Are Dems Throwing in the Towel in KY?

Southern Dad

macrumors 68000
Original poster
May 23, 2010
1,532
547
Shady Dale, Georgia
The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has pulled all their TV advertising in Kentucky from now through election day. What does this mean for senate hopeful, Alison Grimes who is working to try and unseat current minority leader, Senator Mitch McConnell.

McConnell is favored, but only by +3 to win the seat. A lot of money has been spent in this race. Why would the Democrats go dark this close to the election? The candidate still has 4 million in her war chest and vows to continue.

Is this seat a pick up for the GOP in November? It only takes SIX.
 

rdowns

macrumors Penryn
Jul 11, 2003
27,345
12,409
The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has pulled all their TV advertising in Kentucky from now through election day. What does this mean for senate hopeful, Alison Grimes who is working to try and unseat current minority leader, Senator Mitch McConnell.

McConnell is favored, but only by +3 to win the seat. A lot of money has been spent in this race. Why would the Democrats go dark this close to the election? The candidate still has 4 million in her war chest and vows to continue.

Is this seat a pick up for the GOP in November? It only takes SIX.

How can this be a pick up for Republicans if they already hold the seat? How ****ing partisan are you?

She won't win. She's a weak candidate and is afraid to open her mouth. Her refusal to answer whether she voted for Obama is bush league, at best.
 

Southern Dad

macrumors 68000
Original poster
May 23, 2010
1,532
547
Shady Dale, Georgia
No because they already have that seat :rolleyes:
Good correction. Okay will it be a pick up for the Dems?

How can this be a pick up for Republicans if they already hold the seat? How ****ing partisan are you?

She won't win. She's a weak candidate and is afraid to open her mouth. Her refusal to answer whether she voted for Obama is bush league, at best.
Ah yes, the required insult for my mistake in starting a conversation. I have come to expect it because time and time again, many liberals in this forum show that they really don't have the decorum to have a discussion.

It does seem that you agree however, however that they are throwing in the towel in that race, correct?
 

Happybunny

macrumors 68000
Sep 9, 2010
1,752
1,351
Good correction. Okay will it be a pick up for the Dems?



Ah yes, the required insult for my mistake in starting a conversation. I have come to expect it because time and time again, many liberals in this forum show that they really don't have the decorum to have a discussion.

It does seem that you agree however, however that they are throwing in the towel in that race, correct?
It is my belief that you are not insulted because you start a conversation, but because you start a conversation to throw a partisan barb.

Also in all too many of the threads that you start, you firmly ignore facts that don’t support your view of the world. Repeat time and again, points that have been answered by other posters, IMO in hope that everybody will just grow tired and you win by default.:p
 

Southern Dad

macrumors 68000
Original poster
May 23, 2010
1,532
547
Shady Dale, Georgia
It is my belief that you are not insulted because you start a conversation, but because you start a conversation to throw a partisan barb.

Also in all too many of the threads that you start, you firmly ignore facts that don’t support your view of the world. Repeat time and again, points that have been answered by other posters, IMO in hope that everybody will just grow tired and you win by default.:p
I made a mistake in the original post. I asked a question if it would be a Republican pick up. It's a simple mistake. But someone had to resort to words that the forum won't even let you use to really hammer that point home.

The GOP only needs six seats. The DNC needs every seat that they can get in this election.
 

samiwas

macrumors 68000
Aug 26, 2006
1,575
3,518
Atlanta, GA
I have come to expect it because time and time again, many liberals in this forum show that they really don't have the decorum to have a discussion.
Would you like me to dig up some conversations I've had with conservatives for some contrast? I've never seen any "liberal" here or anywhere else go so far as to tell someone they should die, that they will "be taken care of by someone else" (meaning killed), that they have a mental disorder, are retarded, an idiot, moron, ********, a disgrace to America, or should have been an abortion. However, in more conservative circles, I've been called or told all of these for nothing more than wishing lower classes were paid more, saying that healthcare should be available to everyone, or saying that something/anything Obama did wasn't destroying the world. In fact, last night on Facebook, one person I don't even know commented against my comments on another friend's post and said at least four of the above. I stopped going to the more conservative-heavy forum I used to frequent because the sheer amount of insulting behavior grew tiresome.

Decorum is most certainly not a conservative trait, by far, if that's what you're trying to get at.
 

iBlazed

macrumors 68000
Feb 27, 2014
1,593
1,224
New Jersey, United States
Would you like me to dig up some conversations I've had with conservatives for some contrast? I've never seen any "liberal" here or anywhere else go so far as to tell someone they should die, that they will "be taken care of by someone else" (meaning killed), that they have a mental disorder, are retarded, an idiot, moron, ********, a disgrace to America, or should have been an abortion. However, in more conservative circles, I've been called or told all of these for nothing more than wishing lower classes were paid more, saying that healthcare should be available to everyone, or saying that something/anything Obama did wasn't destroying the world. In fact, last night on Facebook, one person I don't even know commented against my comments on another friend's post and said at least four of the above. I stopped going to the more conservative-heavy forum I used to frequent because the sheer amount of insulting behavior grew tiresome.

Decorum is most certainly not a conservative trait, by far, if that's what you're trying to get at.
Or just check out the comments section on any yahoo article, even non-political ones. Conservative ideology is a breeding ground for extremism, for whatever reason.
 

Southern Dad

macrumors 68000
Original poster
May 23, 2010
1,532
547
Shady Dale, Georgia
Would you like me to dig up some conversations I've had with conservatives for some contrast? I've never seen any "liberal" here or anywhere else go so far as to tell someone they should die, that they will "be taken care of by someone else" (meaning killed), that they have a mental disorder, are retarded, an idiot, moron, ********, a disgrace to America, or should have been an abortion. However, in more conservative circles, I've been called or told all of these for nothing more than wishing lower classes were paid more, saying that healthcare should be available to everyone, or saying that something/anything Obama did wasn't destroying the world. In fact, last night on Facebook, one person I don't even know commented against my comments on another friend's post and said at least four of the above. I stopped going to the more conservative-heavy forum I used to frequent because the sheer amount of insulting behavior grew tiresome.

Decorum is most certainly not a conservative trait, by far, if that's what you're trying to get at.
And I've never told you any of things, imagine that. There are many liberals that converse with decorum. And others that if they were gentlemen, custom would decree that I remove my glove and name my second.
 

zin

macrumors 6502
May 5, 2010
488
6,476
United Kingdom
I made a mistake in the original post. I asked a question if it would be a Republican pick up. It's a simple mistake. But someone had to resort to words that the forum won't even let you use to really hammer that point home.

The GOP only needs six seats. The DNC needs every seat that they can get in this election.
The Democrats don't need any seats. It's pretty clear that they will not net any new seats, therefore they could in theory safely lose up to 19 of their 21 seats that are up for election.

Why? Because even if they lose control of the chamber, rather than the Senate stopping crazy GOP legislation, it will be Obama welding his veto. Nothing changes.
 

Southern Dad

macrumors 68000
Original poster
May 23, 2010
1,532
547
Shady Dale, Georgia
The Democrats don't need any seats. It's pretty clear that they will not net any new seats, therefore they could in theory safely lose up to 19 of their 21 seats that are up for election.

Why? Because even if they lose control of the chamber, rather than the Senate stopping crazy GOP legislation, it will be Obama welding his veto. Nothing changes.
Oh no, major change. President Obama becomes the leader of the party of "No" and then if they try and override a veto and fail, the GOP can show they tried but the Dems blocked them.
 

zin

macrumors 6502
May 5, 2010
488
6,476
United Kingdom
Oh no, major change. President Obama becomes the leader of the party of "No" and then if they try and override a veto and fail, the GOP can show they tried but the Dems blocked them.
That only works on ultra-partisan persons that have below-average intelligence. Any person with common sense would look at the laws a Republican Congress would try to pass and probably arrive at the conclusion that they are bad laws.

Congressional approval is already at record lows. Most people rightfully blamed Republicans for shutting down the Government. (Most) people are not stupid and will be able to see through any GOP attempts at labelling Obama and the Democrats as the party of "No".
 

Southern Dad

macrumors 68000
Original poster
May 23, 2010
1,532
547
Shady Dale, Georgia
That only works on ultra-partisan persons that have below-average intelligence. Any person with common sense would look at the laws a Republican Congress would try to pass and probably arrive at the conclusion that they are bad laws.

Congressional approval is already at record lows. Most people rightfully blamed Republicans for shutting down the Government. (Most) people are not stupid and will be able to see through any GOP attempts at labelling Obama and the Democrats as the party of "No".
Congress as a whole has terrible approval ratings but representatives and senators are not elected in national polls. When you ask about individual members the get re-elected.
 

Bug-Creator

macrumors 6502a
May 30, 2011
552
2,131
Germany
That only works on ultra-partisan persons that have below-average intelligence.
Isn't that the definition for "registered voter in the US" ??

Atleast thats how it tends to look from here.



















Not even sure myself wether joking or serious :rolleyes:
 

pivo6

macrumors 68000
Dec 2, 2002
1,741
199
Minnesota
Oh no, major change. President Obama becomes the leader of the party of "No" and then if they try and override a veto and fail, the GOP can show they tried but the Dems blocked them.
It's very likely that the Republicans will win the Senate, but to think that the Republicans will all of a sudden start doing something after so many years doing **** all, is laughable.

It doesn't matter who wins in November. Nothing will get done by Congress until the Presidential election in 2016.
 

hulugu

macrumors 68000
Aug 13, 2003
1,819
10,250
quae tangit perit Trump
I made a mistake in the original post. I asked a question if it would be a Republican pick up. It's a simple mistake. But someone had to resort to words that the forum won't even let you use to really hammer that point home.

The GOP only needs six seats. The DNC needs every seat that they can get in this election.
The GOP clearly needs to protect this seat, but the DNC may be shifting to protect other seats or find seats they can take in order to protect their majority. It's clear that Grimes doesn't have the chops to win and her inability to savage McConnell during the debate might have been the end.

Support for Grimes has been softening since August and she's taken a pretty good hit in the last week or two. The DNC could be shifting their own support, but encouraging 'dark' money campaigns, or they could be done with Grimes' entirely.

Oh no, major change. President Obama becomes the leader of the party of "No" and then if they try and override a veto and fail, the GOP can show they tried but the Dems blocked them.
That's true and could be good for the 2016 election, however, they will also have to run on whatever horribleness comes out of the Senate and House after the Republicans take it. It's conceivable that they could gain both houses and yet, be unable to take the White House in 2016, or that they could lose the Senate and the White House.

It's hard to tell at this point, but the Republican party seems decidedly lacking in actual ideas, so it might be good to let them run the show for a few moments to remind voters of how their abject corruption.

Of course, if Democrats had a clue they'd still have the entire government by they've managed to lose control of the message.
 

samiwas

macrumors 68000
Aug 26, 2006
1,575
3,518
Atlanta, GA
And I've never told you any of things, imagine that. There are many liberals that converse with decorum. And others that if they were gentlemen, custom would decree that I remove my glove and name my second.
And the same can be said for conservatives, Christians, left-wing wackos, libertarians, agnostics, gun enthusiasts, gun haters, welders, basketball players, mobsters, math teachers, CEOs, janitors, engineers, prostitutes and porn stars. In other words...people. It's not a "liberal" thing.

However, I can easily say that I have rarely seen a "liberal" go apoplectic on people the way I regularly see conservatives do. So, call me crazy, but I just don't see what you see.
 

Southern Dad

macrumors 68000
Original poster
May 23, 2010
1,532
547
Shady Dale, Georgia
It's very likely that the Republicans will win the Senate, but to think that the Republicans will all of a sudden start doing something after so many years doing **** all, is laughable.

It doesn't matter who wins in November. Nothing will get done by Congress until the Presidential election in 2016.
The Republicans in the House have passed many bills that died in the Senate. Just as the Democrats in the Senate have passed many bills that died in the House. It's called Gridlock for a reason.

That's true and could be good for the 2016 election, however, they will also have to run on whatever horribleness comes out of the Senate and House after the Republicans take it. It's conceivable that they could gain both houses and yet, be unable to take the White House in 2016, or that they could lose the Senate and the White House.

It's hard to tell at this point, but the Republican party seems decidedly lacking in actual ideas, so it might be good to let them run the show for a few moments to remind voters of how their abject corruption.

Of course, if Democrats had a clue they'd still have the entire government by they've managed to lose control of the message.
The Senate seats that are open in 2016 do not look good for the GOP keeping control. They will have to do something to really spark.

And the same can be said for conservatives, Christians, left-wing wackos, libertarians, agnostics, gun enthusiasts, gun haters, welders, basketball players, mobsters, math teachers, CEOs, janitors, engineers, prostitutes and porn stars. In other words...people. It's not a "liberal" thing.

However, I can easily say that I have rarely seen a "liberal" go apoplectic on people the way I regularly see conservatives do. So, call me crazy, but I just don't see what you see.
But you haven't seen this conservative attacking liberals. You don't see ME doing it and you won't. I'm not stooping to that level. I'd leave the forum first.
 

Huntn

macrumors demi-god
May 5, 2008
17,088
16,609
The Misty Mountains
Oh no, major change. President Obama becomes the leader of the party of "No"and then if they try and override a veto and fail, the GOP can show they tried but the Dems blocked them.
It's helpful if you have a gullible audience to swallow this partisan bilge. However Dems are the party of "no" to idiotic conservative notions (all in the eye of the beholder), but I don't think you ment that. ;)
 

Southern Dad

macrumors 68000
Original poster
May 23, 2010
1,532
547
Shady Dale, Georgia
It's helpful if you have a gullible audience to swallow this partisan bilge. However Dems are the party of "no" to idiotic conservative notions (all in the eye of the beholder), but I don't think you ment that. ;)
It isn't a problem. The left can't get their base to even come out in midterm elections. They'll do well in 2016 if they can get a rock star at the top of the ticket to draw out the low information voters but they flounder in 2014 just like 2010.
 

Sydde

macrumors 68020
Aug 17, 2009
2,105
2,164
IOKWARDI
There are many liberals that converse with decorum. And others that if they were gentlemen, custom would decree that I remove my glove and name my second.
Well, there you go, your solution to a perceived insult is to resort to meaningless violence. How very decorous of you.
 

DonJudgeMe

macrumors regular
Feb 21, 2014
123
2
Arizona
Parties, in general, should be done away with. Left vs Right nonsense is tiresome. We need to scrap this system while we still can.
 

Southern Dad

macrumors 68000
Original poster
May 23, 2010
1,532
547
Shady Dale, Georgia
Parties, in general, should be done away with. Left vs Right nonsense is tiresome. We need to scrap this system while we still can.
Why should parties be done away with? The majority of Americans seem to disagree with you because they keep voting Republican or Democrat. The voters have a choice. There are other candidates on the ballot and there is always the option of writing in. Just like term limits, this is another bad idea that would do nothing but take away or limit the voter's right to choose.
 

Bug-Creator

macrumors 6502a
May 30, 2011
552
2,131
Germany
The majority of Americans seem to disagree with you because they keep voting Republican or Democrat.

Yeah, but is that a sign of a working system or just a sympton of a failed one ?

Cos in the US voting anything but D or R most often means throwing that vote away resulting in voters choosing the lesser evil.

How many votes would those D&Rs get if you had a voting system where the 2 leading candidates had to go to a 2nd round failing to win 50%+ in the 1st one ? Would be quite an eyeopener.