Bloomberg says he can outspend the NRA

[Gadgetmonster]

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.”

http://news.yahoo.com/katie-couric-and-michael-bloomberg-221417585.html

 

[Jack Burton]

clueless... it's not about the dollars and never has been.

 

[Birds Away]

If he's looking for suggestions I know a couple other things he can do...

 

[JeremiahJohnson]

1 - you probably can, 2 - yes you are the only significant contributor.

3 - will it make you right? NO

 

[Bill of Rights]

Bloomberg can outspend the NRA, true, but the NRA's strength is less in dollars than it is in voters.

If Bloomy can find enough whores willing to sell their votes for 30 pieces of silver, I suppose he could even win... But as the saying goes, "I could agree with you, but then we'd both be wrong."

 

[CathyInBlue]

Put up or shut up, Bloomie. I'd love to see you bankrupt yourself into the poor house and still not manage to move the ball on gun control.

 

[Mark 1911]

clueless... it's not about the dollars and never has been.

Got that right!

 

[Mosineer]

Put up or shut up, Bloomie. I'd love to see you bankrupt yourself into the poor house and still not manage to move the ball on gun control.

clueless... it's not about the dollars and never has been.

Bloomberg can outspend the NRA, true, but the NRA's strength is less in dollars than it is in voters.

If Bloomy can find enough whores willing to sell their votes for 30 pieces of silver, I suppose he could even win... But as the saying goes, "I could agree with you, but then we'd both be wrong."

Exactly to all^^^

Bloomberg is addicted to trying to force his moronic views on all the American people.

 

[level0]

If it was so simple as being about money, we'd already have cures for cancer and the common cold.

Maybe Bloomingidiot should look at the statistics on accidental deaths involving, say, swimming pools. Or automobiles.

 

[sharkey]

Didn't Lord Haw Haw outspend the NRA in the CO recalls last fall?

 

[KG1]

How'd that giant soda ban work out in NYC Bloomie? Couldn't outspend that could ya?

 

[ghostdncr]

Can't wait until this detached idiot fades quietly into obscurity....

 

[Leadeye]

He spent the equivalent of $100 per vote in his last election and probably has a good law/lobby firm in dc. The gun issue though really is more about votes than money, and there he can't beat the NRA or anybody else. When James Carville said that guns were a loser political issue he wasn't kidding, big insurance and big pharma spend vastly larger sums than the NRA in dc, guns just aren't a money maker in that town.

 

[IndyDave1776]

If he's looking for suggestions I know a couple other things he can do...

Would these activities generally be considered anatomically impossible?

 

[Movealongmovealong]

Well... That's probably a true statement. 30+ billion dollars is significantly more than all the money spent on all advertising for a federal election cycle (including presidential).

He could blanket the airwaves and internet for quite some time with ads of his choosing. Doesn't mean that they will convince everyone.

 

[sparkyfender]

If solely spending money would get guns outlawed, George Soros would have written that check long ago.

 

[JettaKnight]

clueless... it's not about the dollars and never has been.

Then why the NRA constantly ask me for money?

 

[SERparacord]

Then why the NRA constantly ask me for money?

Politicians are charging more for their votes.

 

[Steve.43]

Politicians are charging more for their votes.

Inflation--it's everywhere.

 

[CitiusFortius]

Bloomberg can outspend the NRA, true, but the NRA's strength is less in dollars than it is in voters.

100% - Saying that the NRA "buys" politicians is what helps the anti gun group sleep at night. The reality is that the NRA is organized, passionate voters with a long memory. Thats what the candidates fear, It's not about the money.