Big Labor Unions out spend the NRA by more than $160 to $1.

Irish Ranger

unread,

Feb 28, 2018, 4:06:15 PM2/28/18

to

If you listen to the hysterical squacking of Democrats, you'd think the National Rifle Association
(NRA) was donating $Billions to Republicans and controlled the entire American political process.
But, like most left wing rants, that's pure bullshit! Here are the facts. In 2016, Big Labor Unions
out spent the NRA on political donations by more than $160 to $1.

The NRA donated $1,085,000.00 to political campaigns in 2016. By comparison, Big Labor Unions
donated $132,000,000.00 to Democrats and they spent an additional $35,000,000.00 on
Federal elections. That's $167 million to $1 million!

"WASHINGTON ― This election cycle, the political influence of labor unions seems greater than ever. Just consider the following numbers. The AFL-CIO union federation contributed $14.6 million to super PACs. The National Education Association has donated $18.1 million and spent an additional $1.4 million. And the Service Employees International Union has donated $19 million.

Those are eye-popping sums. As the Wall Street Journal recently reported, organized labor on the whole has spent more money on this election ― steering its cash overwhelmingly to Democratic candidates ― than ever before. Overall, labor unions have donated more than $132 million to super PACs and spent an additional $35 million on federal elections."

Irish Mike

Obama's legacy is President Trump

unclejr

unread,

Feb 28, 2018, 4:11:12 PM2/28/18

to

Link?

Eric Ramon

unread,

Feb 28, 2018, 4:29:31 PM2/28/18

to

how's this for a link?

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=d000000082

Contributions: $1,085,000 (check!)
Lobbying: $3,188,000
Outside Spending: $54,398,558
that's like commercials, you know. Broken down further:
for Democrats or against Republicans: $2,456
for Repubs or against Dems: $54,395,953

Some dued

unread,

Feb 28, 2018, 4:42:20 PM2/28/18

to

The NRA and labor unions are two very different things. Comparing them is just a desperate attempt at distraction / whataboutism.

xyzzy

unread,

Feb 28, 2018, 4:44:34 PM2/28/18

to

There are 15 million union members in the US.
There are 5 million NRA members.

The unions represent more people.

xyzzy

unread,

Feb 28, 2018, 4:47:21 PM2/28/18

to

Ahh yes, the old "only count direct contributions" dodge. Shoulda figured.

Well that plus no source cited. Oh and that it came from Irish Mike.

Tom Enright

unread,

Feb 28, 2018, 4:48:46 PM2/28/18

to

On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 at 4:42:20 PM UTC-5, Some dued wrote:

> The NRA and labor unions are two very different things. Comparing
> them is just a desperate attempt at distraction / whataboutism.

No, they are exactly the same thing when addressing the issue of political
donations. I keep hearing about how "the NRA owns the politicians"
but in truth the NRA is not a heavy hitter WRT to monies donated.

-TE

Tom Enright

unread,

Feb 28, 2018, 4:50:54 PM2/28/18

to

On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 at 4:44:34 PM UTC-5, xyzzy wrote:

> There are 15 million union members in the US.
> There are 5 million NRA members.
>
> The unions represent more people.

True, but the NRA is one organization, while there are many unions.

The power of the NRA is not about the money they give to politicians,
it's always been about organizing their members and sympathizers.

-TE

unclejr

unread,

Feb 28, 2018, 6:07:28 PM2/28/18

to

> Well that plus no source cited. Oh and that it came from Irish Mike, a known moron.

IFYPFY. YW!

Some dued

unread,

Feb 28, 2018, 6:26:50 PM2/28/18

to

If the topic is getting rid of lobbyists then I agree it's the same thing. But is that the topic that we're discussing?

J. Hugh Sullivan

unread,

Mar 1, 2018, 8:01:36 AM3/1/18

to

On Wed, 28 Feb 2018 13:44:31 -0800 (PST), xyzzy <xyzzy...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>The unions represent more people.

When equality has to be legislated (and still doesn't make people
equal), numbers tend to lose their consequence (unless they have
AR-15s or AK-47s).

Hugh

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

michael anderson

unread,

Mar 2, 2018, 10:24:22 AM3/2/18

to

yes, I posted this earlier...the nra is just a convientment bogeyman.

The real 'problem' in passing gun changes is that the voters just don't want it(in a real sense of what matters in electoral politics, not some meaningless poll). Much easier to blame a bogeyman than blame US citizens...that tends to not go over to well.

michael anderson

unread,

Mar 2, 2018, 10:26:40 AM3/2/18

to

Look at the total figure though...for the entire country. It's just not a lot of money. The nra simply isn't 'buying' politicians.....what is keeping gun laws the way they are is those daggum american citizens and the whole concept of democracy and whatnot.

xyzzy

unread,

Mar 2, 2018, 11:04:05 AM3/2/18

to

This has been your fantasy for a while, I see you've added the parenthetical about polls because you know the only way to keep the fantasy alive is to handwave away data you don't like, given that polls consistently show strong support for the gun changes you say don't have support.

michael anderson

unread,

Mar 3, 2018, 1:37:32 AM3/3/18

to

just because a poll shows something about a particular issue doesn't mean that's where it will matter from a voting/electoral perspective. If you have a situation(and we do) where an insignificant number of people on one side of the pole will actually change their vote/vote based on that issue, whereas on the other side of the poll(even if a minority is present) a much much larger percentage will actually vote based on the issue and is very charged on the issue, then it can be incredibly damaging from an electoral perspective to act on the issue.

this is not a hard concept to get.

Im just an observer here. Let's look at things objectively- we have no action on 'gun reform' right? I think everyone can agree on that. Doesn't really matter who is in power because when the dems were in power they wouldnt touch the issue either....

so whats the reason for that? Well it's clearly what I say...voters don't want it in a meaningful sense.

J. Hugh Sullivan

unread,

Mar 3, 2018, 7:29:44 AM3/3/18

to

On Fri, 2 Mar 2018 22:37:29 -0800 (PST), michael anderson
<miande...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Im just an observer here. Let's look at things objectively- we have no act=
>ion on 'gun reform' right? I think everyone can agree on that. Doesn't re=
>ally matter who is in power because when the dems were in power they wouldn=
>t touch the issue either....

So what happens if the mouths ban assault weapons and stop sales to
people under 21?

Many of us already have all the assault weapons we need and have no
plans to buy more (unless maybe they are banned).

Dads will buy guns for their kids under 21 - my dad's dad did, my dad
did, I did and our sons did.