Dem forced from congressional race over NRA support (The NRA is becoming toxic)

pouring money in races in another state? In principle, how is that different than the Kochs? This is the same guy that supported Scott Brown over Warren.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/27/nyregion/bloomberg-gives-support-to-senator-scott-brown.html
One of Bloomberg's propaganda mailers in California falsely claimed that the candidate supported "supported convicted sex offenders and felons getting CCWs"
Now none of her rants about "big money interests" no longer have any credibility.

But the fact remains that this country has changed significantly since Newtown.

just the propaganda machine. Bloomberg has been doing this before Newtown.

The massacre of children at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn., appears to be profoundly swaying Americans’ views on guns, galvanizing the broadest support for stricter gun laws in about a decade, according to a New York Times/CBS News poll.

As President Obama tries to persuade a reluctant Congress to pass new gun laws, the poll found that a majority of Americans — 54 percent — think gun control laws should be tightened, up markedly from a CBS News poll last April that found that only 39 percent backed stricter laws.

The rise in support for stricter gun laws stretched across political lines, including an 18-point increase among Republicans. A majority of independents now back stricter gun laws.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/18/us/poll-shows-school-shooting-sways-views-on-guns.html?_r=0

Facts can be stubborn things.

If you're poor, all you have do is go to candidate appearances and raise your hand and ask, "How do you justify being a darling of the NRA?" "Why do you support the NRA instead of American children?" And use your phone to record the answer. Put it on YouTube.

Make it a toxic association even in small local races where careers begin.

Ask the questions. Ask and ask and ask. No answer is a recordable answer.

either don't care or send their ten bucks to the NRA.

Not to mention statistically misinformed.

may occasionally not care, I find it believable because obviously almost half the country (~40%) doesn't give a shit enough to even vote....

but I think there is a significant portion that don't have time because they're trying to make a living. Hell, I haven't been to any political anything since Obama's first campaign because I am spending every last second of time trying to keep my job and raise 2 kids <5 yrs old. Going to the grocery store is literally hard to work in.

there, fixed it. It was not local opposition to her stance but $$$$$ going to her opponent from a distant billionaire that is altering the election. What would the reply be if the NRA, Kochs or any other RW group flooded money to change a democratic primary?


Care to comment on this sentence? I find the analogy sickening.

Great news!

Thanks for sharing this Cali_Democrat

johnston: so she is OK with a billionaire {bloomberg} in New York This is the same guy that supported Scott Brown over Warren.

Bloomberg is not a democrat but an independent, altho he certainly seems a de facto dem with some 'veiled' support (imo) for republican issues, as well as some sincere support for both/all sides.

One of Bloomberg's propaganda mailers in California falsely claimed that the candidate supported "supported convicted sex offenders and felons getting CCWs"

.. the nra does support this, as well as reinstating 'gun rights' to ex cons & ex felons who did their time, excepting for violent crimes as attd murder, rape, robb & asslt, and even those a plea bargain out or dismissal on tech is OK with nra to give the guys guns again. So why do you claim it was a false? because the nra told you so?
.. as far as bloomberg support of brown not warren, here's why (tho boo, bloomy, brown still a gunnut):

Mr. Bloomberg -- endorsement was about his desire to reward Mr. Brown for voting against his party and the National Rifle Association on a gun control measure. Mr. Brown has generally received high ratings from gun rights organizations and has not pushed for renewing a federal assault-weapons ban or for tightening restrictions on gun shows.. the mayor had been won over {er, suckered in imo} by the senator’s “tough stand” opposing a measure that would have required states to honor concealed-weapons permits issued by other states.
“The biggest reason the mayor is supporting Senator Brown is the senator’s help on one of our biggest gun issues: opposing concealed-carry reciprocity that would let people with gun permits from rural states like Arkansas and Kentucky carry hidden handguns in New York City,'

Other ways to say 'Thanks!' Mayor B, than supporting an nra A student, rather than a Brady Campaign A student. IMO, the mayor spit in the face of guncontrol for a friendly smile. Eliz Warren a bigger guncontrol fan with more than a smile, a good head on her shoulders.

many countries allow non violent felons to legally own guns, Canada being one of them. Since rape is a common sex offense, it is violent so is armed robbery. That made the claim false.

Bloomberg supported Scott Brown because of Wall Street regulations.

johnston: Bloomberg supported Scott Brown because of Wall Street regulations.

Well I dunno really, I was just going by the link YOU provided, which said this: Mr. Bloomberg, through a spokesman, said his endorsement was not about Wall Street at all, but about his desire to reward Mr. Brown for voting against his party and the National Rifle Association on a gun control measure.

So it appears a he said/he said, johnstons word vs bloombergs (as I said I dunno, bloomy could be playing coy; we might never know, sniff).

johnston: 1 One of Bloomberg's propaganda mailers in California falsely claimed that the candidate "supported convicted sex offenders and felons getting CCWs"
2 Since rape is a common sex offense, it is violent so is armed robbery. That made the claim false.

.. so that's it? you & the gun lobby pounce on semantics; the gun lobby apparently twisted what was written to the extreme case, the 'gunnut way'.
.. most sex offenses are misdemeanors not felonies, which rape is. Lumping in violent ex cons & felons is again exploiting the wording & does not disprove what the ad claimed, except when interpreted to the extreme absolute. As often as the nra & gun lobby transmogrify what guncontrol advocates say & write, it's another case of their double standard - OK when we do it but when you do it it's WRONG.
.. The candidate evidently DID support ccw for most ex felons & convicted sex offenders - I daresay almost all candidates rec'g an A grade from the nra, would.
I call the ad mostly true but could insert the word 'most' or 'some', but overall typical trumped up counter attack.

johnston: ... many countries allow non violent felons to legally own guns, Canada being one of them.

just curious what this international tack had to do with anything in this post?
.. the nra wants it both ways; in order to distinguish between the noble 'law abiding gun owner' the nra claims things like most violent crimes are done by people with past criminal records, but the nra has few qualms about distinguishing whether those past felons were non violent or violent, or simply misdemeanants. (Burglary & Larceny are considered non violent felonies, misdemeanors are getting drunk or urinating in public.)
.. (on edit) Then the nra simultaneously supports those non violent ex felons & misdemeanants when they try to get their 'gun right's back, after prison or the trial etc.. thus having it 'both ways'. Most crimes are done by ex criminals not Law Abiding Gun Owners, but we supported giving most of them ex criminals their gun rights back!

Toi Hutchinson is the candidate who most recently dropped out, after she reversed her position on the 2nd amendment.

The post makes it sound like Halvorson dropped out.

At the link: "State Sen. Toi Hutchinson dropped out of the 2nd District special Democratic primary Sunday"