According to a recent Pew poll, it was 44%, but I agree with the rest of what you said.
The reasoning here isn’t sound. One doesn’t need to be a gun owner to be affected by stronger regulation. When civil rights are curtailed everyone is impacted. It would be like saying only X% of the population identifies as homosexual so the majority of people wouldn’t be negatively affected by banning same sex marriage. Civil rights are for everyone.
It may be unsound reasoning but that’s how most non-gun owners feel. I know it’s in the constitution and all but most non-gun owners don’t put it on par with other rights. Most people would get upset about a law curtailing free speech. Many people would just go “meh” about stricter gun regulations.
I’d say any issue where there is an intensity of feeling that will draw out one issue voters. Abortion is one, it’s not that pro-choicers outnumber pro-lifers by much, so much as there are more motivated pro-choice voters. Pro-lifers are also motivated, but not by specific legislation. Republicans have generally done best when they motivate the pro-lifers with rhetoric while not screwing with abortion in any real way. But when they do, watch out!
Gun rights is another. The issues of abortion and gun rights seem so different, but politically they are extremely similar.
Since Christian voters tend to be motivated, it’s generally a bad idea to get out in front of the social consensus on civil rights issues. That’s why Democrats tend to lag just a big behind on gay rights.
(The poll asked “What Do You Think Is the Most Important Problem Facing the Country Today?” Phrased that way, to answer “Guns” would be like applying for a job at The Onion ! Yet in one of the polls a full 5% did answer Guns!!!)
So I question ITR champion’s conclusion on multiple grounds. Gun control may not be a “problem” for some voters simply because it is their most important issue and their votes have prevented gun control. Some voters may have felt clicking that box meant they support gun control. Some voters might be embarrassed to admit that their vote is swayed by such a stupid issue.
There’s plenty of anecdotal evidence that guns are a huge political issue for many Americans. Also, a politician’s stance on gun control is very tangible. All politicians say they want to improve the economy and create jobs — which one are we to believe? Our gut tells us to believe the one who agrees with us about … Guns!
One problem with the premise of this thread is its highly dependent on what office you’re running for, and where. In California, climate change is (politically) connected with droughts and air quality, but they’re not trying to bring back heavy industry - so vote-gainer. But in West Virginia it’s connected with known job loss - vote loser. And we can probably argue forever about wither Clinton would have won over enough WI and MI Stein voters with a stronger environmental stance, versus losing blue collar workers - her splitting the difference lost both sides there.