Gun Control & RKBA
Related: About this forumHow Much Does the NRA Influence Elections?
In tight races in battleground states such as Ohio and North Carolina, staying on the right side of the powerful pro-gun organization is often considered necessary for electoral success in both Republican and Democratic campaigns. The quest for the endorsement also helps explain the steady, bipartisan voting bloc in Washington on one of the most divisive issues in American politics.
But how much does the group actually matter in individual races? Possibly less than you think.
http://www.wnyc.org/articles/its-free-country/2012/sep/13/explainer-how-much-does-nra-influence-elections/
discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,483 posts)...this OP belong in Politics 2012?
This much.
SecularMotion
(7,981 posts)If you feel the OP is off-topic, please use the alert function and stop disrupting threads.
discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,483 posts)I'm just not the "teacher, teacher, mommie, mommie" type.
Besides, for being a well-rounded poster apparently interested in sharing even peripherally related information outside the group SOP, I'm surprised you prefer that I not share this information. After all, the SOP doesn't read "Discuss gun control laws, the Second Amendment, the use of firearms for self-defense, and the use of firearms to commit crime and violence except what the thread originator finds disruptive.
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,483 posts)It's entertaining to have the group, which whines about the need for more rules, characterize anyone referencing the forum SOP as a whiner.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)SecularMotion
(7,981 posts)ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)Tuesday Afternoon
(56,912 posts)and Sorry, SM but, this OP does not meet the SoP, imo.
on edit: Adding -
Statement of Purpose
Discuss gun control laws, the Second Amendment, the use of firearms for self-defense, and the use of firearms to commit crime and violence.
SecularMotion
(7,981 posts)Response to SecularMotion (Reply #6)
Tuesday Afternoon This message was self-deleted by its author.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)Oneka
(653 posts)The NRA has virtually no impact on congressional elections. The NRA endorsement, so coveted by so many politicians, is almost meaningless. Nor does the money the organization spends have any demonstrable impact on the outcome of races, Waldman wrote.
http://www.wnyc.org/articles/its-free-country/2012/sep/13/explainer-how-much-does-nra-influence-elections/
Or:
Thanks to the National Rifle Association (NRA) and its massive $200 million-plus war chest, politicians are forced to treat assault rifle ownership like it's as sacrosanct as the First Amendment.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/117270278
So really, which is it, does the NRA have , all the power? Or no power at all?
The divergent opinions in seperate articles that you posted, here in the RKBA forum, both ostensibly trying to bash the NRA, make me wonder if you even read the articles you post?
SecularMotion
(7,981 posts)I believe the NRA has been more successful getting legislation passed. The irony is that they use the threat of influencing elections to strong-arm legislators.
Oneka
(653 posts)lobbying may as well be prayer. Lobbying
does not exist, outside of the framework of electoral consequence. An empty threat, of the ability to influence elections, would produce weak lobbying results. Recent NRA victories, indicate strong lobbying results. How can this be?
shadowrider
(4,941 posts)I've heard it referred to as, "Talking out of both sides of the mouth".
DonP
(6,185 posts)We have to remember to bookmark this one to add to our stock of gun controllers quotes claiming that the NRA:
1. Really isn't a force influencing elections or legislation
2. Is a major threat to honest electoral politics
3. Doesn't really represent any real voting bloc
4. Is just a tool of the "Big Gun" industry
What did I miss?
shadowrider
(4,941 posts)DonP
(6,185 posts)At least that's what I've been assured of up in Meta and GD.
shadowrider
(4,941 posts)friendly_iconoclast
(15,333 posts)And just like Mittens, the weak-minded either ignore (or never notice) the contradictions...
shadowrider
(4,941 posts)DWC
(911 posts)IMO, the correct answer is Not Nearly Enough.
Semper Fi,
ileus
(15,396 posts)Atypical Liberal
(5,412 posts)And I vote accordingly.
In the last election, all of my Democratic candidates except one had high marks from the NRA. 3 were the endorsed candidate. I voted for all of them except the guy with the F rating.
Of course, I am ignoring the NRA opinion on President Obama as I am trying to push our government away from a state of perpetual oil-driven warfare and corporate pandering. I feel safe in doing this because I don't think the president can move against the second amendment at this time.
I suspect he will do so given a second term, but I'm hopeful Congress will shut down such a move.
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)President Obama .... I feel safe in doing this because I don't think the president can move against the second amendment at this time.
Atypical Liberal
(5,412 posts)You can see my ballot in my sig.
Fortunately for me, all of my Democratic candidates except one had high marks from the NRA, and 3 were the endorsed candidate.
My elected officials will respect the second amendment or they won't get my vote.
aikoaiko
(34,186 posts)Which is why Democrats, including the president, have been abandoning those who seek to restrict gun ownership even more.
rl6214
(8,142 posts)Even though you never post a comment with your google dumps
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)More than you wish, and less than I wish.