Bizarro World Politics in CD-6

For those of you unfamiliar with the term “Bizarro World,” it is a reference to a planet in the Superman comics where everything is backwards (the planet is square, compared to the spherical earth, etc.)

The term seems to fit recent events in the race for Congress in CD-6. As Eli Stokols at Fox 31 reports:

In the increasingly tight race for Colorado’s 6th Congressional District, Congessman Mike Coffman is attacking his opponent for not attending a debate next week.

Joe Miklosi’s campaign says he never agreed to appear at the Oct. 1 debate sponsored by the North Metro Chamber of Commerce, but Coffman’s campaign has been under the impression that Miklosi was participating until the Chamber told them Thursday that he’d be a no-show.

There are plenty of different ways you can interpret this, but it is almost always the case that the incumbent candidate refuses to engage in debates — usually because the campaign is comfortably ahead and feels that they have nothing to gain. There have been rumblings that Democrat Joe Miklosi is right on the heels of incumbent Republican Rep. Mike Coffman (moreso even than the public polls have suggested), and Coffman’s public insistence that Miklosi attend this debate may prove the rumors.

It was Coffman, of course, who disappeared for much of August and September, rarely making public appearances for the same reasons we just discussed. Have the tables turned that much that now it is Coffman trying to pull Miklosi out?  

15 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. droll says:

    http://blogs.denverpost.com/th

    That article is linked and briefly discussed in Stokol’s piece.

    Sounds like a Miklosi staff problem that Coffman is exploiting, not a trip to Bizarro World.

    • Colorado PolsColorado Pols says:

      It sounds more like they changed their mind because they are comfortable with their position in the campaign.

      • droll says:

        A former boss of mine changed international plane tickets (for a fee) to go to that event, off of that article. While she’s an old friend of Coffman’s and a Republican, she was/is considering voting for Miklosi and wanted to see him in action.

        I’m sure she’ll appreciate his new found “position.” But it’s not like moderate Republicans are the audience Joe’s looking for anyway.

        Is that the official line, or are you pulling that out of somewhere? I’m happy to pass it on if it’s the former. While we’re at it, is Joe cancelling the rest of the debates?

        • JeffcoBlueJeffcoBlue says:

          Because if droll doesn’t understand or agree, the usual response is a firehose of apoplectic incoherent bullshit.

          Nice sig line, chump.

          • droll says:

            Which part don’t you understand? I’m really curious.

            BTW, according to Pols’ new rules of quoting I’m actually being generous. You did tell me that. Defend away!

            • JeffcoBlueJeffcoBlue says:

              Sometimes you actually have very reasonable points to make. Other times you act like Libertad with your pointless trolling. In the blog post about Joe Coors this weekend, it really seemed to be the latter. If you don’t think the points the Guvs made about Coors’ crazy past statements is valid, say why. But by simply declaring them not “anchored in reality,” it seemed to me like you were defending Joe Coors for predicting Armageddon, or ever thinking AIDS was God’s revenge on gays. I happen to agree those things make Coors unelectable. I found it strange that you did not.

              There, I’ve explained myself. Please feel respond to respond in kind. I get the feeling that you’re not a person I would normally want to fight with, so let’s see if that’s true.

              • JeffcoBlueJeffcoBlue says:

                Let’s not get hung up on typos, either.

              • droll says:

                I never said that Coors’ statements were off limits, I said that the diary wasn’t based in reality. They made it look like the DP article was somehow related to the diary and it really wasn’t. Bartels only briefly mentioned Coors’ crazy and then told a lovely story.

                Specifically I asked where the devastation in Bartels’ article was and where they got their definition of “sociopathic.” Because, I’m sorry, but forcing your kid to live on his own for not following a (fairly sensible rule, even) is not anywhere close to being sociopath behavior. Allowing him to die in that situation because he couldn’t afford medical care probably could be. The devastation in Bartels’ article was missing because it was the inverse of the diary, brief crazy, lots of nice.

                You never addressed those specific questions, so I didn’t feel it necessary to explain myself.

                My problem is that a) I don’t appreciate the if-you’re-not-with-us-you’re-against-us attitude and b) integrity is really important to me. Obnoxiously so, I’m aware. That diary had a nasty slant while purporting to be about an article without really seeming to be. It was a re-hash of their own work, at best. I wouldn’t care who the article is about. I don’t care that I don’t like Coors and he’s not on my side (as a woman, doubly). Frankly, I’m finished giving Pols the benefit of the doubt.

                This diary is worse. I’ve made good points and added historical context. You didn’t respond to any of that. Why would you attack first?

                FWIW, both BC and I have recently mocked ‘Tad for posting something and pretending it said something else and I’ve done it to ArapaGOP, too. It is very Libertad behavior.

                Now I’ll repeat my question; in this diary, what did I write that is confusing or incoherent? I’m happy to clear it up.

                • JeffcoBlueJeffcoBlue says:

                  What the fuck? You’re entitled to your opinion about their opinion, but I fail to detect a “if-you’re-not-with-us-you’re-against-us attitude” or any lack of “integrity.” This blog has an opinion, and that’s ok with me. I don’t always agree with it either, but you’ve got a chip on your shoulder that isn’t explained by what they actually wrote.

                  I think Bartels’ story did tell a nice tale about Coors’ life, but there is NO way you can read it and not reel from the crazy. That’s my opinion and Pols’ opinion. You clearly have a different opinion, and that’s fine. What doesn’t make sense is your invective.

                  It’s tough to say more about the Miklosi thing, which isn’t what I was taking issue with, I don’t know anything about your Republican former boss or you. Sometimes you have dare I say progressive opinions I very much agree with, and sometimes you seem like you’re arguing very cleverly on behalf of Republicans.

                  As a partisan Democrat, I’m keen on not helping Republicans be clever. Does that make sense to you?

                  One more thing: as long as you keep that ridiculous signature that has no relationship whatsoever to anything I said but still uses quotation marks as though it’s verbatim, you’re a little short on credibility with me.

                  • droll says:

                    You’re the one I get the IYNWUYAU attitude from. Mostly this kind of line, “sometimes you seem like you’re arguing very cleverly on behalf of Republicans.” I’m not on anyone’s party’s side.

                    The new quoting rules allow my quote. Sorry. I didn’t make the rule. :( I’ll change it just for you, but you are going to have to counter an argument in the diary you’re posting in. It’s a little odd for someone to bitch about credibility when you called me “incoherent” for a reason you apparently can’t put your finger on.

      • droll says:

        against Flerlage, who I’m sure he was super scared of.

        Voters will have the opportunity to observe Coffman and Flerlage in upcoming debates – one hosted by the South Metro Chamber of Commerce on Wednesday, Oct. 13, and Channel 4/12 TV debate that will air on Friday, Oct. 8 at 9:30 p.m. and Monday, Oct. 11 at 12:30 p.m.

        http://www.coloradostatesman.c

        You’re welcome for the research.

  2. Gadfly says:

    Joe had a great issue and now he blows it by blowing off the chance to debate. Change your schedule and show up!

    I am amazed at how much money the DCCC and other outside Democratic groups are pouring into CD 6.  It appears that Sal Pace has been cut adrift and Joe Miklosi is the candidate with an actual chance of winning a seat in Congress.  

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.