WELL, I SAID EARLIER that Bush’s assault-weapon stance might prove expensive for him. It’s not proof yet, but this article suggests that he’s angered a core constituency.

UPDATE: Clayton Cramer says I’m wrong. Hmm. So did Rand Simberg. Well, maybe I am. We’ll see.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Then again, maybe I’m not:

Gun chat rooms are rocking. Folks mad as hell about the Presidents stance.

Gun owners ELECTED Bush by a thin margin, because they enthusiastically worked for him. This time, even if they do hold their nose and vote for him, they are NOT going to put up yard signs, talk him up, campaign, send money,
etc.

I think this is a real mistake by Bush.

Robert Langham
Texas State Rifle Association Highpower Rifle Team Member, National Matches, ’02, 03.

But on the other hand, he’s being praised by gun-control groups! Somehow, though, I don’t think their members will actually vote for him, much less give money, or put up yard signs.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Capt. Mike McRae emails:

I am (and have been) a loyal Bush supporter. I am a lifelong Republican, a conservative thinker, and someone who cares deeply about the 2nd amendment and the direction in which this country is heading. My home state, New Jersey, is a disaster in terms of constitutional rights and we need help from the federal government. What we don’t need is the Republican President and Congress aiding the enemy.

I hate the liberals, but I hate back-stabbers more and would be a hypocrite if I still supported them anyway. .

Bush is unwise to support this continuation of the ban, because he gets so little in return. But we saw the same thing when he signed into law that miserable campaign finance legislation (right after which I stopped donating to the RNC), when he got so little in return.

I’ve gotten a lot of equally angry email from (formerly) committed Bush supporters. Has Karl Rove dropped the ball here? It depends on how many people like this there are, and how long they stay mad.