Bill Richardson and Obama

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: chowderhead
Obama once wanted to ban all handguns in Illinois. Once that gets put in a ad across the country, I think his support in will drop in his battleground states (midwest/Southwest, far west, and VA) regardless of adding a pro-gun rights VP.

I'm not so sure. The problem with gun rights political attacks is that the people who tend to decide who to support based mostly on that issue tend to be the kind of people who aren't voting for a Democrat in the first place. Don't get me wrong, "they want to take your guns" has been an enormously successful approach for the Republican party as a whole, but at this point it's almost TOO successful, the people it pulls in have already been pulled in. If a Democrat who's in favor of MORE gun rights runs, they might be able to pull some votes away from the Republicans...but I don't think the Democrats could lose any more votes on the issue than they already have.

 

[chowderhead]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: chowderhead
Obama once wanted to ban all handguns in Illinois. Once that gets put in a ad across the country, I think his support in will drop in his battleground states (midwest/Southwest, far west, and VA) regardless of adding a pro-gun rights VP.

I'd like to think that Obama's views on guns are a result of a lack of experience with them, and living in a place where only criminals had them (chicago.)

And he actually said he wanted to ban all semi-automatic weapons, (rifles and handguns.)

That 1996 questionnaire asked whether he supported banning the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns in Illinois. The campaign's answer was straightforward: "Yes." Eight years later, he said on another questionnaire that "a complete ban on handguns is not politically practicable" but reasonable restrictions should be imposed.

good luck with the far west/southwest/midwest and VA strategy

Edit: Obama supports the DC gun ban
link

At his news conference, he voiced support for Washington D.C.'s ban on handguns, which is scheduled to be heard by the Supreme Court next month.

 

[imported_Lothar]

Originally posted by: Vic
I don't think Richardson is going to get the VP nod. Not that it wouldn't be an ideal ticket, just that I don't see him bringing much to the table voter-wise. Edwards would have been the obvious choice if not for his unfortunate involvement in Kerry's disastrous run.

Off topic, I am now more or less certain that the Pub ticket will be McCain/Romney. I'd say that deal has been signed, and now they're just waiting for the ink to dry.

Romney doesn't add much to the ticket for McCain.

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: chowderhead
Obama once wanted to ban all handguns in Illinois. Once that gets put in a ad across the country, I think his support in will drop in his battleground states (midwest/Southwest, far west, and VA) regardless of adding a pro-gun rights VP.

I'm not so sure. The problem with gun rights political attacks is that the people who tend to decide who to support based mostly on that issue tend to be the kind of people who aren't voting for a Democrat in the first place. Don't get me wrong, "they want to take your guns" has been an enormously successful approach for the Republican party as a whole, but at this point it's almost TOO successful, the people it pulls in have already been pulled in. If a Democrat who's in favor of MORE gun rights runs, they might be able to pull some votes away from the Republicans...but I don't think the Democrats could lose any more votes on the issue than they already have.

I was an early Richardson supporter. I really liked his foreign and domestic policies, as well as the cut of his jib.

People fluidly change sides based on issues. If you look over at democratic underground, you'll find a whole contingent of people voting for McCain, for various reasons.