Let’s say your flawed premise is right: that the NRA helped elect Harry Reid (as other posters pointed out, they did NOT endorse Reid).
Ergo (remember, flawed premise and all that), Harry remained victorious over Angle.
The resultant situation: Majority Leader Harry Reid. The alternate situation: Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.
Even if the flawed premise is correct, the NRA achieved its goal, did it not? Do you think Chuck Schumer (Brady Bill II sponsor, would have registered ALL guns federally) would be remotely friendly to gun rights?
We may have another opportunity to get a Thune Amendment (national CCW) attached to a defense bill, or other pro-gun amendments brought up.
I see your premise as being flawed. Here is one bit of reality... the NRA could care less what either of us think. It is not the NRA that I joined as a kid... or my Father’s NRA... or before him... his Father’s. Anyone paying close attention to what the NRA leadership has been about the last few years, cannot be happy with what has taken place. They have done some very good things... but they are much like politicians today... untrustworthy and out for themselves.
LLS
Ergo (remember, flawed premise and all that), Harry remained victorious over Angle.
The resultant situation: Majority Leader Harry Reid. The alternate situation: Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. "
The NRA may not have endorsed Reid, but they did quietly donate money to him, which amounted to a tacit endorsement.
Many of us around here were thinking more along the lines of "Minority Leader Chuckie Schumer."
We just might have gotten there, too, if not for the efforts of (being totally honest about it here) the RSCC. The NRA didn't help matters with their tacit endorsement of Reid.