The NRA Says That The Senate Will Pay For Disloyalty

[jet57]

Threats can be many things and you know that. You also know what they meant by it.....so stop playing coy.

Uh, no when a right-wing front group says that the senate will pay, it's a threat.

The NRA has paid it's Republican senate servants 36 million dollars to front its agenda. so - it's a threat.

 

[RetiredUSN]

Uh, no when a right-wing front group says that the senate will pay, it's a threat.

The NRA has paid it's Republican senate servants 36 million dollars to front its agenda. so - it's a threat.

Financial threats get your panties in a wad?

 

[jet57]

Financial threats get your panties in a wad?

A right-wing front group threatening to defund US senators over a right-wing agenda is an outrage - yes.

 

[RetiredUSN]

A right-wing front group threatening to defund US senators over a right-wing agenda is an outrage - yes.

LOL.....why is that a outrage to you? Or better yet, unexpected?

 

[eohrnberger]

Of just as much concern to both of us are the down-ballot races. Of the 15 so-called "in-play" Senate races, only two are DEMs. I can see the Senate easily flipping back-and-forth for the next five elections through 2024 given the current maps.

As with McConnell's book title, GOPs still have the better 'long game' heading into the crucial state legislative races in 2020, when federal and state remaps are up.

You were spot-on with your advice to your GOP to give Garland hearings and a vote. Still surprised McConnell made this mistake. He could end up being the 2016 version of what Reid was in 2014.

Wondering why states like AZ have down-ballot primaries well after the Presidentials, forcing McCain to the right in a late primary against a strong DEM Congresswoman in the general. Though that scenario will help the GOP in FL when Rubio announces for the Senate by this Friday .

Not to take the thread too far off course, and in specific reference the 'long game' that you mentioned, assume a liberal Democrat is the next POTUS and Senate control switches parties. What sort of SCOTUS appointments do you think will be made to fill the 3 perhaps 4 potential vacancies?

Seems to me that the GOP long game needs a bit of work, as SCOTUS appointments last a life time, a presidency only lasts a single term, at most 8 years. Fundamental change and all that. WTF is going to happen should Obama be appointed? :screwy

 

[jet57]

NRA Has Spent Millions on Senators Opposing Gun Regulations - NBC News

The National Rifle Association has spent a total of $37 million in support of the 54 U.S. senators who voted last December against an amendment prohibiting those on the terrorist watch list from purchasing firearms, according to an analysis of data from the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.
Of the 54 senators, all but one were Republicans - the exception being Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D.

The biggest recipients over their careers are Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., (at $7.7 million); Thom Tillis, R-N.C. ($4.4 million); and Cory Gardner, R-Colo., ($3.9 million)

And the NRA has spent a total of $27 million in support of the 50 senators - all Republicans, plus Heitkamp- who voted against an amendment last Decemberrequiring universal background checks for gun purchases (though McCain voted for the amendment).
That amount was first reported by Mic.

 

[ocean515]

So, the thuggery of the NRA has reach its zenith of arrogance and they are threatening the US government.

NRA strategist: Politicians who blame NRA for violence will 'pay a price' | TheHill

LOL

The zenith of arrogance?

:roll:

How is that different than what Unions, the LGBT community, BLM, and many other special interests groups have done against Dems?

I've written the same message to politicians I have supported. Is that threatening the US Government?

Sometimes it's best for people lacking perspective to leave the discussion to more rational minds.

 

[jet57]

LOL

The zenith of arrogance?

:roll:

How is that different than what Unions, the LGBT community, BLM, and many other special interests groups have done against Dems?

I've written the same message to politicians I have supported. Is that threatening the US Government?

Sometimes it's best for people lacking perspective to leave the discussion to more rational minds.

Show me where any of those groups have publicly threatened the US senate.

 

[haymarket]

NRA Has Spent Millions on Senators Opposing Gun Regulations - NBC News

I wonder if the NRA gives each Senator a nice red light they can place over their office door for proper identification?

 

[jet57]

I wonder if the NRA gives each Senator a nice red light they can place over their office door for proper identification?

Monica Lewinsky has nothin on them.

 

[ocean515]

Show me where any of those groups have publicly threatened the US senate.

WTH?

Show me where the NRA has threatened the Senate. If Senators want NRA dollars, they should expect to support NRA actions. If they don't, no dollars. That's a threat?

You really want to wander down this thought trail you're stumbling down?

 

[polgara]

Not to take the thread too far off course, and in specific reference the 'long game' that you mentioned, assume a liberal Democrat is the next POTUS and Senate control switches parties. What sort of SCOTUS appointments do you think will be made to fill the 3 perhaps 4 potential vacancies?

Seems to me that the GOP long game needs a bit of work, as SCOTUS appointments last a life time, a presidency only lasts a single term, at most 8 years. Fundamental change and all that. WTF is going to happen should Obama be appointed? :screwy

Greetings, Erik. :2wave:

Will we even have a SCOTUS if we join the NWO that many fear is likely under a Dem "plurality" - we got Obamacare the last time that happened, without one GOP vote, and contrary to promises, the premiums keeps going up every year! :shock:

 

[haymarket]

Monica Lewinsky has nothin on them.

I thought Monica provided her series for free.... unlike the Senate who charges fairly healthy rates for that sort of ...... personal cooperation.

 

[jet57]

WTH?

Show me where the NRA has threatened the Senate. If Senators want NRA dollars, they should expect to support NRA actions. If they don't, no dollars. That's a threat?

You really want to wander down this thought trail you're stumbling down?

So you have nothing to validate you assertion - again.

And I did show you.

 

[jet57]

I thought Monica provided her series for free.... unlike the Senate who charges fairly healthy rates for that sort of ...... personal cooperation.

Did she?

 

[eohrnberger]

Greetings, Erik. :2wave:

Will we even have a SCOTUS if we join the NWO that many fear is likely under a Dem plurality - we got Obamacare the last time that happened, without one GOP vote! :shock:

Greetings, Polgara. :2wave:

I think we'll still have a SCOTUS, especially if it's packed with liberal judicial activists, why would the Dems get rid of that? It's exactly what they want, to dictate ideological imperatives without the electorate having any means of recourse. Perfect for those with self-imagining / self-delusional visions of omnipotence.

Don't think that the electorate would sit still for any NWO nonsense. At least not for another generation or two of continued liberal / progressive indoctrination in the education system. After that? Maybe.

 

[polgara]

Greetings, Polgara. :2wave:

I think we'll still have a SCOTUS, especially if it's packed with liberal judicial activists, why would the Dems get rid of that? It's exactly what they want, to dictate ideological imperatives without the electorate having any means of recourse. Perfect for those with self-imagining / self-delusional visions of omnipotence.

Don't think that the electorate would sit still for any NWO nonsense. At least not for another generation or two of continued liberal / progressive indoctrination in the education system. After that? Maybe.

What makes you think the electorate will be asked? The elite refer to us as "grubers," you know! :thumbdown:

 

[ocean515]

So you have nothing to validate you assertion - again.

And I did show you.

The NRA threatened to pull support and work against those who don't support their cause. How is that a threat against the Senate?

The SEIU alone spent more than $24 million in 2014 to push their agenda. In fact, they have spent over $230 million since 1989 to form government and policy into their desired shape. Shall we get into their tactics? Does that mean they are threatening the US Government if they threaten to pull support for all the Democrats and causes they are lobbying for?

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000077

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/

If you want to promote over the top, hyperbolic propaganda, again, that is your prerogative.

 

[eohrnberger]

What makes you think the electorate will be asked? The elite refer to us as "grubers," you know! :thumbdown:

No, they won't be asked, however, can you imagine the up raising that would be the response?
It would make the 2012 mid terms look like a patty cake party, and likely decimate the Democrats in government much like the passing of ObamaCare did.

 

[Linc]

Not to take the thread too far off course, and in specific reference the 'long game' that you mentioned, assume a liberal Democrat is the next POTUS and Senate control switches parties. What sort of SCOTUS appointments do you think will be made to fill the 3 perhaps 4 potential vacancies?

Seems to me that the GOP long game needs a bit of work, as SCOTUS appointments last a life time, a presidency only lasts a single term, at most 8 years. Fundamental change and all that. WTF is going to happen should Obama be appointed? :screwy

Going with your Clinton/DEM Senate assumptions, that will last only two years, with 25 DEMs up for reelection in 2018 compared to only 8 GOPs. I count at least 5 Red DEM Senators and 7 Purple DEM Senators up in this mid-term where DEMs are historically election-challenged.

Four of those DEMs, from RED states, crossed over on yesterday's amendments at least once, Donnelly from IN twice. Heitkamp from ND, who crossed once, also voted with the GOP to filibuster Toomey/Manchin in 2013, as soon as she took office, playing her 'long game' against future anticipated NRA ads.

Clinton will get her 9th Justice, by your assumptions, after Schumer pulls the nuclear trigger. You may see Ginsburg leave on her own free will during this 2-year span. Once the GOP takes over in 2019, Clinton will get no more Justices, as with the current McConnell/Grassley gambit.

GOPs still have their 'long game' of 2010 in place for 2020, dominating state legislative elections. DEMs and their DNC Chief at the time, Sen. Kaine of VA, still haven't figured out what hit them. After two years of Clinton batting the GOP in Congress, I expect another mid-term drubbing of the DEMs as we saw in 2010 and 2014, with the NRA certainly playing an active role, which is their legal right .

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

So, the NRA Can threaten the US senate to bring them in line with agenda.

The NRA did not threaten anyone. They simply pointed out that the anti-gun politicians will pay a price. That price is paid on election day. Anti-gun politicians tend to do very poorly in elections following 2nd amendment fights.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

So it's okay for a lobby group to publicly threaten the US senate for NOT going along with the group's agenda.

Sure, as long as they are not threatening them with violence.

 

[jet57]

The NRA did not threaten anyone. They simply pointed out that the anti-gun politicians will pay a price. That price is paid on election day. Anti-gun politicians tend to do very poorly in elections following 2nd amendment fights.

Apparently you haven't read the article; saying that "the senate will pay" - is a threat dude.

 

[jet57]

Sure, as long as they are not threatening them with violence.

 

[eohrnberger]

Going with your Clinton/DEM Senate assumptions, that will last only two years, with 25 DEMs up for reelection in 2018 compared to only 8 GOPs. I count at least 5 Red DEM Senators and 7 Purple DEM Senators up in this mid-term where DEMs are historically election-challenged.

Four of those DEMs, from RED states, crossed over on yesterday's amendments at least once, Donnelly from IN twice. Heitkamp from ND, who crossed once, also voted with the GOP to filibuster Toomey/Manchin in 2013, as soon as she took office, playing her 'long game' against future anticipated NRA ads.

Clinton will get her 9th Justice, by your assumptions, after Schumer pulls the nuclear trigger. You may see Ginsburg leave on her own free will during this 2-year span. Once the GOP takes over in 2019, Clinton will get no more Justices, as with the current McConnell/Grassley gambit.

GOPs still have their 'long game' of 2010 in place for 2020, dominating state legislative elections. DEMs and their DNC Chief at the time, Sen. Kaine of VA, still haven't figured out what hit them. After two years of Clinton batting the GOP in Congress, I expect another mid-term drubbing of the DEMs as we saw in 2010 and 2014, with the NRA certainly playing an active role, which is their legal right .

Interesting and informative Nimby. Thank you.