U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Jena Griswold
60%
60%
40%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Alexis King
(D) Brian Mason
40%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez
(D) George Stern
(R) Sheri Davis
50%↑
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(R) Kevin Grantham
(D) Jerry DiTullio
60%
30%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(D) Somebody
80%
40%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Somebody
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(D) Joe Salazar
50%
40%
40%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
September 19, 2011 05:30 PM UTC
19 Comments
He’ll ride in on his big HOG-mobile. Maybe wear his war bonnet…nah, he’ll have a feather in his cap and call it….
I have nothing against a good zombie horde, snarkiness or satire, but would rather see a true pro/con analysis of Prop 103 than multiple parodies of the gonzo journalism that is today’s media.
The back story is one of two things, either
A) Pols is down with a CEA plan to fund this pig and therefore are pimping it daily to create the illusion this group of tax hikes is on the minds of Coloradans or
B) Pols is pimping 1) the CEA to actively engage with a couple of million $s. 2) the folks over at the Den Post who monitor this site for stories in hopes of generating one or two. 3) desparately hoping to support those proponents of 103 that hope to use it’s success to continue the spending orgy.
So where are the pro/cons …. you won’t see them here.
Don’t agree with me.
The back story is Pols wants to highlight the idiocy and vapidness of claims like yours about Prop 103.
My point – this could be done in an educated way, as with most articles on this site.
Your point – this website is in a conspiracy with the CEA and the daily newspaper to undermine democracy in the state.
Please, don’t agree with me.
….. CEA is saving their cash after reviewing the polls on 103, considering all the local district mil levy measures, and seeing the polls on Obama’s massive tax hikes.
But hey I’m with you car31, I’d like to see the pro/cons too. As I’ve said before I’m undecided on 103.
So I’m interested in hearing more such as the spending priorities 103 will deliver, what return the tax payers will achieve with this critical government investment of $3 billion dollars, ….?
‘turd can’t play like he’d pay 103 any rational thought because:
1) he’s incapable of independent thinking
2) he’s incapable of reasoned thought
3) it’s guaranteed that any position he’d espouse (likely one merely parroted than origninal) would squarely start & end against Prop 103
Trolls like ‘turd are spoilers — they don’t want a sane, reasonable thread offering open discourse. Don’t fall for his BS feigned interest. What’s desired is any & all attention feed his vapid little GOTP-martyr ego.
He’s all giggly & tingly thinking that anyone would pay him some heed and actually waste time rebutting his assinine statements. He posts crap daily knowing 2,5, or 10 folks can’t resist responding to his drivel. What’s sadder is that he’s deluded enough to believe the crap he posts is worthy of attention.
Faux News … rAssmussen … WND … whatever ‘turd cites deserves 0 credibility. Guess most ColPol folks feel they must have a foil with which to practice their parry but really folks you can do better than feed the troll.
What we’re lampooning here is lazy reporting that allows opponents and supporters of ballot measures or candidates to just say whatever they want — and watching it get reported as news in the guise of “quotations.” Reporters who do this will often defend themselves by saying, “I’m just reporting what so-and-so said,” but that’s a cop-out. When you repeat an important quotation without any sort of critical reporting, you’re essentially endorsing the accuracy of the quote. And it’s not enough to just report what each side says and leave it at that; if someone says something that is known to be untrue, the media has a responsibility to either not quote that person or to directly point out that what they are saying is false.
layoff Bachmann, huh?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44…
Requiring people to check the accuracy of what they repeat is simply an infringement on of the right of Republicans’ free speech.
folks dumb enough to vote in Tipton and Gardner got barely enough brainstem to feed zombie “Nighthorse” let alone a brain-sucking horde.
Not walk like a zombie day.
n/t
I skip posts that don’t interest me. Usually when people start complaining about a post there is a reason beyond simply not being interested.
Just sayin’.
Oh, wait… now I’m acknowledging reading it. Crap.
Prop 103 is still going down.
What I don’t understand is why you did not bring up George Soros? Saving some ammo for your next brilliant comment?
potato :: potahto
Saul Alinsky pioneered many of the tactics that Colorado Pols uses to attack conservatives. They are classic practitioners actually…
Pls. elaborate or admit you are full of it.
Who the hell is that? Is he related to George Soros?