Jump to content
The Political Lounge

2022 Kentucky Senate Poll


Sean F Kennedy

Kentucky Senate Poll  

19 members have voted

  1. 1. Who would you vote for in the Kentucky senate race?

    • Charles Booker (D)
    • Rand Paul (R)


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Fbarbarossa said:

True he didn't say, but he signed a pledge to term limits which would limit a senator to two terms

It is hypocritical but there isn’t anything wrong with it. He thinks that you shouldn’t be able to serve more than 2 terms but that doesn’t mean that you can’t take advantage of the law not existing. Similarly to how Marx and Engels both invested in the stock market. You might not like the system, but you can (and should) still take advantage of the existing system.

 

rand Paul still sucks monkey butts tho

Edited by Rezi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Fbarbarossa said:

True he didn't say, but he signed a pledge to term limits which would limit a senator to two terms

The pledge was to support a term limits amendment (which he has done). However, the logic behind staying on is as follows: Politicians against term limits will stay on as long as they want. If politicians who support term limits are constantly leaving, there will never be 2/3rds of Congress who support term limits (needed for an amendment). Thus, politicians self term limiting themselves would be counterproductive be the ultimate goal of establishing term limits.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, jvikings1 said:

The pledge was to support a term limits amendment (which he has done). However, the logic behind staying on is as follows: Politicians against term limits will stay on as long as they want. If politicians who support term limits are constantly leaving, there will never be 2/3rds of Congress who support term limits (needed for an amendment). Thus, politicians self term limiting themselves would be counterproductive be the ultimate goal of establishing term limits.

I can't stand Rand Paul and I "hate" him just as much as anybody really. 😛

But the point here is valid.

Although I do wonder if the justification on his own part, is credible.  

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, jvikings1 said:

The pledge was to support a term limits amendment (which he has done). However, the logic behind staying on is as follows: Politicians against term limits will stay on as long as they want. If politicians who support term limits are constantly leaving, there will never be 2/3rds of Congress who support term limits (needed for an amendment). Thus, politicians self term limiting themselves would be counterproductive be the ultimate goal of establishing term limits.

Fair enough point, I personally am just a believer in leading by example and principle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jvikings1 said:

Well, outside of his neighbor

😛 Curious on your thoughts of how big the margin will be when he goes against Booker. 

Booker being the Democratic nominee makes me disappointingly support Rand Paul. But I can see Paul's vote share hitting 60 to 65 percent against someone like Booker who is way out of line with Kentucky politics. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Pringles said:

😛 Curious on your thoughts of how big the margin will be when he goes against Booker. 

Booker being the Democratic nominee makes me disappointingly support Rand Paul. But I can see Paul's vote share hitting 60 to 65 percent against someone like Booker who is way out of line with Kentucky politics. 

60% would be a great target to hit as a Republican has only hit that mark once (McConnell in 2002 against a relatively nobody candidate). It'll be tough to beat Trump's coattails where he got 62%. However, Rand does benefit from having an extremely unpopular Democratic president and an unpopular Democratic governor. And he is much more popular in the state than Mitch is (who got just under 58% in 2020).

I'd say 57.5% is probably the floor with the low 60s as the ceiling. You are certainly right about Booker. He'll be popular in the urban centers of Jefferson and Fayette Counties. But his style is out of touch with everything else (suburban areas of Jefferson and Fayette, other urban/suburban areas, and rural areas). There's a chance this might cause a backlash vote allowing Rand to get higher in the 60s.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, jvikings1 said:

60% would be a great target to hit as a Republican has only hit that mark once (McConnell in 2002 against a relatively nobody candidate). It'll be tough to beat Trump's coattails where he got 62%. However, Rand does benefit from having an extremely unpopular Democratic president and an unpopular Democratic governor. And he is much more popular in the state than Mitch is (who got just under 58% in 2020).

I'd say 57.5% is probably the floor with the low 60s as the ceiling. You are certainly right about Booker. He'll be popular in the urban centers of Jefferson and Fayette Counties. But his style is out of touch with everything else (suburban areas of Jefferson and Fayette, other urban/suburban areas, and rural areas). There's a chance this might cause a backlash vote allowing Rand to get higher in the 60s.

The Political Process has spoken and given Rand Paul 63.2% to 36.8% in a election simulation I made. 😛 

I definitely think the county map is right on lmao. 

Capture.PNG.7a0121391210ba4c9b83d28ac732ee36.PNG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

@Pringles

https://www.wtvq.com/content/uploads/2022/01/n/i/KY122Poll.pdf

 

Here’s the first poll on the race that’s been released. I’m a little skeptical because I highly doubt Beshear’s approval is at 60% (there’s just so little evidence to support such a number). But at the same time, the senate race shows a sizeable difference between the 2. Booker only wins in the Louisville Metro-area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jvikings1 said:

@Pringles

https://www.wtvq.com/content/uploads/2022/01/n/i/KY122Poll.pdf

 

Here’s the first poll on the race that’s been released. I’m a little skeptical because I highly doubt Beshear’s approval is at 60% (there’s just so little evidence to support such a number). But at the same time, the senate race shows a sizeable difference between the 2. Booker only wins in the Louisville Metro-area.

Interesting. 55-39 for Paul at the moment. 6% Undecideds. So if we take that poll literally Paul could get around 60% if he does extremely well with the remainder. Not bad. Not really surprising too. 

Also, on Beshear's approval, you think that the recent tornado devastation and recovery efforts are aiding him? That's about all I can think of that I've seen in the news. Not sure about what else is going on in Kentucky politics. 

Personally I don't mind Beshear, then again, I'm not a Kentuckian so I don't know what the word is on the block. 😛 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Pringles said:

Interesting. 55-39 for Paul at the moment. 6% Undecideds. So if we take that poll literally Paul could get around 60% if he does extremely well with the remainder. Not bad. Not really surprising too. 

Also, on Beshear's approval, you think that the recent tornado devastation and recovery efforts are aiding him? That's about all I can think of that I've seen in the news. Not sure about what else is going on in Kentucky politics. 

Personally I don't mind Beshear, then again, I'm not a Kentuckian so I don't know what the word is on the block. 😛 

Correct. I’d expect this to be a base number for him. And there’s a decent shot he’s a little higher if my suspicions about the poll are correct.

Beshear is likely benefiting from a disaster boost, but it is still hard to see that getting all the way up to 60%. It’s especially hard to believe that 40% of Republicans approve of his job. His lockdowns were not popular, especially amongst R voters. And he will most definitely get attacked during the election next year for sending cops to churches on Easter Sunday. He’s also proudly pro-abortion (not something that wins you points in KY).

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Patine said:

What was this about? I haven't heard anything in any news outlet I read.

I don't think anyone is, "pro-abortion." This label implies actively encouraging abortions to happen, and promoting the procedure as a good thing. Even the most fervent pro-choice types are not of that sort, at all. They do view every abortion as a grim and dire thing that should not happen, and does have definite, negative repercussions, but with the view that the woman carrying the child is the one who makes the choice (hence, "pro-choice,") in the end, and not the state or moralistic groups. That is the belief behind the pro-choice side of the debate. "Pro-abortion," sounds like something a Simpsons (or, better, yet, South Park or Family Guy) political figure would push, or someone as mad and wonky as a Batman villain. Get a grip here, @jvikings1!

Ok fine. “Anti-life” is more accurate then

  • Based 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Patine said:

What was this about? I haven't heard anything in any news outlet I read.

Beshear sent cops to churches on Easter Sunday to intimate worshipers and write down license plate numbers. Meanwhile, one could still shop at a liquor store as well as Wal-Mart/Kroger.

KY Governor Beshear Sued for Targeting Churches - Liberty Counsel (lc.org)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Patine said:

Although such draconian and insidious tactics are unbecoming of responsible and accountable government, the fact remains that Freedom of Religion - one of the enshrined and inalienable conceived, among many others, during the Enlightenment, that have collectively become a foundational pillar of Western civilization and jurisprudence - does not actually guarantee a right to exercise said freedom in one's accustomed place of worship inviolably, necessarily.

Freedom of Religion in American Constitutional law is given the Strict Scrutiny test. It means measures must be the least restrictive means and must be neutral. The fact that secular activities were allowed to operate in-person (grocery stores, liquor stores, abortion clinics) meant the restrictions were not neutral and thus in violation of the 1st Amendment (illegal).

Edited by jvikings1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Patine said:

I personally believe the liquor store lobby is just very powerful in a lot North America, and capable of levying significant bribes to politicians. Liquor stores were the first to reopen after hard lockdown here, too. Liquor stores, in most U.S. States and Canadian Provinces got themselves exempted from the Blue Laws before most other establishments (although churches, obviously, were always a counter-example, there). Grocery stores are a matter of necessity, which pragmatically overrides liberty in terms of providing availability (and in most other senses - dead people are NOT free by mortal reckoning), so that is actually understandable.

Whatever the reason for them being open, it still means that the same standard must be applied to churches. And if not, then the restriction is not neutral (which then fails the strict scrutiny test).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...