Discussion for article #228392
I appreciate any pledge that supports common sense activism and legislation.
But I just don’t get the timing of the campaign-- as per the polling of voter’s priorities.
$50M is a big pledge/spend.
To drop that kind of money when it may have a lesser impact seems like poor judgment.
jw1
1 Like
Running for president ?
Money isn’t going to change the dynamics of the gun discussion. I think the only thing that is going to get us talking, seriously, about gun control is when someone walks into a maternity ward and shoots a bunch of pregnant women.
Killing adults? Yawn.
Killing 6 year olds? Whatever.
Killing a fetus? A fetus is the Holiest of All That Is Holy to Republicans.
Perhaps that will make a difference. Nah, it won’t.
Nothing to see here; move along.
2 Likes
Cue elitist VS Joe Six Pack, you know that’s going to happen
1 Like
Bloomberg = When the cure is much worse than the ailment!
Obviously Bloomberg has it to toss around and is willing, those are both good things.
With Gifford’s $20 million they’ve beyond evened the fight. They may or may not spend it, it sounds like an attempt to discourage the momentum of the NRA to me.
Better gun laws are definitely coming as the madness grows and the laws themselves may cause more craziness. The gun freaks aren’t ever going to come around so the laws have to. This isn’t a seasonal fight or election timing thing, it is a constant and the money will help after the elections and up until the next round.
Everyone cares about their kids, even if it isn’t polling high at this time, it is always an issue and so are common sense gun regulations. Fatigue and current events take over in popularity but just one more high profile mass shooting and everyone is right back on board. The gun issue isn’t going away and the Giffords and Bloomberg know that.