I didnt vote for Clinton either but he got elected twice. Part of the problem is that the republican and democratic votes are tied pretty evenly. So the truth is that a small perceantage of voters decide who the president is. Thats who the parties are worried about. voter turnout and undying party alliegence are the problems. I tend to vote for the person regardles of the party label he or she wears. Ron Paul labels himself as a Republican, If he decided to switch to a democrat or libertarian I would still vote for him.
Lets look at Obama's positon on gun issues per the link provided.
Principles that Obama supports on gun issues:
Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.
Didnt President Bush say he would sign an assault weapons ban if Congress passed one? look at Guliani and Romney two Republicans who are potential candidates. They pretty much have the same notions.
Increase state restrictions on the purchase and possession of firearms.
Wishful thinking here....the courts have pretty much let the states do thier own thing on firearms. Voters in each state have pretty much decided what they want in a lot of states.
Require manufacturers to provide child-safety locks with firearms.
Who has a stack of these things at the house? I know I do. I dont have any kids and have gun safes. I think these are a good idea if you have kids and dont own a safe.
As I get older this political lablel fixation has me scratching my head. If I see a guy who is a party x politician but I vote party y. However, I am in 100% agreement with the fellow from party x more than the guy form the party y. I should vote for the person and not the party.
How is Obama different from Romney and Guliani on gun control issues? With the right set of circumstances they could be a Republican President with a Democratic Congress. who would sell your gun rights out so quick it would make your head spin. They would probably have an easier time getting away with than Obama the "Democratic liberal" would.