Churchill has spent the better part of the last decade acting against the long-term interests of racing and likely of their own business. I think they've more than earned a second-guessing on the actions of the corporate side.

The point is Churchill Downs is a gambling institution facing a financial crisis and they are supporting people who will hurt their business.

 

I imagine it's in hopes of gaining some leverage with them. It's fairly common for businesses and organizations (or the people in charge of them) to donate to both sides for this reason and to ensure you will still have access no matter which party ends up in power.

I imagine it's in hopes of gaining some leverage with them. It's fairly common for businesses and organizations (or the people in charge of them) to donate to both sides for this reason and to ensure you will still have access no matter which party ends up in power.

I agree with this. This kind of pay to play system is why I consider Kentucky's government one of the most corrupt in the country - and so much of the corruption is perfectly legal.

 

Companies that do business with the state are routinely squeezed for political campaign contributions and if they fail to put money on the winner, their businesses do suffer.

 

Blame placed on companies that make contributions is misplaced. Stumbo has no issue with companies making big contributions to PACs, as long as it is not a GOP or conservative PAC.

This is an internet forum - asking questions is one of the purposes of such forums. You are under no obligation to answer questions and are free to ignore them if you want - but I have the right to ask them nonetheless.

 

Duh ... that is my point.

 

And I am allowed to comment on why I think it makes no sense for Churchill Downs to support people who are against their business interests. Right?

Duh ... that is my point.

 

And I am allowed to comment on why I think it makes no sense for Churchill Downs to support people who are against their business interests. Right?

Duh ... that's not the impression that the OP gives. The donation is probably in Churchill Downs' best business interests. For some reason, I am having a hard time believing that this thread would exist if the donation would have been made to one of Greg Stumbo's favorite groups. That is my point.

Duh ... that's not the impression that the OP gives. The donation is probably in Churchill Downs' best business interests. For some reason, I am having a hard time believing that this thread would exist if the donation would have been made to one of Greg Stumbo's favorite groups. That is my point.

 

Explain the bold. That is the purpose of the thread. How is this in Churchill Downs' best business interests?

Explain the bold. That is the purpose of the thread. How is this in Churchill Downs' best business interests?

It's already been explained. Money is access in Kentucky politics. Obama's failed presidency has made it more likely that Republicans will win elections at all levels. Churchill Downs has bought a place at the Republican table. Aside from the fact that Greg Stumbo does not believe the donation is in Churchill Downs' best interest, what makes you believe that to be the case?

They should have just set it on fire and whizzed on it. Would've accomplished the same thing.

They should have just set it on fire and whizzed on it. Would've accomplished the same thing.

 

For all the good it's going to do, I agree.

As long as it pleases California Chrome's owner, I'm happy.

It's already been explained. Money is access in Kentucky politics. Obama's failed presidency has made it more likely that Republicans will win elections at all levels. Churchill Downs has bought a place at the Republican table. Aside from the fact that Greg Stumbo does not believe the donation is in Churchill Downs' best interest, what makes you believe that to be the case?

 

You just can't get your mind out of the box can you? It is extremely simple.

 

Churchill Downs is a gambling institution. Every gambling institution (racetrack) in Kentucky is struggling with revenue because of expanded gambling in surrounding states. Every time the racetracks have tried to expand gambling to compete, conservatives in KY have blocked it. Churchill Downs just gave money to the same people who are working hard to block expansion of their business.

You just can't get your mind out of the box can you? It is extremely simple.

 

Churchill Downs is a gambling institution. Every gambling institution (racetrack) in Kentucky is struggling with revenue because of expanded gambling in surrounding states. Every time the racetracks have tried to expand gambling to compete, conservatives in KY have blocked it. Churchill Downs just gave money to the same people who are working hard to block expansion of their business.

Spindoc hit the nail on the head. If Churchill Downs is happy with whatever bang it expects to get for its buck, then that is their business. If the donation had gone to some left-wing group, I doubt that there would have been a thread created.

Spindoc hit the nail on the head. If Churchill Downs is happy with whatever bang it expects to get for its buck, then that is their business. If the donation had gone to some left-wing group, I doubt that there would have been a thread created.

 

Of course you feel that way. I assure you, if the donation went to a liberal group known for working to defeat legislation Churchill and other racetracks need to survive, I would have started the thread if no one else did. I really don't care whether something is labeled a liberal or conservative issue. I look at each situation and call it like I see it.

 

As to commenting on this being "their business", I say "This is an internet forum - asking questions is one of the purposes of such forums."

Of course you feel that way. I assure you, if the donation went to a liberal group known for working to defeat legislation Churchill and other racetracks need to survive, I would have started the thread if no one else did.

 

As to commenting on this being "their business", I say "This is an internet forum - asking questions is one of the purposes of such forums."

My opinion is as valid as yours. How a private company spends its money is their business - not mine and not your's. That is my opinion. If they broke the law, or I believe that they did so, then I will have a different opinion.

Edit

Edited June 29, 201412 yr by Voice of Reason
Duplication of previous post.