It is not an easy decision. But, she could inform the voters of Kentucky that KYConnect is "Obamacare" and we do not have to like Barack Obama just because we like insurance coverage for our children. However, we cannot let Mitch McConnell and the Republicans take it away and he has promised to repeal it if he is the Majority Leader. KY cannot take the gamble.

that Democrats are responsible for giving them... says everything about why American politics is broken, and how Dems allowed the GOP to break it.

If she feels like her constituents can't bear to wrap their minds around the idea that Obama was involved in something they're benefiting from, I suppose she could just go with "McConnell wants to take away your Kynect program, and I promise to keep it."

I actually "like," as in support, universal, not-for-profit nationalized health care, free at point of service and paid entirely by taxes. THAT is the goal.

I actually don't like for-profit insurance which is not by any stretch "affordable," and still limits care. I think the fact that many Democrats think that calling insurance "care" and having to pay premiums plus deductibles plus copays if we're actually going to get any care is somehow "affordable" and something to "like" says everything about why the Democratic Party is broken.

thank you.

Precisely.

...and many do not know they are being deceived.

that they know us Democrats do not agree with. If they did not know how to play the game they would consistently lose to the Rs.

Think about what we are trying to accomplish in 2014. We do not want to lose like we did in 2012. We are trying to keep the Senate (and the House if possible) in our hands. That red state senator helps us keep control. The numbers add up. We are trying to once again gain control of the SCOTUS. Without the Senate we have no hope of doing that. Things are not always what they seem.

If I could have my way I would have 100% of our candidates resemble Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. But I know that I am not going to get that.

Because all it really accomplishes is implicitly admitting that liberal democratic principles are wrong. What else would any voter possibly conclude?

SCOTUS will be gone for the next 30-40 years and Rs will control both the House and the Senate. Nothing we want will get done and we will be lucky they even let us vote in coming elections. They already obstruct too many voters.

The "war to the gop" is only lost in the red states if we let them run unopposed or do not run a smart campaign thus losing by default. IF we run liberals in those states we will lose for sure.

As to admitting that democratic principles are wrong. So if we do not have 100% agreement in all of the states that is an admission of defeat? I do not agree. Sometimes compromise is necessary to get where you are going. We want our elected officials to represent their constituents but not if they live in red states? When a red state truly believes that they do not want to follow liberal policies how do we get a win for the democratic party in that state?

"Things are not always what they seem." Currently living in a red state, native of KY: Given a choice between Mrs. Grimes and the man who promised to prevent the Senate from any action on the people's business, my choice would be clear. Not voting is suicidal

of difference. But even in MN I vote in every election. It is my duty.

Can you imagine the change in direction if the US could register over 90% of the population? Even better, what is possible if the majority actually votes. Vote by mail is available across the US. In most places we do not need to stand in lines.

no lines.

You're argument would make sense, and I know because I live in Georgia, if it was actually working.. which it isn't.

And, there are many examples where supporting issues of the left, even in red states, actually help the Democrat.

It's not about being Sanders or Warren. It's about just supporting things that are already very popular; like Kynect, higher minimum wage, immigration reform, campaign finance reform, etc.

no good.

Yes, I believe Gore actually won the state of FL and the election, but the results would likely have been more definitive had Gore aligned himself more closely with Clinton's presidency.

Here in SW Ohio, we're in the Northern Kentucky TV market, so I'm hearing the Grimes and McConnell TV ads steadily.
I'm disturbed that Ms. Grimes doesn't align herself with the ACA. - One doesn't have to use the term "Obamacare", after all.
Point out that a Democratic Congress made Kynect possible and that a Democratic Senate is needed to keep it in place, because Mitch McConnell would like to lead the Senate in taking away those benefits from Kentuckians.

A hat tip to Gov. Beshear wouldn't hurt either.

Grimes has repeatedly called out McConnell for voting against raising the minimum wage, voting against re-financing student loans, voting against the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, and voting against the Violence Against Women Act. REPEATEDLY, in her campaign materials to boot!

People shouldn't take the one TV commercial they saw a snippet of on MSNBC or some internet blog as the only thing that ever happened. You're clearly not at all informed about the campaign Grimes is running.

but the swing rite is on the wane. the media just won't accept that.

In a pathetic apology that never should have been made, and did nothing to stop the right wing echo machine anyway.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/8307379/ns/politics/t/illinois-senator-apologizesfor-guantanamo-nazi-remarks/#.VB8zJBZqtOQ

What's so tough about her? She gives great speeches, but what makes her so tough?

If a Democrat has a chance in that state, let them gage what is best to do.

Still waiting to see the first "Vote for me, I'm a liberal Democrat" sign.