-
Is it given to the senators campaign funds, so that they benefit from not having to pay for anything themselves?
Politicians don’t tend to self-fund. Reform would involve the funding being a flat sum administered by the central government
Obliging politicians to fund themselves out of their own pockets would exclude all but the richest from running for office.
-
The NRA funding is pernicious.
Consider a slate of potential Republican nominees covering their spectrum of beliefs/issues. At a State level a surprisingly small donation may well be enough to skew the poor turnout through allowing a radio ad campaign. Once the NRA back a candidate there is always the threat that the donation can be withdrawn and used to support the next nominee off the Right of the cab rank.
Pretty soon in Republican states you end up with concealed right-to-carry & armed guards at schools. -
• #51155
If you read the actual story instead of just the tweet... Details matter.
Says the guys who posted a link to an image and then followed it up with "Look at the chart".
-
The NRA's power doesn't come from donations, but from their millions of highly active, motivated members, which the NRA leadership use ruthlessly.
Hence the NRA report card on every member of congress. If you score badly, the NRA will whip up their members to support your primary challenger.
-
This is an amazing story - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-02-15/a-chinese-company-has-conquered-a-piece-of-america
-
We have concluded that preventing acts of mass violence on U.S. soil
isn’t important enough to restrict access to assault weapons — but
that this goal is, nonetheless, vital enough to justify turning away
tens of thousands of Syrian refugees on the baseless suspicion that
welcoming them will increase the frequency of such attacks; and that
the mass murder of 58 concertgoers by an apolitical white man is an
event unworthy of any policy response whatsoever — but the prospect of
politically motivated Muslims committing similar atrocities is such an
existential threat, it is worth overthrowing sovereign governments,
killing more than 1 million foreign civilians, and investing trillions
of American dollars in an indefinite, global war aimed at
extinguishing every last radical Islamist who might have even
daydreamed about committing such an attack. -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43093154
They lost center parks advertising money due to his column. Good.
-
Did the earth move for you?
-
They’re such a paranoid nation. I might have posted this before, but I’ve got two pro-gun friends in the US - one is a Capitol Hill enforcement officer, trains every week. The other is a high school security guard, and has a concealed carry license. They both asked me about guns in the UK, “how do you protect yourself if you can’t have a gun?”
“Protect myself from what?”
They were baffled that I didn’t feel like everyone was always after me.
Yes to this, but consider certain developments--quite a lot of kids saying they don't feel 'safe' unless they're carrying a knife, people buying massive cars--there's definitely a bit of that here, if, of course, not to the same extent. It's obviously not that apparent to a white middle-class male (yet?).
-
Also, Britsplaining on weapons--it may be far-fetched, but I can't help thinking that Britain is still a major arms manufacturer and, crucially, exporter. Not small firearms so much, but there are definitely ways in which Britain's no better than the US.
h2o
mespilus
deleted
¡apesta!
Lebowski
spindrift
Theoazb
andyp
JWestland
rhb
Oliver Schick
-
Post a reply
About
In the news
Posted by
@Platini
If you read the actual story instead of just the tweet, you’ll see that the NYT is including money spent on their behalf by PACs since 1989, whereas the chart is just donations since 1998. Details matter.