Obama calls small town Americans bitter

[senseamp]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: senseamp
Dems are going to nominate this guy and snatch defeat out of jaws of victory. Serves them right.

Nah, he'll win. I'd put money on it. He has the media appeal, he has a crushing fund raising advantage, he's genuinely inspiring, and he inherits a favorable political climate for Democrats. McCain doesn't stand a chance once Obama starts campaigning against him.

Don't be mad because Hillary is going to lose. I liked Hillary too, but if you like her then you should be glad to hear that a candidate that supports nearly identical things will be in the White House.

That candidate is John McCain.

 

[WHAMPOM]

I am supporting Obama just because he sees the truth and speaks the truth. No matter that he has to backpeddle when people find them unpleasant. {That's just politics.}

{edit}

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
Amazing how Obama can say something 100% true and it turns into a controversy.

++

 

[Farang]

Looking at realclearpolitics.com I see this is just a symptom of a long gap between primaries. It seems nearly every editorial piece is about this because they have nothing better to talk about.

Clinton/Bosnia may have been a worse gaffe, but the ensuing attempt to get her on anything she says (the health care story, for example) was similar in stupidity on the part of the press.

 

[cyclohexane]

well it's true.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: senseamp
Dems are going to nominate this guy and snatch defeat out of jaws of victory. Serves them right.

Nah, he'll win. I'd put money on it. He has the media appeal, he has a crushing fund raising advantage, he's genuinely inspiring, and he inherits a favorable political climate for Democrats. McCain doesn't stand a chance once Obama starts campaigning against him.

Don't be mad because Hillary is going to lose. I liked Hillary too, but if you like her then you should be glad to hear that a candidate that supports nearly identical things will be in the White House.

That candidate is John McCain.

What are you talking about?

Hillary and Obama's campaign platforms are nearly identical. McCain's differs on taxes, abortion, Iraq, social security, trade, health care, and so on.. and so forth. If you are going to try and make the argument that McCain is more similar in policy positions to Hillary then Obama is, I would very much like to see it.

 

[jpeyton]

We've been down this path before.

During the 2006 midterm elections, we had the same non-issue mudslinging, and boasts from the GOP that their party had a legitimate chance to win in many contests.

In reality, 4 years of the Iraq war and "making progress" finally took its toll. The same people who, just two years earlier, re-elected Bush because they believed there was still a chance to salvage Iraq, had finally had enough and handed the Democrats an unprecedented victory in Congress. Beyond the huge swing in seats from one party to another, there were several prominent incumbent GOP Congress member defeated by Democratic newcomers. They picked up some governors too, along with many state legislature seats.

Iraq is still weighing heavily on this country, with renewed violence, lack of benchmarks set or met, and the slowdown or reversal of troop withdrawal. Last week was the bloodiest for US soldiers in almost a year, with 19 dead.

The Iraq war alone, just like in 2006, will be the difference. McCain may match up well with Hillary or Obama on other issues, but he can't make up the deficit he'll have once the anti-war votes are cast in November.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: senseamp
Dems are going to nominate this guy and snatch defeat out of jaws of victory. Serves them right.

Nah, he'll win. I'd put money on it. He has the media appeal, he has a crushing fund raising advantage, he's genuinely inspiring, and he inherits a favorable political climate for Democrats. McCain doesn't stand a chance once Obama starts campaigning against him.

Don't be mad because Hillary is going to lose. I liked Hillary too, but if you like her then you should be glad to hear that a candidate that supports nearly identical things will be in the White House.

I would not count on that. Obama is having trouble putting away one of the least appealing candidates in recent memory.

Add to that his problems with Rev. Wright, his elitist comments about small town people and his association with 60s radical terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn and his ties to Rashid Khalidi a support of palestinian "resistance" attacks against Israel and an apologist for Arafat.

All of these little things are going to add up and main stream American is going to look at Obama for what he is: an elitists liberal Democrat.

The anti-Israel thing may be enough to doom him in Florida and with Florida off the map it comes down to Ohio and a few other places. (McCain leads in Ohio already as well.)

It is going to be a long fall for the Democrats.

I stopped reading right there. Either you're ignorant of American politics or you're lying. Up until December of 2007 Hillary was the candidate to beat. Republican media outlets supported Obama in order to stop her. Even Karl Rove was giving Obama pointers on how to beat her Her name was on everybody's lips, Republicans and Democrats. Her name recognition was at 100%.

You are probably one of those revisionist people who will make things up as you go along. But you're not fooling anyone.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Originally posted by: Dari
I stopped reading right there. Either you're ignorant of American politics or you're lying. Up until December of 2007 Hillary was the candidate to beat. Republican media outlets supported Obama in order to stop her. Even Karl Rove was giving Obama pointers on how to beat her. Until recently, Hillary was the one to beat. Her name was on everybody's lips, Republicans and Democrats. Her name recognition was at 100%.
You are probably one of those revisionist people who will make things up as you go along. But you're not fooling anyone.

Hillary Clinton has enjoyed tremendous popularity among partisan Democrats, with a much poorer showing among independents and Republicans. Most non-Democrats have a negative view of Senator Clinton; while she may have been the "candidate to beat" in the primaries, she has also been a far less than "sure thing" for the general election.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: CallMeJoe

Originally posted by: Dari
I stopped reading right there. Either you're ignorant of American politics or you're lying. Up until December of 2007 Hillary was the candidate to beat. Republican media outlets supported Obama in order to stop her. Even Karl Rove was giving Obama pointers on how to beat her. Until recently, Hillary was the one to beat. Her name was on everybody's lips, Republicans and Democrats. Her name recognition was at 100%.
You are probably one of those revisionist people who will make things up as you go along. But you're not fooling anyone.

Hillary Clinton has enjoyed tremendous popularity among partisan Democrats, with a much poorer showing among independents and Republicans. Most non-Democrats have a negative view of Senator Clinton; while she may have been the "candidate to beat" in the primaries, she has also been a far less than "sure thing" for the general election.

You can say that now but not six months ago.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

I would not count on that. Obama is having trouble putting away one of the least appealing candidates in recent memory.

Add to that his problems with Rev. Wright, his elitist comments about small town people and his association with 60s radical terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn and his ties to Rashid Khalidi a support of palestinian "resistance" attacks against Israel and an apologist for Arafat.

All of these little things are going to add up and main stream American is going to look at Obama for what he is: an elitists liberal Democrat.

The anti-Israel thing may be enough to doom him in Florida and with Florida off the map it comes down to Ohio and a few other places. (McCain leads in Ohio already as well.)

It is going to be a long fall for the Democrats.

She might be unappealing to you, but you hardly count as a representative sample. Hell, just look at a listing of polls right now, shown here. If Obama is having difficulty putting away such an unappealing candidate, why does McCain poll similarly against her? There are two answers: either both Obama and McCain are similarly poor candidates, or a substantial portion of the country genuinely likes Hillary. I know which one I find more likely.

Considering McCain has been spending the last month and a half doing nothing but going after the Democrats and fluffing himself with the Democrats have been fighting one another, and he's still locked in a dead heat? That's really bad news for him, especially considering the massive fund raising disadvantage he will have. As soon as the Democratic nominee secures it and starts campaigning against him he's toast.

You heard it here first. Okay, you didn't hear it here first... that's pretty much what everyone's been saying for months.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: CallMeJoe
Hillary Clinton has enjoyed tremendous popularity among partisan Democrats, with a much poorer showing among independents and Republicans. Most non-Democrats have a negative view of Senator Clinton; while she may have been the "candidate to beat" in the primaries, she has also been a far less than "sure thing" for the general election.

You can say that now but not six months ago.

You're probably right. I don't think I started posting questions about Hillary's general election prospects until December.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
She might be unappealing to you, but you hardly count as a representative sample. Hell, just look at a listing of polls right now, shown here. If Obama is having difficulty putting away such an unappealing candidate, why does McCain poll similarly against her? There are two answers: either both Obama and McCain are similarly poor candidates, or a substantial portion of the country genuinely likes Hillary. I know which one I find more likely.
Considering McCain has been spending the last month and a half doing nothing but going after the Democrats and fluffing himself with the Democrats have been fighting one another, and he's still locked in a dead heat? That's really bad news for him, especially considering the massive fund raising disadvantage he will have. As soon as the Democratic nominee secures it and starts campaigning against him he's toast.
You heard it here first. Okay, you didn't hear it here first... that's pretty much what everyone's been saying for months.

Considering the overwhelming distaste for the sitting Republican president and for those of his policies championed by Senator McCain, the fact that Senators Clinton and Obama are tied in the polls with Senator McCain speaks volumes about the weakness of both remaining Democratic candidates.

 

[Andyb23]

Wow I can't believe this thread. I haven't visited here in a while but apparently this forum has gone down the hill a bit.

Let me just say that if another candidate turned this statement around and said the 'truth' about the African-American population in the United States he would be out of the race in no time. A lot of people are harping about Obama bringing change and being attractive to everyone regardless, but in reality he has not made significant inroads with many minority groups like Asian-Americans and Hispanics. Its for a lot of reasons, but the worst one is that this guy is an opportunist. He will visit a town just before the primary to get votes, he will say one thing in front of a group of people to get their support. This is a prime example of that.

The hilarious part about this is he insulted the exact same people who he wants to vote for him in the Pennsylvania primary.

I happen to be pretty liberal but I don't think small town folk are bitter at all. In fact in all of my travels in America small-town people seem to be the happiest with strong family connections and support groups. If anything its the inner cities that are bitter because they are the ones that are hurt the most by a poor economy.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Andyb23
Wow I can't believe this thread. I haven't visited here in a while but apparently this forum has gone down the hill a bit.

Let me just say that if another candidate turned this statement around and said the 'truth' about the African-American population in the United States he would be out of the race in no time. A lot of people are harping about Obama bringing change and being attractive to everyone regardless, but in reality he has not made significant inroads with many minority groups like Asian-Americans and Hispanics. Its for a lot of reasons, but the worst one is that this guy is an opportunist. He will visit a town just before the primary to get votes, he will say one thing in front of a group of people to get their support. This is a prime example of that.

The hilarious part about this is he insulted the exact same people who he wants to vote for him in the Pennsylvania primary.

I happen to be pretty liberal but I don't think small town folk are bitter at all. In fact in all of my travels in America small-town people seem to be the happiest with strong family connections and support groups. If anything its the inner cities that are bitter because they are the ones that are hurt the most by a poor economy.

Originally posted by: Coldkilla
You people take everything out of context, heres him in 2004 regarding this: http://youtube.com/watch?v=6oGF3cyHE7M

Hillarys pulling out all the stops, bringing in the deck's pool, soon she'll be out of bodies of water to throw at him. She's going to lose, and you exaggeraters can just stop and face the facts... put his words in context and put yourself in the shoes of someone whos poorly educated, poor as in cannot afford healthcare, etc.. They don't give a damn about whats happening in North Korea or his 10 point policy plans. These people do cling to the few things they have... and vote based on those issues.

That's what Coldkilla posted earlier. Apparently, he was saying the EXACT same thing 4 years ago. Not something similar. It's the exact same thing and he was talking about his own state of Illinois. Try again.

 

[Andyb23]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Andyb23
Wow I can't believe this thread. I haven't visited here in a while but apparently this forum has gone down the hill a bit.

Let me just say that if another candidate turned this statement around and said the 'truth' about the African-American population in the United States he would be out of the race in no time. A lot of people are harping about Obama bringing change and being attractive to everyone regardless, but in reality he has not made significant inroads with many minority groups like Asian-Americans and Hispanics. Its for a lot of reasons, but the worst one is that this guy is an opportunist. He will visit a town just before the primary to get votes, he will say one thing in front of a group of people to get their support. This is a prime example of that.

The hilarious part about this is he insulted the exact same people who he wants to vote for him in the Pennsylvania primary.

I happen to be pretty liberal but I don't think small town folk are bitter at all. In fact in all of my travels in America small-town people seem to be the happiest with strong family connections and support groups. If anything its the inner cities that are bitter because they are the ones that are hurt the most by a poor economy.

Originally posted by: Coldkilla
You people take everything out of context, heres him in 2004 regarding this: http://youtube.com/watch?v=6oGF3cyHE7M

Hillarys pulling out all the stops, bringing in the deck's pool, soon she'll be out of bodies of water to throw at him. She's going to lose, and you exaggeraters can just stop and face the facts... put his words in context and put yourself in the shoes of someone whos poorly educated, poor as in cannot afford healthcare, etc.. They don't give a damn about whats happening in North Korea or his 10 point policy plans. These people do cling to the few things they have... and vote based on those issues.

That's what Coldkilla posted earlier. Apparently, he was saying the EXACT same thing 4 years ago. Not something similar. It's the exact same thing and he was talking about his own state of Illinois. Try again.

Try again for what?? I'm sorry but maybe I'm just being retarded here and not putting 2 and 2 together but what does that video have to do with was I was saying?

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Andyb23

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Andyb23
Wow I can't believe this thread. I haven't visited here in a while but apparently this forum has gone down the hill a bit.

Let me just say that if another candidate turned this statement around and said the 'truth' about the African-American population in the United States he would be out of the race in no time. A lot of people are harping about Obama bringing change and being attractive to everyone regardless, but in reality he has not made significant inroads with many minority groups like Asian-Americans and Hispanics. Its for a lot of reasons, but the worst one is that this guy is an opportunist. He will visit a town just before the primary to get votes, he will say one thing in front of a group of people to get their support. This is a prime example of that.

The hilarious part about this is he insulted the exact same people who he wants to vote for him in the Pennsylvania primary.

I happen to be pretty liberal but I don't think small town folk are bitter at all. In fact in all of my travels in America small-town people seem to be the happiest with strong family connections and support groups. If anything its the inner cities that are bitter because they are the ones that are hurt the most by a poor economy.

Originally posted by: Coldkilla
You people take everything out of context, heres him in 2004 regarding this: http://youtube.com/watch?v=6oGF3cyHE7M

Hillarys pulling out all the stops, bringing in the deck's pool, soon she'll be out of bodies of water to throw at him. She's going to lose, and you exaggeraters can just stop and face the facts... put his words in context and put yourself in the shoes of someone whos poorly educated, poor as in cannot afford healthcare, etc.. They don't give a damn about whats happening in North Korea or his 10 point policy plans. These people do cling to the few things they have... and vote based on those issues.

That's what Coldkilla posted earlier. Apparently, he was saying the EXACT same thing 4 years ago. Not something similar. It's the exact same thing and he was talking about his own state of Illinois. Try again.

Try again for what?? I'm sorry but maybe I'm just being retarded here and not putting 2 and 2 together but what does that video have to do with was I was saying?

You called him an opportunist when he was worried about the same thing four years ago. This is not an opportunist. This is someone who's seen this problem before and is talking about it. If he insulted them, it wasn't meant that way as you can see that he clearly said that people need to say such things in a non-condescending manner. These are real issues for real small towns, some of whom are facing extinction. Obama is not an opportunist on this issue.

 

[Andyb23]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Andyb23

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Andyb23
Wow I can't believe this thread. I haven't visited here in a while but apparently this forum has gone down the hill a bit.

Let me just say that if another candidate turned this statement around and said the 'truth' about the African-American population in the United States he would be out of the race in no time. A lot of people are harping about Obama bringing change and being attractive to everyone regardless, but in reality he has not made significant inroads with many minority groups like Asian-Americans and Hispanics. Its for a lot of reasons, but the worst one is that this guy is an opportunist. He will visit a town just before the primary to get votes, he will say one thing in front of a group of people to get their support. This is a prime example of that.

The hilarious part about this is he insulted the exact same people who he wants to vote for him in the Pennsylvania primary.

I happen to be pretty liberal but I don't think small town folk are bitter at all. In fact in all of my travels in America small-town people seem to be the happiest with strong family connections and support groups. If anything its the inner cities that are bitter because they are the ones that are hurt the most by a poor economy.

Originally posted by: Coldkilla
You people take everything out of context, heres him in 2004 regarding this: http://youtube.com/watch?v=6oGF3cyHE7M

Hillarys pulling out all the stops, bringing in the deck's pool, soon she'll be out of bodies of water to throw at him. She's going to lose, and you exaggeraters can just stop and face the facts... put his words in context and put yourself in the shoes of someone whos poorly educated, poor as in cannot afford healthcare, etc.. They don't give a damn about whats happening in North Korea or his 10 point policy plans. These people do cling to the few things they have... and vote based on those issues.

That's what Coldkilla posted earlier. Apparently, he was saying the EXACT same thing 4 years ago. Not something similar. It's the exact same thing and he was talking about his own state of Illinois. Try again.

Try again for what?? I'm sorry but maybe I'm just being retarded here and not putting 2 and 2 together but what does that video have to do with was I was saying?

You called him an opportunist when he was worried about the same thing four years ago. This is not an opportunist. This is someone who's seen this problem before and is talking about it. If he insulted them, it wasn't meant that way as you can see that he clearly said that people need to say such things in a non-condescending manner. These are real issues for real small towns, some of whom are facing extinction. Obama is not an opportunist on this issue.

I'm sorry but I still see him as an opportunist, I also mentioned that he campaigns in minority communities (Asian, hispanic) right before the primaries to rack up votes.

As for your example, if you look at the whole situation and don't bring your pro-Obama bias into the picture, he was still being an incredible opportunist. Last week he was in Pennsylvania talking about the value of rural voters and the problems with trade laws and this week hes in San Francisco putting those very people down. Now I'm the first to admit that ALL politicians are opportunists, but Obama keeps running his campaign with the idea that he is not the average politician. I followed the last election very carefully and I didn't even see George W. make such a big flip-flop in such a short span.

 

[senseamp]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: senseamp
Dems are going to nominate this guy and snatch defeat out of jaws of victory. Serves them right.

Nah, he'll win. I'd put money on it. He has the media appeal, he has a crushing fund raising advantage, he's genuinely inspiring, and he inherits a favorable political climate for Democrats. McCain doesn't stand a chance once Obama starts campaigning against him.

Don't be mad because Hillary is going to lose. I liked Hillary too, but if you like her then you should be glad to hear that a candidate that supports nearly identical things will be in the White House.

That candidate is John McCain.

What are you talking about?

Hillary and Obama's campaign platforms are nearly identical. McCain's differs on taxes, abortion, Iraq, social security, trade, health care, and so on.. and so forth. If you are going to try and make the argument that McCain is more similar in policy positions to Hillary then Obama is, I would very much like to see it.

Obama is too liberal, Clinton is a moderate pragmatist like McCain.

 

[videogames101]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
The more this guy campaigns, the more I like the fucker.

he speaks truth!

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: senseamp
Dems are going to nominate this guy and snatch defeat out of jaws of victory. Serves them right.

Nah, he'll win. I'd put money on it. He has the media appeal, he has a crushing fund raising advantage, he's genuinely inspiring, and he inherits a favorable political climate for Democrats. McCain doesn't stand a chance once Obama starts campaigning against him.

Don't be mad because Hillary is going to lose. I liked Hillary too, but if you like her then you should be glad to hear that a candidate that supports nearly identical things will be in the White House.

That candidate is John McCain.

What are you talking about?

Hillary and Obama's campaign platforms are nearly identical. McCain's differs on taxes, abortion, Iraq, social security, trade, health care, and so on.. and so forth. If you are going to try and make the argument that McCain is more similar in policy positions to Hillary then Obama is, I would very much like to see it.

Obama is too liberal, Clinton is a moderate pragmatist like McCain.

On which issue is one more liberal than the other?

 

[chowderhead]

Originally posted by: videogames101

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
The more this guy campaigns, the more I like the fucker.

he speaks truth!

I've read this comment throughout the thread. But I wonder why people think that. Many folks have had pro-gun right positions and have held their religious values in high regards for a long long time regardless of economic conditions. Obama says they cling to those values because of economic hardship implying they use religion or gun rights as a crutch. It is a totally elitist thing to say, especially since he was explaining to a bunch of donors at a San Francisco fundraiser why he thinks people in small time America are apparently bitter. It was a condescending comment.

 

[OrByte]

he didn't say it implying that guns and religion are crutches. He clarified that when washington fails to work in the best interests of the people on issues like education, economy, healthcare, taxes then all these people have left are their guns and their religion and illegal immigration, gay marriage, abortion, and other wedge issues to vote on. He thinks it makes people bitter over Washington, hence why people in small town PA aren't taking him seriously.

just my .02

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Andyb23

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Andyb23

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Andyb23
Wow I can't believe this thread. I haven't visited here in a while but apparently this forum has gone down the hill a bit.

Let me just say that if another candidate turned this statement around and said the 'truth' about the African-American population in the United States he would be out of the race in no time. A lot of people are harping about Obama bringing change and being attractive to everyone regardless, but in reality he has not made significant inroads with many minority groups like Asian-Americans and Hispanics. Its for a lot of reasons, but the worst one is that this guy is an opportunist. He will visit a town just before the primary to get votes, he will say one thing in front of a group of people to get their support. This is a prime example of that.

The hilarious part about this is he insulted the exact same people who he wants to vote for him in the Pennsylvania primary.

I happen to be pretty liberal but I don't think small town folk are bitter at all. In fact in all of my travels in America small-town people seem to be the happiest with strong family connections and support groups. If anything its the inner cities that are bitter because they are the ones that are hurt the most by a poor economy.

Originally posted by: Coldkilla
You people take everything out of context, heres him in 2004 regarding this: http://youtube.com/watch?v=6oGF3cyHE7M

Hillarys pulling out all the stops, bringing in the deck's pool, soon she'll be out of bodies of water to throw at him. She's going to lose, and you exaggeraters can just stop and face the facts... put his words in context and put yourself in the shoes of someone whos poorly educated, poor as in cannot afford healthcare, etc.. They don't give a damn about whats happening in North Korea or his 10 point policy plans. These people do cling to the few things they have... and vote based on those issues.

That's what Coldkilla posted earlier. Apparently, he was saying the EXACT same thing 4 years ago. Not something similar. It's the exact same thing and he was talking about his own state of Illinois. Try again.

Try again for what?? I'm sorry but maybe I'm just being retarded here and not putting 2 and 2 together but what does that video have to do with was I was saying?

You called him an opportunist when he was worried about the same thing four years ago. This is not an opportunist. This is someone who's seen this problem before and is talking about it. If he insulted them, it wasn't meant that way as you can see that he clearly said that people need to say such things in a non-condescending manner. These are real issues for real small towns, some of whom are facing extinction. Obama is not an opportunist on this issue.

I'm sorry but I still see him as an opportunist, I also mentioned that he campaigns in minority communities (Asian, hispanic) right before the primaries to rack up votes.

As for your example, if you look at the whole situation and don't bring your pro-Obama bias into the picture, he was still being an incredible opportunist. Last week he was in Pennsylvania talking about the value of rural voters and the problems with trade laws and this week hes in San Francisco putting those very people down. Now I'm the first to admit that ALL politicians are opportunists, but Obama keeps running his campaign with the idea that he is not the average politician. I followed the last election very carefully and I didn't even see George W. make such a big flip-flop in such a short span.

K.

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: chowderhead

Originally posted by: videogames101

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
The more this guy campaigns, the more I like the fucker.

he speaks truth!

I've read this comment throughout the thread. But I wonder why people think that. Many folks have had pro-gun right positions and have held their religious values in high regards for a long long time regardless of economic conditions. Obama says they cling to those values because of economic hardship implying they use religion or gun rights as a crutch. It is a totally elitist thing to say, especially since he was explaining to a bunch of donors at a San Francisco fundraiser why he thinks people in small time America are apparently bitter. It was a condescending comment.

He didn't say anything about gun rights. He said they cling to their guns.