I have to give her credit for this. And in NC, no less. Hillary Clinton Challenges the #Gun Lobby.

[riversedge]

Kevin Rogers
‏@kevinjohnrogers

I have to give her credit for this. And in NC, no less. Hillary Clinton Challenges the #Gun Lobby. #ncpol http://buff.ly/1nCF0yN



Hillary Clinton Challenges the Gun Lobby
Taking on the NRA marks contrast with her previous campaign and rival Bernie Sanders


By Valerie Bauerlein
March 10, 2016 7:12 p.m. ET

DURHAM, N. C.—Hillary Clinton is making gun violence a central theme of her campaign, becoming the first leading presidential candidate to directly confront the National Rifle Association without the cover of a hunting license. She is holding town halls with a group known as the Mothers of the Movement, composed of mothers of victims of “gun violence, police and racially charged incidents,” including Sybrina Fulton, mother of Trayvon Martin, a black teenager fatally shot by a white neighborhood-watch volunteer in 2012. [full article]

[MADem]

1. She absolutely has the moral high ground on this issue. nt

[TeddyR]

4. I keep reading that Hillary is tough on guns

Or is going to "fight" the NRA. What exactly has she proposed -- specifically -- that is different than what Bernie has proposed, AND is going to make a real difference with respect to firearm violence? Universal background checks (which I support) will have next to no impact since the vast majority of firearms sales are already subject to background checks. Repeal the PLCAA? Why should gun manufacturers be subject to lawsuits when someone commits a crime with their product, and even if a manufacturer is subject to such suit what will that do to prevent firearm deaths (more specifically suicides, which are 2/3 of all gun deaths)? Will that stop criminals using guns to kill people?

[MADem]

5. You've got a computer with google--you can examine her positions in depth, if you're really

interested, at her website.

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/gun-violence-prevention/

More here: http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Hillary_Clinton_Gun_Control.htm

[revbones]

18. The problem is what's in those links isn't true

Because actions speak louder than text...

[MADem]

22. So says you. nt

[revbones]

25. So say facts.

If you're too lazy to look them up, then please don't contribute falsehoods.

Hillary was opposed to the bankruptcy bill, then she got donor money and voted for it.

She was publicly opposed to the Colombia Free Trade agreement, and promised unions to fight it. Her released emails show that she secretly lobbied for it.

She was supposedly a champion of equality, but was publicly for DOMA, DADT, etc... and only came out in 2013 against DOMA. She even campaigned in 2008 as pro-DOMA.

The list goes on and on.

[TeddyR]

32. Are you purposefully ignoring my questions?

You post that Hillary has the moral high ground and when I ask for specifics you point me to "Google" and/or refuse to answer the question. It isn't a hard question so can you answer?

On edit, I prefer to discuss specific policy points, not argue about platitudes. So let's discuss specifics as I asked in my first post, and if you don't know the details or how Hillary's position differs from Bernie's it is ok to say so.

[NWCorona]

7. Read posts#2

[MADem]

11. Read post #10.

[KPN]

8. I am a Bernie supporter, so I obviously have a bias

but in an effort to be open-minded, I think you are right (as far as what she says -- who knows how much of what she says during the campaign will actually get pursued by her if she is elected).

Bernie's position on torts against gun manufacturers seems fairly specious to me. Immunity from torts can be lifted without dooming the gun manufacturing industry. And some credit needs to be given to potential juries on such cases. So this may actually be a weak link in Bernie's armor -- not sure it's enough of an impediment to affect the outcome though. Berners support him for other reasons. The same is true for Hillary. The gun control issue doesn't seem to be a primary driver in the primary.

[MADem]

13. How much of what ANYONE says during the campaign will actually be pursued?

I think she's making a pledge that she'll prioritize preventing the slaughter of little kids in schools and daycares, or older kids in high schools and colleges, or adults and children in churches and synagogues and workcenters, by people who have no business owning a gun.

America needs to have this conversation. This is long overdue by a damn century or more.

[KPN]

44. Can't argue with that!

[MoonRiver]

24. Every candidate makes promises to support specific positions.

Obviously the follow-up comes after winning the presidency, but she has to start somewhere.

[KPN]

45. True.

Guess I just don't trust her to follow through if she does win the presidency based on her past positions, convenient adjustments she has made constantly throughout the current campaign, and establishment politics generally. Bernie has my support 100% for now.

[CentralMass]

2. - NRA Lobbyist Will Co-Host Hillary Clinton Fundraiser

https://theintercept.com/2016/03/01/nra-lobbyist-will-co-host-clinton-fundraiser/
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has called her support for gun control laws a key differentiator from her opponent Bernie Sanders, who she claims isn’t tough enough on the industry. But in mid-March, a Clinton campaign fundraiser will be co-hosted by a lobbyist whose clients have included the National Rifle Association (NRA).

As David Sirota reported Monday in the International Business Times, Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta is a co-host and the guest of honor at a fundraising lunch in the nation’s capital on March 21.

One of the other co-hosts is Jeff Forbes of the lobbying firm Forbes-Tate.

Forbes has represented the NRA since 2009 and as of the last quarter of 2015 was still registered to lobby for the organization. On his lobbying disclosure, Forbes wrote that he was signed up to lobby for “Issues related to 2nd Amendment rights, regulation and gun control, and tax and appropriations related to same; issues related to corporate tax reform.” [Update at 4:41 p.m. ET: Jennifer Baker, director of public affairs for the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, emails us to say that “Jeff Forbes is no longer an NRA consultant.”]

During the 2013 push for universal background checks, Forbes was one of a phalanx of Democratic Party lobbyists employed by the NRA to kill that legislation.

Forbes is an alumnus of the Bill Clinton administration and later worked as chief of staff to former Montana Democratic Sen. Max Baucus.

Another co-host is Steve Elmendorf, who has lobbied for Goldman Sachs and the U.S.-Colombian Free Trade Agreement."

[FrostyAusty]

3. +1

She says/ will do anything to get elected.. More of the same from her .

[MADem]

10. Cough.

Looks like Jeff has seen the error of his ways.....or something. Hey, smart people do evolve--only hardline contrarians and authoritarians don't change their positions when they realize that they're taking the wrong path--they distance themselves from dumb associations:

One of the other co-hosts is Jeff Forbes of the lobbying firm Forbes-Tate.

Forbes has represented the NRA since 2009 and as of the last quarter of 2015 was still registered to lobby for the organization. On his lobbying disclosure, Forbes wrote that he was signed up to lobby for “Issues related to 2nd Amendment rights, regulation and gun control, and tax and appropriations related to same; issues related to corporate tax reform.” (Update at 4:41 p.m. ET: Jennifer Baker, director of public affairs for the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, emails us to say that “Jeff Forbes is no longer an NRA consultant.”)

What was that again?

Update at 4:41 p.m. ET: Jennifer Baker, director of public affairs for the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, emails us to say that “Jeff Forbes is no longer an NRA consultant.”

[NWCorona]

14. Thanks for that info

But you do realize that your qouted text states that he left 4Q 15 right? That's less than 3 months ago.

[MADem]

17. So? I'm not taking your point.

He did the job for five years and didn't like it.

Are you saying that no one can think better of a position? That once they've signed on to a POV, they have to stick to it?

If that's the case, you'd better assume a defensive stance...! LOL!

[NWCorona]

26. No I'm not saying that at all

I'm saying that it's highly convenient that he just resigned his position. This is the same person along with the Blackstone guy that was going to host a fundraiser for Clinton last year but it was canceled and postponed due to the fact that it would look bad.

[MADem]

27. "Highly convenient?" Like it's "highly convenient" that Sanders distanced

himself from some of HIS positions after he declared for office? Mmmm hmm.

I guess only some people are allowed to change their minds?

I'd be interested in knowing how much lobbying this guy ever did--maybe you can find that out. After all, Alan Grayson's new girlfriend who is running for his House seat is a "registered lobbyist," but she doesn't actually do much lobbying. Being on the list gets her in a lot of doors.

[NWCorona]

30. Yeah 1972 is comparable to 2015

So while we're at it can see bring up the goldwater girl?

Yes. People can change their minds but I'm saying that IMHO this case is highly suspect.

The fact that neither of us knows the extent of his lobbying only fuels my point.

[MADem]

31. Ah, the NWCorona "time" exemption! OK!

Why is it "highly suspect?"

I've told you that registered lobbyists often don't do ANY lobbying on the topic for which they are registered.

Do we even know this guy did any actual "work," or was he just added on to a list to accommodate a portfolio?

[NWCorona]

33. Why?

I just said that a previous event by this same guy was canceled (postponed) because of the backlash.

He knows that his biscuit will be buttered more efficiently with the Clinton's.

[MADem]

34. You did?

Funny how those experts at (cough) The Intercept didn't even know that the guy was "off the list" when they wrote this hit piece.

Or maybe they did, and they liked the hit, hoping that the correction would go unnoticed.

Seems to me they should have done a little homework at that point--even before that point--to find out exactly if this guy had a toe in (his name on a list) or he was wading in the deep with those guys.

But maybe that would have harshed the agenda.

[NWCorona]

35. Did you read the article as it was updated the same day to reflect that

"Forbes has represented the NRA since 2009 and as of the last quarter of 2015 was still registered to lobby for the organization. On his lobbying disclosure, Forbes wrote that he was signed up to lobby for “Issues related to 2nd Amendment rights, regulation and gun control, and tax and appropriations related to same; issues related to corporate tax reform.” Update at 4:41 p.m. ET: Jennifer Baker, director of public affairs for the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, emails us to say that “Jeff Forbes is no longer an NRA consultant."

[MADem]

36. Yes, but, as I said, when people are put on those LISTS, they don't always do that WORK.

They are on the lists in case they need to intervene for the firm, but they often barely touch the portfolio.

This is why I wanted to know if he'd actually done any WORK, any LOBBYING, on the behalf of the NRA.

You'd think those Jimmy Olsens over that INTERCEPT would be hot on that, to bolster their argument...especially after they were busted that the guy is a "WAS" -- not an "IS."

[NWCorona]

38. It could be as simple as the NRA not getting back to them in time.

The article before the update was still very clear in spelling out the time frame of his time with the NRA.
Especially considering that the fillings happen quarterly. They used the last available statement.

[MADem]

39. Anything is possible--but this is the Intercept.

Follow the money....

[NWCorona]

40. True

But that can be said for any of these people.

[jack_krass]

42. Ahh, Now I get what Hillary means when she talks about

"Going after" the Gun lobby. Lol

[Lizzie Poppet]

6. She must think she has the primary there completely locked up.

But aggressive advocacy of gun control remains utterly toxic in the General...so I have zero doubt that if she locks up the nomination, she'll pivot back so fast she'll risk whiplash. If she doesn't, she'll be fucking the downballot hard, sans lube.

Oh, and as always with bullshit attempts to paint Sanders as pro-gun, it should be pointed out he maintains a D- rating with the NRA and supports most proposed new gun regulations. His vote for the prohibition of anti-democratic nuisance lawsuits was, of course, the correct one, so a full "F" shouldn't be expected. Even the NRA can manage the "stopped clock" thing.

[Barack_America]

19. Is she actively trying to lose?

Is she aware that NC has a semi-open primary?

Someone here reported getting a pro-gun control mailer from Clinton in MI. Golly gee, I do wonder why independents broke so hard for Sanders at the last minute here.

[revbones]

9. Interesting given that NRA lobbyist hosted fund-raiser

Must've already gotten the money, now she needs to flip again to a different audience.

Too bad she wouldn't actually stick to any principles if she got in. She'd just do the same as when she stabbed us in the back on the bankruptcy bill after speaking against it, taking their money, then voting for it.

[MADem]

15. He's not representing the NRA anymore.

Update at 4:41 p.m. ET: Jennifer Baker, director of public affairs for the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, emails us to say that “Jeff Forbes is no longer an NRA consultant.”

You were saying?

Unless no one is allowed to distance themselves from dumb assertions, ever?

[revbones]

16. He was as recently as 4th quarter 2015. nt

[MADem]

20. So--if it's recent, then it's not a sincere parting? Just what are you insisting?

Update at 4:41 p.m. ET: Jennifer Baker, director of public affairs for the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, emails us to say that “Jeff Forbes is no longer an NRA consultant.”

Sounds to me like he tried it and didn't like it. YMMV.

[revbones]

21. If you really need to believe that there are no ties, have at it.

But deep down, whether you admit the truth or not, it's there.

[MADem]

28. Mmmm hmmmm. I see--it's ok to disbelieve that people have severed associations

with stances, beliefs, and attitudes.

I'll remember that.

[revbones]

29. Take what you will from that.

I can't be responsible for whatever you believe.

[Hiraeth]

12. She has nothing to lose in NC.

[SMC22307]

41. I dunno. NC has a semi-open primary.

Unaffiliated voters can vote in any recognized party's primary. Registered party members can only vote their party's ballot.

http://enr.ncsbe.gov/voter_stats/results.aspx?date=02-13-2016

Democrats - 2,633,871
Republican - 1,971,440
Libertarian - 27,984
Unaffiliated - 1,835,981

Bernie Sanders draws thousands to Raleigh rally

RALEIGH — Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders drew thousands of supporters to a rally in downtown Raleigh on Friday, four days before primary elections in North Carolina and four other states.

At least 1,000 people showed up who couldn’t get inside the 2,300-seat Memorial Auditorium, which was full. Sanders emerged on the steps of the venue and addressed the outside crowd before delivering his speech inside.

....

The Vermont senator hit all his campaign notes — campaign finance reform, student debt, health care, war, pay equity and the environment among them — and emphasized women’s and minority issues. He met briefly before his speech with the African-American caucus of the N.C. Democratic Party, and with John Boyd Jr., a Virginia activist and founder of an advocacy group for black farmers. Afterward, Boyd endorsed him.

Caucus official Jaymes Powell Jr. said his group wasn’t making an endorsement but liked what Sanders had to say on most issues.

....

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article65465677.html#storylink=cpy

I'm not convinced NC is in the tank for Clinton, and those nearly 2 million Unaffiliateds are crucial.

[Hiraeth]

43. NC will probably go R in the general that is why I say she has nothing to lose. She knows this.

[mmonk]

23. I get the stereotyping.

Just because we were taken over in 2010, don't overplay it.

[DrFunkenstein]

37. Disturbing: She's Lost The White Male Vote Generally And Won't Carry Any of These Southern States

All these big wins may get her the nomination, but more and more it looks like Clinton would struggle in battleground states. She doesn't have to worry about North Carolina. She has to worry about places like New Hampshire, Virginia, Pennsylvania, etc. with a big hunting population.

I'm seriously thinking that Trump may have the electoral math on his side. Which is damn frightening.