More Grimes food for thought

[Mitch Rapp]

Poverty

Poverty is more the effect of electing too many Democrats than it is the cause. Poor people tend to vote for Democrats, so Democrats enact programs that ensure that poverty will never be in short supply.

[BIG BLACK JACK]

Poverty is more the effect of electing too many Democrats than it is the cause. Poor people tend to vote for Democrats, so Democrats enact programs that ensure that poverty will never be in short supply.

 

I can't get the 2008 Presidential Election map to upload, but only eight counties voted Democrat.

 

Henderson

Hancock

Jefferson

Fayette

Elliott

Rowan

Menifee

Wolfe

 

The poorest five counties (according to Wiki) in Kentucky are:

Owsley

Clay

Martin

Knox

Lee

 

None of the poorest five voted Democrat.

 

If I expanded the list to the poorest ten (again using Wiki), adding Leslie, Harlan, Bell, Breathitt, and Wolfe, then only Wolfe voted Democrat.

 

That's 1 out of the 10 poorest counties in Kentucky. 10 counties which are amongst the 22 poorest counties in the USA.

[doomer]

Poverty is more the effect of electing too many Democrats than it is the cause. Poor people tend to vote for Democrats, so Democrats enact programs that ensure that poverty will never be in short supply.

 

I believe this statement to be valid for cities especially. Taking a rural county and extending this rule to draw a conclusion about people is statistically insignificant.

[Mitch Rapp]

I believe this statement to be valid for cities especially. Taking a rural county and extending this rule to draw a conclusion about people is statistically insignificant.

Eastern Kentucky is a good example. There really is not much difference in the personal political beliefs of the Republicans of Martin and Johnson Counties and the Democrats of Floyd and Knott Counties. The party registrations in those counties still reflect local events during the Civil War.

 

Politicians in rural Kentucky counties often choose their party based on the registration numbers rather than political positions. As you correctly pointed out, they are a different breed of Democrat than you find running places like Detroit, Washington, DC, and other horribly mismanaged large cities.

[Jim Schue]

Why is Mitch a "big part of the problem in Washington"? There are 435 member in Congress and John Beohner is the speaker and Nancy Pelosi the minority whip. There are 100 members in Senate which must vote on the bills proposed by Congress. According to some facts, Congress has proposed numerous 40+ bills to improve the economy, and the Democratic majority Senate will not discuss them or vote on them. So that is because of Mitch?

 

Given Mitch's power, he's a huge part of the problem.

 

He gets the overwhelming majority of his campaign cabbage from New York, California, Virginia and Texas. What exactly is he doing in the interest of Ky voters? He's just as much a puppet as Grimes is portrayed to be. Not saying she's an answer, but the question still remains.

[75center]

Mitch's power is the difference between the two. That is either good or bad depending on one's persuasion.