Republican gun enthusiasts, take heart: If Hillary Clinton is elected president, you’ll have something in common with her (even if you don’t bowl or drink whiskey). Or rather, she wants you to think you do. Gateway Pundit has the details of Hillary’s claims of once upon a time being taught to hunt. She says she’s not a hunter, but when she did hunt that she hunted ducks.
These days she’s hunting for people who are ducking away from her: superdelegates.
Related: Mike Allen at The Politico writes about how Hillary has changed her tone a bit on the issue of gun control. I think Marc Ambinder pegs Clinton’s recent nuanced commentary on gun control the best:
HRC isn’t changing her positions, but she is changing the appearance of her positions â€“ her tone â€“ to match the prevailing music. It’s much like Rudy Giuliani suddenly declaring his support for “strict constructionist” judges. Heck, the entire Democratic Party did this after Al Gore lost West Virginia in 2000.
Here’s how Obama has tap danced on the issue of gun control over the years.
It’s amazing how the candidates treat voters in each state depending on the issue. Sometimes it’s justified, but other times it looks like they are, well, ducking the issue. Like how NAFTA was a huge part of the Dem campaign in Ohio, where many Dem voters feel NAFTA has been a major cause of job loss there, versus how the NAFTA debate did not get much Dem candidate bashing in Texas, where it is credited for bringing jobs into the state. Why not just take a position on the issue that applies in all states? Is that too much to ask these days?