Wednesday, January 08, 2014

Bloomberg Giving Up?

That's the question that Hot Air asks.  It seems that with the Senate midterms coming up later this year and the House being fully roiled every two years, the Democrats have decided that having an outfit like Mayors Against (Some) Illegal Guns targeting Democrats who are squishy on gun control is a bad thing.
Halperin added that, while there are many Democrats in the Senate up for reelection this year, they all enjoy some advantages; including strong fundraising, weak Republican challengers, and incumbency itself. These incumbents, he insisted, may hang on in November in spite of six-year midterm headwinds, but attacking these Senate Democrats from the left could imperil them by reducing the base’s enthusiasm.
The Dems are asking Bloomberg to hold off on Dems in red states (Like our own Senator, Mary Landrieu, who enjoys a good rating from the NRA), go silent for now on the gun issue, and try to keep the Democrats in their seats.   So, it's a political consideration.  Keep the Dems in power and hope for better headwinds on gun control later.

I don't think for a minute that Bloomberg is giving up on gun control.  However, I'd like for someone to ask him if his bodyguards are armed.  Bloomberg's not against guns, he's just against my guns.


plblark said...

OR, this could be yet another reason why MAIG and Moms Demand Action merged.

Rivrdog said...

Bumberg has shifted his attention to State Legislatures. We're going to get a huge Bloomie-financed gun control push in Oregon this year, starting with Senate Bill 700, a pre-Registration law.

Makes sense from a "bang for buck" perspective: it costs hundreds of millions to play his game with the US Senate, but a hundred thou here and there in State races can swing an entire State Legislature.