Board Elections and the Norquist Recall

NRA Ballot

By now many of you are getting your ballots for NRA Board. We used to do endorsements, but not being able time or money wise to go to Arlington for a few days and sit in on committee meetings, I can’t tell you I’m connected enough these days to offer a truly informed opinion. I can tell you the Board members we’ve gotten to know over the time we were more active. In the past we’ve endorsed Tom King. I think Tom is supporting Trump this year, but we won’t hold that against him :) We’ve also endorsed Carol Bambery before, along with Sandy Froman, and Graham Hill. You can see our whole list from this cycle previously here. I would not change my votes. In the past we’ve only endorsed people we either know directly, or who we’ve heard from people we know directly need some help and are worthy of help.

I’d also note that Ted Nugent is up this year. While he apologized for posting that last anti-semitic post, the excuse he offered was that he was not careful. I think he’s given way too many black eyes to NRA the past several years, so I’m not inclined to vote for him. He’ll make it anyway on name recognition, but I won’t be part of electing him to another term.

As for the recall of Grover Norquist, I will be voting no on that. In the past I’ve expressed skepticism over Norquist because if you look up “DC insider” in a dictionary, you’ll find a picture of Grover. Sometimes those folks have different agendas, but I’m told Norquist has been very effective at helping NRA out. Also, the “charges” against him look like bullshit and quackery to me, and apparently the person leveling them didn’t even bother showing up to the hearing to make his case.

Todd Rathner is a fellow Board Member and a lobbyist. He’s been spearheading a lot of these knife rights bills, and is generally pretty effective at getting shit done. So if he’s saying it would be a huge mistake to boot Grover I believe him.

Many voting yes and advocating for a yes vote are doing so because Norquist has advocated positions in favor of amnesty. Whether I agree with Norquist on that issue or not, I am steadfastly against NRA taking any position on immigration policy, so I’m happy to vote no on the recall of Grover Norquist.

12 thoughts on “Board Elections and the Norquist Recall”

  1. I would suggest you hope the NRA and every other pro-Constitution/Pro invidiual rights takes a stand against illegal immigration. It is an undenieable fact that if Democrats have the Presidency, the Congress, the Supreme Court and the State Govts gun rights will be destroyed. It is an UNDENIEABLE fact tha illegal(and legal) immigrants overhwelmingly vote Democract. Is it is a fact that immigrants coming fro third world(and most first world) countries have little or no experience with personal freedoms or with owning guns….and they aren’t coming here for them. They are coming for a better paycheck. It is also an undenieable fact that many of the so-called RED states are in fact just a few million from turning solid blue(Texas, Florida, etc). If you change the demographics with illegal immigration you change the politics and the culture….California is a perfect example of what happens to gun rights when that happens. So yes, gun rights organizations need to look at the big picture. Unchecked illigal immigration is quite simply the greatest threat to gun rights and the one thing that can destroy them in a generation. You can’t fight the numbers.

    1. There are a lot of things that affect voting patterns. I don’t think it’s NRA’s issue. Should VoterID laws be their issue? What about state election law in general? NRA’s been very successful as a single-issue organization. I don’t want to see them grading politicians based on their position on laws that affect voting patterns. Almost everything does.

    2. I’m sorry, but your nuts Jim Jackson.

      Each and every point you claim to be UNDENIABLE is in fact pretty easily refutable.

      1. I’m pretty sure that one of the major reasons the Democrats support illegals (and perhaps legals, also) is their support. I’ve seen studies that indicate that a majority of them agree with the Democrat platform, so in a numbers game they come out ahead.

        If you can refute his points, though, please do so.

  2. “I think Tom is supporting Trump this year, but we won’t hold that against him…”

    If it’s true, I will!

    “Ted Nugent is up this year.”

    Does anyone know a strategy for bullet-voting against a single candidate, in an election like this? (And please, no puns about “bullet” voting. They’re too obvious.)

  3. I’m looking at in reverse. 31 on the ballot. Vote for 25. So who not to vote for. Pick six.

  4. Thank you for the article. I was unaware that Mr. Norquist was on the NRA board. Tonight, I have requested that the NRA cancel my membership in large part because of Mr. Norquist’s position on the board. I have professional associates and social acquaintances that have a different view of both him and some of the other people mentioned in the article.
    I am not a voting member, and never have been, although I considered getting a life membership some years back. That will no longer be the case.

    1. This is the kind of thing that results when the NRA digresses from its nominal single issue.

      In this case it is not the NRA’s fault, strictly speaking, as Norquist was elected by the membership. I won’t urge you to change your mind, other than to point out that if you remained and were a voting member, you could at least make your opposition to him visible with your vote.

      All of the above said, I admit I see a problem developing as the NRA de facto winks at too many squirrely “conservative” side issues, if only by (arguably) pandering to a loon base as the low-hanging fruit for member recruitment. They bring their issues with them.

  5. As the Lyons letter posits, if Norquist’s NRA board position can be used to damage the NRA in the view of the public, due to his connection to Islamic terrorism, then he must be removed. There appears to be enough of a “smoking gun” connection to warrant this action. Certainly enough to convince “Joe public”. We do not need this, and the long term political cost, to the NRA, and gun owners, could be huge. I’ll be voting to get rid of him.

    1. …so you’re against ANY candidate that can be used to damage the NRA in the view of the public?

Comments are closed.