Quantcast
NRA launches anti-Bloomberg ad campaign - THR
THR  

Go Back   THR > Social Situations > General Gun Discussions

Welcome to THR
You are currently viewing our site as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have, access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!


If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please visit the help section.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old August 20, 2014, 11:29 AM   #1
wojownik
Member
 
 
Join Date: May 15, 2009
Posts: 1,194
NRA launches anti-Bloomberg ad campaign

Pretty blunt and direct message, about Bloomberg and his agenda

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/p...berg/14296467/

The NRA ads are supposed to start running today. Has anyone seen one yet in their area?

NRA put $500,000 into the ad campaign - not sure how wide play they can get nationally with that budget. (TV ads running locally run about $1000 per 30 second spot, a national ad during prime time can run north of $450k).
wojownik is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 11:38 AM   #2
wally
Member
 
 
Join Date: January 2, 2004
Location: Houston, Tx
Posts: 10,599
I'm not sure this is wise, Bloomberg is a media company and this is playing to his strengths, on his turf.

Hope I'm wrong here and its not a waste of resources.

I think targeted local ads would be more effective and not so straight up on Bloomberg's turf.
__________________
Your commitment to Freedom and Liberty is measured by your tolerance for others doing things you disapprove. NRA Endowment Member, 2007.
NRA Patron Member, 2009. NRA Benefactor Member 2012. There is no "race" or "ethnicity" section on the NRA membership application, unlike the Federal 4473 form to purchase a firearm!
wally is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 02:02 PM   #3
hso
Moderator
 
 
Join Date: January 3, 2003
Location: 0 hrs east of TN
Posts: 39,807
I wish they had not used "Liberal" in place of Prohibitionist or Ant or People Who Want To Ban Guns. We have plenty of liberal members and there are even more people out in America that see themselves as liberal but are 2A supporting that can be turned away from our message when it is used as an epithet.
__________________
SAF Life Member/NRAILA Contributor
******************
Please Read The Forum Rules

TheHighRoad exists to provide a higher grade of discussion than is found on some other gun forums so antis and undecideds can see that gun owners and RKBA advocates are not the reckless misanthropes they tell everyone we are. Personal attacks, group stereotyping, macho chest-thumping, and partisan hackery are low road and hurt all of us.

Last edited by hso; August 20, 2014 at 02:10 PM.
hso is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 02:41 PM   #4
TRX
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 5, 2008
Location: Central Arkansas
Posts: 607
Since that's the same amount they spent to buy themselves a NASCSR sponsorship, I assume they only intend a minimal level of commitment.
TRX is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 02:41 PM   #5
Theohazard
Member
 
 
Join Date: February 24, 2014
Location: Western WA
Posts: 464
Hso, I agree 100%. I can't understand why anyone would want to alienate a huge group of potential allies by mis-using the term "liberal" to mean "anti-gun". Sure, a liberal is more likely to be anti-gun than a non-liberal, but that doesn't mean they all are. I have plenty of liberal friends who are either pro-2A or at least not anti, and intentionally alienating them is a terrible idea (besides showing a complete lack of political nuance).
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume."
Theohazard is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 03:13 PM   #6
wojownik
Member
 
 
Join Date: May 15, 2009
Posts: 1,194
Agree with HSO as well - there are other word choices out there for those who seek to restrict rights (whether 1A, 2A or 4A).

This seems to be a targeted ad, using a couple of standard themes - conservative vs. liberal, rural vs. big city, middle America vs. "New York".

That might explain the modest ad budget - to play the ad in specific geographic areas (probably in the West and south) - not national, and not big-market advertizing.
wojownik is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 03:46 PM   #7
stonecutter2
Member
 
 
Join Date: January 29, 2009
Location: Bloomington, IL
Posts: 806
Quote:
Originally Posted by hso View Post
I wish they had not used "Liberal" in place of Prohibitionist or Ant or People Who Want To Ban Guns. We have plenty of liberal members and there are even more people out in America that see themselves as liberal but are 2A supporting that can be turned away from our message when it is used as an epithet.
Agreed. I think that part of the ad is insulting. The rest, I like.

Supporting 2A doesn't mean it rules your entire political outlook...I wish more organizations, like the NRA, understood that and really took it to heart.
__________________
"If a thief is found breaking in and is struck so that he dies, there shall be no bloodguilt for him" Exodus 22:2
stonecutter2 is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 03:47 PM   #8
cologuy
Member
 
 
Join Date: May 20, 2009
Posts: 83
The article mentioned that the ads will run in several states that are considered important for Senate races, including Colorado, not nationally or regionally. They might get a decent amount of air time by concentrating in just a few spots, and I have the feeling that here in CO they'll get a positive response - the laws passed last year and the resulting recalls really caught people's attention, which I think is the first, important step in educating them. I've got my fingers crossed, anyway.
cologuy is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 06:37 PM   #9
berettaprofessor
Member
 
 
Join Date: March 25, 2008
Location: Kansas
Posts: 1,223
Except for the "liberal" reference, I love it. But I'm not sure what I would have used in place of it. "NorthEast Elitists"?

Quote:
NRA put $500,000 into the ad campaign - not sure how wide play they can get nationally with that budget. (
The NRA will spend about $500,000 on the first round of ads, and officials plan to expand the campaign in coming weeks.
__________________
"It never ceases to amaze me that there is always the one guy urging the others to hurry up and get in the ovens before they upset the Nazis." Unattributed quote.
berettaprofessor is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 06:51 PM   #10
jerkface11
Member
 
 
Join Date: October 27, 2005
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 4,812
Liberals vote for anti gun candidates so they have a point.
__________________
we can work together to enact commonsense improvements—like reinstating the assault weapons ban and closing the gun show loophole—so that guns do not fall into the hands of those irresponsible, law-breaking few. DNC party patform.
jerkface11 is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 06:54 PM   #11
Walkalong
Moderator
 
 
Join Date: November 20, 2006
Location: Alabama
Posts: 36,214
One of the important things I have learned over my years here at THR is that you cannot paint all members of any one group with the same brush. Not all liberal voters are anti gun. In fact, many are not. We really do need to use anti in place of Liberal or Democrat, despite the averages on how they vote. We need to stand with all pro gun voters and against all anti politicians.

That said, I am sure the NRA picked their words carefully and think it will be effective.

There are some very staunchly pro gun Liberals here who must want to pull their hair out sometimes over some of the broad strokes we make here. I have been guilty in the past, but try to be more fair and inclusive these days.

It is us against the antis. Plain and simple. And "us" includes all kinds of folks.
__________________
Do you ever wonder why nobody ever robs the bag man for the mob? No, you don't.

"Oh bother" said Pooh, as he chambered another round. Author unknown.
Walkalong is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 07:03 PM   #12
Carl N. Brown
Member
 
 
Join Date: May 10, 2005
Location: Kingsport Tennessee
Posts: 6,790
The antigun people have identified gun control as "the litmus test of liberalism", and they clearly identify gun control with the Democrat National Party, regarding local democrats against gun control as red state rednecks and not true national democrats.

Try discussing gun control in Washington Post comments without the anti-gun people knee-jerk calling you conservative, right-wing, Republican and racist to boot, finding clever ways of working KKK into the comments too.

Back in the 1980s, the curmudgeon on the staff of the local Mensa newsletter labeled me (on other issues) a "bleeding heart liberal" and I had to point out that I could never be a liberal because I didn't believe in gun control. One of my reference books for gun control debate is Don B. Kates "Restricting Handguns: The Liberal Skeptics Speak Out" 1979. So there are a lot of liberals skeptical of gun control. Plus there are a lot of Dixiecrat conservatives who support gun control too.

I have not seen the ads. While the USA Today coverage quotes extensively from the ad, I used "Find:" to search for "liberal" which found no match in the USA Today article, Fredreka Schouten, "Exclusive: NRA launches anti-Bloomberg ad campaign", USA Today, 19 Aug 2014.
__________________
Cogito me cogitare; ergo, cogito me esse.
Carl N. Brown is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 07:07 PM   #13
Bartholomew Roberts
Moderator Emeritus
 
 
Join Date: December 26, 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 13,660
Waste of money. Bloomberg is his own anti-Bloomberg advertising and will spend his own money to make the point far more effectively than the NRA can.
__________________
Texas gunowners should belong to TSRA.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 07:09 PM   #14
Speedo66
Member
 
 
Join Date: May 31, 2008
Posts: 1,983
Using terms like "liberal" and "NY" in a negative connotation begins an "us against them" theme, which I find deplorable.

Certainly not all liberals are anti gun, and certainly not all of NY is NYC. Even if it was, there are plenty of gun owners in NYC, and probably many of them are liberals.

Making blanket suppositions and stereotyping is just wrong. In this day and age, do they really believe no one outside their target area will see these ads? Are they trying to appeal to a certain audience by trashing other parts of the country? Wrong, wrong, wrong!
Speedo66 is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 07:38 PM   #15
george burns
Member
 
 
Join Date: May 26, 2014
Posts: 396
Let him waste his money. This will do nothing but make people want more guns. He is such an ass that he doesn't realize this. Insulting 90% of the population was never a great political move. The guy is just an idiot. An idiot with a lot of money, but still and idiot never the less.
george burns is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 08:07 PM   #16
Carl N. Brown
Member
 
 
Join Date: May 10, 2005
Location: Kingsport Tennessee
Posts: 6,790
Found someone quoting the ad's use of the "L" word.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-nra-...-gun-advocacy/
Jake Miller, "New NRA ad campaign targets Michael Bloomberg". CBS News, 20 Aug 2014.
NRA Ad is quoted: "Liberals call this flyover country. It's an insult, but nobody insults your life like this guy: Michael Bloomberg - billionaire, elitist, hypocrite. Bloomberg tries to ban your snack foods, your soda, and most of all, your guns."

CBS says also: "Last month, though, Bloomberg dismissed the recall elections in Colorado, saying the communities that voted were "as far rural as you can get. I don't think there's roads" there, he said. Opponents deemed the remarks condescending, a characterization echoed by the NRA's ad."
__________________
Cogito me cogitare; ergo, cogito me esse.
Carl N. Brown is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 08:08 PM   #17
Carl N. Brown
Member
 
 
Join Date: May 10, 2005
Location: Kingsport Tennessee
Posts: 6,790
And Post#13 is probably right.
__________________
Cogito me cogitare; ergo, cogito me esse.
Carl N. Brown is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 08:09 PM   #18
CLP
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 21, 2010
Posts: 488
Quote:
Originally Posted by hso View Post
I wish they had not used "Liberal" in place of Prohibitionist or Ant or People Who Want To Ban Guns. We have plenty of liberal members and there are even more people out in America that see themselves as liberal but are 2A supporting that can be turned away from our message when it is used as an epithet.
Very true. Inclusive vs. exclusive. The more numbers you have, the more votes.
CLP is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 08:34 PM   #19
X-Rap
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 23, 2006
Posts: 4,513
I'd like to see honest numbers of so called 2a friendly liberals who vote for 2a candidates and causes regardless of party or union affiliation.
I don't believe that they could be counted on in a crunch so bowing to their sensitivities in hopes for their support is doubtful.
Bloomberg personifies the liberal/progressive attitude toward Middle America and his quote about roads in CO prove it to me.
__________________
In the land of the blind the one eyed man is king
X-Rap is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 08:51 PM   #20
Theohazard
Member
 
 
Join Date: February 24, 2014
Location: Western WA
Posts: 464
Quote:
Originally Posted by X-Rap
I'd like to see honest numbers of so called 2a friendly liberals who vote for 2a candidates and causes regardless of party or union affiliation.
I don't believe that they could be counted on in a crunch so bowing to their sensitivities in hopes for their support is doubtful.
Even if that were true, so what? What advantage is there in using the term "liberal" to mean "anti-gun". There's not a single one: It only alienates potential allies and also demonstrates that you don't understand the complexities of politics, especially on the state and local levels. And when trying to convince someone to see your side of the argument, it's not a smart strategy to start off the conversation by alienating them and showing your political ignorance at the same time.
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume."
Theohazard is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 09:34 PM   #21
X-Rap
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 23, 2006
Posts: 4,513
As one of the unsophisticated "ignorant" residents of "road-less fly over country" I've learned that someone espousing the liberal agenda while saying he/she supports my 2a rights is most certainly full of crap or disingenuous at best.
We do have some liberal gun owners and they for the most part fall under what's good for me and my security team isn't whats good for you commoners and hold a much more European view of gun ownership.
I would have been much more offended if the NRA would have colored the Libertarians with that broad brush.
For the targeted audience I think they are on the mark.
__________________
In the land of the blind the one eyed man is king
X-Rap is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 10:01 PM   #22
Theohazard
Member
 
 
Join Date: February 24, 2014
Location: Western WA
Posts: 464
Quote:
Originally Posted by X-Rap
As one of the unsophisticated "ignorant" residents of "road-less fly over country" I've learned that someone espousing the liberal agenda while saying he/she supports my 2a rights is most certainly full of crap or disingenuous at best.
Read what I wrote in post #20 again, because it applies to this also.
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume."
Theohazard is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 10:09 PM   #23
Cazadores
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 4, 2012
Posts: 2
I can't agree with delineating firearm rights along partisan lines. Liberal and conservative, particularly to younger voters is meaningless and often offensive.

I am a Life Member of the NRA and gun rights drive my voting decisions, unfortunately those people around me, urban, educated, pro gun rights voters are more difficult to influence when our side paints ourselves as alligned with seemingly inconsistent values. All supporters of gun rights, gay, straight, urban or rural, pro choice, pro life, wealthy or on public assistance, atheist or devout, should be able to find a home in the NRA. It is not a Democrat vs. Republican issue, and if we insist on making it one we will lose.
Cazadores is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 10:18 PM   #24
X-Rap
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 23, 2006
Posts: 4,513
What happens when the tent gets to big and tries to be everything for every body is that the whole movement gets diluted to the point that it means nothing.
We also live with different demographics which are not one size fits all. I believe I know what they are in my neck of the woods and the lines are pretty clear. Those who ride the fence from either side can't be counted on.
__________________
In the land of the blind the one eyed man is king
X-Rap is offline  
Old August 20, 2014, 10:20 PM   #25
lxd55
Member
 
 
Join Date: April 1, 2014
Posts: 251
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theohazard View Post
Hso, I agree 100%. I can't understand why anyone would want to alienate a huge group of potential allies by mis-using the term "liberal" to mean "anti-gun". Sure, a liberal is more likely to be anti-gun than a non-liberal, but that doesn't mean they all are. I have plenty of liberal friends who are either pro-2A or at least not anti, and intentionally alienating them is a terrible idea (besides showing a complete lack of political nuance).
well another political thread.
these people know who they are
saying liberal will not sway them.
pass the hoppes#9 please.
lxd55 is offline  
Closed Thread

Tags
bull, failure, incompetent, nra


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Optimisation by vB Optimise.
This site, its contents, Shooting Reviews, and its contents are Copyright (c) 2010-2013 Firearms Forum, Inc.
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER
Although The High Road has attempted to provide accurate information on the forum, The High Road assumes no responsibility for the accuracy of the information. All information is provided "as is" with all faults without warranty of any kind, either express or implied. Neither The High Road nor any of its directors, members, managers, employees, agents, vendors, or suppliers will be liable for any direct, indirect, general, bodily injury, compensatory, special, punitive, consequential, or incidental damages including, without limitation, lost profits or revenues, costs of replacement goods, loss or damage to data arising out of the use or inability to use this forum or any services associated with this forum, or damages from the use of or reliance on the information present on this forum, even if you have been advised of the possibility of such damages.