Why are Democrats having a hard time getting blue collar white Dem voters?

[jade_nova]

Because blue collar white voters are racists.

[Gryphon]

That test was interesting. I thought living in a black neghborhood and teaching at a predominantly black school would give me a preference for black people, since I have had a lot of positive associations for several years. I scored neutral. Which to me indicates that those of us that think we have a preference are still infected with a negative racial bias (that is, we lean further towards white preference than we realize).

Or that the tests are flawed in that it makes broad assumptions based not on every fact but only what is asked which doesnt neccessarily give the full story.

[mikekerrIII]

But they didn't ban it based on it's looks. They banned it based on it's ability to swap parts with fully automatic battlefield rifles with large capacity mags. Their ability to be modified into chain guns with things a typical gun nut might have laying around the house. To say an SKS or a Mac-90 is not an assault weapon because it's not full auto is just as ridiculous as the rest of your ideas about gun control. The sole purpose the Mac 90 exists is to skirt gun laws and put AK-47's in the hands of people who live where AK-47's have been banned, and to claim otherwise is ridiculous. A $2 piece of bent metal will turn either of those guns into fully automatic weapons. The internet is filled with kits to make either weapon a gatling gun. The guns don't need these parts and kits to be assault weapons, they already are. That's the reason they make kits for these guns and not the Remington 700.

Thap ios patently untrue, A mini 14 an be converted for a few bucks, a Browning automatic Shot gun can be converted for free and my M-ia is easier to convert to full utomatic than a legal AK-47 is. The law makes no statements about what you propose to be the treason for the law. Almost every provison is on the appearance of the weapon.

If they wanted to base it on the ability to convert to full automatic< why the provisons on thinks like flash suppressor and pistol grips? What part of the law mentions convertibility?

[mikekerrIII]

While the Uzis themselves have changed a great deal...

Not in any significant way. Small SMGs were available in the 1930's also.

[dupont2005]

The law makes no statements about what you propose to be the treason for the law. Almost every provison is on the appearance of the weapon.

Well if they based it purely on looks, why can an AK-47 still be purchased in California? And for choosing the weapons strictly based on looks, they did an amazing job of accidentally and coincidentally choosing the most popular battle ready weapons available, the ones that just so happen to have popular kits available to turn them into turret mounted multi barreled killing machines. I know they were not banned based on their ability to be converted to full auto. That was simply one example of what makes them an "assault weapon" though. Your opinion obviously differs. So what is an "assault weapon" in your eyes? What would qualify a rifle to be one? A drop free high capacity mag that can be loaded with closed bolt? A bayonet? An auto-reloading quick rate of fire? Length of barrel combined with collapsible stock making it an adequate mid range and close range weapon? I mean, what do the worlds military groups and guerilla/rebel fighting forces look for in a battle rifle? Is the number of rounds released with a single trigger pull really the ONLY qualifying factor? Why aren't insurgents using Browning shotguns? How many rounds does that bad boy pack, six?

[mikekerrIII]

Well if they based it purely on looks, why can an AK-47 still be purchased in California? And for choosing the weapons strictly based on looks, they did an amazing job of accidentally and coincidentally choosing the most popular battle ready weapons available, the ones that just so happen to have popular kits available to turn them into turret mounted multi barreled killing machines. I know they were not banned based on their ability to be converted to full auto. That was simply one example of what makes them an "assault weapon" though. Your opinion obviously differs. So what is an "assault weapon" in your eyes? What would qualify a rifle to be one? A drop free high capacity mag that can be loaded with closed bolt? A bayonet? An auto-reloading quick rate of fire? Length of barrel combined with collapsible stock making it an adequate mid range and close range weapon? I mean, what do the worlds military groups and guerilla/rebel fighting forces look for in a battle rifle? Is the number of rounds released with a single trigger pull really the ONLY qualifying factor? Why aren't insurgents using Browning shotguns? How many rounds does that bad boy pack, six?

The federal law expired when the Democrats could not get enough votes to push it it though again, they had trouble with a large part of their own party. It will remain a dead issue until the enough democrats is "fly-over country decide they want to lose their jobs.

Guerrilla Armies around the world tend to use full auto assault weapons, weapons that the ban did not affect at all. They don't use converted weapons becasue they get the real thing more easliy than civilian versions, real AK-47 are the opposite of rare

[dupont2005]

So the two dollar piece of bent metal is the difference...

[o1pickleboy]

Because blue collar white voters are racists.

As a blue collar white voter I can say not all of us are.

[mikekerrIII]

So the two dollar piece of bent metal is the difference...

Yes, and that is a more significant difference than any of the things banned by the bill

As a blue collar white voter I can say not all of us are.

The common attidiued that goes with the statement is one of the prime reasons that Democrats have so much trouble getting the blue colloar vote< why vote with people who accept thinking like that?

Many liberals tend to general come off like they do here dismissive and smug in the superiority of their opinions.

[o1pickleboy]

Yes, and that is a more significant difference than any of the things banned by the bill

The common attidiued that goes with the statement is one of the prime reasons that Democrats have so much trouble getting the blue colloar vote< why vote with people who accept thinking like that?

Many liberals tend to general come off like they do here dismissive and smug in the superiority of their opinions.

They stereotype just like everyone else. They are many blue collar workers who work side by side with almost all of the minority groups. With the hours of work in many cases being well over 40 hour to the point one could say they spend more time with their co workers than there familys.

[Nick Soapdish]

The common attidiued that goes with the statement is one of the prime reasons that Democrats have so much trouble getting the blue colloar vote< why vote with people who accept thinking like that?

I think that you're also dramatically over-simplifying it (just like jade). Hillary Clinton swamped Barack Obama in the Democratic primaries in West Virginia and Kentucky. Her positions were fairly similar to Obama's in the primaries and I think that she's actually been more liberal since. Both of West Virginia's senators are Democrats, as is the Governor (although he wasn't elected). Four years later, 40% of West Virginia Democratic voters in the closed primary voted for a convicted felon still serving time in Texas over Obama. As Ian pointed out, it was a low turnout (only 150,000) and most probably had no idea who he was and was just voting for the other guy. Kentucky managed to avoid that embarrassment with "no preference" getting 40%. And in Arkansas, a nobody named John Wolfe took 40%. It's not like Obama is one of the liberal Democrats. He's not a Blue Dog by any stretch, but he's squarely among the moderates.

I think that a lot of it is unconscious as per my previous post about implicit racial bias.

Many liberals tend to general come off like they do here dismissive and smug in the superiority of their opinions.

And "many" conservatives call the poor or unemployed lazy of which blue collar white voters are a disproportionate number (at least among white voters).

[Iangould]

Yes, and that is a more significant difference than any of the things banned by the bill

The common attidiued that goes with the statement is one of the prime reasons that Democrats have so much trouble getting the blue colloar vote< why vote with people who accept thinking like that?

Many liberals tend to general come off like they do here dismissive and smug in the superiority of their opinions.

No offense, Mike but at times so do you.

And so do I.

It's less a liberal failing than a human failing.

[dupersuper]

It's less a liberal failing than a human failing.

You foolish humans...

[o1pickleboy]

No offense, Mike but at times so do you.

And so do I.

It's less a liberal failing than a human failing.

That only liberals have because conservatives aren't human.

[Winslow]

As a blue collar white voter I can say not all of us are.

While true, I still think it's the elephant in the room that's not being addressed.

My observations are all anecdotal, but the most vicious and nasty racism I have ever witness was from blue collar whites.