Ted Cruz to Announce Carly Fiorina as Pointless Running Mate

Carly Fiorina (right), with Rep. Gordon "Dr. Chaps" Klingenschmitt. Picture taken long before Fiorina was a pointless VP choice.

Carly Fiorina (right), with Rep. Gordon “Dr. Chaps” Klingenschmitt. Picture taken long before Fiorina was a pointless VP choice.

Republican Presidential candidate Ted Cruz is expected to announce today that he has selected Carly Fiorina as his “running mate.”

It is mathematically impossible for Cruz to win the GOP Presidential nomination, so this all seems particularly pointless. Our friends at “The Fix” attempt to explain:

Cruz and his team understand that after the primary votes over the past two weeks, any momentum he might have had following Wisconsin on April 5 is now gone. And all of it has gone to Donald Trump who now looks damn-near unstoppable in his quest to become the GOP’s nominee.

Given that reality, Cruz needs to change the narrative of the race. Immediately. There are five and a half days until the Indiana primary and if Cruz loses to Trump there the nomination fight will be effectively over. And, if nothing changes in the race in the Hoosier State, Cruz will lose…

…This is rightly understood as a desperate attempt to re-take the momentum in the race before it’s too late. To Cruz’s credit, he’s trying it. (I’m a big believer in leaving it all out on the field. If you are going to lose, lose with all of your best plays called. Or something.)…

…But, make no mistake: This is a Hail Mary pass. It, like the deal that Cruz and John Kasich cut earlier this week, amounts to a tacit acknowledgment that if nothing changes in the race Trump is going to win.

Could it work? Sure. Sometimes Hail Marys get caught. But usually they get knocked down and the other team starts celebrating.

So, there’s that.

Kiss of Death: Gardner Switches Endorsement To Losin’ Ted Cruz

UPDATE: What does it mean when the losing candidate picks a running mate?

Answer: Diddly squat. Sorry, Carly Fiorina.


A marriage of convenience.

A marriage of convenience.

A press release from Ted Cruz’s presidential campaign today announces the endorsement of Sen. Cory Gardner of Colorado, who was left high and dry after his first choice Marco Rubio dropped out of the race:

“Ted Cruz has always been a fierce defender of the Constitution and a tireless advocate for conservative principles,” said Senator Gardner. “He has spent his entire career fighting for the men and women of this country and pushing back against the special interests in Washington. Ted is the only candidate who will change the way Washington works and restore the balance of power back to the American people. It’s time for Republicans to rally behind this campaign in order to put forth the best candidate to stop Hillary Clinton in November. I am confident Ted Cruz is that person and I’m thrilled to endorse him for President.”

“Cory has spent his time in Congress focused on improving the economy, creating jobs, and fighting for the people of Colorado,” said Cruz. “He has stood up and been a strong advocate for conservative principles like stopping the train wreck that is Obamacare and this dangerous deal the Obama administration struck with Iran. I am honored to have Cory’s support and look forward to working together to continue to coalesce Republicans around this campaign.”

Mutual admiration in today’s statement aside, Gardner’s endorsement of Cruz is just another sign of the desperation establishment Republicans are increasingly gripped with as frontrunner Donald Trump continues to win primary after primary. Before Cruz became the last hope to stop Trump, he had a reputation of being the least popular member of the U.S. Senate–a man with more influence among the “Tea Party Caucus” in the House than within his own chamber. That didn’t stop Gardner from invoking Cruz’s devotion to the cause of repealing Obamacare during his own run for the Senate, but Gardner has certainly fallen more on the establishment wide of the U.S. Senate GOP majority than Cruz’s since taking office.

And after Trump’s clean sweep of yesterday’s Northeast primaries, accelerating his pace to clinch the Republican nomination ahead of the party’s convention in July, Gardner’s endorsement looks like a “too little, too late” attempt to rehabilitate a loser.

Which is pretty much what happened with Marco Rubio.

Senate Dems Vote Unanimously Against Loan Sharks

loanshark2A press release from the Bell Policy Center celebrates…well, it bears some explanation, but they’re celebrating the passage of a bill they strenuously oppose: Senate Bill 16-185, a late bill to allow predatory subprime lenders like OneMain Financial to charge higher interest rates on larger personal loans.

Why would the Bell celebrate the passage of a bill they oppose? Simple: every Democrat in the Colorado Senate voted against it. In the fraught battle to protect Colorado consumers from predatory lenders who are deliberately courting Democratic support, that’s a big, big win:

Today the Colorado Senate passed (18-17) Senate Bill 16-185, meaning some senators chose to support New York hedge funds over hard-working Coloradans.

We appreciate and thank the 17 senators who stood against making Coloradans pay at least $9.5 million in additional interest and finance charges. Now we need help urging the House to reject this bad bill.

The senators who voted yes on this bill did so despite there being NO need to increase interest rates. The number of loans issued and the amount loaned has increased over the past five years.

This bill would increase interest rates on all supervised loans larger than $1,000. The bill would also increase the rates charged to Coloradans who finance the purchase of appliances, furniture and used cars. Many of these loans are more expensive than they appear because of high-cost credit products sold with them.

The Colorado Attorney General’s Office testified at the hearing on the bill there is no evidence that borrowers cannot get access to these loans or that lenders are not making them available. The lenders making these loans are highly profitable and their cost of capital has decreased dramatically since 2000. The representative from Springleaf, the major Colorado lender, told the Denver Post that the company is very profitable nationally and confirmed a 30 percent Colorado growth over the past four years.

The majority shareholder in Springleaf is the owner of Fortress Investment Group, a Wall Street Private Equity Group/Hedge Fund. Its investment in Springleaf has grown by 2,700 percent since 2010.

From here the bill moves on to the Democratic-controlled House. Last year, a bill allowing predatory lenders to jack up interest rates started in the House, and with the help of Democratic-friendly lobbyists raced out of that chamber on a 62-2 vote. All indications are as of this writing that House Democrats are not interested in getting burned again, as they were in 2015 when the pushback against the bill took leadership by surprise. We’re watching for this bill to be routed directly to the “kill committee.”

Looking ahead, what we’re seeing here could be the end–at least in Colorado–of the predatory lending industry’s corrosive influence over Democratic lawmakers. For years we have documented this struggle, first against payday lenders who tried to win over Democrats in the name of “access to credit,” and now high-rate personal lenders making almost exactly the same arguments. We don’t expect the debate over predatory lending to end entirely, but we do foresee a clearer partisan split on the issue: thanks to the patient work of the Bell Policy Center to educate Democrats.

For anyone who thinks the harm of predatory lending outweighs any benefit, stripping away its “bipartisan” veneer is a good thing.

Tom Sullivan’s War: Casus Belli

We’ve had a few occasions to mention the name Tom Sullivan in recent years, long before he announced his candidacy for the Colorado Senate a few weeks ago. Sullivan is the father of a victim of the 2012 Aurora theater mass shooting that left 12 people dead and many dozens more wounded. Photos of an anguished Tom Sullivan desperately seeking information about his son in the hours after the shooting are seared into the memory of everyone who was following the news that day, whether he knew his name or (more likely) not.

In 2013, Sullivan joined with survivors and family from the Aurora shooting, the 1999 Columbine High School massacre, the Newtown, Connecticut school shooting that occurred just months after Aurora, and other incidents of gun violence to testify in support of the gun safety bills passed that year: requiring background checks for most transfers of firearms, limiting magazine capacity to 15 rounds, and strengthening protections for domestic violence victims. Sullivan earned a reputation as one of the most dedicated witnesses on either side of these debates, with his clear ringing voice and harrowing story forcing even the most jaded pro-gun Republican to at least acknowledge his loss.

For awhile, anyway.

Unfortunately, Sullivan has increasingly endured what we can only describe as totally inappropriate disrespect from a variety Republican lawmakers. We took note of a incident in May of 2013 in which Sen. Bill Cadman flew into an insolent rage at Sullivan during a Denver Post panel on the legislative session. And during this week’s hearing in the Colorado State Affairs Committee, Sullivan was dissed again:


This photo was taken at the exact moment Sullivan was testifying late Monday night about the death of his son in the Aurora theater shooting during testimony against Senate Bill 16-113, the bill to repeal the 15-round magazine limit. These two Republican lawmakers, Reps. Justin “Sleepy Dwarf” Everett and Patrick Neville, are co-sponsors of the bill. Sources tell us that Rep. Everett never looked up even once during Sullivan’s entire testimony, apparently engaged in an intense…well, something or other on his smartphone. Facebook? Angry Birds? We’ll never know.

What we do know is that this is unacceptable behavior for a lawmaker listening to witness testimony on their bill. And before you shoot back with a photo of a Democrat looking downward in a hearing, you’ll want to explain to us in detail the moment in time the photo originated.

For example, the moment a witness is testifying about the murder of his son.

As the debate over the 2013 gun laws has dragged on in the Colorado legislature, we don’t doubt that the failure of pro-gun Republicans to repeal them has provoked great frustration. The recalls didn’t scare Democrats into abandoning their principles, and the 2014 “GOP wave” election’s failure to unseat Gov. John Hickenlooper or the Democratic House proved only that the 2013 gun laws were not going anywhere.

But folks, this infantile disrespect for Tom Sullivan is not the way to express their frustration. We don’t care how many times they’ve seen him testify. Especially as sponsors of the bill to repeal what he fought for, they owe Sullivan their attention every time.

If they won’t give it to him as a citizen, we’ll see what they do when he’s a senator.

Get More Smarter on Wednesday (April 27)

Get More SmarterIf you still have an old Gart Bros. gift certificate, you might want to hurry up and try to redeem that sucker. It’s time to Get More Smarter with Colorado Pols. If you think we missed something important, please include the link in the comments below (here’s a good example).


► It looks like we are going to have a Hillary Clinton-Donald Trump matchup in the race for President. Trump went 5-for-5 last night in the “Acela Primary,” or whatever the hell you want to call it. By winning in Pennsylvania, Maryland, Connecticut, Delaware and Rhode Island, Trump has likely created a scenario where next Tuesday’s Indiana Primary is the last real chance for anti-Trump forces to stop His Hairness from winning the GOP nomination.

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz had an awful night, finishing in third place in every state but Pennsylvania. Cruz says his campaign will make a “major announcement” this afternoon; there is some speculation that Cruz may announce a potential running mate for the GOP nomination that he is no longer mathematically able to win anyway.


► On the Democratic side of the Presidential equation, Clinton all but sealed the nomination with big wins in delegate-rich states on Tuesday. As NBC News reports:

With five Northeast states voting Tuesday, Clinton easily won the two biggest prizes of the night: Pennsylvania and Maryland. She also took home Delaware and Connecticut in tighter races. By 12:15 a.m. ET, NBC News put Clinton at 2,117 delegates and Sanders at 1,330. The nomination requires 2,383 delegates.

The added delegates create a virtually unbridgeable gap for Sanders, who had already moved on to West Virginia, which holds its primary May 10…

…Meanwhile, Sanders addressed more than 6,400 people and made it clear he has no interest in dropping out. Notably, he spoke about his campaign as a movement with more important goals than winning.


► Lawyers for Republican Jon Keyser were in a Denver courtroom on Tuesday making the case that their client deserves to appear on the Primary ballot even though his campaign failed to collect enough valid petition signatures before the April 4th deadline. There was no official ruling on Tuesday, though a judge said that a decision would come within 72 hours. Two more Republican Senate candidates — Robert Blaha and Ryan Frazier — are still waiting to hear from the Secretary of State’s office in regards to the validity of their own petitions.



Get even more smarter after the jump…


East Coast Primary Open Thread

UPDATE 6:50pm: Hillary Clinton captures the biggest prize of the night, winning Pennsylvania and a sizable share of its 189 delegates.


UPDATE 6:38pm: CNN projects that Hillary Clinton will win the Delaware Primary. Earlier she was declared the winner in Maryland.



5 up, 5 down. Donald Trump sweeps all five East Coast Primaries on Tuesday.

UPDATE 6:34pm: Five-for-Five for Donald Trump, who easily wins in Pennsylvania, Maryland, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Delaware. Trump’s Tuesday sweep decreases the likelihood of a contested convention.


UPDATE 6:22pm: Rhode Island has not yet been called for Trump, but he maintains a substantial lead over Ted Cruz and John Kasich.


It’s 6:10pm Mountain time, and most polls on the East Coast have closed.

On the Republican side, Donald Trump has already been declared the winner in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Connecticut.

For Democrats, Hillary Clinton is projected to win the Maryland Primary.

We’ll update the results as the come in, but please feel free to beat us to it in the comments thread below…

Keyser Ballot Rejection Court Challenge Races Ahead

UPDATE: No ruling today says the Denver Post’s John Frank:


Jon Keyser's "two ballots."

Jon Keyser’s “two ballots.”

A hearing for embattled GOP U.S. Senate candidate Jon Keyser, who was unexpectedly thrown off the 2016 primary ballot this week after Secretary of State Wayne Williams determined he did not submit enough valid petition signatures in CD-3, is getting under way right now in Denver District Court. From Keyser’s filing:

Due to the Secretary’s breach/neglect of duty or other wrongful act, Mr. Keyser was wrongfully deprived of a place on the primary election ballot for the Republican Party’s nomination for United States Senator.

Here’s the court filing. Keyser’s rejection appears to boil down to a (presumably paid) petition circulator who was not properly registered as required under Colorado election law, and resulted in the invalidation of signatures collected by that circulator. Keyser’s response is never mind those pesky details:

WHEREFORE, Petitioner prays for judgment and relief as follows:

A. For an order requiring the Secretary to comply with the Colorado Elections Code by accepting the Keyser petitions circulated by Tyler Gonzalez and all otherwise valid signatures thereon;

B. For an order requiring the Secretary to place Jon Keyser’s name on the Republican primary election ballot for United States Senator;

C. In the absence of an order requiring the Secretary to accept the Keyser petitions circulated by Tyler Gonzalez, an order continuing the proceeding on this Verified Petition for no longer than four business days to allow the Keyser Campaign to supplement this Verified Petition on the basis of additional wrongfully rejected signatures before the deadline under C.R.S. §§ 1-4-909 and 1-1-113; and

D. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

We’ll update when we hear what happens in court this afternoon.

So You Want a Presidential Primary, Do You?

Rush Limbaugh's "Operation Chaos."

Rush Limbaugh’s “Operation Chaos.”

The Durango Herald’s Peter Marcus reports on debate over House Bill 16-1454, legislation that would restore the state’s presidential primary elections–a timely push after both Republicans and Democrats found their own things to hate about the caucus process in 2016:

While the legislation has bipartisan sponsorship, it passed the Democratic-controlled committee on a party-line vote.

Sponsors of the legislation introduced the measure after chaotic March 1 caucuses, where many voters expressed frustration. Reports of long lines and confusion swept the state…

Most everyone agrees that the long lines, low participation rates, and general confusion in the party-operated caucus process stymie the voting public’s access to the presidential nomination process. With that agreed upon, restoring a presidential primary comes down to a much stickier question–who would be able to participate? Presently voters must declare their party affiliation well in advance of the caucus.

Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton.

Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton.

Under the proposed new system, there would be at least some opportunity for crossover voting shenanigans–but proponents say it beats the alternative.

The legislation would stop short of creating a full, open primary, but it would allow unaffiliated voters to temporarily choose a party preference in order to participate.

Thirty days after the election, the preference would default back to unaffiliated. There would, however, be a public record of what preference that voter chose for the election.

One thing that makes it more difficult to “protect” the partisan primary from malicious “Operation Chaos” style meddling by the other party is Colorado’s progressive voter registration law passed in 2013–which allows eligible voters to register and vote on Election Day. If you want same-day registration, some other provision must be made for primary elections unless you want to throw the doors wide open and have a fully “open” primary. The “temporary affiliation” proposal is an admittedly awkward workaround, but would at least try to uphold these competing ideals of access vs. party participation.

Ted Cruz, Donald Trump.

Ted Cruz, Donald Trump.

We recognize that one’s preference for or against an open primary in this presidential election year may well be biased by circumstances that might help or hurt a favored candidate. But insofar as political parties continue to exist, the logical argument still resolves in favor of parties retaining control over their nominating process–including preferring primary voters be bonafide party members.

And as the Denver Post’s Joey Bunch reports, if you don’t like this idea, there are much worse ideas in the wings:

A group called Let Colorado Vote is proposing a ballot initiative to allow unaffiliated voters to vote in every race and receive ballots from major parties.

“I think the proposed system is infinitely better than the system that has gone through my office during the ballot-title setting that would involve sending everyone multiple ballots,” said Secretary of State Wayne Williams.

There’s no question that mailing both primary ballots to every voter would be a much more sinister blow to the power of political parties in Colorado, and an open invitation to crossover voting games beyond Rush Limbaugh’s wildest dreams. Even if you rankle at the idea of weakening party membership requirements to vote in a presidential primary, the compromise represented in HB16-1454 may well be your best shot at retaining some measure of control in today’s fluid political landscape.

Because whether you’re a fan of the status quo or not, it’s going to change. Whatever the solution is, the train wreck of this year’s caucuses for both parties is not to be repeated.

Get More Smarter on Tuesday (April 26)

Get More SmarterTomorrow is Administrative Professionals’ Day; don’t say we didn’t warn you. It’s time to Get More Smarter with Colorado Pols. If you think we missed something important, please include the link in the comments below (here’s a good example).


► Politicos around the state are still buzzing about Republican Jon Keyser’s failure to submit enough valid petition signatures to make it onto the June 28th Primary ballot for U.S. Senate. Keyser’s campaign is challenging a Secretary of State (SOS) ruling that he came up 86 valid signatures short in Congressional District 3 (GOP Senate candidates must collect a minimum of 1,500 valid signatures from registered Republicans in each of Colorado’s 7 congressional districts). Keyser also barely collected enough scribbles to meet the requirement in CD-1, CD-5, and CD-6.

While Keyser’s campaign is busy trying to work out a challenge to the SOS ruling, two other Republican Senate candidates are gnawing their fingernails to the bone waiting for good news; Robert Blaha and Ryan Frazier should hear from the SOS any day now regarding their petitions, but after Keyser’s stumble and Jack Graham’s piss-poor 56.6% “validity rate”, both candidates have every reason to worry about the future of their own campaigns.


► Voters are going to the polls today in the “Acela Primary” or “Amtrak Primary” or whatever you want to call it. Republican Presidential frontrunner Donald Trump is expected to grow his lead after ballots are counted in Pennsylvania, Maryland, Connecticut, Delaware and Rhode Island.

On the Democratic side of the equation, Hillary Clinton appears to be riding a wave of momentum after her decisive victory in New York last Tuesday; polls suggest that Clinton could defeat Bernie Sanders in all five states voting today. Should Clinton sweep today’s Primaries, Sanders’ math problem is going to get much more complicated.

Meanwhile, as the Washington Post reports, down-ballot Democratic women are looking to ride some Clinton coattails in several important Primary fights today.


Get even more smarter after the jump…


Majorities Matter: Anti-Vaxxers Win As GOP Senate Locks Down



AP reports via the Greeley Tribune on the death yesterday of House Bill 16-1164, which would have given the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment control of the state’s system of documenting self-claimed exemptions from childhood immunization guidelines:

The state House backed off the proposed database Monday, when it was scheduled for a vote. The legislative maneuver means the database proposal is dead for the year.

Democratic sponsors had enough support to steer the database through the House. But the proposal faced certain death in the GOP Senate, where some Republicans complain the state Health Department has already overreached by contacting parents about their children’s immunizations. [Pols emphasis]

“The public health of Colorado was not enough to convince opponents of the bill,” said Rep. Dan Pabon, a Denver Democrat who proposed the database. “The politics around the ‘I word,’ or immunizations, just got to be too intense.”

Colorado law on childhood vaccinations is among the most lenient of any state in America. Parents are allowed to claim an “exemption” from school immunization requirements for any personal reason they choose, beyond more common exemptions granted elsewhere for religious or other specific objections. This bill wouldn’t have changed that, simply centralizing the gathering of the information so as to better understand why the state has one of the lowest rates of vaccinations in the nation.

The failure of the vaccine database bill makes Colorado one of only three states with no central tracking of childhood immunizations, Pabon said. [Pols emphasis]

In short, this was a battle between public health experts defending science, and politicians protecting those who reject or at least question the science behind vaccines in public health policy.

“It has to do with what authority the state has over parents” who object to vaccines, said Sen. Kevin Lundberg, R-Berthoud. “A lot of parents don’t disagree necessarily with all vaccinations. But they do disagree with the volume and schedule of vaccinations.”

In 2015, legislation that would have made it even easier for parents to “exempt” their children from vaccines and attend public school failed against the backdrop of outbreaks of measles and other diseases preventable by vaccination. The issue hasn’t been in the headlines to the same degree in 2016, but the passion on both sides of this issue is never more than one headline away.

With that said, the political consequences of being on the wrong side of this fundamental public health issue appear very serious to us. Polls show the overwhelming majority of the public supports vaccination of school-age children, with almost 80% saying vaccination should be mandatory for healthy kids.

Worth keeping in mind when Republicans celebrate how they “protected” our “right” to not vaccinate our kids.

BREAKING: Jon Keyser Fails to Make Primary Ballot

UPDATE #3: The clock is ticking for Keyser to make this challenge. The deadline for the Secretary of State to finalize the Primary ballot is April 29th:

Last day for the Secretary of State to deliver the Primary Election ballot order and content to county clerks. (No later than 60 days before the Primary Election)


UPDATE #2: The Denver Post’s Mark Matthews:

Keyser fell short by 86 votes in Colorado’s 3rd Congressional District, according to Colorado’s Secretary of State, which verifies the signatures. The district is represented by U.S. Rep. Scott Tipton, R-Cortez, and has 145,778 registered Republicans to 124,007 Democrats.

Keyser’s campaign is expected to appeal the decision and has five days to do so. The 16,067 signatures he submitted overall allowed him to clear the threshold in the six other districts…

If Keyser’s challenge is unsuccessful, his bid to unseat U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo., will end weeks before a single vote is cast in the June 28 primary — throwing an already chaotic race for Senate into further disarray.

Liberal group ProgressNow Colorado says it’s time for “Liar Keyser” to hang it up:

“We wouldn’t put anything past Jon Keyser, including dishonesty,” said ProgressNow Colorado political director Alan Franklin. “This is the same Jon Keyser who claimed as a House candidate that he had received ‘two ballots’ for an election, when the truth is Keyser was lying–and he knew it the whole time. Keyser can’t blame our Republican Secretary of State for his own incompetence. It’s time for Keyser to do what he seems to have the most trouble doing: play by the rules, and respect our election system even when it doesn’t go his way.”

“Jon Keyser is the biggest nothingburger in Colorado politics, and it’s time to throw in the towel,” said Franklin. “Keyser promised to clear the field with his Washington, D.C. insider support, but he could barely raise enough money to keep the lights on. Now we learn his pay-to-play petition campaign also came up short?”

“In hindsight, Jon Keyser should have held on to his House seat,” said Franklin. “Keyser has a long way to go before he’s ready for prime time.”


Jon Keyser will have plenty of time to spend with his young family now that he's no longer a Senate candidate.

Jon Keyser will have plenty of time to spend with his young family now that he’s no longer a Senate candidate.

UPDATE: Keyser campaign says they will challenge, but this is a complete disaster regardless. Keyser came up 86 signatures shy in CD-3, and just barely got enough signatures in CD-1 (Denver) to get over the 1,500 threshold (he made it in CD-1 by just 20 signatures).


Just in from the Colorado Secretary of State’s office:

Former state Rep. Jon Keyser’s petition to appear on the Republican primary ballot for U.S. Senate has been declared insufficient, Colorado Secretary of State Wayne Williams announced today.

Keyser was required to gather 1,500 valid signatures from Republican voters in each of Colorado’s seven congressional districts for a total of 10,500 signatures. He came up 86 signatures short in Congressional District 3.

Keyser submitted 16,067 petition signatures to the Secretary of State’s office, which began a line-by-line review of the signatures. Of that 11,436 were deemed valid.

His campaign has five days to protest the decision.

We had a feeling this might happen after Republican Jack Graham made the ballot last week with a meager 56.6% “validity rate” on his signatures. Keyser’s campaign never did release a number on how many total signatures they collected — every other GOP candidate made sure to reveal a rough number when they first submitted signatures prior to the April 4th deadline. With four candidates competing to collect 1,500 signatures from each of seven congressional districts, there was always a strong possibility that at least one Republican would fail to qualify for the ballot.

Keyser can certainly challenge this decision, but as we wrote over the weekend, the former half-term state representative had an awful fundraising quarter and his campaign is running on fumes already.

Keyser’s campaign has been a raging dumpster fire since the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) first started flirting with the idea of making him their top recruit back in December. Perhaps it’s better that everyone just cut their losses on Keyser now.

Woods Clears Up Trump Support Question (Damn Right She Will)

Sen. Laura Waters-Woods (R-RMGO) takes aim.

Sen. Laura Waters-Woods (R-RMGO) takes aim.

In an email update yesterday from Sen. Laura Waters Woods of Arvada, headed into Colorado’s most hotly contested state senate race this election season, we have the clearest attempt yet to sort out conflicting statements about her support for GOP presidential frontrunner Donald Trump, Colorado’s disastrous GOP caucuses, and the resulting push to return the state to a presidential primary election.

Fasten your seat belt:

I have been widely criticized for voting against a presidential primary bill that was being proposed last year by former GOP chair, Ryan Call. The reason I voted against that bill then was because the grass roots activists didn’t like it, and neither did the State GOP Chair, Steve House. We voted against the bill in May of 2015, which was some six weeks before Donald Trump announced he was running for President.

My vote had NOTHING to do with Donald Trump or any other presidential candidate.

rmgolaura2Because, gosh darn it,

Down through the fall and winter months, I have consistently said that I will support whichever Republican gets the nomination. I have liked Trump and Cruz, and at times I have disliked them both. It is not true to say that I am a “Trump hater” or that I’m on the “NeverTrump” train. I am NOT. [Pols emphasis]

We get no more detail in this message about exactly what it is she “liked” about Donald Trump or his rival Ted Cruz, or what she may have disliked–a fairly important thing to be specific about. She also doesn’t disclose how she might vote on a bill to restore the presidential primary. But the one thing Sen. Waters Woods does want you to know is this:

I do believe that our nation won’t survive either Hillary or Bernie, and it is my hope that we will unite behind the candidate that survives the Republican National Convention. Whether it is Trump or Cruz, I will support him. [Pols emphasis]

rmgolaura3We can’t help but get a little uncomfortable about the choice of words here: does Sen. Waters Woods really believe our nation won’t physically “survive” if Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders are elected President? Would this be worse than if Trump wins, an event at least some well-adjusted people believe would be pretty bad on a national survival level? Should we assume she doesn’t mean anything, you know, apocalyptic, or do we take her words at face value?

Sen. Waters Woods cleared up the burning question of whether she would support Donald Trump, but now we’d say there are some more questions for her to answer.