Even when the NRA is having a “bad day” and being called aggressive, Cupp argued, it actually ends up being a good day for them usually, in terms of membership. “The politics of maligning the NRA is probably not a strategically good idea,” she added, noting that while there’s “been an urgency to vilify” the organization, polling and gun sales numbers show otherwise. Gun control advocates would do better to focus on concrete legislation and proposals, Cupp advised.
To that point, The Financial Times‘ Gillian Tett agreed. While some would love to believe the NRA is “losing the PR war,” that doesn’t
“The NRA is not a way of life,” John Heilemann countered, asserting that it’s an interest group that mainly represents manufacturers, not gun owners. Here, Cupp disagreed. Yes, they’ve taken corporate money, she said, but it technically it does represent gun owners.
Speaking of the NRA, the segment then moved to Christie — who yesterday deemed the new NRA ad “reprehensible.” Cupp viewed this response as a “missed opportunity.” Thinking it would be good to hear his opinion on gun control, she said, but instead “the first thing you hear out of him are thinks thoughts on this ad.”
“I just think it really kind of cheapened the debate and cheapened his influence,” Cupp contended. “He had a real opportunity there and he squandered it.”
Mike Barnicle replied that it wasn’t the first time Christie had spoken about. Indeed, he’d been on their own show recently. Asked whether she, too, found the ad “reprehensible,” Cupp said she did not. “I think they were making a point, I don’t think they made it particularly well,” she said. “The point was valid.”
That led to the fellow hosts and guests to assert she’d take issue if
Watch below, via MSNBC: