Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You actually make a very good parallel. Cantor was a long time incumbent with tons of money and resources against a very obscure opponent. Why Cantor lost is not because of his "softening" stance on immigration, as some would like to believe, but another, more simpler explanation: he pretty much forgot about his constituents, instead wanting to nurture his national ambitions.
Now it's debatable to what extent McConnell has ignored his KY constituents for the power game in Washington compared with Cantor, but he probably wouldn't be fighting for his political life now if he'd had done a bit more constituent glad-handling back in the state.
From what I can tell Cantor didn't lose because of lies his opponent told about him. All you say is true and why McConnell can be beat with the simple truth.
Well, I think the premise is a dead issue in this case, given that McConnell has always gone for the jugular in political campaigns, and if Grimes is smart, she will do the same thing - you don't bring a knife to a gun fight, and politics for McConnell is ALWAYS a gun fight.
Well, I think the premise is a dead issue in this case, given that McConnell has always gone for the jugular in political campaigns, and if Grimes is smart, she will do the same thing - you don't bring a knife to a gun fight, and politics for McConnell is ALWAYS a gun fight.
I think the ad was basically truthful if you think about it. McConnell voted to privatize medicare for non-current retirees in 2011.
Honestly, how long do you think people 55 and under are going to be willing paying large sums of money into a system they won't get for a period of 30 years? The political will to just scrap the entire thing would be enormous at that point. Had that bill passed I have no doubt that it would raise medicare costs for current beneficiaries, because that system would not be acceptable to current payees.
In essence I think the ad is 100% fair. If you disagree then please state right now that as a 35 year old you would have been willing to sign off 3%+ of your income for the rest of your life for no tangible benefit and you think most people 35-55 would do that happily for the rest of their working careers and people 35 and under would be happy to pay that much into a system that they wont be the beneficiaries of ever, for a large portion of their earning years.
Last edited by Egbert; 07-13-2014 at 10:13 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
