Mark August 30, 2012, as the day Mitt Romney lost Colorado.

( – promoted by ClubTwitty)



“President Obama promised to begin to slow the rise of the oceans – and to heal the planet. My promise is to help you and your family.”  Mitt Romney – RNC Nomination Acceptance Speech, August 30, 2012.

Mark August 30, 2012, as the day Mitt Romney lost Colorado.   We expect the not so subtle swipe at the Obama Administration’s efforts to address climate change and environmental issues in general will fall decidedly flat among Colorado’s conservation minded voters.

Mitt Romney, perhaps fully taken by tea partiers, has completely bought into the false choice that we must choose between a strong economy and a clean environment.

Coloradans in poll after poll have stated that we can protect the environment and have a strong economy.  As a matter of fact, Colorado businesses and our political leaders has made the environment – our access to outdoor recreation, Rocky Mountain blue skies, and our health conscious and outdoor orientated population – one of the prime marketing tools for our State.  

On top of that we have substantially invested in a “new energy economy” which has resulted in the creation of over 72,000 green jobs in our State.  Once Romney’s campaign inexplicably opposed the bipartisan supported wind production tax credit – all hope of an extension this fall was lost in the political morass of Washington.  Coloradans lost their jobs because of it.

We are so lucky to live in our blessed state – our mountains, access to clean rivers, the sight of our Bronco orange sunsets, and the ability to lose yourself in our open spaces.  For some reason Romney has made the political calculation to put its political eggs in the basket of the past.  

Not so in Colorado.  We are working to create a sustainable future and preserve the Colorado we enjoy today for future generations.  We know that slowing the rise of the oceans and healing our planet is imperative and important for Coloradans and their families.

We will work this fall to make sure Coloradans and our elected officials remember that at the ballot box.

23 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. ArapaGOPArapaGOP says:

    More Coloradans want help for their family and this economy than they want the “planet healed.” While Obama promises abstract touchy feely nonsense, Romney offers America a hand up to the prosperous future we all know is obtainable simply through expanding freedom.

    Sorry, enviros. You’re going to lose.

    • baaramewe says:

      I agree that this election won’t be decided on environmental issues (even in Colorado). Perhaps this can be used to drum up support with the environmental base — and thus get more people knocking on doors and making phone calls… but the average voter doesn’t really care about the environment right now.

      Obama will win Colorado and the GE, but it will have very little to do with anything around his stance for or against environmental issues. Best to fight that battle at the state level anyways.

    • Tom says:

      People making a living from industries that would be harmed by anti-environmental policies? Not just workers directly involved in renewables, but people involved with tourism, agriculture and forestry can tell that Romney’s policies aren’t going to be very helpful.

      No doubt that will be outweighed by oil and gas interests drumming up opposition based on high gasoline prices and worker layoffs, despite that mostly having to do with clogged transportation and processing infrastructure rather than environmental regulations.

    • Duke Coxdukeco1 says:

      too fine a point on it, but…you are an idiot…fuck you.

    • Mr. Toodles says:

      Contributes billions to Colorado’s state and local economies. Not to mention the equipment and clothing manufacturers, many of which are headquartered here. But yeah, keeping thinking that a state full of hunters, anglers, and just general lovers of the outdoors won’t care about the environment when they step into the voting booth.

    • Driver8 says:

      First off, I don’t post much, so hello all. Secondly, I give the (R)’s credit. They don’t give actual plans (the Ryan “Plan” notwithstanding, which would be an utter nightmare of catastrophic proportions if ever actually passed by Congress ), but instead play on the emotional heartstrings of their constituents.

      My point is, what exactly does “expanding freedom” mean? Sounds to me it’s just the definition “touch feely nonsense” with a (R) slant. Is it less government regulations? Less taxes for the super-duper rich? More shit trickling down to us lucky enough to grovel at the feet of our corporate masters and lick up the leftovers?

      What will Romney actually do to expand freedom? Cause, you know, that would actually mean he would have to give us more than “Trust me, vote for me, at least I’m not the Black guy who wasn’t born here.”

    • ClubTwitty says:

      to reject the notion that we must either capitulate to ‘representatives’ that are corporate trollops parroting the same old trickle down deregulation BS or give a damn about quality of life, quality of living, and the quality of our environment.  

      What the hell does this even mean:

      While Obama promises abstract touchy feely nonsense, Romney offers America a hand up to the prosperous future we all know is obtainable simply through expanding freedom.  

      What has RMoney offered again but vague platitudes and re-warmed VooDoo malarkey?  Specifics please.  (That’s a joke.  When have you once demonstrated the integrity to actually defend your regurgitated talking point nonsense?).  

    • speedyexpress48 says:

      The problem with your logic is the fact that you think that “help for their family and this economy” has nothing to do with the environment (particularly in CO.)

      Like it or not, Colorado’s economy depends a lot on the environment. Will it decide the election? Probably not, but it does give voters something to think about, especially the ones that don’t live in the Boulder-Denver-Colorado Springs area, where there’s a lot more dependence on industries that depend on the environment.

      Also, “touchy feely” nonsense? “expanding freedom”? Really? Freedom for the rich to screw the poor? WOOO FREEDOM FOR THE 1%! facepalm

      Of course, knowing you, I’m pretty sure you won’t reply to this thread and come up with some other useless comment on another thread.

  2. harrydobyharrydoby says:

    Who’s Mitt to refuse?

  3. BlueCat says:

    A bit prematurely hyperbolic, don’t you think?

    • MADCO says:

      when he couldn’t convince the Christians of Colorado (or Rome) that Mormons are Christian, nor that his position on a women’s right to choose had nothing to do with overturning Roe v Wade and instead everything to do with getting elected governor of MA.

      • Diogenesdemar says:

        Colorado early last February when all the patriots in this State decided that Rickey Sweatervest best represented their political goals and aspirations.  Now all that’s left is a few moderates who still have enough money to stash offshore.  

        Colorado Republican Party — 2012 — R.I.P.   (Ok,  . . .  that’s a blatantly disingenuous lie on my part, should be — “R.I.H.”)

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.