PDA

View Full Version : NRA will score the Sotomayor vote


elenius
07-23-2009, 10:07 AM
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jul/23/nra-score-sotomayor-vote/?feat=home_headlines


The National Rifle Association said Thursday it will count the vote to confirm Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor as part of its influential legislative scorecard on how members of Congress stand on gun-rights issues.

The politically potent gun-rights group said it is concerned about Judge Sotomayor's stance on Second Amendment rights and her rulings as an appellate judge, including one upholding a New York law that barred a man from carrying a martial-arts weapon.

Although not expected to derail the confirmation of President Obama's first Supreme Court pick, the decision could mean political headaches for lawmakers of both parties who often tout perfect NRA voting records in their campaigns. The NRA previously had announced its opposition to Judge Sotomayor but had not stated previously whether it would "score" the vote in its rankings.

Five Senate Republicans, including Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, have said they will vote to confirm Judge Sotomayor, and all or virtually all of the Senate's 58 Democrats and two independents are expected to support her as well.

7x57
07-23-2009, 10:10 AM
I guessed they wouldn't score it, since she's going to win anyway and it might waste political capital they could use to better effect on a vote that has a chance of going our way. Shows what I know.

7x57

elenius
07-23-2009, 10:13 AM
I guessed they wouldn't score it, since she's going to win anyway and it might waste political capital they could use to better effect on a vote that has a chance of going our way. Shows what I know.

7x57

Yes, I thought that too. Maybe they are sensing an opportunity.

grammaton76
07-23-2009, 10:14 AM
Maybe they just want to let the folks with exceptional records stand out?

yellowfin
07-23-2009, 11:00 AM
I think it's a good way of contrasting with the Thune amendment vote where if the same 58 people were really pro gun they'd be consistent and vote against her. There shouldn't be a problem with blocking her and any other blatantly anti gun judges if there weren't any discrepancies. We can hold the senators' feet to the fire on this one and make them prove they're on our side instead of just empty votes that do nothing except window dressing.

bwiese
07-23-2009, 11:02 AM
I don't think they'd score if the Thune amendment got thru.

(We did damned well to get only 2 votes away, however)

Would be interesting if this forced Sotomayor to offer to recuse herself on Maloney & related matters ;)

nicki
07-23-2009, 11:11 AM
Sotomayor was expected to be nominated, but the NRA must flex it's muscles and Senators need to know that they are going to have to pay some price for voting for her.

Those who voted for her and want our vote probably will bend over backwards on other gun issues to try to make things right.

A Few bad rulings not just on guns, but other issues as well will make it more likely that we will get better future judges.

Obama hopefully will lose a few seats in the Senate and the Congress in 2010.

By taking action, the NRA can grow in size and hopefully more gun owners will step up and do their share.

This board has grown in size, in the last few months I noticed we gained an extra 1000 active members.

Our side has been playing defense for years, but now we are going on the offense.

I predict that the NRA will grow to at least 6 million members strong and more will be active.

Nicki

megavolt121
07-23-2009, 3:59 PM
Politicians are elected to do what their constituents want them to do.

If a politician touts a "Perfect NRA record", that means their constituents want them to vote PRO-2A.

The NRA is merely reminding politicians who tout the perfect record to remember their constituents who voted them in office to represent them.

hvengel
07-24-2009, 1:52 PM
Sotomayor was expected to be nominated, but the NRA must flex it's muscles and Senators need to know that they are going to have to pay some price for voting for her.

Those who voted for her and want our vote probably will bend over backwards on other gun issues to try to make things right.

A Few bad rulings not just on guns, but other issues as well will make it more likely that we will get better future judges.

Obama hopefully will lose a few seats in the Senate and the Congress in 2010.

By taking action, the NRA can grow in size and hopefully more gun owners will step up and do their share.

This board has grown in size, in the last few months I noticed we gained an extra 1000 active members.

Our side has been playing defense for years, but now we are going on the offense.

I predict that the NRA will grow to at least 6 million members strong and more will be active.

Nicki

I read somewhere that the NRA has grown something like 35% since the election. So it is already well on it's way. The more anti the current government the more people who join the NRA and this has been true for a long time. For example NRA numbers were up significantly during the Clinton years when it went from around 3.2 million to almost 4 million. The current administration has been even better for NRA membership numbers than Clinton and is likely to be the gift that keeps on giving in this regard for at least a few years. I would not be at all surprised to see the NRA membership reach 6 million before the next election.

I also think you are right about our side shifting from defense to offense. I think this also encourages those who were not active in the past to start stepping forward. In addition there is a tendency for people to want to be on, what appears to be, the winning side and I think gun rights looks more like a winner now than at anytime in many decades.

Glock22Fan
07-24-2009, 3:25 PM
I don't think they'd score if the Thune amendment got thru.

(We did damned well to get only 2 votes away, however)

Would be interesting if this forced Sotomayor to offer to recuse herself on Maloney & related matters ;)

Bill, from another thread (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=206050), I think that this gives a misleading picture. It seems as if the 2 votes was carefully orchestrated to allow as many Dems as possible to give the appearance of being Pro Gun, while basking in the knowledge that the bill still couldn't pass.

So, maybe (and here your guess is as good as mine) even if, say, twenty of the Dems who voted no, voted yes next time - we might still lose as, maybe, another twenty who voted yes might vote no.

Grakken
07-24-2009, 3:26 PM
So someone else posted in another thread ( washington post article) that certain blood suckers only voted for it because they knew it would lose and had the vote had 60, some of the yays would have been nays...this was done to protect them from the NRA score?? If that is true, will the NRA reflect that? Does anyone else think that is bullship other than me?

berto
07-24-2009, 3:32 PM
So someone else posted in another thread ( washington post article) that certain blood suckers only voted for it because they knew it would lose and had the vote had 60, some of the yays would have been nays...this was done to protect them from the NRA score?? If that is true, will the NRA reflect that? Does anyone else think that is bullship other than me?

It's how the game is played. The whip counts votes before anything reaches the floor and sweet talks, twists arms, or arranges trading votes as necessary. It's a charade. Once the whip is fairly certain how the vote will go he releases members who need to vote a certain way for appearances.

Any NRA grade can only reflect votes as they're actually cast. As such the grade is only worth so much.

forgiven
07-24-2009, 5:48 PM
The dems always held serve. If one republican votes to confirm, that person should be held accountable when up for re-election PERIOD.