I think Amy McGrath will lose based on Lexington

[Wanderlust988]

Astonished that Booker won 70% of the vote in Lexington for today's in-person voting at Univ. of Kentucky's football stadium. Lexington is in Amy's backyard and she ran in the 6th CD in 2018. This is her home. If the absentee ballots show anything close to today's tally, I don't see how she wins the state. Booker will romp in Louisville. The results we show right now don't even tally Louisville at all.

[chillfactor]

1. DAMN!

[oasis]

2. Not that big of a deal as long as Mitch is stripped of leadership. nt

[sfstaxprep]

3. We Will Need To Dump Filibuster

Otherwise he will block EVERYTHING the Democrats want to pass.

[BannonsLiver]

4. It was a long shot to beat Turtle even with McGrath

But with an Our Revolution candidate even trying is a waste of time. Hopefully now people will focus on donating to winnable races in other states.

[Karadeniz]

5. You don't think Booker might encourage voter turnout?

[BannonsLiver]

7. Honestly, no.

[Awsi Dooger]

10. Turnout means nothing

Turnout is a sloppy desperate ignorant explanation after the fact. Meanwhile the reason races are lost is that swing voters rejected the candidate. The most common reason the candidate is rejected is due to ideology. That will happen in Kentucky if Booker is the nominee. A state with 42% self-identified conservatives and only 23% self-identified liberals is not going to vote for the more progressive Democrat. This was another case of incompetent handicapping and application by our primary voters, just like Florida 2018 with Andrew Gillum.

In primaries the numbers flow like water in a fish tank. In general elections those stacks of liberals and conservatives are like unbendable fortresses that dictate the outcome.

Everyone loves to fixate on the most recent example, whether it's a sporting event or election. That's why turnout is so overhyped recently. It is convenient to recite Hillary 2016 and those handful of states while obsessing over turnout and ignoring everything else. We should be cherishing the big picture and understand that preference dictates outcomes. Jamey Comey changed preference in 2016.

[StevieM]

11. James Comey dominated the 2016 election from start to finish.

He completely redefined HRC as both a public figure and a human being.

What he did to her was disgraceful.

[Hortensis]

15. He's male and men do better with iffy voters than women,

plus he's riding the George Floyd zeitgeist. So can we really guess at this point?

I have some natural sympathy with McGrath, working so long and hard to be displaced almost frivolously by someone who'd been ignored by the voters until distant events shifted the political mood. But stopping the enormous damage McConnell destructive power is doing to our nation and futures is my interest in this race.

[Amishman]

17. Yes, but on both sides. Which hurts us in Kentucky overall

A progressive candidate also helps rightwing turnout. The bigger the ideological gap between candidates, the more the fringes on both ends are motivated.

In Kentucky this is a easy way to lose, as the far right is much larger than the far left.

This is why in 2018 for the PA house,l seats, all of our pickups were with somewhat moderate candidates. In most areas there just aren't enough progressives to carry the election.

[JonLP24]

18. I remember when Grimes ran a very centrist campaign and received a lot of criticism

There were endless arguments saying she has to run this way as this the only way she can beat Mitch. She lost. Ironically she endorsed Booker.

I hope all those Democrats outside the state who sent funds to Mcgrath who wanted to beat Mitch so bad will extend similar support to whoever wins.

[Amishman]

20. Has to be a good campaign too

Hillary was a good candidate and was well positioned ideologically with her policies, but ran a very poor campaign.

The tougher the location, the better the campaign must be. To win somewhere as red as Kentucky you either need the right candidate plus a good campaign, and/or some huge unforced errors by our opponent. Alabama Senate and Kentucky governor are two cases where we needed and got both.

[pnwmom]

19. It would encourage white turnout just as much, and white Republicans are in the majority. n/t

[Celerity]

13. the native Kentucky people on many threads said that Booker was far more popular than many thought

and that last poll (valid or not I cannot truly say it is just one poll and may have been an outlier) showed Booker getting closer to Moscow Mitch than McGrath

the Our Revoluton boogeyman tripe is really getting tiresome

it treats legit candidates like Booker like they are some sort of marionettes, which I find problematic at best

Cenk left them years ago now

they are a spent force

[JonLP24]

14. I agree

Booker was actually out polling Joe Biden in the state in the last poll that I saw.

[SKKY]

6. I hope so. I think Booker gives us the best chance to beat Moscow Mitch...

...He will turn out Louisville/Lexington in big enough numbers to counter Cleatus and Lucian in the east and west of the state.

[mvd]

8. The fact that he might beat an establishment candidate in KY is something in itself

While progressives might not be the best to run in all areas (though I wish they could win everywhere), Booker actually seems more politically astute to me in addition to having policies I like.

[SKKY]

9. Yep. I like Amy. I respect her. But, her first appearance on Morning Joe after...

...she announced her candidacy told me she didn't have a chance against Moscow Mitch. Now, I am voting for whoever the Democrat is against Moscow Mitch, obviously, and I would feel much better about Booker. But, I was a John Edwards supporter, so do take my opinion with a big fat grain of pink Himalayan salt.

[Corgigal]

12. I feel the same way.

Booker feels like a fighter, who will get dirty. The only way to dump Mitch.

[sunonmars]

16. I think you are right, she is not running up enough in the other counties to offset.