s=”wp image 10370 alignleft” src=”http://www.dailyyonder.com/wp content/uploads/2015/12/voting button final 01 760×760.png” alt=”voting button final 01″ width=”250″ height=”250″ /> Two Los Angeles Times reporters say that the universal call among Democratic presidential candidates for new gun laws is a sign that they have little hope (or interest?) in winning rural voters. Evan Halper and Mark Barabak note that Democrats suffered when President Clinton signed an assault weapons ban in 1996. In 2000, Al Gore lost Tennessee and West Virginia. That led Democrats to steer away from the gun control issue. In 2008, Hillary Clinton talked about shooting firearms with her father. But the demographics of presidential elections have changed, the reporters contend. “Democrats no longer rely on states like Tennessee or West Virginia to win the White House,” Halper and Barabak write. “The strategy that emerged under President Obama depends, instead, on a coalition of minority voters, urban dwellers and single women — groups that look far more favorably on restricting firearms.” This election, therefore, Clinton pushes for more gun control at every stop. Conservative columnist Jonah Goldberg says that the gun issue has set off an “urban vs. rural clash.” And for Democrats running in urban America, that’s just fine, he contends. People in Democratic metro areas don’t own guns and don’t know anyone who does. “To urban liberals, guns are like cigarettes — products that when used as intended only hurt or kill people, and that are also low class and crude,” he writes. A girl tests rifles at a trade booth during the National Rifle Association’s annual meeting in Nashville, Tennessee, this year. Photo by Reuters.