In fact, I don’t think Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke poses much of a threat at all to gun owners in the Lone Star State, even if he does declare himself a candidate for governor. But as we detail on today’s Bearing Arms’ Cam & Co, there is a potential candidate who has the potential to upend Texas politics, and his views are not alright, alright, alright with most Second Amendment activists.

Yep, Matthew McConaughey is rumored to be weighing a run for governor himself next year, and a new poll of Texas voters suggests he’d be the front-runner if he officially declares.

In the most recent poll from the Dallas Morning News and the University of Texas at Tyler, a still undecided Matthew McConaughey is polling better against Gov. Greg Abbott than O’Rourke.

McConaughey, who has been flirting with a gubernatorial run for almost a year now, has polled well against Abbott in the past. In this poll, 44 percent of respondents said they would vote for McConaughey over Abbott in a hypothetical matchup, compared to 35 percent who would vote for Abbott.

Comparatively, 37 percent of respondents said they would vote for O’Rourke. But Abbott would win with 42 percent of the vote, according to this particular poll.

Now, part of McConaughey’s popularity undoubtably comes from the fact that most voters don’t know much about his political positions. If he were an actual candidate, he’d be facing a lot more scrutiny on various issues, and that would include his stance on gun control. I’m guessing that many Texans aren’t aware that McConaughey is a lot closer to Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke’s “hell yes I’m going to take your AR-15” than he is to the Gonzales Flag’s “Come and Take It”. Take this report from 2018:

A month after speaking at the March for Our Lives in his hometown of Austin, Texas, Matthew McConaughey says he supports some gun control but fears the youth-led movement could be “hijacked” by those hoping to eliminate all guns in the United States.

McConaughey spoke about his support for the marchers on Monday in Las Vegas, where he was promoting his upcoming film, White Boy Rick, at the CinemaCon theater-owners convention.

He called gun violence “an epidemic in our country.”

“I’ve got a lot of friends who are gun owners. I’ve got a lot of friends who are NRA (National Rifle Association). I grew up hunting. We had responsible gun ownership, but I was taught the right way to respect that tool,” he said. “At the same time, their petition that they were speaking about is a very good one. And I also fear that their campaign — they have to watch that they don’t get hijacked. Meaning, a lot of the crowd was for no guns at all. That was not the march for life. March for Our Lives was for rightful, just, responsible gun ownership — but against assault rifles, against unlimited magazines and for following up on the regulations.”

The 48-year-old Oscar winner said he hoped to find room for agreement between anti-gun activists and the NRA.

“The two sides (have) got to talk. Because we both agree that there’s an epidemic. We both agree something has got to change. So I was for what they were marching for, and I wanted to speak to my hometown on the capital of my state Texas’ steps. And also talk to the many men and women who I grew up with, I know that had the guns, that owned the guns, and say hey, do we really, where can we reach across the aisle here? Find a compromise for the betterment of all of us?”

Well, you won’t find common ground by trying to criminalize the possession of the most commonly-sold rifle in the United States or the 100+ million “large capacity” magazines in the hands of legal gun owners. And contrary to what McConaughey said about March for Our Lives three years ago, the organization isn’t for “responsible” gun ownership. In fact, it has made its position clear: gun licensing and registration, bans on commonly-owned firearms, a 30% reduction in the number of privately owned guns within the next few years (accomplished, or so they claim, through gun “buybacks”), and other attempts to criminalize the exercise of a civil right.

McConaughey’s candidacy would largely mirror Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke’s support for gun bans, but it would be wrapped in a much more appealing package. The actor is a genuinely likable guy, unlike O’Rourke, and I think McConaughey is savvy enough that he wouldn’t proclaim his support for a ban on AR-15s by telling Texans he was coming for their guns.

I’m really not worried about Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke delivering Texas to the gun control lobby next year, but Matthew McConaughey is a different story, and one that could have a very unhappy ending as far as Second Amendment supporters are concerned.