AP Photo/Elise Amendola

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) used to be a pro-gun lawmaker representing one of the most conservative districts in New York. She waxed eloquently in defense of the National Rifle Association.

Then she decided to run for the Senate and all of that changed.

Now, she’s lashing out at the NRA with every opportunity as she tries to gain the Democratic Party nomination for president. Unfortunately for her, the NRA isn’t willing to let her forget her past.

Gillibrand called us the worst org in the country, but when she represented NY20, she wrote us: “I appreciate the work that the NRA does to protect gun owners rights, and I look forward to working with you for many years.” Now that she’s looking to crack 1%, she’ll say anything. pic.twitter.com/uW5OgpUa5B

— NRA (@NRA) June 3, 2019

Read Gillibrand's full letter here ➡️ https://t.co/hzGNdAsJdK pic.twitter.com/iwUr35kAm7

— NRA (@NRA) June 3, 2019

Of course, nothing the NRA is saying about Gillibrand is false. She was a vocal supporter of the NRA up until the moment it was politically expedient to oppose them. At that moment, she switched sides on the debate.

Her willingness, even eagerness, to do so should concern any potential supporters who are hoping for a candidate with principles. Simply put, she doesn’t have any.

If she does, well, we haven’t seen any signs of them.

The truth is that Gillibrand will say whatever she has to say to get your votes. While I’m sure she has some genuine positions, things she wants to see passed, there’s no way to tell a sincerely held belief from garden variety pandering.

Gillibrand needs to be taken to task for her flip-flopping on the gun issue. It’s convenient when her change of heart, such as it was, took place. It wasn’t something she held while in office as a representative who was elected by a conservative district in spite of that position. I could at least respect that.

No, it was the moment she wanted higher office.

As Beth Baumann wrote at Townhall:

People like Gillibrand upset Americans across the board. If you believe in gun control, fine. Stick to it. Defend it. If you believe in the Second Amendment, fine. Stick to it. Defend it. But pick a side and stick to it. I’m not saying people can’t grow and change their point-of-view but this is straight up political pandering. She didn’t just alienate one side. She’s alienated everyone. 

I agree.

While I may despise someone like Sen.Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), at least she’s been anti-gun during her entire time in Congress. Presidential candidates like Sens. Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Kamala Harris (D-CA), for all the harsh words I have for them and will continue to have for them over their anti-gun views, they have never pretended to be pro-gun to get a few votes.

Granted, none of those lawmakers have had to face pro-gun districts, either.

But Rep. Lucy McBath (D-GA), who I’m no fan of, ran in a Republican-controlled district as an anti-gun candidate and won. She didn’t pretend to be pro-firearm to win an election. We knew who she was on the issue from the start. While I’ll continue to oppose her at every opportunity, I don’t doubt that her belief is sincerely held. I even understand why she has that view.

Gillibrand, however, represents everything people hate about politicians.

That alone is probably enough to keep her from cracking the one percent mark in the polls.