Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Editorials & Other Articles

Showing Original Post only (View all)

elleng

(141,926 posts)
Tue Apr 23, 2013, 11:35 PM Apr 2013

The Gun Vote and 2014: Will There Be an Electoral Price? 538 [View all]

Did the senators who voted against a proposal last week to expand background checks on gun buyers take an electoral risk?

At first glance, it would seem that they did. Background checks are broadly popular with the public. Overwhelming majorities of 80 to 90 percent of the public say they favor background checks when guns are purchased at gun shows, at gun shops or online. Support for background checks drops when guns are bought through informal channels, or gifts from family members — but the amendment that the Senate voted upon last week, sponsored by the Joe Manchin III, Democrat of West Virginia, and Pat Toomey, Republican of Pennsylvania, would have exempted most of these cases.

And yet, the Senate did not behave as though this was a piece of legislation favored by 80 percent or more of the public. The analysis that we posted last week suggested that, if anything, senators who are up for re-election in 2014 were less likely to vote for the bill.

It’s worth considering in more detail how the senators’ re-election status might have affected their votes. Doing so yields a more subtle conclusion than we’d reached initially. Senators who are up for re-election in 2014 were more sensitive to attitudes toward gun-ownership in their states. However, this influenced behavior in both directions. Senators running for re-election were especially likely to vote for Mr. Manchin’s amendment if they represented states with low rates of gun ownership, but especially unlikely to do so if they came from states where gun ownership is common.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/23/the-gun-vote-and-2014-will-there-be-an-electoral-price/?hp

41 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
That 90% was from a poll rrneck Apr 2013 #1
As Bill Maher said, even felons who can't legally own guns are for BG checks. Hoyt Apr 2013 #4
Bill Mahar is a comedian and gets paid to say things like that. You know, money. nt rrneck Apr 2013 #5
NRA and gun cultists have their own sick reasons for promoting/toting/accumulating guns too. Hoyt Apr 2013 #7
And there it is... rrneck Apr 2013 #11
Wayne La Pierre also says anything the puppet master wants him to say, he will say and do anything Thinkingabout Apr 2013 #26
A national gun registry is not reasonable or sensible. ` rrneck Apr 2013 #27
Then why are those praised for protecting 2nd Amendment rights which voted NO on a bill which made Thinkingabout Apr 2013 #30
What (I think) you just advocated has already happened. rrneck Apr 2013 #31
why should there not be a national gun register, the Senators who voted NO has prevented Thinkingabout Apr 2013 #32
It's over. rrneck Apr 2013 #33
You like Crazy Cruz did not read the bill, so much for those who did nit want a national Thinkingabout Apr 2013 #34
Text from the bill... rrneck Apr 2013 #35
Good for the USA, to have a data base in which to access in order to know if a gun buyer is a Thinkingabout Apr 2013 #36
You don't get it do you? rrneck Apr 2013 #37
Once a person steps over the line and becomes a criminal "rights" are lost, stepping Thinkingabout Apr 2013 #38
Lovely, rrneck Apr 2013 #39
You are wrong on some points but to make it really simple, if you dont care to drive, Thinkingabout Apr 2013 #40
Okay rrneck Apr 2013 #41
Got an email about a more recent poll ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2013 #10
No..the numbers of voters for whom pipoman Apr 2013 #2
In many places, yes... bobclark86 Apr 2013 #9
The sad thing about this is Democrats had a shot at extended b.g. tests... Eleanors38 Apr 2013 #3
If there is an election backlash, then the democratic party will easily win the house graham4anything Apr 2013 #6
Why do you continue to push that lie premium Apr 2013 #13
because your version is just not true, and the NRA knows it.Which is why they want it. graham4anything Apr 2013 #14
Continuing to push that lie. premium Apr 2013 #15
Yeah, straight from the NRA website. We will agree to disagree. you are 100% wrong. graham4anything Apr 2013 #16
Here. premium Apr 2013 #17
No, you are 100% wrong. It says so right there. End of discussion. It is not definite. graham4anything Apr 2013 #18
Sorry, but you are completely wrong as usual. premium Apr 2013 #19
No, it says either OR.. Thank God the bill is dead. It won't return either. graham4anything Apr 2013 #20
It means that you can carry concealed from SC into NY without fear of prosecution premium Apr 2013 #21
Thanks for admitting it. Once it is in, it can be used. Do you think these perps care about law? graham4anything Apr 2013 #22
I didn't admit anything, premium Apr 2013 #23
As said, thank God that SC couldn't come in with a gun. That is important. graham4anything Apr 2013 #24
More word salad. premium Apr 2013 #28
A land where 35 a day die violently from a gun, 100 wounded, countless others mourn graham4anything Apr 2013 #29
No, bcause the Dems won't jump on it Doctor_J Apr 2013 #8
k & r thanks for posting..... nt Stuart G Apr 2013 #12
There'd BETTER be an Electoral Price! Brimley Apr 2013 #25
Latest Discussions»Editorials & Other Articles»The Gun Vote and 2014: Wi...