Skip to content
 
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.

(The Hill)   The Democrats spent $40 million for challenger Amy McGrath to beat a progressive candidate in a close KY primary. Let's see how her challenge to the Turtle is going so far   (thehill.com) divider line
    More: Fail, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Democratic Party, Joe Biden, Bill Clinton, United States Senate, United States presidential election, 2008, Barack Obama, George W. Bush  
•       •       •

4244 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 Aug 2020 at 2:24 PM (11 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



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


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2020-08-04 1:08:33 PM  
"But progressives can't even win primaries!!1!1111!!!11!1!11!!!!!1!!!!!​!1"

1!
 
2020-08-04 1:16:08 PM  

gameshowhost: "But progressives can't even win primaries!!1!1111!!!11!1!11!!!!!1!!!!!​!1"

1!


Well, they didn't in Kentucky. Now did they?
 
2020-08-04 1:16:37 PM  
If the voters were smart, they wouldn't live in Kentucky to begin with.  What a shiathole.
 
2020-08-04 1:28:04 PM  
"If you run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. You run into assholes all day, you live in Kentucky."
 
2020-08-04 1:28:49 PM  

Darth_Lukecash: gameshowhost: "But progressives can't even win primaries!!1!1111!!!11!1!11!!!!!1!!!!!​!1"

1!

Well, they didn't in Kentucky. Now did they?


it's almost as if the headline mentions the part where an obscene amount of cash went to mcgrath, tilting the playing field distinctly in her favor

if you were the least bit confident about your preferred candidate having better ideas instead of having more money (oh and distinct intraparty backing), you'd be shrieking for publicly financed elections - specifically primaries - to prove your claim
 
2020-08-04 1:34:10 PM  

gameshowhost: Darth_Lukecash: gameshowhost: "But progressives can't even win primaries!!1!1111!!!11!1!11!!!!!1!!!!!​!1"

1!

Well, they didn't in Kentucky. Now did they?

it's almost as if the headline mentions the part where an obscene amount of cash went to mcgrath, tilting the playing field distinctly in her favor

if you were the least bit confident about your preferred candidate having better ideas instead of having more money (oh and distinct intraparty backing), you'd be shrieking for publicly financed elections - specifically primaries - to prove your claim


The only thing that counts is the ballot box.

Progressives didn't show up in enough numbers.

Kentucky will remain Kentucky.
 
2020-08-04 1:59:24 PM  
You think a progressive would have done better? Facts not in evidence.
 
2020-08-04 2:12:12 PM  
Twelve percent of "Democrats" said they also support McConnell.

FTFY
 
2020-08-04 2:15:23 PM  
No, they're just pissed because it's a woman and not the guy they wanted.
 
2020-08-04 2:20:08 PM  
The papers do love a horse race.

Polls aren't votes people.
 
2020-08-04 2:24:30 PM  
The United States is not a homogenous place where every single Congressional district and state is composed of the same electorate. Sometimes, your best path to getting elected is not to simply pick the furthest possible candidate to the left. Sometimes you're going to lose to a Republican regardless in an extremely conservative electorate.

I feel like I shouldn't have to point out this grade-school level set of basic facts about politics, but then we've got our own version of teabaggers, so I guess I do.
 
2020-08-04 2:26:17 PM  

Kat09tails: The papers do love a horse race.

Polls aren't votes people.


That's not how the "horse race" criticism works.
 
2020-08-04 2:26:47 PM  
Still worth trying.
 
2020-08-04 2:27:21 PM  
Kentucky voters get what they deserve. It's just too bad it hurts the entire country when they keep electing Mitch and Rand.
 
2020-08-04 2:27:57 PM  
It would be nice to give him the boot...
But I would settle for Minority Leader McConnell.
 
2020-08-04 2:28:01 PM  

gameshowhost: "But progressives can't even win primaries!!1!1111!!!11!1!11!!!!!1!!!!!​!1"

1!


Bernie had a huge monetary advantage, that didn't manage to allow him to bribe his lazy ass voters to show up against a sundowning old man.

Because you are right, progressives generally *can't* win primaries outside of safe urban districts that don't matter nationally.   Because they are not the base.
 
2020-08-04 2:28:25 PM  
OK Berner.
 
2020-08-04 2:28:40 PM  
I feel certain that a more progressive candidate would be trouncing Mitch.

Wait - no I don't. It's goddamned Kentucky.
 
2020-08-04 2:28:51 PM  
The best way to get rid of Mitch McConnell was always to get rid of enough other Republican Senators that they're staring down the barrel of 4+ years in the minority, as it'll be hard for them to gain seats in 2022. Throwing money at this race was never a good use of resources, no matter the candidate.
 
2020-08-04 2:29:04 PM  
If you give Democrats the choice between giving a Republican the election and giving a Progressive, they'll f*ck over the Progressive every single time.

Just like when they made their 2nd- and 4th-place candidates drop out suddenly so they can consolidate support behind the 5th place candidate.

And then smugly tell progressives that they just didn't try hard enough to win an election that was retooled and reshaped the night before.
 
2020-08-04 2:29:47 PM  

Jack Sabbath: If the voters were smart, they wouldn't live in Kentucky to begin with.  What a shiathole.


This is exactly why we have this dickhole. Because Kentucky became a shiathole. All the good people left. And all the rest of the people got gerrymandered.
 
2020-08-04 2:29:55 PM  

Ambivalence: You think a progressive would have done better? Facts not in evidence.


Because Democrats never let that reality ever come to fruition.
 
2020-08-04 2:29:56 PM  

Ambivalence: You think a progressive would have done better? Facts not in evidence.


It's difficult to gather facts when the scenario which would allow you to gather facts has never happened.
 
2020-08-04 2:29:57 PM  
Progressives after winning a few early state whitebread primaries: "Hahaha kneel and kiss the ring moderate scum"

Progressives after, once again, losing badly to a sub-par moderate candidate: "WHY AREN'T YOU ALL LISTENING TO ME, STOP BEING SUCH MEANIES AND GIVE US EVERY DEMAND WE SCREAM ABOUT"
 
2020-08-04 2:30:11 PM  
Subby, your concern is showing.
 
2020-08-04 2:30:48 PM  

bluejeansonfire: Ambivalence: You think a progressive would have done better? Facts not in evidence.

Because Democrats never let that reality ever come to fruition.


Almost an awesome simul-post.
 
2020-08-04 2:31:33 PM  
It is always better to lose to a Republican than a progressive.
Only donors matter.
 
2020-08-04 2:32:16 PM  
I'm sure the change from 3700 polling places to 200 was a coincidence.
 
2020-08-04 2:32:17 PM  

lilplatinum: Progressives after winning a few early state whitebread primaries: "Hahaha kneel and kiss the ring moderate scum"

Progressives after, once again, losing badly to a sub-par moderate candidate: "WHY AREN'T YOU ALL LISTENING TO ME, STOP BEING SUCH MEANIES AND GIVE US EVERY DEMAND WE SCREAM ABOUT"


You're literally no different than a Trump supporter.

/keep attacking them strawmen.
 
2020-08-04 2:32:44 PM  
The DNC suffers from survivorship bias.  It's all old motherfarkers who weren't wiped out by Reagan or Gingrich.  They were the whitest bread on the shelf, and they assume that's why they're still here.
 
2020-08-04 2:32:52 PM  
So I'll repeat what I just said in the other McGrath thread. A lot of that money came from this very site. People loved her:

https://m.fark.com/comments/10583831/​E​veryone-hates-Moscow-Mitch-Amy-McGrath​-raises-huge-sum-to-take-him-out-in-20​20

https://m.fark.com/comments/9682365/L​O​L-a-democrat-cant-win-in-Kentucky-Amy-​McGrath-Challenge-accepted

https://m.fark.com/comments/10483125/​M​itch-McConnells-democratic-opponent-wi​ll-be-former-Marine-fighter-pilot-Amy-​McGrath-God-speed-Amy-were-all-countin​g-on-you

https://m.fark.com/comments/10119071/​l​ast

I like Booker. I wish he had gotten more attention but he had a whole election cycle to present his case and attract donors like McGrath did. McGrath showed the ability to campaign over the long term and again had a ton of support, in state and out of state. Now that she's losing I'm not going to pretend I didn't think she had a shot. I think there's a strong likelihood that Booker would be doing at least as bad as McGrath. Kentucky isn't full of a silent majority of liberal voters just yearning for the right candidate. And just because she's losing doesn't mean she wasn't the candidate with the best chance.
 
2020-08-04 2:32:57 PM  
Is it fake progressive brigade feeding day on fark?
 
2020-08-04 2:33:24 PM  

Darth_Lukecash: gameshowhost: "But progressives can't even win primaries!!1!1111!!!11!1!11!!!!!1!!!!!​!1"

1!

Well, they didn't in Kentucky. Now did they?


When you have the establishment backing you, yea, it's an uphill battle. This shouldn't be a surprise.

Next, you'll tell me water is wet!
 
2020-08-04 2:33:49 PM  
gameshowhost: it's almost as if the headline mentions the part where an obscene amount of cash went to mcgrath, tilting the playing field distinctly in her favor

I donated to McGrath, maybe a couple of times. When I donated to her, she was pretty much the only viable Democrat running. Maybe the Progressives shouldn't wait so long to jump in. If there had been one, I would have donated to them.
 
2020-08-04 2:34:05 PM  
Today's Democrat Bashing Thread is brought to you by Turtle Wax.  Turtle Wax: If our candidate doesn't win the primary, we're going to punish y'all by smoothing the way for McConnellTM
 
2020-08-04 2:35:56 PM  

Ambivalence: You think a progressive would have done better? Facts not in evidence.


At some point, does it really matter?  How many centrists have been ground under McConnell's heel?  Why keep throwing up the same mealy-mouthed hand-wringers if they aren't going to win anyway?  Might as well go for broke and nominate a progressive.
 
2020-08-04 2:36:10 PM  

TannerWorke: Darth_Lukecash: gameshowhost: "But progressives can't even win primaries!!1!1111!!!11!1!11!!!!!1!!!!!​!1"

1!

Well, they didn't in Kentucky. Now did they?

When you have the establishment backing you, yea, it's an uphill battle. This shouldn't be a surprise.

Next, you'll tell me water is wet!


https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2020​/​04/mcconnell-falls-kentucky-small-dono​rs-flock-to-mcgrath/

Most of her money was small donors. It wasn't like she was bankrolled by Soros and Gates in some evil DNC conspiracy.
 
2020-08-04 2:36:20 PM  
How well did progs do at red seat flipping in 2018 again? 0-28 or something?
 
2020-08-04 2:37:25 PM  

Persnickety: Today's Democrat Bashing Thread is brought to you by Turtle Wax.  Turtle Wax: If our candidate doesn't win the primary, we're going to punish y'all by smoothing the way for McConnellTM


That's quite literally what McGrath just did.
 
2020-08-04 2:37:50 PM  

thiefofdreams: Is it fake progressive brigade feeding day on fark?


They'll be here soon enough.  It takes time for their talking points to get translated into English.  We don't have nearly as many words describing despair and hopelessness as the mother tongue.
 
2020-08-04 2:38:00 PM  
So we get to watch Amy McGrath flounder and run a milqetoast campaign that stand for nothing just to lose anyway, instead of a firebrand progressive making McConnel look like a moron every day.

Great job libs.
 
2020-08-04 2:38:17 PM  
I'm in Kentucky.

It's not a progressive/moderate issue.

McGrath had so much money others were scared to get into the race.  McGrath is bad at interviews and inauthentic and people were looking for better option.

Booker's leadership with black lives matter gave people that better option and McGrath just squeaked by (perhaps only because of early mail voting) in a race she was expecting to dominate.
 
2020-08-04 2:38:38 PM  

TannerWorke: Darth_Lukecash: gameshowhost: "But progressives can't even win primaries!!1!1111!!!11!1!11!!!!!1!!!!!​!1"

1!

Well, they didn't in Kentucky. Now did they?

When you have the establishment backing you, yea, it's an uphill battle. This shouldn't be a surprise.

Next, you'll tell me water is wet!


Welcome to the wonderful world of politics, where you have to make your case to the party, and then to the people.

Oh, did you think changing the world was going to be easy?

Try again next time. Support the candidate of your choice. But more importantly learn to work with the others in your Democratic Coalition.
 
2020-08-04 2:38:43 PM  

SolderGlob: lilplatinum: Progressives after winning a few early state whitebread primaries: "Hahaha kneel and kiss the ring moderate scum"

Progressives after, once again, losing badly to a sub-par moderate candidate: "WHY AREN'T YOU ALL LISTENING TO ME, STOP BEING SUCH MEANIES AND GIVE US EVERY DEMAND WE SCREAM ABOUT"

You're literally no different than a Trump supporter.

/keep attacking them strawmen.


Well, except for the fact that I'm not the one that spends every waking moment shiatting on Trump's opponent.
 
2020-08-04 2:38:52 PM  
I'm more upset that they poured $40 million into any single race in Kentucky.  Sorry, but it doesn't matter who the opposition candidate is, Kentucky isn't  going to vote D for a long, long time.
 
2020-08-04 2:39:01 PM  
willwall:
I like Booker. I wish he had gotten more attention but he had a whole election cycle to present his case and attract donors like McGrath did. McGrath showed the ability to campaign over the long term and again had a ton of support, in state and out of state. Now that she's losing I'm not going to pretend I didn't think she had a shot. I think there's a strong likelihood that Booker would be doing at least as bad as McGrath. Kentucky isn't full of a silent majority of liberal voters just yearning for the right candidate. And just because she's losing doesn't mean she wasn't the candidate with the best chance.

I think that too many people read into the Bevin upset as a political shift. It's more like the Roy Moore situation in AL: it took a uniquely awful Republican who had an approval rating generally reserved for sticking one's genitals in a food processor in order to allow the Democrats to eke out a tiny win, and in most states (both blue and red) there's more willingness to move across party lines in gubernatorial races than for federal government.

The sheer amount of money wasted on this race in the primary/general could have had a massive impact on the races in Montana or Iowa where the Democrats are in a toss-up position. Win both of those alongside the races where the Democrats are favoured and Mitch is politically irrelevant for a long time, and probably likely to retire.
 
2020-08-04 2:39:33 PM  
Democrats will give Republicans money OR let Republicans pay them just so they can get rid of pesky conservatives.

Pin an embossed donkey badge on Bloomberg and call him a Democrat. Drop the floor out from both liberal candidates, so long as the progressive is out.

Democrats are just Republicans charged with gatekeeping. Their job is to look concerned and worried about the country while they keep progress from ever happening.
 
2020-08-04 2:40:37 PM  

Darth_Lukecash: TannerWorke: Darth_Lukecash: gameshowhost: "But progressives can't even win primaries!!1!1111!!!11!1!11!!!!!1!!!!!​!1"

1!

Well, they didn't in Kentucky. Now did they?

When you have the establishment backing you, yea, it's an uphill battle. This shouldn't be a surprise.

Next, you'll tell me water is wet!

Welcome to the wonderful world of politics, where you have to make your case to the party, and then to the people.

Oh, did you think changing the world was going to be easy?

Try again next time. Support the candidate of your choice. But more importantly learn to work with the others in your Democratic Coalition.


Faaaaaark you.

There's no working with someone who'd rather evil people win than let the young and idealistic have a chance.
 
2020-08-04 2:40:52 PM  
It's definitely the DNC's fault that Kentucky is chocked full of inbred rednecks that vote against their own interests between shifts at the coal mine.
 
2020-08-04 2:41:02 PM  

bluejeansonfire: If you give Democrats the choice between giving a Republican the election and giving a Progressive, they'll f*ck over the Progressive every single time.

Just like when they made their 2nd- and 4th-place candidates drop out suddenly so they can consolidate support behind the 5th place candidate.

And then smugly tell progressives that they just didn't try hard enough to win an election that was retooled and reshaped the night before.


So... Sanders could only win if the rest of the party was a split vote.

What part of this makes you think he would do well in the election?
 
Displayed 50 of 277 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.