The Weekly Reload Podcast examines how gun control groups are out-fundraising the NRA ahead of the 2024 election, as Ed Morrissey of Hot Air weighs in on what this financial edge might mean for Second Amendment supporters.
As we enter the final stretch before the historic 2024 election, the fight for financial backing between gun rights and gun control groups is heating up, highlighting more profound questions about the role of money in shaping political influence.
Gun Control Funding Outpaces NRA
This year, gun control groups like Everytown for Gun Safety, Giffords, and the Brady Campaign have gained a financial edge over the NRA and its allies. Ed Morrissey, managing editor at Hot Air, notes that these groups now have a massive fundraising advantage, primarily thanks to a few wealthy and desperate donors like Michael Bloomberg and the backing of larger progressive dark money networks.
With this financial support, gun control groups have secured significant spending power, allowing them to push their agenda in various state and local races across the country.
But Morrissey questions whether this funding surge will truly translate into a significant advantage on Election Day. Although gun control groups have a clear funding lead, Morrissey believes the results of the highest-profile races may not be heavily swayed by money alone. Instead, the deeply rooted values held by voters on both sides of the gun debate may play a more decisive role.
The NRA’s Targeted Strategy
In contrast, the NRA and other gun rights groups have taken a more focused approach, targeting key races like those of Senators Jon Tester in Montana and Jared Golden in Maine. Morrissey points out that this strategic spending aligns with the core supporters of the gun rights movement, aiming to make impactful investments where possible rather than trying to match gun control groups dollar-for-dollar.
The NRA’s approach reflects a more cautious stance following recent struggles. After years of financial and internal management issues, former NRA donors may be hesitant to contribute to large organizations and instead shift their support to smaller, more effective, hardline groups like The Second Amendment Foundation and Gun Owners of America (GOA). While these groups advocate fiercely for gun rights, they lack the NRA’s historical reach, creating a gap that the pro-gun side has yet to bridge fully.
Ad Messaging & “Coalition Spending”
As for how each side is spending, a notable trend this election is what Morrissey calls “coalition spending” by groups like Everytown. With a well-funded coalition, gun control groups are expanding their spending beyond traditional races, even putting resources into school board elections. Everytown and Giffords are also running ads that combine gun control with other high-profile issues, like abortion, aiming to capture voters focused on multiple issues at once. The NRA, meanwhile, has linked gun rights with crime control, arguing that the two are closely related.
Both sides recognize that tying their cause to broader social concerns could strengthen their appeal. For gun control advocates, highlighting gun policy alongside abortion rights could resonate with left-leaning voters who prioritize judicial decisions and a progressive court system. Meanwhile, the NRA’s focus on crime and self-defense speaks directly to its core supporters, emphasizing how Second Amendment rights protect personal safety.
Kamala Harris vs. Donald Trump: A Contrast in Gun Policy
Both major party candidates have approached gun policy in unique ways. While Kamala Harris claims to own a handgun for self-defense, her past support for gun control policies and “mandatory buybacks” has led many gun rights supporters to view her stance with skepticism. Morrissey argues that her recent statements may not be enough to convince voters who remember her more restrictive views from earlier campaigns.
On the other hand, Trump’s messaging has centered on the importance of protecting gun rights, often reminding voters to head to the polls and painting Harris as a threat to the Second Amendment. Morrissey suggests that, despite Trump’s occasional controversial statements on gun policy (such as his past support for “red flag” laws and the political maneuvering around bump stock ban), he has built a level of trust among gun owners, largely due to his record of Supreme Court appointments that led to major pro-gun rulings.
The Real Question: Does Money Make the Difference?
For both sides, the bottom line remains: how much does funding sway voter decisions, especially on such a deeply personal and value-driven issue as gun rights? According to Morrissey, while significant funding certainly allows gun control groups to extend their reach, it’s uncertain whether this financial edge will result in an electoral advantage. For many gun rights voters, the choice is clear, and no amount of money is likely to change their stance.
As we careen toward Election Day, the divide over gun rights and gun control funding is a microcosm of the broader American political landscape—where funding, ideology, and voter turnout are tightly interwoven. Regardless of where the money flows, it’s the voters, driven by their deeply held beliefs, who will ultimately determine the outcome.
Read Related:
