Only ONE Senate Candidate Campaigned With Obama &...

[onenote]

103. Your passion is admirable. But you don't make a lot of sense

First, I don't trust McConnell and Boehner. I also don't trust Senators Cornyn or Cruz, who would be the most likely candidates to become Senate Majority Leader had McConnell lost. All peas from the same pod as far as I'm concerned. If you have some factual basis for why I should be more concerned with McConnell as majority leader than any of the likely replacements, I'd be interested in knowing what it is. Absent any such evidence, the notion that Grimes failure to unseat McConnell puts the ACA at significantly greater risk (so much so that she can be said to have "blood on her hands" for losing) seems rather ridiculous.

Second, one fewer Republican vote would mean that the Republicans would have to get 14 Democratic senators to vote to override a Presidential veto rather than 13 Democratic Senators. I'm curious who the 13 "DINOs" that you believe would vote to override the President are. Care to name them?

Finally, as others have pointed out, the notion that Grimes would have defeated McConnell in the face of the 2014 repub "wave" had she embraced Obama rather than run away from his is simply ludicrous. McConnell got more votes in an off-year election for Senate than Obama got in Kentucky in either 2012 or 2010. That alone should be enough to put the fantasy of an Obama-fueled Grimes victory to bed once and for all.

Grimes ran a lousy campaign. A better campaign might have closed the margin a bit, but there isn't a scenario where she wins. And there isn't a scenario where she can be justly accused of "having blood on her hands" for something that, if it does happen, would have happened whether or not she managed to win.