Steyer Believes Term Limits Key To Passing Gun Control

For all the anti-billionaire rhetoric we typically hear from Democrats these days, they have two running for the presidential nomination from their party right now. One, of course, is already well-known to most political watchers. The other, Tom Steyer, is the guy who people tend to forget is even running in the first place.

However, a comment from him last night during the debate tells you all you need to know about why literally no one is taking him seriously.

Democratic presidential candidate Tom Steyer is calling for Senate term limits to help pass gun control legislation.

“If we want real change, we need new and different people in charge. We need it,” Steyer said Monday during a CNN town hall late Monday.

“And, you know, look, the six-word argument for term limits: Mitch McConnellLindsey GrahamTed Cruz,” he added, referring the to Republican Senate majority leader from Kentucky and Republican senators from South Carolina and Texas, respectively.

“So in order for us to pass this legislation, we actually have to take back this government, because the Senate of the United States under Mitch McConnell won’t consider any of those things, even though 90 percent of Americans want some of them,” Steyer said.

In other words, Steyer thinks the states that sent these three to the Senate time and time again would…what? That they’d suddenly elect anti-gun senators? They’d suddenly flip parties simply because the long-time senator is gone?

Well, with answers like that, is it any wonder that he’s destined to perhaps be listed as an also-ran in the future histories of the 2020 primary season?

Honestly, this is one of the most idiotic concepts I’ve ever heard.

Don’t get me wrong, I have no issues with term limits. I like the idea of ending the idea of career politicians in general. Yet just as I don’t expect California to elect a Republican as a result of those limits, only a complete fool would think those states who elected them would suddenly decide to elect a Democrat instead. (Plus, I hate to break it to Steyer, but Cruz is only on his second term. Unless the limit is just one term, it’s unlikely Cruz would have been gone.)

Oh, it might happen here or there, but you’d also see Democrats being replaced by Republicans here or there, enough so that it’s mostly a wash.

I get that he thinks by removing people like Graham, Cruz, and McConnell then the power they wield will go to other people, but take a look at the Senate’s makeup. It’s Republican. The GOP gained seats in 2018. How would that power have shifted?

Steyer’s argument is beyond dumb. If there’s any consolation, though, it’s likely that Democratic voters are likely to reject the argument just like they’re rejecting Steyer. After all, he’s polling at a whopping 2.4 percent per Real Clear Politics polling average as of this writing and no poll since December has had him above 4 percent.

In other words, he’s not exactly wowing anyone with this level of stupid.

Maybe he should offer the voters their own money back instead. That seems to be working on really well for Bernie Sanders, after all. Might be worth a try for Steyer as well.