If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Talking Points Memo)   Bill Clinton urges another Democrat to challenge McConnell. Clearly, he wants Judd all to himself   (livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line 51
    More: Interesting, Democrat Party, Bill Clinton, McConnell v. FEC, Senate GOP  
•       •       •

919 clicks; posted to Politics » on 20 Mar 2013 at 8:37 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



51 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-20 08:15:43 AM  
Who polls better?
 
2013-03-20 08:29:49 AM  
All he has to do is play basketball for Kentucky, from what I hear.
 
2013-03-20 08:34:09 AM  

DamnYankees: Who polls better?

 
2013-03-20 08:35:21 AM  

FirstNationalBastard: DamnYankees: Who polls better?


i6.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-20 08:40:59 AM  

DamnYankees: Who polls better?


Considering one is the current Secretary of State and the other is a bi-polar, anti-child birth, liberal movie star, I'm guessing who polls better a year and 4 months out of an election isn't the question you should be asking when deciding who could win a statewide race in Kentucky.
 
2013-03-20 08:41:16 AM  

Nabb1: All he has to do is play basketball for Kentucky, from what I hear.


I think a disgraced former Kentucky agricultural commissioner may tell you otherwise.
 
2013-03-20 08:51:58 AM  

DamnYankees: Who polls better?


Bill

/wink wink nudge nudge
 
2013-03-20 08:59:55 AM  

WTF Indeed: DamnYankees: Who polls better?

Considering one is the current Secretary of State and the other is a bi-polar, anti-child birth, liberal movie star, I'm guessing who polls better a year and 4 months out of an election isn't the question you should be asking when deciding who could win a statewide race in Kentucky.


We've got the new talking points here boys, dismiss her because she has an under-control mental illness and she encourages people to consider adoption.  This should last until she starts getting serious media traction, at which point the old "get back to the kitchen" and "slut" comments should resurface.

I wonder how long until Rush Limbaugh or Hannity or some other conservative thought-leader says she deserves to get raped.
 
2013-03-20 09:01:22 AM  

Bored Horde: I wonder how long until Rush Limbaugh or Hannity or some other conservative thought-leader says she deserves to get raped.


I thought conservative "comedian" and occasional union punching bag Steve Crowder kicked off the Ashley Judd rape jokes at CPAC. Oh, conservative humor!
 
2013-03-20 09:02:28 AM  

Bored Horde: WTF Indeed: DamnYankees: Who polls better?

Considering one is the current Secretary of State and the other is a bi-polar, anti-child birth, liberal movie star, I'm guessing who polls better a year and 4 months out of an election isn't the question you should be asking when deciding who could win a statewide race in Kentucky.

We've got the new talking points here boys, dismiss her because she has an under-control mental illness and she encourages people to consider adoption.  This should last until she starts getting serious media traction, at which point the old "get back to the kitchen" and "slut" comments should resurface.

I wonder how long until Rush Limbaugh or Hannity or some other conservative thought-leader says she deserves to get raped.


Does she still use Apple products?

For someone with an under control mental illness she sure does say things that indicate otherwise.
 
2013-03-20 09:03:37 AM  

Bored Horde: WTF Indeed: DamnYankees: Who polls better?

Considering one is the current Secretary of State and the other is a bi-polar, anti-child birth, liberal movie star, I'm guessing who polls better a year and 4 months out of an election isn't the question you should be asking when deciding who could win a statewide race in Kentucky.

We've got the new talking points here boys, dismiss her because she has an under-control mental illness and she encourages people to consider adoption.  This should last until she starts getting serious media traction, at which point the old "get back to the kitchen" and "slut" comments should resurface.

I wonder how long until Rush Limbaugh or Hannity or some other conservative thought-leader says she deserves to get raped.


Personally, I'd rather vote for the person who has a mental illness that's under control than the unmedicated ones that believe an invisible man in the sky helped them get elected.
 
2013-03-20 09:07:40 AM  

DamnYankees: Who polls better?


Judd probably isn't burdened with a laundry list of promises and skeletons in the closet like a career politician, so the Democratic party will have less control over her.  Senators are  incredibly powerful in America.  Having an actually liberal senator would be a big deal, especially if she started gaming the system to disrupt the current Washington narratives.
 
2013-03-20 09:10:44 AM  

Bored Horde: I wonder how long until Rush Limbaugh or Hannity or some other conservative thought-leader says she they deserves to get raped.


Alison Grimes has a vagina too. She longs for a real American conservative to rape her.
 
2013-03-20 09:11:14 AM  

Bored Horde: We've got the new talking points here boys, dismiss her because she has an under-control mental illness and she encourages people to consider adoption.  This should last until she starts getting serious media traction, at which point the old "get back to the kitchen" and "slut" comments should resurface.


It's almost like that when someone who has never been elected to public office runs other issues come into play. It's also almost like that running statewide in a conservative state like Kentucky, being a bi-polar, anti-child birth, liberal movie star might be a political liability. And it's almost like McConnell has been shown to be weak in past elections, and a strong, moderate-to-conservative democratic candidate would prove to be a real challenge to him, not to mention that if this candidate already had a statewide office and was a woman.

Holy f*ck, Bob! It's like politics is local or some sh*t?!
 
2013-03-20 09:13:29 AM  
I want to see her run. The admittedly little I've seen/read of her politics makes her seem like an actual liberal, something we could use a few of around Washington to counter the hard push right we've been seeing. As for the 'she talks about rape too much' criticism - rape is a serious problem in this country. 1 in 2 women are raped at some point in their lives, and part of what allows that to continue is the culture of silence around it. It's refreshing to see a public figure with the, well, balls to talk about it.
 
2013-03-20 09:14:52 AM  

Mrbogey: Bored Horde: WTF Indeed: DamnYankees: Who polls better?

Considering one is the current Secretary of State and the other is a bi-polar, anti-child birth, liberal movie star, I'm guessing who polls better a year and 4 months out of an election isn't the question you should be asking when deciding who could win a statewide race in Kentucky.

We've got the new talking points here boys, dismiss her because she has an under-control mental illness and she encourages people to consider adoption.  This should last until she starts getting serious media traction, at which point the old "get back to the kitchen" and "slut" comments should resurface.

I wonder how long until Rush Limbaugh or Hannity or some other conservative thought-leader says she deserves to get raped.

Does she still use Apple products?

For someone with an under control mental illness she sure does say things that indicate otherwise.


This is some crap that wouldn't pass the Turing test.  Step up your game.
 
2013-03-20 09:17:45 AM  
"Earlier this month, the former president - a long-time friend of Grimes' father - privately urged the young secretary of state to mount a Senate bid"

"Senate Bid" is what he calls his penis.
 
2013-03-20 09:21:10 AM  

Bored Horde: Mrbogey: Bored Horde: WTF Indeed: DamnYankees: Who polls better?

Considering one is the current Secretary of State and the other is a bi-polar, anti-child birth, liberal movie star, I'm guessing who polls better a year and 4 months out of an election isn't the question you should be asking when deciding who could win a statewide race in Kentucky.

We've got the new talking points here boys, dismiss her because she has an under-control mental illness and she encourages people to consider adoption.  This should last until she starts getting serious media traction, at which point the old "get back to the kitchen" and "slut" comments should resurface.

I wonder how long until Rush Limbaugh or Hannity or some other conservative thought-leader says she deserves to get raped.

Does she still use Apple products?

For someone with an under control mental illness she sure does say things that indicate otherwise.

This is some crap that wouldn't pass the Turing test.  Step up your game.


You didn't get the reference. That's okay, like Kerry noted the other week you have a right to not know anything.
 
2013-03-20 09:22:17 AM  

WTF Indeed: Bored Horde: We've got the new talking points here boys, dismiss her because she has an under-control mental illness and she encourages people to consider adoption.  This should last until she starts getting serious media traction, at which point the old "get back to the kitchen" and "slut" comments should resurface.

It's almost like that when someone who has never been elected to public office runs other issues come into play. It's also almost like that running statewide in a conservative state like Kentucky, being a bi-polar, anti-child birth, liberal movie star might be a political liability. And it's almost like McConnell has been shown to be weak in past elections, and a strong, moderate-to-conservative democratic candidate would prove to be a real challenge to him, not to mention that if this candidate already had a statewide office and was a woman.

Holy f*ck, Bob! It's like politics is local or some sh*t?!


So I guess being a Kentucky native, UK alum, an involved activist, and member of the very popular and beloved Judd family isn't local enough.

You really have no idea how much Naomi and Wynonna are adored by country music fans, do you. They are going to be right there on that stage with Ashley too, nodding in approval and telling Kentuckians who still have their cassette copies of "Mama He's Crazy" to take a chance on little sister.

I'm not saying Grimes is a bad candidate. She may even wind up with the nomination. All Ashley Judd really needs to accomplish is to draw out the worst of the GOP's misogyny, and show Kentuckians that Mitch is afraid of not one, but two girls.

There's no need to engage the party of no ideas. One needs only to hand them the rope, and let them hang themselves from it.
 
2013-03-20 09:24:29 AM  

WTF Indeed: Bored Horde: We've got the new talking points here boys, dismiss her because she has an under-control mental illness and she encourages people to consider adoption.  This should last until she starts getting serious media traction, at which point the old "get back to the kitchen" and "slut" comments should resurface.

It's almost like that when someone who has never been elected to public office runs other issues come into play. It's also almost like that running statewide in a conservative state like Kentucky, being a bi-polar, anti-child birth, liberal movie star might be a political liability. And it's almost like McConnell has been shown to be weak in past elections, and a strong, moderate-to-conservative democratic candidate would prove to be a real challenge to him, not to mention that if this candidate already had a statewide office and was a woman.

Holy f*ck, Bob! It's like politics is local or some sh*t?!


I'm sure you're very concerned about Ashley Judd and her political views.  Very concerned indeed that she might compete in the Democratic primary process, which I'm sure as a card-carrying Democratic party member you'll be participating in.  You're concerned that she's not a Very Serious candidate with Very Serious views on being pro-childbirth (what is this I don't even).  She's getting in the way of another Very Serious Woman and her damn popular appeal will ruin everything.

She's very uppity, isn't she.  Running in a democratic primary process and asking people to consider her for the role of Democratic candidate for Senator.  She's too upset and emotional, having a bipolar diagnosis she's openly discussed in an attempt to battle the stigma against mental illness.  She's irrationalbecause she has encouraged people to adopt before deciding to have their own children, because Kentucky has lots of children that need homes.  Why doesn't she know her place, getting in the way of the more serious candidate?
 
2013-03-20 09:27:09 AM  

DamnYankees: Who polls better?


Ah, this thread again.  Quick summary for folks:

Judd gets better numbers nationally.  With her, the hope is that the GOP as a whole will go nuts attacking her and drive down their overall polling numbers with the general public as a result, as well as vastly overspend to defend a seat in one of the reddest states in the country.  In other words, that whether they win or lose the seat itself, the GOP would lose overall.  The potential drawback is that, while McConnell is vulnerable right now, the numbers on the race are likely to tighten between now and the election; and with Judd being a lot more liberal than the state she's running in, that could wind up costing the Dems a seat that by all rights they should be able to pick up.

Grimes, on the other hand, is a more moderate Clinton Democrat.  She's the current (fairly new) SecState, and polls extremely well in Kentucky; she's arguably the most popular Dem in state politics right now.  Early research polling by the state party suggests that she breaks McConnell by a much safer margin than Judd, and is (at least currently) the single best choice to finally knock him out of the Senate.  The downside is that Grimes is purely local and has no real chance of moving national numbers as a result of the race.  She is also, again, more of a moderate than Judd; while her signature policy pushes to date have included a few civil liberties issues (such as voting rights expansions), her everyday focus tends to be the state economy and balanced business development.
 
2013-03-20 09:40:39 AM  

verbaltoxin: So I guess being a Kentucky native, UK alum, an involved activist, and member of the very popular and beloved Judd family isn't local enough.

You really have no idea how much Naomi and Wynonna are adored by country music fans, do you. They are going to be right there on that stage with Ashley too, nodding in approval and telling Kentuckians who still have their cassette copies of "Mama He's Crazy" to take a chance on little sister.


That's nice. I'm sure moderate Republicans will unquestionably vote for her because they like the songs her sisters did in the 80's.  That's a solid political strategy.

verbaltoxin: I'm not saying Grimes is a bad candidate. She may even wind up with the nomination. All Ashley Judd really needs to accomplish is to draw out the worst of the GOP's misogyny, and show Kentuckians that Mitch is afraid of not one, but two girls.

There's no need to engage the party of no ideas. One needs only to hand them the rope, and let them hang themselves from it.


Yes you are. You're argument is that Judd is a better candidate because she'll bring out "misogyny", something a Grimes candidacy would also do being that she's also a woman. So if both sides are equal, what makes Judd a superior candidate to run for a Kentucky Senate seat.

Bored Horde: Assholic words

Yes, I'm a misogynist because I think one female candidate is better than another female candidate.
 
2013-03-20 09:47:58 AM  

WTF Indeed: songs her sisters did in the 80's


Just to clarify: Naomi is her mother, Winona is her half-sister.
 
2013-03-20 09:58:01 AM  
Kentucky is full of deviants, reprobates and ne'er-do-wells.
 
2013-03-20 10:03:32 AM  
WTF Indeed: words that ignore what verbaltoxin actually said.

1. I didn't say Grimes was a bad candidate. So that's two times I've told you this, care to ignore it again, or acknowledge what I LITERALLY NEVER SAID and bring up a salient point.

2. Christ, you really don't understand how much people in the South love the Judds. They may not win the election for her, but they will help smooth over that Hollywood liberal stuff quite a lot.

3. I also said Judd will be able to point out that McConnell is afraid of two women. Two. Count again. Two. That's including Sec. Grimes. I am picturing a scenario where both are competing for the nomination here. Keep up.

4. Judd works way better as a decoy than Grimes. Grimes can focus on issues and winning statewide support. Judd can bring in tons of outside money and get the Sen. McConnell campaign worked up in a froth. Judd doesn't even have to get nominated. She just has to run long enough to hurt Mitch. Then she can pass the baton and the money to Grimes for the general.

5. Worst case scenario here is McConnell gets re-elected but is severely weakened. Grimes continues in her current office but shows she can handle a national campaign. Judd goes back to her activism and movies. The Democrats plan for running Grimes for governor, or taking a shot at Rand Paul, an even weaker Senator than McConnell.

But you go on defending Grimes even though I never attacked her or said she was a bad candidate.
 
2013-03-20 10:07:09 AM  

WTF Indeed: verbaltoxin: So I guess being a Kentucky native, UK alum, an involved activist, and member of the very popular and beloved Judd family isn't local enough.

You really have no idea how much Naomi and Wynonna are adored by country music fans, do you. They are going to be right there on that stage with Ashley too, nodding in approval and telling Kentuckians who still have their cassette copies of "Mama He's Crazy" to take a chance on little sister.

That's nice. I'm sure moderate Republicans will unquestionably vote for her because they like the songs her sisters did in the 80's.  That's a solid political strategy.

verbaltoxin: I'm not saying Grimes is a bad candidate. She may even wind up with the nomination. All Ashley Judd really needs to accomplish is to draw out the worst of the GOP's misogyny, and show Kentuckians that Mitch is afraid of not one, but two girls.

There's no need to engage the party of no ideas. One needs only to hand them the rope, and let them hang themselves from it.

Yes you are. You're argument is that Judd is a better candidate because she'll bring out "misogyny", something a Grimes candidacy would also do being that she's also a woman. So if both sides are equal, what makes Judd a superior candidate to run for a Kentucky Senate seat.

Bored Horde: Assholic words

Yes, I'm a misogynist because I think one female candidate is better than another female candidate.


Hrm.  I think that whatever little filter you slap on the screen before reading other peoples' posts isn't serving you very well.
 
2013-03-20 10:11:35 AM  

Wasteland: DamnYankees: Who polls better?

Ah, this thread again.  Quick summary for folks:

Judd gets better numbers nationally.  With her, the hope is that the GOP as a whole will go nuts attacking her and drive down their overall polling numbers with the general public as a result, as well as vastly overspend to defend a seat in one of the reddest states in the country.  In other words, that whether they win or lose the seat itself, the GOP would lose overall.  The potential drawback is that, while McConnell is vulnerable right now, the numbers on the race are likely to tighten between now and the election; and with Judd being a lot more liberal than the state she's running in, that could wind up costing the Dems a seat that by all rights they should be able to pick up.

Grimes, on the other hand, is a more moderate Clinton Democrat.  She's the current (fairly new) SecState, and polls extremely well in Kentucky; she's arguably the most popular Dem in state politics right now.  Early research polling by the state party suggests that she breaks McConnell by a much safer margin than Judd, and is (at least currently) the single best choice to finally knock him out of the Senate.  The downside is that Grimes is purely local and has no real chance of moving national numbers as a result of the race.  She is also, again, more of a moderate than Judd; while her signature policy pushes to date have included a few civil liberties issues (such as voting rights expansions), her everyday focus tends to be the state economy and balanced business development.


Also, Grimes may be the stronger candidate overall but she doesn't move the needle nationally like Judd does. Judd is more likely to force the national GOP into a "panic buy" and siphon money from other races into KY to keep their old boy Mitch in office. Money that could've been used to keep seats safe in other states. Grimes may be a "safer" candidate, but a little danger can be a good thing here and there.
 
2013-03-20 10:22:37 AM  
I'd white knight WTF Indeed, but I've got a bet with him about this, so i'mma sit back and watch.
 
2013-03-20 10:25:03 AM  

hobberwickey: As for the 'she talks about rape too much' criticism - rape is a serious problem in this country. 1 in 2 women are raped at some point in their lives, and part of what allows that to continue is the culture of silence around it. It's refreshing to see a public figure with the, well, balls to talk about it.


I think the big problem is not that she talks about it, it is that she diminishes it by comparing things like owning an Apple product to it.
 
2013-03-20 10:25:07 AM  
I live in Oklahoma there are worse senators than McConnell.
 
2013-03-20 10:30:51 AM  

verbaltoxin: WTF Indeed: Bored Horde: We've got the new talking points here boys, dismiss her because she has an under-control mental illness and she encourages people to consider adoption.  This should last until she starts getting serious media traction, at which point the old "get back to the kitchen" and "slut" comments should resurface.

It's almost like that when someone who has never been elected to public office runs other issues come into play. It's also almost like that running statewide in a conservative state like Kentucky, being a bi-polar, anti-child birth, liberal movie star might be a political liability. And it's almost like McConnell has been shown to be weak in past elections, and a strong, moderate-to-conservative democratic candidate would prove to be a real challenge to him, not to mention that if this candidate already had a statewide office and was a woman.

Holy f*ck, Bob! It's like politics is local or some sh*t?!

So I guess being a Kentucky native, UK alum, an involved activist, and member of the very popular and beloved Judd family isn't local enough.

You really have no idea how much Naomi and Wynonna are adored by country music fans, do you. They are going to be right there on that stage with Ashley too, nodding in approval and telling Kentuckians who still have their cassette copies of "Mama He's Crazy" to take a chance on little sister.

I'm not saying Grimes is a bad candidate. She may even wind up with the nomination. All Ashley Judd really needs to accomplish is to draw out the worst of the GOP's misogyny, and show Kentuckians that Mitch is afraid of not one, but two girls.

There's no need to engage the party of no ideas. One needs only to hand them the rope, and let them hang themselves from it.


KY sounds farking retarded either way.

Congrats Y'ALL.
 
2013-03-20 10:35:43 AM  

verbaltoxin: But you go on defending Grimes even though I never attacked her or said she was a bad candidate.


So your argument here is that Judd is a better candidate because people in the South like the music her mom and half-sister(Thanks MontanaDave) did in the 80's. However Judd will be a good "decoy"(whatever that means) in the primary because McConnell, who will more than likely have his own primary from the right, will spend all his time and money attacking Judd.  This will then make Grimes the stronger candidate coming out of the Primary?

Now let's look at this from McConnell's point of view. He will more than likely be facing a primary challenge from the right which means he'll have to spend money in the primary, putting him in a weaker cash on hand position going into the general.  If both and only Judd and Grimes run, he'll have a choice between trying to influence their election(Something campaigns do all the time) through PAC ad buys. Being his position coming out of a primary would be weak, it would behoof him to try to get the weaker of the two candidates.  McConnell would choose to face Judd, since a Grimes challenge would mean Bill and Hillary Clinton campaigning on her behalf, and that's hard to compete with when the voter demographic that will be most in play would be moderate republicans, democrats, and independents.

McConnell's supporters will then target Grimes in the primary and ignore(or more likely boost) Judd since Judd would we the weaker general election candidate.
 
2013-03-20 10:37:42 AM  

KCCO: hobberwickey: As for the 'she talks about rape too much' criticism - rape is a serious problem in this country. 1 in 2 women are raped at some point in their lives, and part of what allows that to continue is the culture of silence around it. It's refreshing to see a public figure with the, well, balls to talk about it.

I think the big problem is not that she talks about it, it is that she diminishes it by comparing things like owning an Apple product to it.


Yep, that was just a bit over the top, but I'll still take it over saying nothing. It's not like she doesn't have a point either, mining camps in developing countries are horror shows.
 
2013-03-20 10:44:32 AM  

what_now: I'd white knight WTF Indeed, but I've got a bet with him about this, so i'mma sit back and watch.


Between you and ginandbacon you're gonna ruin my "right wing shill" status I've so carefully cultivated by saying moderate things in threads.
 
2013-03-20 10:53:44 AM  

WTF Indeed: what_now: I'd white knight WTF Indeed, but I've got a bet with him about this, so i'mma sit back and watch.

Between you and ginandbacon you're gonna ruin my "right wing shill" status I've so carefully cultivated by saying moderate things in threads.


LOL we are here to make you look worse as we come to your defense.
 
2013-03-20 10:58:06 AM  

WTF Indeed: verbaltoxin: But you go on defending Grimes even though I never attacked her or said she was a bad candidate.

So your argument here is that Judd is a better candidatebecause people in the South like the music her mom and half-sister(Thanks MontanaDave) did in the 80's. However Judd will be a good "decoy"(whatever that means) in the primary because McConnell, who will more than likely have his own primary from the right, will spend all his time and money attacking Judd.  This will then make Grimes the stronger candidate coming out of the Primary?

Now let's look at this from McConnell's point of view. He will more than likely be facing a primary challenge from the right which means he'll have to spend money in the primary, putting him in a weaker cash on hand position going into the general.  If both and only Judd and Grimes run, he'll have a choice between trying to influence their election(Something campaigns do all the time) through PAC ad buys. Being his position coming out of a primary would be weak, it would behoof him to try to get the weaker of the two candidates.  McConnell would choose to face Judd, since a Grimes challenge would mean Bill and Hillary Clinton campaigning on her behalf, and that's hard to compete with when the voter demographic that will be most in play would be moderate republicans, democrats, and independents.

McConnell's supporters will then target Grimes in the primary and ignore(or more likely boost) Judd since Judd would we the weaker general election candidate.


I didn't say "better." I never implied "better." I said she'd make a good candidate, and stated why. I also stated what Democrats could do if McConnell ends up winning, because there are strategies in play here that go beyond 2014. In case you haven't noticed, other farkers have already detailed this for you. Dems either want to either defeat McConnell or force pyrrhic victory out of him. If the McConnell campaign becomes a money-suck for the GOP, it leaves less for down-ticket races. That improves Democrats' chances.

Your position is "Grimes is better than Judd." My position is, "Either are good, but the Democrats have a strategy that includes the possibility of not winning."

This race is as much about trolling the GOP as it is beating them for a Senate seat. In fact it may be more about the former. Should Grimes prove to be a competent candidate in this but loses, then she has a future shot at the governor's house or Rand Paul's Senate seat. There's even the chance she may beat McConnell. This is low risk for her. Judd has the least to lose out of everyone. McConnell has to fend off challenges from the left and far right, and manage to beat them all when his popularity as at an ebb.

So now we await the Tea Party to dredge someone up to challenge McConnell.
 
2013-03-20 10:59:14 AM  

hobberwickey: Yep, that was just a bit over the top, but I'll still take it over saying nothing.


Really?  Just a bit over the top.  And the statement did worse than saying nothing.  It trivialized a horrible crime.

hobberwickey: It's not like she doesn't have a point either, mining camps in developing countries are horror shows.


No she doesn't have a point.  It may be a horror show.  It may be evil but it is not even remotely like rape.

She's a very good actress but I like her much better when she is reading other peoples words.  She is too prone to bizarrely hyperbolic language.
 
2013-03-20 11:08:57 AM  

KCCO: She's a very good actress but I like her much better when she is reading other peoples words. She is too prone to bizarrely hyperbolic language.


Right, so let's stick with the guy who recites Frank Luntz's newest talking point that Obama's presidency is the equivalent of 10 9/11s happening every day.
 
2013-03-20 11:12:24 AM  

WTF Indeed: Now let's look at this from McConnell's point of view. He will more than likely be facing a primary challenge from the right which means he'll have to spend money in the primary, putting him in a weaker cash on hand position going into the general. If both and only Judd and Grimes run, he'll have a choice between trying to influence their election(Something campaigns do all the time) through PAC ad buys. Being his position coming out of a primary would be weak, it would behoof him to try to get the weaker of the two candidates. McConnell would choose to face Judd, since a Grimes challenge would mean Bill and Hillary Clinton campaigning on her behalf, and that's hard to compete with when the voter demographic that will be most in play would be moderate republicans, democrats, and independents.


The problem with that strategy is that Judd will be largely self-funded.  If McConnel comes into the general with a cash problem, he'll be facing a challenger that can bleed him dry without hurting the DNC at all.  Outside groups will have a field day because the chance to knock off the sitting Minority Leader will be too good to pass up.  The GOP will be forced to put more money into that race which is money they won't have available elsewhere.  Meanwhile, the DNC will be able to reallocate their resources to more pressing races.
 
2013-03-20 11:17:07 AM  

Mentat: If McConnel comes into the general with a cash problem...



Then the price of underage male prostitutes must have skyrocketed.
 
2013-03-20 11:22:57 AM  
Grimes is electable...Judd is not.

Grimes can actually win a Senate bid in the state of Kentucky against Turtleface Mitch, getting votes from outside Fayette & Jefferson County....Judd, her UK basketball fandom and 90s UK Hockey poster aside, cannot.

Grimes' commercials for her SecState bid featuring her grandmothers were a stroke of pure genius, raising her profile and making her come across as affable and reasonable (a rarity in politics, especially KY politics).
 
2013-03-20 11:26:41 AM  

verbaltoxin: Your position is "Grimes is better than Judd." My position is, "Either are good, but the Democrats have a strategy that includes the possibility of not winning."


I should have said "as good" instead of "better", however your argument that they equally good candidates is still wrong because it does not take into account the scope of the race.  This race does not exist in a vacuum, it exists in the real world where Grimes would be a better candidate than Judd. In that world Judd becomes a liability nationally as she essentially becomes the Christine O'Donnell-type candidate.  If anything an Ashley Judd candidacy means you support McConnell being reelected, since she would be the weaker general election candidate.

Mentat: The problem with that strategy is that Judd will be largely self-funded.


She's rich, but she's not "I can dump $25 million of my own money into unseating a US Senator" rich.  Because that's what it takes.
 
2013-03-20 11:30:44 AM  

DamnYankees: Who polls better?


Who looks better in a Starfleet uniform?
 
2013-03-20 11:32:02 AM  

WTF Indeed: DamnYankees: Who polls better?

Considering one is the current Secretary of State and the other is a bi-polar, anti-child birth, liberal movie star, I'm guessing who polls better a year and 4 months out of an election isn't the question you should be asking when deciding who could win a statewide race in Kentucky.


spotonlists.com

Not feeling like coming into the office today to do real work?  Here's a device that will really help you deliver your message with all the care and concern that we've expected: the Lohan 2000.
 
2013-03-20 11:41:00 AM  

EyeballKid: KCCO: She's a very good actress but I like her much better when she is reading other peoples words. She is too prone to bizarrely hyperbolic language.

Right, so let's stick with the guy who recites Frank Luntz's newest talking point that Obama's presidency is the equivalent of 10 9/11s happening every day.


Or just maybe the Democrats should listen to Clinton and pick another candidate.
 
2013-03-20 12:07:21 PM  

DamnYankees: Who polls better?


This question still hasn't been answered.

As a fairly liberal Democrat (with some unique views on a couple of topics), I'm completely satisified with having fairly moderate Democrats in conservative states/districts such as Kentucky.  This is not going to be an easy race either way.  If the only way to win it is to run a moderate, so be it.  If Judd's star power and ability to raise funds helps more, that's great too.
 
2013-03-20 03:20:01 PM  

WTF Indeed: since a Grimes challenge would mean Bill and Hillary Clinton campaigning on her behalf, and that's hard to compete with when the voter demographic that will be most in play would be moderate republicans, democrats, and independents.


the clintons may stay out if their gal doesn't get in but don't bet on that. getting rid of the turtle is a DNC goal and one they support.
 
2013-03-20 03:47:10 PM  

EyeballKid: Mentat: If McConnel comes into the general with a cash problem...


Then the price of underage male prostitutes must have skyrocketed.


His father-in-law can import them cheaply from Southeast Asia.
 
2013-03-20 04:01:22 PM  

give me doughnuts: EyeballKid: Mentat: If McConnel comes into the general with a cash problem...


Then the price of underage male prostitutes must have skyrocketed.

His father-in-law can import them cheaply from Southeast Asia.


Be careful. McConnell, his wife et al will call you racist. Funny how he couldn't find the time to call out racism when his buddy Jim Bunning said his then-opponent Daniel Mongiardo looked like one of Saddam Hussein's sons. He must have been busy collecting bribes that day.
 
2013-03-20 08:24:08 PM  

Bored Horde: WTF Indeed: DamnYankees: Who polls better?

Considering one is the current Secretary of State and the other is a bi-polar, anti-child birth, liberal movie star, I'm guessing who polls better a year and 4 months out of an election isn't the question you should be asking when deciding who could win a statewide race in Kentucky.

We've got the new talking points here boys, dismiss her because she has an under-control mental illness and she encourages people to consider adoption.  This should last until she starts getting serious media traction, at which point the old "get back to the kitchen" and "slut" comments should resurface.

I wonder how long until Rush Limbaugh or Hannity or some other conservative thought-leader says she deserves to get raped.


If she really wants to be a senator, she'd be better off pulling a Hillary, and carpet munchin...er...carpetbagging herself to New York, or the west coast.
 
Displayed 50 of 51 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report