Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

flamin lib

(14,559 posts)
Tue May 31, 2016, 11:38 AM May 2016

I guess it depends on how you look at it . . .

0https://www.thetrace.org/2016/05/nra-election-spending-daily-news/



The article suggests that the NRA spending is becoming more targeted and therefore more effective. I disagree.

In 2010 they spent $6.7 million to elect 50 legislators. That's $134,000 for each win. In 2012 the number jumped to $383 million for each win. Two years later in 2014 the cost per win jumped to $969,600 per win.

Seems gun friendly legislators are getting more expensive. From 2010 to 2012 the cost rose 300% and from 2012 to 2014 it rose by 200%. A 700% increase over 6 years is not sustainable.

At this rate by 2022 they'll have to spend the entire campaign donation budget to get just one more Representative. The gun lobby has deep pockets, but they're not bottomless.

So much for the all powerful NRA.

1 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I guess it depends on how you look at it . . . (Original Post) flamin lib May 2016 OP
One would also hope billh58 May 2016 #1

billh58

(6,635 posts)
1. One would also hope
Tue May 31, 2016, 12:33 PM
May 2016

that cost is going up because corrupt and cowardly politicians are becoming a scarce commodity -- especially on the Democratic side of the aisle.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control Reform Activism»I guess it depends on how...