Yes it's early and not entirely fair to pitch an incumbent against a generic savior, but this, for Mitch McConnell, from a Louisville Courier-Journal poll, is bad:
With his re-election bid just a year away, those opposed to U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell outnumber his supporters 2-1 among Kentucky voters....
[Thirty-four] percent said they plan to vote against McConnell--while just 17 percent say they will vote to give him six more years. Forty-four percent said they will wait to see who is running against him before deciding.
So the Senate minority leader's top priority now shifts from burning Obama to saving his own butt by protecting his right flank, which in turn imperils even the most digestible bipartisan cooperation on, say, immigration or gun control. And that, combined with Speaker Boehner's ineluctable bunker mentality, promises two more monotonous years of 2010's election results.
Perhaps I'll take up writing movie or restaurant reviews.
Perhaps Mitch McConnell should take up writing movie or restaurant reviews. But then, would he be anymore useful?
Posted by: dr.e | January 29, 2013 at 01:12 PM
PM,
I would love to read your long-form review of the new "Care Bears 3" movie.
Posted by: MinneapolisPipe | January 29, 2013 at 01:23 PM
It's too bad he's up for reelection in a midterm year this time. The Democrats came somewhat close to knocking him off in 2008. Maybe a teabagger will run him out of the party the way Rand knocked off the establishment's candidate in 2010.
Jack Conway ran a decent campaign in 2010 and kept it close against Rand Paul until the end. I wonder if he's willing to be the Democratic candidate again. He's probably a better nominee than Ashley Judd, at least.
Posted by: Turgidson | January 29, 2013 at 01:54 PM