HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Bloomberg aims money to d...

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 05:14 PM

Bloomberg aims money to defeat Pryor (D, AR) over gun control

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/04/27/179318906/bloomberg-aims-his-money-at-gun-control-opponents

The billionaire mayor is spending from his personal fortune to help defeat lawmakers who voted against gun control proposals last week and to prop up those who supported the measures.

Bloomberg's first target is a Democratic senator facing a tough fight for re-election in 2014: Mark Pryor of Arkansas.

...

Pryor was one of four Democrats who voted against a proposal to expand background checks last week, and Bloomberg, the founder of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, is trying to make sure Pryor pays. Bloomberg plans to pour money into months of TV ads, radio ads and mailings to defeat the Arkansas senator. His group says it has spent $12 million in the months since the Newtown, Conn., school shootings on field campaigns and commercials across the country.

"This is just a toe in the water," says John Feinblatt, Bloomberg's chief policy adviser. And toe in the water is right this is a guy Forbes estimates to be worth about $27 billion. Bloomberg will also be doling out money to help re-election campaigns of lawmakers who voted for gun control both Democrats and Republicans.


Ayotte (R, NH) is listed as next. Nothing like hitching our wagon to Bloomberg's star, huh?

16 replies, 1982 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to Recursion (Original post)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 05:20 PM

1. Not that I'm a fan of Bloomberg, but Mark Pryor desperately needs to be primaried.

The man's dumber than a box of hair, and has absolutely zero backbone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backscatter712 (Reply #1)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 05:22 PM

2. Only if he's primaried by a D that can win in Arkansas

Replacing someone who votes against us on everything except leadership with someone who votes against us on everything including leadership is, well, not a good thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backscatter712 (Reply #1)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 05:23 PM

3. +1.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backscatter712 (Reply #1)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 05:26 PM

4. Case in point:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backscatter712 (Reply #4)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 06:25 PM

9. Bill's betraying an irrational belief of his own here:

 

that the "US Senators are the people that run the country."

Oh BillyBillyBillyBillyBilly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Original post)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 05:30 PM

5. Is there anything to the speculation that Wesley Clark could be persuaded to run?

Don't know if he would be interested, but he would be a solid democrat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to femmocrat (Reply #5)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 05:44 PM

7. I don't know, but I'd volunteer for that campaign.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Original post)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 05:35 PM

6. Why in hell would any Democrat support any elected official who votes against the will of the Party

 

And against the OVERWHELMING will of the people?

The irrational RW hatred of Michael Bloomberg reminds of nothing as much as the irrational RW hatred of Jane Fonda. They remind everyone that she's "Hanoi Jane", and treat every sound she makes as utterances directly from Satan, and they boycott the local multiplex because it made the mistake of showing a Jane Fonda movie once 30 yrs ago.

Well, you can rest assured that this time next year, NYC will have a new Mayor. Maybe your wish will come true and it'll be another Ghouliani-wannabe GOPer.

But Bloomberg's money isn't going away, so the push to enact real gun control that the majority of Americans want isn't going away either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #6)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 06:06 PM

8. You should ask the people in California's 9th district who voted for Barbara Lee.

She was the only person in congress who didn't think it was a good idea to give the president a blank check to invade anyone he wanted shortly after 9/11. The only one to vote no on the "Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists" legislation.

And yet I still support Barbara Lee... (she's been redistricted and is now in the 13 district, I think).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hughee99 (Reply #8)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 06:42 PM

11. The senators who voted against universal background checks

 

Didn't do so out of any sense of morality or justice. The did it because they're cowards. They did so because they're afraid of the NRA - and because they're not afraid of their constituents.

Your comparison to Barbara Lee's War On Terror vote is not justified. At the time, the majority of Americans supported it, and the majority of Democrats supported it - and the majority won.

With the vote on background checks, the majority of Americans supported it, and the majority of Democrats supported it - and the majority LOST, because of a few cowardly Democrats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #11)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 07:01 PM

12. Ah I see what you did...

"Why in hell would any Democrat support any elected official who votes against the will of the Party. And against the OVERWHELMING will of the people?"

You were referring to a specific situation, but turned it into a general catch-all statement. Then I gave you an example of how the general catch-all statement doesn't really work. Now you are going back to the specific situation.

Barbara lee opposed AUMF against both her party and the overwhelming will of the people. From that standpoint, she is exactly the type of person you were talking about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hughee99 (Reply #12)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 08:52 PM

13. Except that she wasn't a coward; the anti-gun control Dems are the very definition of cowardice.

 

You're comparing apples to things that are entirely not apples and could never be confused with them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #13)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 09:36 PM

14. So it's okay to not go along with your own party or constituents

as long as you think it was the right thing to do...

Barbara lee's stand was certainly brave, yet she bucked her own party and constituents to do it. See, this is the problem with making blanket statements like "why would anyone ever ..." because when someone gives you a reason you think is a good one, you now have to start making a bunch of exceptions.

IF you think politicians should always try to do what they think is the RIGHT thing, that's fine. If you think politicians should always try to follow the party or the constituents, that's fine too. If you're wondering why anyone would ever support someone who doesn't follow the party or their constituents, I just gave you a reason. I'm not defending repuke positions, just giving you an example of supporting someone who bucked public opinion and party leadership (which is what you initially asked for).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Original post)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 06:31 PM

10. Pryor needs to go. Let's get an actual Democrat in there.

Like the rest of the Dems that voted with the GOP, his right-wing views extend to other issues. Overall, Bloomberg standing up against the NRA is a good thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Original post)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 09:44 PM

15. Barring his being the 50th vote

Pryor is utterly worthless.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #15)

Sat Apr 27, 2013, 09:48 PM

16. +1000000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread