"I can outspend the NRA" headlines

He may be able to out-spend, but can he out-motivate?

Political races aren't won by dollars alone. Even if a billionaire were willing to bankrupt himself to support something like repeal of the 19th Amendment (women's suffrage), he'd still lose because it wouldn't sway enough voters.

Bloomberg is going to need more than bare dollars if he's going to get his agenda past voters. Just not going to happen- sure, he'll score limited victories in states where the RKBA hasn't had a win in a long time, but he hardly needs to spend money there. In the places that are against his message he can't buy enough commercials to get people willing to give up their rights.
 
He ways has outspent the NRA; and it is a well acknowledged fact that there is a serious intensity gap between antis and RKBA supporters. We show up at the polls and vote our issue; we don't base our political stance on this issue on emotions...

2A issues are the most important ones to me; 4a and 1a follow close. Everything else is secondary.
 
"Political races aren't won by dollars alone."

True enough!

If you don't think so, just check out the recent election in Florida, the Democratic candidate out spent the Republican candidate by a margin of
4 to 1 but didn't win.
 
While the ex-mayor's resources are substantial, this wouldn't be the first time he has stumbled / struck out on gun control. And taking on the NRA is far from a static target.
 
He outspent us by a huge margin in Colorado. The result? Two state senators lost their seats to a recall initiative, and a third stepped down rather than face the same fate.

As others have rightly said, money alone doesn't do it.

More to the point, his reaction to Giron and Morse's recall was pretty much "sucks to be them." His promise that his money and influence would be enough to protect anyone voting for gun control is now starting to look pretty suspect.
 
We have long known that Bloomberg could outspend the NRA. In the Couric interview Bloomberg spoke to several different topics.

Couric prodded Bloomberg for this answer:

Asked if he could outspend the National Rifle Association and other opponents of gun control measures, Bloomberg casually replied, “Oh sure.” But then added, “I’m not the only funder of this.”
Click to expand...

Methinks Bloomberg is well aware that gun control is not a winning theme.
 
The problem as I see it, Democrats are going to have enough problems with the ACA. They don't want to add gun owners to their re-election problems.

Bloomberg is fighting more then the NRA.
 
We don't want to discuss general politic issues.

Anyway, there have been articles by politicians suggesting Bloomberg is a negative to pro gun control efforts in their states as he is personally obnoxious and seen as a busybody outsider.
 
I wonder if they realize that headlines like "I can outspend the NRA" just confirms that they believe they can buy anything and anyone, including the rights and freedom of a nation.
 
Exactly, kilimanjaro. I love how he feels that dollars will buy his America for him. I've always wondered if Bloomberg believes he is the only real person in the world
 
Anyway, there have been articles by politicians suggesting Bloomberg is a negative to pro gun control efforts in their states as he is personally obnoxious and seen as a busybody outsider.
Click to expand...

I feel that's because he IS a busybody outsider. And in addition, a hypocrite.

Bloomberg thinks his opinion is holy and everyone should be thankful for his meddling, regardless of whether or not he holds political office in that erea or if he even lives in those areas.
 
Technosavant said:
He may be able to out-spend, but can he out-motivate?
Click to expand...
That's Factor #1. IMHO Factor #2 is "...can he outlast?"

One of the major strengths of the NRA is that it has staying power. Barring some sort of unprecedented catastrophic national crisis, there is no question that the NRA will still exist 20-30 years from now, even if the gun rights cause suffers major setbacks between now and then.

The current gun-control movement is being pushed along by only a handful of major players. Furthermore, the movement was seemingly withering away prior to Sandy Hook; recall that the Brady Campaign's total reported lobbying expenditures could barely have bought a nice new car ca. 2008-2009. :rolleyes:

Bloomie may be willing to outspend the NRA today, but what if he loses interest tomorrow?
 
That's Factor #1. IMHO Factor #2 is "...can he outlast?"
Click to expand...

Excellent point. The gun rights movement is more motivated than we've ever been. New shooters are not of the "ok, you can ban these guns but leave my hunting rifle alone" persuasion. Bloomberg is not a young man. The NRA isn't going anywhere and is actually gaining strength. That strength is even of a very determined sort.

It doesn't look good going forward for Bloomberg and his buddies. And they know it.
 
Bloomberg can't outspend the NRA. The NRA has 4 million members. That means reserves likely in excess of 4,000,000,000 that the NRA can try and tap into.

Also, even Bloomberg doesn't have the appetite to spend any substantial amount of his wealth on defeating the 2nd Amendment. His mouth is bigger than his wallet.
 
Bloomberg can't outspend the NRA. The NRA has 4 million members. That means reserves likely in excess of 4,000,000,000 that the NRA can try and tap into.
Click to expand...
No, he can and he has.

Let's remember that regular NRA dues do not, and cannot, go to legislative and legal battles. Only donations to the ILA and PVF do that, and those come from a very small fraction of members.
 
Tom Servo said:
Let's remember that regular NRA dues do not, and cannot, go to legislative and legal battles. Only donations to the ILA and PVF do that, and those come from a very small fraction of members.
Click to expand...

Exactly. This is why, when the panic was in full swing and we were all waiting to see what kind of mess would be starting in the legislature once it came back into session in 2013, I was telling some friends and family that we ought to donate a few bucks to the NRA-ILA instead of using all available funds to buy up scarcer and scarcer magazines and parts.

A few dollars in our defense can make the panic buying completely unnecessary... the NRA membership dues don't cover that particular war chest.
 
Not saying all 4M+ member's WILL contribute, but they have the POTENTIAL to contribute, and therefore, the NRA has a huge amount of untapped potential reserves. I don't see the antis rallying behind Bloomberg. He's out there on his own spending his own personal funds.
 
80 million lawful gun owners, 4 million NRA members, that's only 5%. "we" are not a very bright or dedicated group.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top