questionable claims repeated multiple times in relatively short order within a political cycle, I suspect there is a concerted effort to spread the narrative.
Rural voters typically vote absentee ballot for the obvious reasons others have pointed out. Voting should be made easier, not harder, and I wish every eligible voter would vote, but that isn't realistic. The issues we face are complex and the as @BuzzH points out, the candidates are largely too dumb to solve them. This is how we get fear and loathing on single issues as the drivers of why and how people vote.
Voter turnout isn't the point that should be drawn from the result. The Herrera lost by only 400 votes, doing much better than expected. 400 vote difference for a YouTuber known as "AK-guy" who ran on a single issue and could largely be viewed as completely unqualified for the job. It is possible that every one of the 29,639 voters who voted owns a gun, the author just didn't like the result and blames low gun-owner voter turnout. If turnout was 100% and AK-guy still lost, what would the claim be? Oh that's right, foreign nationals and illegal aliens, which he made sure to sprinkle in just in case he needs it for later.
Trump's Wrong: Gun Owners More Likely to Vote - FactCheck.org
In a speech at a National Rifle Association convention, former President Donald Trump deceptively stoked fears that if President Joe Biden is reelected, the government will be "coming for your guns." Biden has advocated a ban on so-called assault weapons, but he has not proposed confiscating...
www.factcheck.org
bucdoego
Well-known member
Yes. I agree. We do have to consider the source. Even the various "Fact-Check-Orgs" can have bias too (and it is often prog/left). Don't care. I'll still consider it.The data on gun owners says otherwise (see link). When I hear a narrative with questionable claims repeated multiple times in relatively short order within a political cycle, I suspect there is a concerted effort to spread the narrative.
Rural voters typically vote absentee ballot for the obvious reasons others have pointed out. Voting should be made easier, not harder, and I wish every eligible voter would vote, but that isn't realistic. The issues we face are complex and the as @BuzzH points out, the candidates are largely too dumb to solve them. This is how we get fear and loathing on single issues as the drivers of why and how people vote.
Voter turnout isn't the point that should be drawn from the result. The Herrera lost by only 400 votes, doing much better than expected. 400 vote difference for a YouTuber known as "AK-guy" who ran on a single issue and could largely be viewed as completely unqualified for the job. It is possible that every one of the 29,639 voters who voted owns a gun, the author just didn't like the result and blames low gun-owner voter turnout. If turnout was 100% and AK-guy still lost, what would the claim be? Oh that's right, foreign nationals and illegal aliens, which he made sure to sprinkle in just in case he needs it for later.
Trump's Wrong: Gun Owners More Likely to Vote - FactCheck.org
In a speech at a National Rifle Association convention, former President Donald Trump deceptively stoked fears that if President Joe Biden is reelected, the government will be "coming for your guns." Biden has advocated a ban on so-called assault weapons, but he has not proposed confiscating...
Low turnout and a close result were two valid points of the author of the ammoland the article, IMHO. No matter how it gets challenged, it is still a valid question, even if some will demand absolute "proof".
FactCheck.org Media Bias Rating
Learn the AllSides Media Bias Rating of FactCheck.org. AllSides rates the media bias of hundreds of news outlets, media sources and writers.
www.allsides.com
bucdoego
Well-known member
Totally agree. We often don't get the best to run for public office.
Last edited:
Marshian
Well-known member
SAJ-99
Well-known member
It's not about left or right or the source per se. It is about the numbers. Every study I have ever seen shows gun owners vote at a very high rate and skew Repub. It is hard to measure because we don't/can't track hard data on gun ownership and instead rely on survey data. But I am skeptical that gun owners suddenly aren't showing up to vote more than non-gun owners. It is on the claimant to prove that. But the author didn't want to prove that. I suspect the point was to scare readers into voting in November. Normal politics these days.Yes. I agree. We do have to consider the source. Even the various "Fact-Check-Orgs" can have bias too (and it is often prog/left). Don't care. I'll still consider it.
Low turnout and a close result were two valid points of the author of the ammoland the article, IMHO. No matter how it gets challenged, it is still a valid question, even if some will demand absolute "proof".
FactCheck.org Media Bias Rating
Learn the AllSides Media Bias Rating of FactCheck.org. AllSides rates the media bias of hundreds of news outlets, media sources and writers.
Forkyfinder
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2023
- Messages
- 6,075
The only solace i can find in election season is south park.
Its the only show on tv that seems to reliably be unbiased in their trollery - which deserves some admiration.
Nick87
Well-known member
Yah how do we get there is the question. I don't see it happening.
Marshian
Well-known member
I signed the petition a few years ago for ranked order voting. I’m idealistic but maybe that’ll put a chink in the two party armor and allow some decent third party people to rise up. Ironically both D and R oppose this. They enjoy the monopoly.
Last edited:
Bonasababy
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 16, 2024
- Messages
- 1,968
I'm not all that surprised. Setting aside that many gun owners are ok with increased regulation and place a higher priority on other things-- In red locales voting is more difficult. By their own design.
And what's the narrative the red folks push? That voting is rigged, that they don't count votes?
Well to those that believe that,what's the incentive to vote?
Just one of many ...but they remain totally clueless they hurt themselves repeating the lies.
Nick87
Well-known member
So does everyone qho fronts the money to that puts them ahead of everyone else that's the problem. Never gonna change that unfortunately.
SAJ-99
Well-known member
I like the idea too, but it would need to be combined with a runoff election if no candidate got 50%. So much emphasis (time and $$$) is placed on elections these days, I'm not sure a runoff at the national level is palatable for the people or the party. Even in the example here (US House TX -23) 57,630 people voted in republican primary, but only 29,639 in the runoff.
~10% turnout happens here when it's not a national election. They'll burn up the socials complaining tho.
Potheads are worse. All they had to do was run pro legalization candidates and all users vote. Just the pothead vote could elect anyone. It would have been legal decades ago. And these are people who see their peers imprisoned regularly!
Potheads are worse. All they had to do was run pro legalization candidates and all users vote. Just the pothead vote could elect anyone. It would have been legal decades ago. And these are people who see their peers imprisoned regularly!
elkduds
Well-known member
And there would likely be better candidates if citizens were more involved in voting. Lotta sheep in the flock.
