Mitch McConnell

Watch This Democratic Senate Candidate Repeatedly Refuse to Say Whether She Voted for President Obama


In perhaps the clearest sign yet of how utterly toxic any association with President Obama is in many close congressional races right now, here's Alison Grimes, who is running just a few points behind in a race against GOP Minority Leader Mitch McConnell for one of Kentucky's Senate seats, repeatedly refusing to answer questions about whether she herself voted for President Obama.

The video comes from an interview session Grimes held with the Louisville Courier-Journal.

Yes, Obama is less popular in Kentucky than in other parts of the country, but even still: Grimes is a Democrat, running on the Democratic ticket, and she won't even say whether she voted for her own party's winning presidential candidate. 

Instead, she argues that "this election isn't about the president."

"I don't think the president is on the ballot," she says later. In addition, she brings up her support for Hillary Clinton in 2008, saying "I think Kentuckians know I'm a Clinton Democrat through and through." 

Astute observers may note that Hillary Clinton is also not on the ballot.

As to whether the election is or isn't about President Obama, here's what he had to say about the matter recently: "I am not on the ballot this fall….But make no mistake: These policies are on the ballot—every single one of them." 

In perhaps related news, election models now give Republicans an average 65 percent chance of taking over the Senate, according to Vox. The Washington Post's model estimates that the GOP's chances are running at 95 percent. 

NEXT: Palin Family Brawl Police Report Released

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. She turned what really wasn’t a gotcha into a viral one. Well done.

    1. Still she is hot. And she’s running against that turkey looking douche, so she’s got that going for her.

      1. She is pretty cute, especially when you consider what most female Democratic pols look like.

        1. They’ve had quite a run of good looking, yet terribly flawed candidates running in red states recently between this broad and Wendy Davis.

          1. I think this broad is a lot cuter than Davis, though Davis isn’t bad. The thing is that being a good looking woman is a huge advantage. And yet, they still manage to fuck it up.

            1. She should be, Wendy Davis is old enough to be her mom.

              1. Based on what we know about Wendy Davis, she probably is.

                1. From failed abortion to US Senator: the story of Allison Davis-Case-Lundergan-Grimes.

                2. Nice!^

              2. I thought Davis was only in her 40s but seemed older because she started having kids in high school.

                1. Davis 51, Grimes 35. Davis is from RI so that diminishes the odds, slightly.

        2. Meh. I’d do Sandra Fluke before her.

          1. Not with Warty’s dick.

          2. Dude, no way Fluke is the most generic looking person on the planet. And I hate short hair.

            1. Well I was assuming there would be a wig, gold foil condom, and plenty of peanut butter.

              1. No German Shepherd?

                1. No, I had a bad experience once.

            2. I’m with Idle Hands on this one. Grimes is attractive. But Fluke is just so very unappealing. I’d have to go public with my demand that she cover the cost of my rape kit.

          3. Goes to show, there is some nut out there who will fuck anyone. Good luck dude. I think getting laid might do Sandra a world of good. Glad to see someone else volunteer to do it.

      2. For a second there I thought the sister from Dexter was running for office.

        1. Deb Morgan would have said “Fuck you, it’s none of your fucking business who the fuck I voted for. Fucker.”

          1. “I’m going to fuck the coal industry so hard in the ass.”

          2. She was cute but I can’t stand her chronically being on the verge of tears.

            1. Not to mention her gangley body.

              1. aren’t in real life her and the actor that plays Dexter married?

          3. Not only that but her campaign manager would turn out to be a serial killer.

      3. I mean if she ends up popular and all over the news, and i have to listen to her blither on reciting liberal nonsense, at least she’ll be easy on the eyes.

        1. I bet this was the thought between Kirsten Gillibrand getting the Senate gig. After inflicting Hillary! and Moobs on us, the NY Democratic party figured they should throw the voters a bone lest they vote Republican in protest.

  2. “I think Kentuckians know I’m a Clinton Democrat through and through.”

    “Did you vote for Obama?”

    “Honestly, at this point, what difference does it make?”

    1. Bam! indeed

  3. James O’Keefe has her donors on film saying that all of them know she is going to “fuck” the evil coal industry if she is elected and is just lying when she says otherwise.…..o-F-k-Them

    It doesn’t look like the plan of running stunt Democrats to claim “I am pretty angry about this Obama bastard too” isn’t working too well in Kentucky at least.

    1. Yeah between that and this she’s for sure cooked. Any poll #’s that she sustains going forward, will probably be more of reflection of what McConnells constituents think of him than what she brings to the table.

      1. McConnel sucks but he doesn’t secretly plan to destroy the state’s economy.

        1. And yet, that seems to be the gist of the Lunderman Grimes campaign…

          “Mitch doesn’t really support coal, and I don’t really support Obama!”

          Vote the apathy ticket!

    2. James O’Keefe has her donors on film saying that all of them know she is going to “fuck” the evil coal industry if she is elected…

      I’d say she was lying to her donors, unless she had no plans of being re-elected.

      1. I would say she is lying to the voters. Six years from now it will be too late to undo the damage. And who cares if she doesn’t get re-elected. She would be handsomely rewarded for her service after she left office. Also, if the coal industry is run out of Kentucky, she might be able to change the demographics of the state enough to win re-election.

        1. This. Compare Sen. Bob Casey Jr. in Pennsylvania, who ran as a “moderate” in 2012, then took it all back before he was even inaugurated into his next term.

      2. In this day and age, the Democratic hostility to industry, jobs etc. is breathtaking. Hell, you can get elected saying exactly that nowadays.

        1. That’s because TEAM BLUE actually feels that way, all the way down to the base. It’s pretty fucked up.

        2. The centrist Dems of the ’90s were rightwing compared to these nuts.

          1. I know I realized that back when I had my first involuntary twinge where I missed Bill Clinton.

    3. I had no idea what a cultural issue coal is for Kentuckians until I moved across the river from them. I am actually as sick of hearing about the “War on Coal” as I am the “War on Women,” and I broadly agree with them on the subject.

      1. War on Christmas and Coal!

        I always got coal for Christmas. That sucked.

        1. War on Christmas Coal! Fuck Santa!

      1. +1 caravan with no wheels.

    4. What is these people’s beef with the coal industry? I use coal in my backyard forge, and stuff gives off virtually no smoke, plus it’s cheap as hell.

      1. Are you that guy from the Viking sword documentary?

        1. No, but that Viking sword documentary is what inspired me. Someday I’ll make an Uthbert. I figure start with knifes first, and work my way up. I’m going to attempt making an anglo-saxon Seax soon, I figure it’s the next step.

          1. You know what I took away from that documentary? That Damascus was hundreds of years ahead of Europe in steel making and the viking’s still got more love in the film that the middle east. Which kind of shoots a hole in the guns, steel, and germs guys theory that Europe got lucky with a few inventions and that is why it was able to become a colonial super power.

            1. Guns Germs and Steel is a stupid book that has been debunked in about a million ways.

              And yes, the middle east was more advanced in steel making and a lot of other things. The difference was Europe put those inventions to productive use to a much greater extent than the middle east did.

              1. If you consider killing people “productive use”, maybe. There wasn’t as much need for weapons in the Caliphate as in disunited Europe.

                1. There wasn’t as much need for weapons in the Caliphate as in disunited Europe.

                  First, there is a lot of need when you goal is to conquer all of Europe, which the Ottomans spent 200 years trying to do. Second, the middle east was never fully unified from about 800 on. The Muslims fought each other as much as they did the Europeans. Where do you think the Ottomans came from? Hint, they didn’t come from the middle east and they ended up owning most of it and not because the people who were there happily accepted them as rulers.

                2. If you consider killing people “productive use”, maybe.

                  And Europe did a lot more with those inventions than kill people. They got rich with them far beyond anything Islamic culture ever achieved.

                  1. They got what they needed to become rich by killing people.

                    When the Portuguese finally managed to get to India by sea, they dicovered that they had nothing of value the Indians would accept for trade. We all know what their solution to this problem was.

                    1. Didn’t Portugal open trade with China and Japan without killing them?

              2. And yes, the middle east was more advanced in steel making and a lot of other things. The difference was Europe put those inventions to productive use to a much greater extent than the middle east did.

                History is weird. Damascus had advanced steel, China had fun powder, but they never put it to use in the ways Europe did. Looking back you think how did you not do more with those advantages.

                1. Gun not fun

                  1. I dunno, sometimes it can be fun to use.

                  2. Same diff.

                2. The Chinese started using gunpowder weapons almost immediately after discovering gunpowder. The Ottomans finally conquered Constantinople with gunpowder cannons.

      2. Burning wood was better for the environment: Sustainability!

      3. Don’t get me started. If you actually learn even a smidge of science behind coal, you begin to learn just how EFFICIENT it is, especially if burned in a state-of-the-art furnace. And by state-of-the-art, I’m talking about anything build probably after about 1900. If I recall, when burning high quality coal, around 99% of the coal is converted directly to heat (energy).

        You begin to realize just how powerful nature is in creating a source of energy, and just how shitty we are at trying to do the same. Switch grass my ass.

        1. Shit my forge consists of some bricks, a pipe, and an air pump from an inflatable mattress and I’m just amazed at clean, and efficient it seems to be, at least compared to wood and charcoal.

          1. But but but …. Sulfur! CO2! Global Warming! Acid Rain! CORPORATIONS!!!1!!1

          2. Coal forged are fucking great. I always manage to melt my work piece a few times since I’m used to propane. It’s cool seeing all the sparks when you pull the metal out of the fire….unless it’s a really important piece.

        2. “If I recall, when burning high quality coal, around 99% of the coal is converted directly to heat (energy).”

          You don’t.

      4. It takes money away from the jihadi friends in Arabia.

    5. Yeah, this is an actual real as opposed to some petty gotcha bs

      1. But Reason never covered it. O’Keefe, even though he is doing the kind of subversive and interesting things Reason should be doing, is icky I guess.

        1. O’Keefe and Breitbart have a history of sliming lies and misdirection. They are not trustworthy, but Reason should consider this story. Carefully.

          1. Yeah, you mean like the time published forged documents saying Bush was AWOL from the national guard? Or the time they paid kids to throw rocks at Israeli soldiers so they could film it? Or the time they employed a reporter who spent years fabricating stories? You mean like that?

            Oh yeah that was CBS and the New York Times. Breitbart is much more trustworthy than the mainstream media.

            But hey, don’t let that stop you from trying to get people who hate you think you are reasonable by saying stupid shit about one of the few organizations actually willing to fight the left with their own tactics.

            1. All power to deflectors! /John

              one of the few organizations actually willing to fight the left with their own tactics.

              IOW, you’re admitting they’re slimy liars. Good job. Accidental honesty is one your best traits next to your typos.

              1. IOW, you’re admitting they’re slimy liars. Good job. Accidental honesty is one your best traits next to your typos.\

                No. Not every leftist tactic is lying. Just a lot of them. And the fact remains their record is better than any of the mainstream media sources. You just don’t like them because you have no balls and want people like Bo to think you are reasonable. Good luck with that.

                1. Yes, Cyto is all about wanting me to think he’s reasonable. John, this Team thinking is driving you a bit batty.

              2. Gotta love Red Tony, and his whining about how reason won’t cover the topics he’s got a bug in his ear about.

            2. That’s a classic ‘you too’ reply John.

              1. No it is not Bo. It is pointing out that Britbart objectively has a better record than CBS or the NYT. The only reason people like you don’t like them is that they point out facts you would like to pretend didn’t exist.

                1. No, it’s a clear you too.

                  You don’t try to refute his claim that Brietbart has been proven to engage in bad journalism, you just say “oh yeah, what about CBS!!!”

                  You know how you don’t trust CBS? Neither do I. The difference is I think the same way about Brietbart an O’Keefe, because unlike you I’m not on a Team.

                2. Britbart objectively has a better record than CBS or the NYT.

                  My BS meter just broke. It’s on you.

          2. I recall a video about NPR which was edited in a Daily Show-esque way that could be considered a lie. But I’m not sure one could call it a “history” of lies. Definitely muckraking, but when it comes to politicians that’s a good thing.

            1. Exactly. But they do things that make Progs mad and Reason could never do that. They really want Progs to like them. They really do.

              1. What a fevered fantasy.

                On any given day half of the posts here are critical of ‘progs.’

            2. BB is a lot worse than that. And I consider fishy editing to be slimy. I am no fan of TDS.

              1. I was defending O’Keefe, not Breitbart. They are the HuffPo of the right, all articles read with a huge grain of salt and avoid the comments at all cost.

    6. “has her donors on film”

      What does that mean? Some of her donors? All of them? A few?

      1. Sorry Bo, we can’t read the articles for you, even the ones that have big words.

        1. If the words are not big why can’t you summarize?

      2. some guy from the FIRE economy.

  4. She could have said, “of course I voted for Obama because he was my party’s candidate. Would you rather that I voted for some other party than my own? I would prefer that Obama had pursued other policies than he did, but in the Senate I will be able to push him in the right direction. In contrast, a Republican Senate would [enslave women, turn workers into slaves, whatever talking point she needs at this point].”

    1. Or better yet, “Sure I voted for Obama and it was a mistake and in hindsight a pretty embarrassing one. I like a lot of people are not pretty embarrassed by our actions.

      How could you not vote for her then?

      1. cause I hate everything she stands for and would vote for?

        1. There is that. But it is not like Mcconnel is that much better.

        2. But she stands for the children and equal pay for different work. How could you be against that?

        3. She refuses to say whether she voted for him and points out he’s not on the ballot, then, when asked what she wants to accomplish, runs through a list of talking points straight off Obama’s teleprompter.

      2. She didn’t vote. Pretty clear.

    2. Sorry, all answers must be in sound-bite form. Your long-winded answer would be edited down to “of course I voted for Obama” and your desired effect would be lost.

      1. In similar form, what I took away from your post:


        My brain inserts an apostrophe and e and BAM!


      2. “‘Bama lied, moderates died”?

        1. Don’t bring Nick Saban into this.

    3. That would require her to have some kind of humanity, instead of the soul sucking parasite wearing a human skin suit that lawyers and politicians walk around in.

      1. Hey! Mine is not made out of human skin.

    4. She should have said “Yes, I did vote for Obama, but my voting precinct had several armed Black Panthers there.”

      1. That would have been even better than my idea.

      2. This is clearly an opportunity to jump on the voter id ban wagon.

  5. How pathetic is Mitch McConnell, being only a few points ahead in a very tough year for the other party, in a deep red state, while he’s flerking Senate Minority Leader (with a good chance at Majority Leader next year if he wins) able to bring home some serious bacon to the state?

    1. In all seriousness, Kentucky isn’t that kind of red state, though…

      They’re special, in more ways than one.

      1. They are West Virginia’s slightly less inbred cousin.

        1. Exactly, and WV is the political exemplar of a Blue Backwater.

          The lefty meme of Deliverance-denizens as thoroughly Republican is exploded by Appalachia generally.

          1. “WV is the political exemplar of a Blue Backwater.”

            They’re getting ready to elect a GOP woman for Senate and went GOP in the last few Presidential races, right?

            1. Dem governor, two Dem senators (including Jim Byrd)

              1. And one of those facts is going to no longer accurate in less than 30 days.

            2. It makes me cringe to link to Wikipedia, but this seems like the most time-efficient way of articulating my general point: They are quite Blue, really.

              1. Of course they’re ‘blue’ in the sense that Democrats have won most elections there, but also of course their Democrats tended to be a bit different from national ones. And that’s really come to be demonstrated if you look at their Presidential votes in recent elections. In terms of national politics, they’re ‘red.’

                1. …And how is any of that relevant to my fairly limited point about the “special” politics of Appalachia generally and Kentucky or West Virginia specifically?

                  I even noted that KY is a “red state,” just not in the usual sense. Don’t make me squander my scare quote quota debating this!

                  1. Fair enough.

    2. That’s a good point. For all the hoopla about how in danger the Democrats are, you’d think that the sitting incumbent would be a slam dunk.

      Luckily, the election is a winner-take-all, so if he wins by 1/16th of a point, he still wins.

      1. I’d bet it’s Tea Partiers spitting mad over what he did in the MS primary, deciding to sit at home on Election Day.

        1. There is this, there was a significant vocal ground-swell in the primary with the message “Retire Mitch” that was produced by Matt Bevin supporters.

          ALG has attempted to coop this message since the primaries.

    3. I posted this a couple weeks ago, but according to this commercial, ALG is running as a Republican.

      1. Given that she at least is able to hold the gun somewhat decently in that commercial, I will now believe that she is not a Obama acolyte.

        Has anyone juxtaposed a pic of her shooting with the one Obama released to show what an ordinary gun guy he was?

  6. There were so many good (well . . . better) primary challengers to these establishment Republicans. It’s just too bad that more of them didn’t win. I hate McConnell, but this woman seems considerably worse.

    1. Yes. This is why the Democrats being so far left is such a problem. No matter how bad the Republican is, the Democrat is likely to be some bat shit insane Prog who is even worse. If the Democrats were less nuts, you could ruthless punish the Republicans for insulting the voters by nominating people like McConnal and Thad whatever his name is in Mississippi. Instead, you are left with the choice of “usual crook” or “complete menace”.

      1. The fellow opposing Cochran doesn’t seem that much worse than Thad. He was against the Iraq War, voted against the ACA and was endorsed by the NRA when he was in the House.

        1. Not that much worse is still worse. There was a time when there were Democrats like Sam Nun or David Boren who while not great were not complete fucking morons either. Those don’t seem to exist anymore and that is a real problem.

          1. McConnell repeatedly voted for the second worst big government debacle of my lifetime, the Iraq War and Nation Building adventure. I don’t see him as much better than anyone.

            1. Wouldn’t that make him better than someone who voted for the first worst?

              1. I think my point is that when you’re talking about terrible and slightly less terrible who cares?

            2. That wasn’t the 2nd worst bit government debacle of anyone’s lifetime but nice try.

              1. Really? You have a better one than our miserable failure after losing thousands of lives, billions of dollars and world respect?

            3. So did a lot of Democrats. And in case you missed it, we are back there as we speak. Moreover, if you want to believe a war that you never had to fight and really only 1% of the population ever did is worse than Obamacare, a program with made the majority of the country’s health insurance much worse, feel free. I doubt you will get many takers though if all you have is “but Iraq”. Sure the Democrats want to repeal the 1st and 2nd Amendments but what about Iraq? Good luck with that.

              1. “And in case you missed it, we are back there as we speak”

                All the more evidence of the level of folly.

                1. Sure Bo. The Democrats are going back into Iraq and that just proves how the Republicans are worse!!

                  1. Did you even pay attention to the Congressional vote authorizing Obama’s plan to rearm the rebels? Which party do you think had more representatives backing that?

                    1. And the problem with arming enemies of our enemies?

                      Or would you prefer boots on the ground?

          2. Richard Epstein is fond of saying that basically all legislative progress in this country depends on (the existence of) moderate Democrats at the Federal level.

            I increasingly wonder if that isn’t the primary reason for our particular brand of political dysfunction at this stage. Are past achievements like the deregulation of transportation or welfare reform even conceivable in our current political environment?

            1. Yes. The last time anything positive got done in Washington it was welfare reform and it was accomplished under a moderate Democratic President. Epstein makes a good point.

              1. I’d say the Bush tax cuts were a good thing.

                1. Bo, I know this was in all likelihood a response to John, but I wouldn’t disagree.

                  However, such tax cuts are symptomatic relief at best if spending isn’t cut: Deficits are future taxes or inflation. Prior tax reform was wisely premised on Laffer-curve effects, so that you took advantage of not only low-hanging fruit, but a genuinely free lunch.

                  Considering how politically unlikely “efficiency” tax reform is at the moment, we need spending cuts or at least decreases in some derivative.

      2. so your a “better the devil you know” kind of guy.

  7. More importantly, would she vote for Harry Reid as Majority Leader? Because that would be the most important and worst vote during each session.

    1. Harry Reid or McConnell, some choice.

      1. Did McConnel bring a bill to repeal the 1st Amendment to the floor? Does McConnell spend his time ranting and raving about the evil Kochs and how they need to be silenced?

        1. No, but he engages in similarly bad though different things of course.

          1. Oh yeah, there are so many things just as bad as wanting to repeal the 1st Amendment and have the government control all political speech.

            The mask is off Bo. Give it up. The whole “but the Republicans are worse” concern troll act doesn’t work anymore. The Democrats have gone full fascist. They don’t even try to hide it anymore.

            1. The mask is off? That’s hilarious coming from someone who is explicitly on the other Team.

              1. Yes Bo, plaining wanting the repeal the 1st Amendment and have the government control all political speech is not fascist.

                But thanks for admitting defeat. You just forgot to formally write “red tony”. That is strictly speaking how one formally admits “yes John I have lost the argument”. But in your case we will accept “you are on the other team”.

                1. You’ve got a vested interest in selling your ‘GOP is better’ snake oil here.

        2. No but his a christfag so con!!11!1!

          And if there’s one thing that bo hates more than jews it’s christfag so cons.

          1. How tired you are there Rev. Al.

    2. You’d rather have Dick Durbin or Chuck Schumer?

      1. Ron Wyden or Rand Paul would be nice.

        1. Can they make the horse unicorn they triumphantly ride in on Consul as well?

          1. Give it time, and a little effort. Cynicism certainly won’t get us anywhere.

            1. Cynicism saves lives.

              For what it’s worth, I’m not the least bit enamoured with the Republican Party. I just harbor righteous contempt for the American people as political actors, and expect them to do the wrong thing, good and hard.

              1. I’m going to hold my nose and participate in the GOP primary in 16 if Paul is running. I think he has a real shot of being President.

            2. Cynicism certainly won’t get us anywhere.

              Everything else only get us somewhere that nobody wants to go.

  8. Distancing oneself from Obama could also be called white flight.

    Just about everyone who doesn’t live in a cave knows something about polar bear hunting and the knockout game. Even Matt Yglasias got a taste of it. Former attorney general Eric Holder prosecuted only one person for this. Yeah, federal hate crimes are nonsense so it should be 0, but the slant is obvious.…..-suspect-/

    1. “Distancing oneself from Obama could also be called white flight.”

      That’s quite clever, made me laugh.

      1. I make a lot of snarky comments here for grins. That wasn’t one of them. You think I’m funny, Bo? In what way?

        1. Like a clown?

          1. You’re not answering my questions. If you want to name call me get a pair and put a period and the end.

            “Like a clown.”

  9. Eh, if I were Kansan I’d still vote LP.

  10. “Did you vote for Obama” is the perfect question in 2014 to watch people squirm.

    If you DID vote for him, you voted for a POTUS as bad a Nixon and maybe worse. And if you didn’t vote for him you are a racist.

    1. I’m sure that was what she was thinking when she gave her pathetic evasion.

      1. The best answer is “I voted ‘present’.” But most people wouldn’t get the joke.

    2. If you DID vote for him, you voted for a POTUS as bad a [sic] Nixon and maybe worse.

      Strunk, White, and Occam get this one right: Parsimony!

    3. I’m telling you, she did not vote in either one or both elections. Not voting is death to candidates.

  11. Did you vote for him?

    “Of course I did. I’m a Democrat.”

    No story.

    1. “Did you vote for him?”

      “I didn’t vote at all, but you should vote for me!”

      That would have been the honest answer.

    2. “Did you vote for him?”

      “I didn’t vote at all, but you should vote for me!”

      That would have been the honest answer.

  12. Seriously, do ya’ll think she voted for Mccain and Romney? No fucking way.
    She didn’t vote at all. It’s got to be hard to admit that, when you’re begging everyone to vote for you.

  13. Bo-Bo rushing to the defense of Democrats…

  14. according to Vox.

    Vox? really?

    Why don’t you just quote and link to a steaming pile of shit.

  15. The level of bullshit spewing from that dumb bitch’s mouth is mindblowing.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.