Chuck Schumer leads the Democrat Senators

Senate Democrats will soon have the opportunity to vote on Neil Gorsuch’s Supreme Court nomination. In recent days, the National Rifle Association sent a letter to Senate leadership, warning of consequences for those who oppose Gorsuch’s bid. NRA-ILA head Chris Cox wrote (as reported by the Washington Examiner):

“Because of the importance of this issue to NRA members and gun owners throughout the country, votes on his confirmation will be considered in future candidate evaluations and we will notify our members accordingly.”

Translation: Senators can side with the radical anti-gun leadership of Chuck Schumer, pictured above, or they can vote with their constituents in support of gun rights.

The NRA will make sure they can’t have it both ways. Even in states that did not vote strongly for President Donald Trump, the NRA’s nod can make all the difference in the world.

Republicans have already announced an offensive against Democrat Senators in Trump-supporting Red States. These include (courtesy of Gateway Pundit):

Florida Bill Nelson (D)
Indiana Joe Donnelly (D)
Michigan Debbie Stabenow (D)
Missouri Claire McCaskill (D)
Montana Jon Tester (D)
New Jersey Bob Menendez (D)
North Dakota Heidi Heitkamp (D)
Ohio Sherrod Brown (D)
Pennsylvania Bob Casey (D)
Virginia Tim Kaine (D)
West Virginia Joe Manchin (D)
Wisconsin Tammy Baldwin (D)

Included in that list are NRA A-rated Senators Jon Tester (Montana), Joe Donnelly (Indiana), and Heidi Heitkamp (North Dakota). They all voted against the strongly pro-Second Amendment nomination of Jeff Sessions as U.S. Attorney General.  B+ rated Bob Casey (Pennsylvania) also voted against Sessions. The NRA has noticed.

A-rated Joe Manchin from West Virginia broke from his party to back Sessions, as he likes his seat and can read the writing on the wall.

“You can’t be pro-gun if you don’t vote pro-gun.”

Professional lobbyist extraordinaire Todd Vandermyde reminded me of this while teaching me how to lobby in the Illinois General Assembly.

Of course, the corollary to the aforementioned rule: you won’t keep that A-rating if you vote against gun rights. Nationally, the NRA has fired a shot across the bow of those flirting with siding with Schumer on guns and Gorsuch.

Undoubtedly, the NRA will bring their forces to bear against politicians who lose touch with the constituents who put them into office. Obviously, this includes Democrat US Senators.

Math doesn’t lie.

I called Donald Trump’s win in the general election as early as March last year based upon the enthusiasm gap between Republicans and Democrats in the primary races. If this enthusiasm gap holds, Democrats have much to fear in the 2018 races even without antagonizing gun owners.

Democrat Senators have a particularly tough choice ahead of them in the coming days. Choose wisely, boys and girls and I’ll tell you why:  The People Of The Gun pay attention. We vote, too.

44 Responses to NRA Targets Red State Democrat Senators

  1. Not to be that guy but there are legitimate reasons to not like Sessions that has absolutely nothing to do with being anti gun. I am very pro gun and have zero love for sessions because he’s a grade A assbag and just as much of a statist as any left wing moron.

    • One word for you here Sir:

      !!!HOLDER!!!

      Sessions is a Saint relatively speaking which is the only salient point here.

      God Bless America.

      • We really need to stop using the concept of “relatively speaking.” Just because “relatively speaking,” your candidate is somehow less bad than the alternative, DOESN’T MAKE THEM GOOD.

        Standards. We used to have them.

        • Wish for a unicorn, accept the donkey in a party hat, but only because the last one was a shit covered pig.

          I think the game is rigged

    • I was going to say the same thing. One thing Sessions is in favor of, which I strongly oppose, are federal civil forfeiture laws, laws that place the burden of proof on the defendant to show that his/her goods and cash were NOT the product of a criminal enterprise. These laws greatly incentivize illegal stops and seizures of property, with the police knowing that it will be nearly impossible for the defendant to prove a negative, and this money is in no way subject to government oversight, allowing it to be spent on whatever the police want to spend it on. I consider it to be legalized theft and a violation of due process of law. California finally amended its laws effective this year shifting the burden of proof back where it belongs: on the prosecutor.

        • Civil forfeiture is an abomination no matter what the context. The government should always have the burden of proof, period, no exceptions. Anything else is tyrannical.

    • Sessions should never have been nominated. He is pro drug war in a country that is already anti drug war. He is pro civil asset forfeiture, aka, he loves telling people they are guilty until proven innocent.

      So many of his positions are anti freedom when it comes to criminal justice so I have no idea how even the Republicans supported him. Granted, Republicans are NOT for small government anymore so I shouldn’t be surprised that he got selected.

      • Do you really want someone responsible for enforcing the law to pick and choose what laws he’ll enforce? That’s rule by fiat, not the rule of law.

        That’s what we spent the last eight years decrying. We just spent last week praising Judge Gorsuch for his stance on interpreting the laws as they were written, not rewriting the laws as he would like them.

        The Attorney General is paid to enforce the law, not legislate from the Prosecutor’s office. Don’t like the law? Write your Congressman, or file a lawsuit, but let’s not slam the AG for doing the job he was hired to do.

        • Civil asset forfeiture is a law enforcement tool that prosecutors have the choice to use or not, just like cops have the discretion whether or not to use no-knock raids. They’re a tyrannical practice that no person who believes in due process and the rule of law should support. It is one area where Sessions is undeniably very bad.

      • And he is anti illegals, and if you do not get rid of them, build the wall/deport them all, limit legal immigration you will have nothing but a leftist majority and you can kiss all of your rights goodbye.

  2. Chuckie Schumer has an irritating habit of perching his glasses on the tip of his nose. Maybe he doesn’t want to look “old” by wearing bifocals. Whatever the reason, I’d be only too happy to push his glasses back where they ought to be – even with and in line with his ears in the middle of his skull.

  3. If you think the only things that matter in life are directly related to firearms, than maybe this is a good opportunity to get out and explore ALL the things this life and world have to offer.
    I don’t think Sessions or Gorsuch are good choices for the same reasons I despise Walker; they are opponents to civil liberties, states rights, and each individuals rights. They are all about states rights until we’re talking about unions, abortion, or a whole number of other issues that people have knee jerk responses to. Hypocrisy is everywhere, and I do not support those who propagate it, whoever they are, irregardless of political persuasion.

    • As a Californian who took that point of view for years, and refused to vote R because of various policies:

      At a certain point, it’s put up or shut up.

      This is the ONE opportunity we have- ONE – for gun rights to ascend.

      I think Gorsuch is probably too corporation friendly myself. I dream of a strict civil libertarian that empowers individuals to a maximal degree that devastates the power of state, government, etc.

      However, at a certain point, it’s put up or shut up. If we don’t secure our rights now, we never will, and the inexorable slide will continue. Gun rights are nearly dead in the finance capitals of this country, and when they are truly extinguished there, all they will have to do is send mass waves of millions to “pro-gun” states and flip them.

      California has 40 million people, and they’re all on the verge of being priced out. We take this victory and move the beachhead forward, or this right will be as lost as the fourth was, decades ago. Trump, Sessions, Gorsuch- all are imperfect and NOT the paradigmn I want. But they’re the only choice, aside from giving up. Frankly, I played the purist card for way too long. Purism tests are what killed the democrats, and if Repbulicans do it, it will kill the Republican party before we can gain the controversial civil right that Republicans are the only game in town for.

    • Then why are you opposed to the civil right embodied in the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution?

      If you’re going to be in favor of civil rights, don’t you need to be in favor of all of them in order to avoid being hypocritical?

      Isn’t that your argument?

    • Yeah I don’t see this as a gun vote.

      National reciprocity? Sure. Hearing Protection Act? I guess. But this nominee has no history on guns that makes me want to fight on this hill.

      (which isn’t to say he shouldn’t be confirmed- he should. But I just don’t see it as a gun issue like I would if a clear pro-2nd nominee was up for the seat)

  4. I’d love to see Bill Nelson un-seated.

    He never met a gun-control scheme he didn’t like (or love).

    He’ll never vote Pro-2A so i wish them well.

    • I can’t stand his voice. He has that smarmy dink voice faking sincerity. I want Nelson, Tester (major dink), McCaskill and Stebanow to lose big.

    • Why the NRA embolden his anti-gun crusade by supporting the Undetectable Firearms Act, then emboldened him AGAIN by supporting its renewal despite the law doing nothing to silence liberal whining about metal detector proof firearms that don’t exist, I will never understand.

  5. There is evidence that Gorsuch supported the contention that in matters of national security the president is above the law. That’s scary if true.

    We need champions of ALL individual rights, not just one or two.

      • Really? We’re talking about the preacher who told people to pay their taxes? You know, “give unto Caeser” et cetera?

        He didn’t care for hypocrites, especially religious ones, I’ll give you that.

    • Mr. “Turn the other cheek”, “you must have faith in me otherwise you drown” isn’t my idea of a good justice.

    • He wouldn’t, especially for those who aren’t Christian. (Nor would be very popular among birther-conspiracists, who would have a hell of a time with the whole divine parthenogenesis tale mucking up that “natural born” citizen thing.)

      The real issue is that both major “sides” tend to be very selective of which rights and which aspects thereof they’ll defend hard (or at least as hard as they need to keep their seats) and which they’ll sell out or even actively destroy. Good luck finding a 2A-absolutist on the left who is hard at work proactively loosening laws on militia-suitable arms (let alone even thinking of discussing 2A’s applicability to laser weaponry or combat-robotics), or a rightist who is hard at work defending the 1A’s establishment clause and actively slapping down those who would attempt to create religious law in America. And of course, both sides will happily sell the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendment away as long as the politician violating said rights wears the same color jersey that they do and the boogieman is scary enough to the average voter.

      We just don’t see anyone who stands up for ALL the Amendments, and slaps down those (even of his own party) who dare to violate the separation of powers.

  6. To a lot of people, myself included. We hold our noses and vote for who we think is the lesser of 2 evils.
    Id vote for anyone who runs against Bill Nelson. He has been absolutely useless for the people and the State of Florida.
    But there are blocks of counties. Little NY South here including my county of Palm Beach, Broward and Dade. Along with a bit of the Orlando area. That always seem to vote these useless Dims in.
    Im a single issue voter. I vote for my gun rights and nothing else matters……….to me. The NRA with its 5 million plus members and a few million more voters who share my view. Can and do make a difference.
    Our voices will be heard as they were in the last elections. Dims don’t have much to look forward to. Seems they still want to give away everything to the folks who believe they are entitled to cash and do noting to help themselves. In order to hold on to their seats. Unless Trump screws up a lot more. He wont be helping the Dims chances much. Which they are also counting on come 2018.

    • Jay,
      I am a Palm Beach County single issue voter for gun rights as well
      Last year we had to get rid of Senator Lopez de Portillo, a Rino who blocked a full senate vote on several gun rights bills
      This year we have Senator Anitere Flores as the Republican blocking a full senate vote on campus carry, open carry etc.
      She is term limited out, so she is positioning herself for a run for mayor of Miami
      I’ve written to her, as I did to Lopez del Portillo, and told her (as I told him) that I will do everything I can to make sure someone else is elected if they vote against these bills
      I can’t believe we are going to have to wait another year before the full senate will vote on these issues!

  7. In the case of North Dakota I would council the NRA to think the matter through! She’s been a pretty reliable friend who got an “A” rating for some very good reasons… on the other hand her opponent last time (yeah the “republican”) liked to put things like “Sportsman’s” and “common sense (gun control)” on his platform.

    I’m not saying she’s perfect all I’m saying is we better know what we are doing before we go pissing away an ally who helped hold Obama back.

  8. I’d love to see Tim Kaine get knocked off his pedestal in Virginia but the Dems have conquered Northern Virginia’s population centers and are currently dominating the airwaves. Virginia has 5,459,615 registered voters as of 2/17. Eyeballing statistics from off-year (non-Presidential) elections, there are between 30 to 50% of those who actually turn out. http://www.elections.virginia.gov/resultsreports/registration-statistics/registrationturnout-statistics/index.html (Presidential years are between 67% and 80% or so. Last year’s critical Presidential election only drew 72% of Virginia voters).

    In 2013, McAwful was the only Dem to actually register on time and became the Dem candidate by default. He massively outspent his opponent (some 58% higher) dumping $38,003,836 Bloomberg dollars to get 1,069,789 votes. Cuccinelli only mustered up $20,942,496 and still got 1,013,354 votes so it was a squeaker, but Bloomberg got McAwful in and then he paid his debt, started issuing executive orders banning guns from government offices, vetoing gun right bills, pardoning thousands of criminals and so on. Massive abuse based on a 56,435 vote difference. The legislature passed a good dozen bills this year trying to get Virginia back on track as a free state but McAwful vetoed them all. Dems need to be voted out and a bit more funding and effort here can make a big difference.

    Kaine still has the Clinton and Bloomberg backing and they will fund him heavily. Good to hear that people are dialed in on this and will make the effort to fund freedom.

    • What are the odds the few Democrat voters who would show up to mid-term elections will blame Kaine for the failure in 2016 and hang him out to dry?

    • DC government jobs and progressives leaving Maryland for lower taxes have destroyed Virginia. What was once a great state will within a decade be another blue crap hole.

  9. The Democrats would be foolish to not support Gorsuch. On multiple occasions he has shown that he does not support the executive branch having never ending power. He is basically going to be more a thorn in the side of Trump than Democrats. If I was them I would support him out of fear of what they would get next which might just be another big government Neo-“Conservative”.

    Also, he is incredibly qualified and they are just going to show everyone that they are sore losers by trying to block him. Elections have consequences, they ran the worst candidate in possibly 100 years. Deal with your dumb decisions and move on.

    • @Adam I think the dem argument against the repubs is that they are returning their obstructionism in kind, regardless of how qualified Gorsuch is. Live by the sword, die by the sword.

      • Right! And so they (Administration, McConnell, etc.) should seat him on a simple majority vote like the Dems did on many occasions. Call their bluff on the filibuster. Show them (Nay votes) to be who they are.

        Secondly, we on our side need to be mindful that good is not the enemy of perfect. This goes for many things in life including political candidates and legislation. I think the Republicans and the conservatives (who are not the same) need to take more of a long view politically. Let us not forget or undervalue the fact that Repubs control the White House, the Senate and the House. This is a wonderful opportunity to change the direction of our country. Trump was not my first choice initially but I support him and his stated policies now.

        We can see that many in Washington want him to fail. They like things just the way they have always been; to our detriment. They make rules for the rest of us and exempt themselves (Obamacare, etc).

        I’m willing to give this guy a chance knowing that he will not be and do everything I want. On the whole, I feel very relieved that he won the election.

        • AJ: Garland was very strongly supported, as well. He was confirmed for the appeals court by a 76-23 vote. Seven of the repubs that voted for him are still in office. Grassley wrote a letter in his support in 1997 and Judge Roberts praised his judgement in his own hearings. He did not come to a vote because the repubs were motivated purely by obstruction. You cannot blame dems when they return the favor.

      • If anything, the Republicans are rerurning to the Democrats’ obstructionist ways. Shall I provide you with numerous Dem senator quotes and accounts of their actions against judicial nominees of presidents Reagan, H.W. Bush, and W. Bush? These are the words of Biden, Leahy, Schumer, and Reid and they all mirror what Republicans said during the Garland affair.

        Now, maybe they were as wrong last year as the Dems have been for decades. That’s a point to argue. I’d argue that in a hotly contested election year, following a lawless presidency, in an era of 5-4 SC decisions on issues obviously constitutional, and with a nomination that would reverse the composition of the court, tge wise and just move would be to make SC appointments a presidential campaign issue. Let the People decide the course by letting the next president make the nomination.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *