CO-04 (Special Election)
See Full Big Line
(R) Greg Lopez
(R) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Biden*
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%↓
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
90%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
90%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
(R) Ron Hanks
40%
30%
20%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(R) Deborah Flora
(R) J. Sonnenberg
30%↑
15%↑
10%↓
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Dave Williams
(R) Jeff Crank
50%↓
50%↑
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
90%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) Brittany Pettersen
85%↑
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
(R) Janak Joshi
60%↑
35%↓
30%↑
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
September 23, 2014 11:30 AM UTC
7 Comments
Cory "Con Man" Gardner supports Amendment 67 100%, regardless of whatever transparently phony BS he spews about "rethinking" his position. The only thing to which he and his GOTP party have given any "thought" is how they can best and most effectively bamboozle you into thinking he doesn't support the amendment!
Don't be fooled, Colorado women. Make no mistake: A vote for Cory Gardner (or Beuaprez, or Coffman) IS A VOTE FOR AMENDMENT 67!
Thats a lie. Gardner does not support Amendment 67. You can say what you want about the distant past, but this is false.
The distant past of six months ago when he "changed his mind?"
Or the distant past of today when he was still a cosponsor of federal legislation doing the same thing?
I guess that depends on your definition of "support". If you mean, is Gardner publicly in favor of Amendment 67, the answer is NO. If however you mean, is Gardner still a believer and supporter of ensuring that fetuses have rights, still expressing such support in statements while continuing to sponsor the Federal equivalent to Amendment 67, then the answer is YES.
Gardner has had all the time – and notice – he needed to withdraw his support from the Federal Life at Conception Act if he had truly changed his mind on the issue. He hasn't, and given both that and his post-"conversion" statements that he still believes in the anti-abortion position, the only sane conclusion one can draw is that Gardner would still be a supporter of A.67 if he weren't also running for a very competitive Senate race.
No, Zippy, IT IS THE TRUTH!
Con Man Cory Gardner is a bald-faced, shamless, amoral liar, and so are you!
I have to wonder what Progress Now's factors have been smoking? They say 67 would pass if the election was held today, according to their polling. A polling report from 9 News (Denver) last week showed 67 failing 35 to 45%, with 17% undecided (yes, I know, it does not add up totally to 100%).
I'm all in favor of 67 going down in flames as it well should. Not only does 67 impose religious ideology on all Colorado citzens, there is also the unethical behavior of personhood backers (read the piece in the Sunday Denver Post (Sept. 21) editorial section). In that point/counterpoint, Jennifer Mason totally ignores that the Legislature fixed the issue of the mother who lost her almost-ready-to-be-born-child in a drunk driving accident. I don't think Progress Now helps things with some of their near-hysterical text (altho I do like the women-in-the-lineup picture).
Regards, C.H.B.
CHB: The proposal starts…
The uninformed who don't know all of the dangerous consequences such a change would set in motion like the way that sounds.