Bloomberg Money Can't buy Virginia Elections

[lostinblue 1,989]

Bloomberg Money Can't buy Virginia Elections

Michael Bloomberg lost a lot of money in the two Virginia elections in 2015 last night. Bloomberg's surrogate disarmist organization spent about 2.2 million dollars trying to buy a Virginia state Senate seat, and a Virginia House of Delegates seat.

Bloomberg reportedly spent $2.2 million in the two elections. He spent $700,000 in the Senate race. From townhall.com:

A day earlier, Everytown said it would spend $700,000 on ads for Democrat Dan Gecker, who is battling Republican Glen Sturtevant to represent part of Richmond and the surrounding suburbs in the Senate. That seat is being vacated by retiring Sen. John C. Watkins (R-Powhatan).

Here are the vote totals for the Virginia Senate election from virginia.gov:

Bloomberg's man, Daniel A. Gecker - 26,171 votes, 47.09 %
Republican Glen H. Sturtevant, Jr. - 27,665 votes, 49.78 %

According to Townhall, Bloomberg spent 1.5 million to attempt to elect disarmist Democrat Jeremy McPike in the Virginia House of Delegates.

Less than two weeks before Election Day, Everytown for Gun Safety announced Thursday that it would spend $1.5 million in TV and online ads for Democrat Jeremy McPike. He is running against Manassas Mayor Harry J. “Hal” Parrish II ® to succeed retiring Sen. Charles J. Colgan (D-Prince William).

It appears that Bloomberg money is toxic to the candidates he wants elected. Here are the results of the Virginia House of Delegates effort, precinct 029. From virginia.gov:

Bloomberg candidate Jeremy S. McPike: 2,806 votes, 41.32 %
Republican Harry J. "Hal" Parrish III: 3,876 votes, 58.55 %

The lesson on this seems clear. Spending money in an election to tout the anti Second Amendment stands of a candidate is very effective - for his opposition.

I am sure that there are a few election districts where the population has been sufficiently propagandised that disarmist ads would be a plus. New York City comes to mind. But those seats would be occupied by disarmists in any case. Republicans have come down heavily on the side of protecting the right to have and carry firearms. Independents are clearly moving in that direction, and now top 50% in the polling data.

American voters have been ratcheting up support for the Second Amendment over the last 50 years. Support drops during an emotional push by the media cartel for more infringements on the Second Amendment. Then, as people actually investigate the legislation proposed, the arguments, and the facts, a significant number of people are converted to Second Amendment supporters. The ratchet does not work in the opposite direction because the facts and logic are against the disarmists.

Comments sections on Internet sites and newspapers are central to this ratcheting effect, as they are primary ways in which people obtain facts about the Second Amendment debate. Nearly everything put forward by disarmists is either a lie or a distortion. When people discern the truth and the facts, which they easily can with some digging on the Internet, they become Second Amendment supporters. Numerous academics have switched their position from being in favor of ever stricter gun controls, to favoring the rights of people to be armed for self defense. I have yet to see a pro-rights academic switch to a disarmist position.

http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2015/11/bloomberg-money-cant-buy-virginia.html

[X Factor 1,112]

Who would vote for virgins?