Don't be so sure. After Mitch McConnell won his primary this week, a huge amount of people here says they'd rather vote for the democrat, Grimes, than him, because he's a RINO.
I hope this isn't another election where millions of us stay home. Those who wanted Bevins to defeat McConnell did.
Here's the turnout from Tuesday's vote:
# Eligible voters / # voted / Percentage
2,980,008 / 415,337 / 13.9
Only 14 % voted! This is why WE (TEA Party/Conservatives) lose. I'm not saying it's universal, but if people in Kentucky hate McConnell so much, they really should have voted Bevins. Turning around now and saying you'll vote democrat is not the answer...
I am really so tired of all the TALKERS who do nothing but complain about RINOs but don't show up at the primaries. Primaries everywhere have dismal turnouts. They are the PRIMARY place to defeat RINOs.
Eligible voters / # voted / Percentage
3,105,349 / 840,586 / 27.07 %
So, 28% is better than 14% but still... If more conservatives had just shown up and voted--and Kentucky has more conservatives than 28%--McConnell would have been defeated.
“I am really so tired of all the TALKERS who do nothing but complain about RINOs but don’t show up at the primaries. Primaries everywhere have dismal turnouts. They are the PRIMARY place to defeat RINOs.”
I agree with this sentiment. Two years ago, here in Texas, in an OPEN seat fight Ted Cruz won because
1. Low primary turnout
2. even lower runoff turnout.
So just how many people care anything about our g’ment? And just how many do we really need to show up on primary day?
For seats where there is an incumbent running there are many obstacles.
Here in Texas John Wayne McCornyn had abysmal opposition. NO ONE with any credibility chose to run against him
Was this also the case in Kentucky? More primary voters had a vested interest in Mitch? Was Bevin as good candidate?
Talk is cheap, isn't it? Reminds me of a conversation I just read (in Shelby Foote's 3-volume "narrative" on the Civil War). A few years after the war, former Confederate General, Joseph Johnston was seated in a train, where he overheard some young blowhard's complaining about the South's surrender to the North, and asserting that HE (the blowhard) would never have surrendered. General Johnson, interested of course, turned and asked the blowhard which unit he fought with in the war. The blowhard replied to the effect that "circumstances prevented me from participating," at which time General Johnson invented a marvelous quote, which is sooo apt, todey:
"Invincible in talk; invisible in war."