The True Source of the N.R.A.’s Clout: Mobilization, Not Donations

[80zephyr]

I get a huge charge outta those that say the NRA spends millions on fighting gun control. The NRA doesn't have millions to spend. But, they do have motivated people that believe that the NRA is on the right track. And its not just their membership, but millions of other Americans who vote based on the gun control argument.

From the link, highlighting is mine:

“Everyone wants a simplistic answer, which is they buy votes,” said Harry L. Wilson, a political scientist at Roanoke College and the author of “Guns, Gun Control, and Elections.” “But it is largely incorrect. The N.R.A.’s power is more complex than people think.”

Compared with the towering sums of money donated to House and Senate candidates in the last cycle — $1.7 billion — the N.R.A.’s direct contributions were almost a rounding error.

The N.R.A. directly donated a total of just $1.1 million to candidates for federal office in 2016, with 99 percent of that money going to Republicans, while giving a total of only $309,000 in direct contributions to state legislative candidates in 2016 and 2017, according to tallies by the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks federal donations, and the National Institute on Money in State Politics, which tracks state-level donations.

Photo

John P. Morse, who lost his seat in the Colorado Senate in 2013, said the N.R.A. had played a decisive role in motivating Second Amendment voters in a low-turnout race. Credit RJ Sangosti/The Denver Post, via Getty Images
Those amounts are dwarfed by the largess of other major contributors. Comcast, through its political action committee and its employees, directly donated $12.7 million in the 2016 campaign cycle to federal candidates or political parties, and the committee for Pfizer, the pharmaceutical giant, and its employees directly donated nearly $3 million, according to the Center for Responsive Politics tallies.

Those numbers are tied to campaign finance reports filed by individual lawmakers. The N.R.A.’s spending on messages like its voter guides does not need to be disclosed, because it falls into the category of a membership-based group communicating with its members.


The True Source of the N.R.A.’s Clout: Mobilization, Not Donations


Mark

 

[DOTR]

Agreed. The power of the NRA comes from the dedication of its members. Not money.
But this isn’t unusual. Hillary far outspent Donald Trump. The money on the Democrat side has always been obscene but is can, and has been, balanced by Americans who simply vote.

 

[del]

The National Rifle Association’s overall spending surged by more than $100 million in 2016, surpassing any previous annual NRA spending totals on record, according to an audit obtained by the Center for Responsive Politics.

The explosion in spending came as the NRA poured unprecedented amounts of money into efforts to deliver Donald Trump the White House and help Republicans hold both houses of Congress.

The audit filed with the state of North Carolina shows that the NRA’s total expenditures exploded to more than $419 million, up from $312 million the prior year.

Audit shows NRA spending surged $100 million amidst pro-Trump push in 2016

your numbers are bullshit along with your premise

 

[80zephyr]

The National Rifle Association’s overall spending surged by more than $100 million in 2016, surpassing any previous annual NRA spending totals on record, according to an audit obtained by the Center for Responsive Politics.

The explosion in spending came as the NRA poured unprecedented amounts of money into efforts to deliver Donald Trump the White House and help Republicans hold both houses of Congress.

The audit filed with the state of North Carolina shows that the NRA’s total expenditures exploded to more than $419 million, up from $312 million the prior year.

Audit shows NRA spending surged $100 million amidst pro-Trump push in 2016

your numbers are bullshit along with your premise

Nope. The NRA does spend money on ads, but it does NOT spend money on politicians. My numbers are correct, as yours probably are as well.

BTW, my link is the New York Times. You don't believe them?

Mark

 

[Mousterian]

The fact that large companies are edging away from the NRA seems to show that the millions of gun freaks are not the majority. In fact, they are outnumbered by people willing to boycott NRA supporters.
Money talks, and, on a moral question, religion is irrelevant.

 

[80zephyr]

The fact that large companies are edging away from the NRA seems to show that the millions of gun freaks are not the majority. In fact, they are outnumbered by people willing to boycott NRA supporters.
Money talks, and, on a moral question, religion is irrelevant.

The left used that tactic against Chic-fil-A Expect the same sort of backlash here.

Mark

 

[DOTR]

The fact that large companies are edging away from the NRA seems to show that the millions of gun freaks are not the majority. In fact, they are outnumbered by people willing to boycott NRA supporters.
Money talks, and, on a moral question, religion is irrelevant.

I am going to say it again. The same celebrities, media hacks, corporate ceo's. silicon valley billionaires and bankers that went all in for Hillary are now attacking the NRA. "Large companies are edging away" from not only the NRA but from all morals and decency. Over 250 corporate CEO's have signed letters in opposition to Trump. Of course the ruling elites are opposed to the NRA...it is another bulwark against liberal control.

I am not sure if it is cognitive dissonance (a nice way to say you are a dumbass...which you are) or just dishonesty. But it is one of the two.

I have watched liberals and Democrats do this for years...lick the asses of the elites while swearing they represent working Americans.

Go ahead...tell me again how Jimmy Kimmel and Goldman Sachs hate the NRA so the gun freaks must be wrong. Explain to me again how the millionaire talk show hosts and corporate boards attacks on the NRA mean there is a citizen uprising.

 

[DOTR]

I get a huge charge outta those that say the NRA spends millions on fighting gun control. The NRA doesn't have millions to spend. But, they do have motivated people that believe that the NRA is on the right track. And its not just their membership, but millions of other Americans who vote based on the gun control argument.

From the link, highlighting is mine:

“Everyone wants a simplistic answer, which is they buy votes,” said Harry L. Wilson, a political scientist at Roanoke College and the author of “Guns, Gun Control, and Elections.” “But it is largely incorrect. The N.R.A.’s power is more complex than people think.”

Compared with the towering sums of money donated to House and Senate candidates in the last cycle — $1.7 billion — the N.R.A.’s direct contributions were almost a rounding error.

The N.R.A. directly donated a total of just $1.1 million to candidates for federal office in 2016, with 99 percent of that money going to Republicans, while giving a total of only $309,000 in direct contributions to state legislative candidates in 2016 and 2017, according to tallies by the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks federal donations, and the National Institute on Money in State Politics, which tracks state-level donations.

Photo

John P. Morse, who lost his seat in the Colorado Senate in 2013, said the N.R.A. had played a decisive role in motivating Second Amendment voters in a low-turnout race. Credit RJ Sangosti/The Denver Post, via Getty Images
Those amounts are dwarfed by the largess of other major contributors. Comcast, through its political action committee and its employees, directly donated $12.7 million in the 2016 campaign cycle to federal candidates or political parties, and the committee for Pfizer, the pharmaceutical giant, and its employees directly donated nearly $3 million, according to the Center for Responsive Politics tallies.

Those numbers are tied to campaign finance reports filed by individual lawmakers. The N.R.A.’s spending on messages like its voter guides does not need to be disclosed, because it falls into the category of a membership-based group communicating with its members.


The True Source of the N.R.A.’s Clout: Mobilization, Not Donations


Mark

Let them think it is money. They thought spending almost a billion dollars would put Hillary in office. When the NRA backslaps a candidate it counts in votes...not donations.

 

[DOTR]

The National Rifle Association’s overall spending surged by more than $100 million in 2016, surpassing any previous annual NRA spending totals on record, according to an audit obtained by the Center for Responsive Politics.

The explosion in spending came as the NRA poured unprecedented amounts of money into efforts to deliver Donald Trump the White House and help Republicans hold both houses of Congress.

The audit filed with the state of North Carolina shows that the NRA’s total expenditures exploded to more than $419 million, up from $312 million the prior year.

Audit shows NRA spending surged $100 million amidst pro-Trump push in 2016

your numbers are bullshit along with your premise

Nope. The NRA does spend money on ads, but it does NOT spend money on politicians. My numbers are correct, as yours probably are as well.

BTW, my link is the New York Times. You don't believe them?

Mark

Del is a liar. "Expenditures" could mean staplers and post it notes for the office. Your New York Times article referred to "contributions" and is correct. When it comes to buying politicians the NRA are pikers.

 

[DOTR]

I read Del's article. To quote

"Republicans in the House and Senate rode into power in 2016 on a wave of Russian secret agents NRA money"

Always a boogyman

 

[longknife]

And they will be participating in the millions in the mid-terms. I just read where "presidential election turnouts" are expected.

The Dims are in deep poopoo.