so because its a source you dont agree with, its propaganda?

same could be said about your harvard source

cant have it both ways, mexican :c

The NRA has a vested interest in not having universal background checks.

Harvard doesn't have a vested interest either way.

thats untrue

background checks are already very common

Harvard is known to push political opinions like anyone else.

Also, if you actually read the damned article you linked, it doesn't prove your case.

1. It doesn't mention any polling data.

2. All that it mentions are two ballot initiatives.

and what are the implication of universal background checks

if you read your article, it didnt prove your case either

did they explain that in their poll

What the article fails to tell you is that roughly half of all people don't vote.

of course not

it even said that the polls could be skewered

because a universal background check could also apply to private gun sales

which nobody supports

So obviously, if only old people are voting, then clearly, yes, the right wing nut job position is the one most likely to pass.

Because old people are disproportionately right wing nut jobs.

An electoral result is not a reliable indicator of public opinion.

because the left wing vouches for pedophilia, who wouldnt be right wing at this point? :c

good, how about a civil war libtard

The only way it would be a reliable indicator of public opinion would be if we had mandatory, universal voting.

Which we don't have.

the best measure of public support

is open conflict

yeah but to say background checks are widely accepted is just as retarded though

Then show me polling data which goes against it.

You didn't show me polling data.

nobody would poll that unless they were trying to achieve a political objective

Even your NRA propaganda source didn't have polling data.

nobody is going to pay the money

YOU MEAN LIKE THE NRA?

it's expensive to run these polls so anti gun lobbyists are footing the bill

YOU DON'T THINK THAT THE NRA WOULD GLADLY DO POLLS IF THEY THOUGHT THE PUBLIC AGREED WITH THEM?

THEY'D BE POLLING LEFT AND RIGHT.

now if those researchers did not achieve the results the lobbyists were looking for, they wouldn't get hired again

it's really as simple as that

Yeah.