3 ms·
To add a counterpoint - it seems to me the main reason the democrats are antigun is that is where most of their funding comes from. When you take money from Blo
by jstream67 4y ago
To add a counterpoint - it seems to me the main reason the democrats are antigun is that is where most of their funding comes from. When you take money from Bloomberg or Soros you agree to be antigun. This is not something that is controversial to say, Bloomberg and Soros are very proud of it. They directly inject vast sums of money into local elections to force in anti-gun candidates, and they have been very successful at it.
Despite your own personal viewpoints guns are very popular in the United States among both parties.
- Spooky23 4y agoAgreed. Urban democrats drive the anti-gun stuff. I’ve belonged to the same gun club since I turned 13. I had a weird upbringing. One side of my family was big in county republican politics, the other were unionists and involved in democratic politics. Nobody talked about any of this crap growing up. What did change is crazy people become prominent starting around Obama times. People I’ve known for years are now difficult to talk to as they have been pulled into a world of paranoia and crazy.
- chimprich 4y ago> the main reason the democrats are antigun is that is where most of their funding comes from From a perspective of a country where gun controls are far stronger, this idea that democrats are "antigun" seems hilariously partisan. Democrats only seem to be proposing modest gun controls compared to Republicans. What do you define as "most of their funding"? What percentage of Democrat funding comes from Soros or Bloomberg?