Rogers has done quite a bit for his district over the years, that could be why they keep re-electing him.

 

He's done a lot for Somerset.

 

Isn't he part of the swamp...30+ years in Congress?

But Kentuckians just put Rogers and Rand Paul back in. Very few incumbents lost in a year where most of the electorate chose to change everything. I feel like @Clyde here, and I just can't get my head around this.

What you are having trouble getting your head around is that most people saw the corrupt Obama administration, including Hillary Clinton, as the swamp architects. As evidenced by the reaction to Hillary's candidacy and the DNC's rigging of the nominating process, most Democratic voters felt right at home in the "swamp."

 

Many more Republican voters were fed up with the people we sent to Washington, but we took their frustrations out in primary elections. Republicans voting for liberal Democrats would only have expanded the swamp and was not an option.

He's done a lot for Somerset.

 

Isn't he part of the swamp...30+ years in Congress?

 

Not just Somerset also London, Corbin, Manchester, Pineville, Hazard and pretty much every community in the 5th District has been touched in some positive way.

 

Even though he has done a lot, I have no problem with term limits. Without them however, he is still the best man for the job in this area...IMO.

 

FWIW I'd love to see Term Limits for all elected positions in Washington.

Not just Somerset also London, Corbin, Manchester, Pineville, Hazard and pretty much every community in the 5th District has been touched in some positive way.

 

Even though he has done a lot, I have no problem with term limits. Without them however, he is still the best man for the job in this area...IMO.

 

FWIW I'd love to see Term Limits for all elected positions in Washington.

 

Yes, please. Term limits should absolutely be necessary. Politicians were supposed to serve the people, not become a rich career funded by corporations and lobbyists.

What you are having trouble getting your head around is that most people saw the corrupt Obama administration, including Hillary Clinton, as the swamp architects. As evidenced by the reaction to Hillary's candidacy and the DNC's rigging of the nominating process, most Democratic voters felt right at home in the "swamp."

 

Many more Republican voters were fed up with the people we sent to Washington, but we took their frustrations out in primary elections. Republicans voting for liberal Democrats would only have expanded the swamp and was not an option.

 

Really?

Is that why Congress had an approval rating in the teens while the president's is plus 50?

 

A new liberal expands the swamp, so we vote in the old guy. :lol2:

Not just Somerset also London, Corbin, Manchester, Pineville, Hazard and pretty much every community in the 5th District has been touched in some positive way.

 

Even though he has done a lot, I have no problem with term limits. Without them however, he is still the best man for the job in this area...IMO.

 

FWIW I'd love to see Term Limits for all elected positions in Washington.

 

30+ years he should have at least done a few good things for the poorest region in the nation, but isn't he part of the swamp?

Really?

Is that why Congress had an approval rating in the teens while the president's is plus 50?

 

A new liberal expands the swamp, so we vote in the old guy. :lol2:

Look at the election results. Draining the swamp resulted in Republicans sweeping control of all three branches of government. I would love to see conservatives topple Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan, but there is no way that Republicans are going to help put Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, or Chuck Schumer in charge of anything.

 

The election results are a pretty strong indicator that Americans blamed Hillary Clinton and her party for the "swamp" more than they blamed Republicans. That seems pretty clear to me.

What you are having trouble getting your head around is that most people saw the corrupt Obama administration, including Hillary Clinton, as the swamp architects. As evidenced by the reaction to Hillary's candidacy and the DNC's rigging of the nominating process, most Democratic voters felt right at home in the "swamp."

 

Many more Republican voters were fed up with the people we sent to Washington, but we took their frustrations out in primary elections. Republicans voting for liberal Democrats would only have expanded the swamp and was not an option.

 

 

You sometimes say let's visit this in a year or so. Lets do that. The GOP has everything but a Supermajoriy. I am willing to wait and see before I judge. Now I have opinions what I think it will be which is more of the same.

 

I am pretty sure you won't see it, though.

Look at the election results. Draining the swamp resulted in Republicans sweeping control of all three branches of government. I would love to see conservatives topple Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan, but there is no way that Republicans are going to help put Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, or Chuck Schumer in charge of anything.

 

The election results are a pretty strong indicator that Americans blamed Hillary Clinton and her party for the "swamp" more than they blamed Republicans. That seems pretty clear to me.

 

They didn't sweep control. They maintained control.

Look at the election results. Draining the swamp resulted in Republicans sweeping control of all three branches of government. I would love to see conservatives topple Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan, but there is no way that Republicans are going to help put Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, or Chuck Schumer in charge of anything.

 

The election results are a pretty strong indicator that Americans blamed Hillary Clinton and her party for the "swamp" more than they blamed Republicans. That seems pretty clear to me.

 

So the swamp only includes old guard GOP and liberals. How very inclusive you are?

 

You do realize this nation was not built on conservative idea alone.

30+ years he should have at least done a few good things for the poorest region in the nation, but isn't he part of the swamp?

Why are you complaining about Hal Rogers? He campaigns like a Democrat and brings home the bacon. Is that not what liberals like in a representative?

 

The last time that I voted for a Democrat, and the last time that I will ever do so, was for a Hal Rogers opponent. I did so after listening to clips of a campaign speech in Paintsville. I would have been happy with Hal if I had been a Democrat.

 

Since that time, I have decided that no vote is more important than the votes that give a party control of the House and Senate. I will never again cast a vote that may help Democrats implement their toxic agenda. If that means that I have to hold my nose and vote for a RINO from time to time, then so be it.

So the swamp only includes old guard GOP and liberals. How very inclusive you are?

 

You do realize this nation was not built on conservative idea alone.

Actually, this nation was much more prosperous when it was run by more conservative Republicans and Democrats. This nation was not founded by modern liberals (not to be confused with classic liberals). It was built by rugged individuals willing to take risks without the benefit of a social safety net.

Why are you complaining about Hal Rogers? He campaigns like a Democrat and brings home the bacon. Is that not what liberals like in a representative?

 

The last time that I voted for a Democrat, and the last time that I will ever do so, was for a Hal Rogers opponent. I did so after listening to clips of a campaign speech in Paintsville. I would have been happy with Hal if I had been a Democrat.

 

Since that time, I have decided that no vote is more important than the votes that give a party control of the House and Senate. I will never again cast a vote that may help Democrats implement their toxic agenda. If that means that I have to hold my nose and vote for a RINO from time to time, then so be it.

 

Hal is part of the swamp isn't he?

30+ years?

Shouldn't he go under when the stopper is pulled?

 

Or are you telling me we pick and choose? It's ok I'm starting to understand the electorate was fed and rationalized this entire election.

 

FWIW Hal ran unopposed in the General.

Hal is part of the swamp isn't he?

30+ years?

Shouldn't he go under when the stopper is pulled?

 

Or are you telling me we pick and choose? It's ok I'm starting to understand the electorate was fed and rationalized this entire election.

 

FWIW Hal ran unopposed in the General.

Certainly, Hal should go, but I would not vote for a Democrat to make that happen. That is like pouring gasoline on a fire and believing that you can extinguish it, if only you can keep the flow of gasoline going. However, I vote against RINOs every chance that I get in primary elections.

 

I doubt that I will every cast another vote for or against Hal myself. I now live in a heavily Democratic area and my Congressman also ran unopposed this year.

30+ years he should have at least done a few good things for the poorest region in the nation, but isn't he part of the swamp?

 

I have answered that already...put in term limits and get him out. Otherwise his service to this district will keep getting him re-elected.