Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 10/22/2009 2:13:56 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/22/2009 2:16:21 PM EST by thelaststand]
I remember a few times when the NRA gave high grades to politicians who have anti-gun pasts. Does this still happen?
Link Posted: 10/23/2009 2:09:39 PM EST
Yes, their ratings are crap.
Link Posted: 10/23/2009 10:21:50 PM EST
Hmm, I was not aware of this and have often used NRA ratings as a guide before voting. Anyone have specific examples?
Link Posted: 10/24/2009 2:57:50 AM EST
2006, Jeanine Pirro running for NY AG was given a C. She deserved an F as for years she used her office as Westchester DA as a soapbox for gun control. 2008, Sandy Treadwell was giving an A in his Congressional bid while his record as NY GOP chief at best suggested indifference to the issue. Plus he lied in a campaign mailer. From what I've seen, about 25% to 35% of their ratings are off, either too pro or too anti. In the NY-23 special Congressional election Dede Scozzafava was given an A, but that is a bit generous as while she voted with us against gun control, I can't recall her ever promoting pro-gun bills.

To be fair I don't believe all of this is deliberate. I do not think they spend enough time looking at incumbent records and I do not believe they research challengers enough to make informed decisions. Most of their endorsements go to incumbents and the bulk of them don't really need them. I suspect that is because they just don't have the ability to use their resources in the most effective manner.
Link Posted: 10/24/2009 9:14:37 AM EST
Originally Posted By nyrkba:
2006, Jeanine Pirro running for NY AG was given a C. She deserved an F as for years she used her office as Westchester DA as a soapbox for gun control. 2008, Sandy Treadwell was giving an A in his Congressional bid while his record as NY GOP chief at best suggested indifference to the issue. Plus he lied in a campaign mailer. From what I've seen, about 25% to 35% of their ratings are off, either too pro or too anti. In the NY-23 special Congressional election Dede Scozzafava was given an A, but that is a bit generous as while she voted with us against gun control, I can't recall her ever promoting pro-gun bills.

To be fair I don't believe all of this is deliberate. I do not think they spend enough time looking at incumbent records and I do not believe they research challengers enough to make informed decisions. Most of their endorsements go to incumbents and the bulk of them don't really need them. I suspect that is because they just don't have the ability to use their resources in the most effective manner.


After looking at some scores of politicians I know well, I found their scores were very acurate. I guess a few slipups will happen given that there must be over 1000 people to score nationwide. Are there anymore examples of bad scores?
Link Posted: 10/24/2009 9:25:43 AM EST
As I said I see about 25-35% of their grades are off every cycle, either too pro or too anti. One Assemblyman votes against us everytime and has a press release touting gun control on his website gets a B while another who votes with us everytime and sponsors good bills get a ?. One former Assemblyman got As and endorsements when he voted against us 50-60% of the time. I gave him the C he deserved an took him out in a primary. The list goes on.
Link Posted: 10/24/2009 10:02:57 AM EST
I'm trying to find Obama's score.

I give him an F. He is clearly anti-gun and also lies about it, so I think the NRA should give a special mark to people who want to do a gun grab but who lie in order to get votes.
F* or something like that.
Link Posted: 11/1/2009 6:30:53 AM EST
As I said I see about 25-35% of their grades are off every cycle, either too pro or too anti.
How can one be too Pro? Please elaborate....
Link Posted: 11/1/2009 9:24:19 PM EST
I think he means that the NRA's grade is erroneously shifted in either the "pro" or "anti" direction.

For example, if a particular candidate should have a C rating, the NRA's rating would be too "pro" if it gave this candidate a B rating or too "anti" if it gave this candidate a D rating.
Link Posted: 11/5/2009 7:45:54 AM EST
Originally Posted By NonDescript:
I think he means that the NRA's grade is erroneously shifted in either the "pro" or "anti" direction.

For example, if a particular candidate should have a C rating, the NRA's rating would be too "pro" if it gave this candidate a B rating or too "anti" if it gave this candidate a D rating.


Yes.

Top Top