Paul Ryan's tweet criticizing sit-in backfires

[Bodakane]

They are trying to force the government to pass legislation that they can't get passed. That's how a two party system works. If they want to pass something, they need to compromise, or win more elections.

Yeah no.

90% of the population wants common sense gun laws and the Republicans (and some Dems) are avoiding it because they are being paid by the NRA to do so.

[Tinykong]

Yeah no.

90% of the population wants common sense gun laws and the Republicans (and some Dems) are avoiding it because they are being paid by the NRA to do so.

90% support universal back ground checks. If you want to provide some citations for additional measures with that kind of support, by all means.

What the Democrats want isn't going to pass because it's not what the overwhelming majority of Americans want.

[Bodakane]

90% support universal back ground checks. If you want to provide some citations for additional measures with that kind of support, by all means.

What the Democrats want isn't going to pass because it's not what the overwhelming majority of Americans want.

Well sure, if you get all your info from Briebart I guess.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/20/politics/cnn-gun-poll/

Support for tighter gun control laws increased 9 percentage points after the Orlando terror attack, and support for background checks and other measures being debated in the Senate hovered around 90%, according to CNN/ORC poll released Monday.

The support for tougher gun laws rose to 55% in the newest poll -- the highest number since just one month after the shootings in Newtown, Connecticut, in January 2013.
But support for specific gun control measures was very strong, with 92% saying they wanted expanded background checks, 87% supporting a ban for felons or people with mental health problems and 85% saying they would ban people on federal watchlists from buying guns. Among Republicans, that number is even higher -- 90% say they favor preventing people on the terror watch list or "no fly" list from buying a gun. That number is at 85% for Democrats.
Versions of those proposals are being taken up in the Senate Monday evening -- but are all expected to fail along mostly party-line votes.

[Yvaelle]

By doing nothing, and preventing the government from functioning properly.

lol

So to paraphrase:

Republicans: "They're taking our jobs!"

[Tinykong]

Well sure, if you get all your info from Briebart I guess.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/20/politics/cnn-gun-poll/

WTF is Briebart?

I know UBCs are at 90%, the rest was unsubstantiated, until your post. Thanks.

[Scyclone]

Well sure, if you get all your info from Briebart I guess.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/20/politics/cnn-gun-poll/

Because low sample high hyped polls are always valid sources of information right? :P

I can go and exploit a horrible event for my own personal agenda too... Just let me go interview people who are emotionally and not logically charged due to the freshness of an event in their mind, you know, "Little Timmy, please tell me how you feel about XXXXX because they were responsible for the bomb that killed your <insert relative here>?" - Literally as Little Timmy just saw his relative carted off in a body bag.

As a citizen of Orlando, who had several friends involved in the Pulse circumstances. Go piss off. Seriously.

[Tijuana]

http://www.businessinsider.com/paul-...-sit-in-2016-6

Paul Ryan's tweet criticizing the Democratic sit-in on gun control is backfiring quickly....

That sit in is so embarrassing for Democrats, and they don't even know it.

Ok for starters, in the 1960s, some of these same people staged sit ins. But why? They did them because the powers that be were not listening, and it was a way to force them to address their issues.

But today, THESE are the people that have the power to address their concerns. When they were kids they sat in to force action, but today they are the action. They need to suck it up, negotiate, and do their job. A sit in is not the same thing as a tantrum.

Second, I wonder if this detail is lost on them: In the 60s, they sat in for civil rights. Today, they are sitting in as part of an anti-civil rights issue.

Third, this law violated FOUR different constitutional amendments in the bill of rights. SCOTUS wold have shot that bill down so fast, the ink would not have even been dry.

Fourth, the Democrats in the Senate were the ones blocking the bill. So, House Democrats, what up yo?

[Dolus]

The incident in Germany should make things interesting. Considering they have some of the strictest gun laws.

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/armed-man-...143855941.html

https://www.romper.com/p/what-are-ge...y-stands-13073

[mvaliz]

That was my point, stuff should have passed, but it didn't because both parties voted against them, even the parties whose members sponsored them.

Gun control is a divisive subject, and they simply aren't going to pass the sweeping reforms the Democrats have been wanting for 20+ years. They are going to have to compromise. Staging a sit in is pretty much the opposite of what they should be doing.

The problem is paranoid people like you labeling it with bullshit terms like "sweeping reform". It's not sweeping at all, and there's little left to compromise on because its so little there. Its basicalky downto improved background checks and thats about it.

[Tijuana]

The gun shooting in Germany should make things interesting. Considering they have some of the strictest gun laws.

https://www.romper.com/p/what-are-ge...y-stands-13073

We only talk about gun control after American shootings. You're being objective, aka doing it wrong.

[Sky High]

you know you have a top news story when they cite tweets.

[mvaliz]

The gun shooting in Germany should make things interesting. Considering they have some of the strictest gun laws.

https://www.romper.com/p/what-are-ge...y-stands-13073

Exactly... Apparently the inital word is the gun he had used had to be home-made, and the only resulting casualty from that gun was the bullet he used on himself. The rest were only injured.

So far, it's been a total argument FOR gun control!

[Tijuana]

Exactly... Apparently the inital word is the gun he had used had to be home-made, and the only resulting casualty from that gun was the bullet he used on himself. The rest were only injured.

So far, it's been a total argument FOR gun control!

The article doesn't say anything about that home made gun. I really wanted to see what that meant. Do you have another source for that? Whatever it was he used, he injured 20-50 people but none are serious. Did he use a BB gun or what?

[Deleted]

By doing nothing, and preventing the government from functioning properly.

lol

Isn't that the usual modus operandi of the Republican party whenever they don't like something? Seems like a normal thing to do in US government.

[Bodakane]

Because low sample high hyped polls are always valid sources of information right? :P

I can go and exploit a horrible event for my own personal agenda too... Just let me go interview people who are emotionally and not logically charged due to the freshness of an event in their mind, you know, "Little Timmy, please tell me how you feel about XXXXX because they were responsible for the bomb that killed your <insert relative here>?" - Literally as Little Timmy just saw his relative carted off in a body bag.

As a citizen of Orlando, who had several friends involved in the Pulse circumstances. Go piss off. Seriously.

lol, ok.

The numbers I can back up are bullshit but the numbers you think are backed up by what exactly? Thought so. They are as bullshit as the rest of your claims in that post.

- - - Updated - - -

WTF is Briebart?

I know UBCs are at 90%, the rest was unsubstantiated, until your post. Thanks.

90% on the background checks....that the majority republican house just blocked. Maybe this will start making sense to you soon, but I'm not holding my breath.

[Tinykong]

The problem is paranoid people like you labeling it with bullshit terms like "sweeping reform". It's not sweeping at all, and there's little left to compromise on because its so little there. Its basicalky downto improved background checks and thats about it.

Right, because Feinstein has just been trying to push a UBC law through for her entire career, and nothing more.



- - - Updated - - -

90% on the background checks....that the majority republican house just blocked. Maybe this will start making sense to you soon, but I'm not holding my breath.

4 measures were voted down in the Senate by both Democrats and Republicans. This isn't a partisan issue.

[Bodakane]

4 measures were voted down in the Senate by both Democrats and Republicans. This isn't a partisan issue.

Hmmmmmmmm its almost as if I said something along those lines.....

Yeah no.

90% of the population wants common sense gun laws and the Republicans (and some Dems) are avoiding it because they are being paid by the NRA to do so.

Well, would you look at that....

This is a NRA issue. They are the bad guys. They also happen to pay off more repubs than they do dems. It also just so happens the House is mostly repub and they just stopped gun legislation that 90% of the country wanted. So again, what the fuck are you arguing with me about?

[Tijuana]

Hmmmmmmmm its almost as if I said something along those lines.....



Well, would you look at that....

This is a NRA issue. They are the bad guys. They also happen to pay off more repubs than they do dems. It also just so happens the House is mostly repub and they just stopped gun legislation that 90% of the country wanted. So again, what the fuck are you arguing with me about?

Ask yourself this: Why does the NRA have political power? You are equating them to being a self existing evil entity. But you are ignoring the fact that their power resides from their widespread support among voters.

But the enemy of this proposed legislation, is the supreme court. This law was never going to stand when it violated 4 of 10 bill of rights amendments. If the American people want to amend the Constitution, then lets have that discussion. But this bill was a shameless intentional failure, whose only point was to rile up Democrats for the election. Congratulations, you are now officially livestock.

[KrazyK923]

lol are people surprised the poster who constantly expresses anti-liberal and anti-Democrat views is pretending the Democrats are doing something horrible?

Must've been triggered by people actually trying to push for gun control now instead of just falling over when the NRA scratches its asshole.

It's a typical strategy. "A thing that is popular atm but I don't like it politically! So I'm going to pull the 'HURRR BOTH SIDES DO IT' "

[Tinykong]

This is a NRA issue. They are the bad guys. They also happen to pay off more repubs than they do dems. It also just so happens the House is mostly repub and they just stopped gun legislation that 90% of the country wanted. So again, what the fuck are you arguing with me about?

You think our government is representative of the people's will?

Excuse me while I die laughing uncontrollably.