Tuesday, April 30, 2019

NRA Attendance And Voting Statistics

The official attendance at the NRA Annual Meeting in Indianapolis was approximately 81,000. This is about 6,000 less than last year's meeting in Dallas. I will say I had no trouble getting about on the floor nor in the hallways of the Indiana Convention Center.

Now to more important statistics.

At the Meeting of Members on Saturday, William Satterfield, chairman of the Elections Committee announced the statistics for the 2019 NRA Board of Directors election.

2,452,893 ballots were bound in the official magazines of the NRA 
145,920 ballots received back 
141,101 ballot were valid 
4,819 were invalid
Ballots that were deemed invalid for a variety of reasons. Among the reasons enumerated by Mr. Satterfield were arrival after the April 7th cutoff date, more than 25 candidates marked, no candidates marked, and some were actually prior year ballots. I think he said there was even one ballot from 2009.

When you do the math, you are left with the conclusion that most members eligible to vote - Life members and 5-year continuous members - don't give a big rat's ass who serves on the Board. The response rate for just returning the ballot was 5.94% and the response rate for a valid ballot was 5.75%.

That is pathetic. Moreover, it is scary. Think what could happen to gun rights if Michael Bloomberg just spent a few million bucks on advertising to run a slate of stealth (or Manchurian) candidates. With the proper slate and modern ad targeting, it would be possible to take over the organization in as little as two years. Whether it could be kept secret for that long is another matter.


  1. It's no wonder they put whomever they want on the damn board... sigh

  2. I shall not tell a lie. I'm one of the non-voters.

    Unlike my local elections, I've got no clue what is going on with everyone at the NRA. I read one article that states so and so is the second coming, and in another article the so and so is the debbil.

    I would love to have the free time to be able to become politically active. But I can barely get free time to read my magazines or to even watch GOT. /shrugs

  3. Consider me skeptical.

    Adam Kraut, who has popular appeal, can't even get elected to a 1 year term by NRAAM attendees, but it's possible for Bloomberg to buy and win multiple BoD elections?

  4. Another way of looking at it is that my ballot has a 17-18x force multiplier. That could be next year's push: vote this year because unlike normal elections, your one vote here is equal to 17 votes in any other election. Like the cereal commercials of old.

  5. Color me skeptical about a stealth Bloomberg takeover. I am a habitual non-voter (for reasons similar to Gladorn) but would vote if Bloomberg tried something. And it would be impossible to keep that secret. The arcane NRA voting rules, which are routinely derided as designed to keep WLP in power, predate him and were designed to prevent exactly such an attempt by an earlier generation of gun banners.

    1. He said "stealth" candidate, remember?

    2. "Stealth". That was the word.

    3. And I said stealth is impossible. Three people can keep a secret if two of them are dead.

  6. I'll jump on Gladorn's comment. I have no idea who these people are and no way to find out. I might, if I stumbled across the onlygunsandmoney blog, have a bit of background on some of them, but then I have to assume that the author of that site has some actual insider knowledge that I don't. I only once remember, in all my years of being a life member, that there were paid advertisements in the NRA magazines pimping for a particular slate. Other than that I would peruse the ballot, see a few names that I recognized from things other than the NRA and, if I had a favorable impression of them from those other things, check the box. I don't think I ever voted for a full slate. I don't know what the solution is but it isn't more people randomly checking off names on a ballot once a year. Political campaigns I can go to various websites and see who they endorse. I can read articles about the candidates, usually by multiple authors. I can see their crazy statements on the news and look up their voting records on government websites. NRA Board? Not sure what I am expected to look at or to read. Near as I could tell, whoever was on the board was doing a good job, right up until they weren't. So now what?

  7. Why should Bloomberg spend over $60,000,000 in membership dues alone (100,000 * the $600 discount-rate life membership) on a long term plan to hijack the board in order to destroy the NRA from the inside, when the NRA board is already doing a great job of doing just that on it's own?


  8. Don't look at it in terms of Bloomberg buying elected officials at a campaign level.

    This week I found out that there is a Dan Boren involved in this, apparently the son of David Boren, former University of Oklahoma president. Both are Democrats. David was very active in signalling his support for leftwing politics before he left the university, and apparently obtained money for the University from the Bloomberg foundation at some point. David is a former Senator and Governor.

    So, technically, Bloomberg could potentially buy people who have been elected to the Board of Directors, depending on family connections. It isn't clear that the opportunity Dan Boren could have presented would be worth that investment. Is he even for sure on the NRA BoD? Would the timing actually work out for the Borens to have sold Bloomberg an opportunity?

    Even if one takes for granted that Dan is a servant of the adversary, the true purpose of his acts are unclear. Is the La Pierre establishment competent, and removal of it necessary to neutralize the NRA as a force in the 2020 election? Or is it incompetent, and this internal act a matter of setting it up for external attack? Was one of the seemingly okay alternatives to the La Pierre establishment compromised in some manner?

    Ballots bound in magazines does not necessarily translate to members eligible to vote. a) people may receive magazines who are not eligible. b) an eligible voter may obtain more than one magazine title.

  9. RE: "2,452,893 ballots were bound in the official magazines of the NRA" Does that include ballots sent by USPS mail to those of us who do not receive any NRA paper magazines, or is that a separate number above and beyond the 2,452,893? I get everything online and my ballot shows up in the mailbox.

    See the comment from "Anonymous May 1, 2019 at 3:35 PM" in which he said "Ballots bound in magazines does not necessarily translate to members eligible to vote. a) people may receive magazines who are not eligible. b) an eligible voter may obtain more than one magazine title."

    What are those numbers? Specifically, is there any mechanism in place to limit total number of ballots sent to a single named eligible member?

    RE: voting. In 40 years I've never voted for anywhere near 25 candidates because: 1) If I don't know them / know of them well enough / can't find out about them they don't get my vote; 2) I couldn't care less how many disciplines they shoot in, how many matches they've won or how much gunsmithing they've done, I'm interested in board members who will advocate for and fight for gun ownership rights and Take No Prisoners in the process. That comes first.

    And, reading the "descriptions" (advertisements?) for the candidates, HOW MANY OF THEM HAVE THE TIME TO SERIOUSLY AND ACTIVELY PURSUE PRO-GUN POLITICAL ACTIVITIES? It's great that Wilhelm Q. Snerdly runs a world-class gunsmithy or shoots every high power match across 7 states, but when does he find the time to buttonhole politicians who oppose us or campaign for those who do?

    1. From what Satterfield said, I believe the 2,452,893 would also include those ballots mailed to a eligible member. He concentrated on saying bound in the magazine but, to the best of my knowledge, this would also include those that were mailed.