U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Phil Weiser
(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) George Stern
(D) A. Gonzalez
(R) Sheri Davis
40%
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%
April 17, 2014 11:31 AM UTC
22 Comments
This useless pustule is the posterchild for the brain-dead, meatheaded torpor that now IS the GOP.
Lamborn vs. DeGette in a competitive district.
That would eliminate at least one piece of dead wood.
I respectfully disagree with your comparison. You may not like the policies and philosophical positions Rep. DeGette pursues but she is certainly not "deadwood." She has always been a very energetic and forceful presense in Congress and continues to be today.
Attempting to draw false equivalencies is a mainstay of the GOP disinformation toolbox. It fools no one, but evidently makes them feel better.
They draw false equivalences because true equivalences show how foolish and extreme they are.
R36, I had in mind the following when I made the suggestion:
She has, at least three times, introduced legislation to ban high-capacity ammunition magazines, and she has signed on to a handful of other gun-control bills that have been introduced in the past year in the wake of the shootings at an Aurora movie theater and a Connecticut elementary school.
Yet last week at a public forum hosted by The Denver Post's editorial board, DeGette made one of the largest gaffes of her career on the very issue she purports to be so passionate about, and the comments came at one of the most politically inopportune times for her party.
Asked why banning ammunition magazines that hold more than 15 rounds would be effective in reducing gun violence, DeGette responded:
"These are ammunition, they're bullets, so the people who have those now, they're going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high-capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won't be any more available."
Magazines, in almost every kind of weapon, can be reloaded.
Read more: Inaccurate remarks on gun magazines put Rep. Diana DeGette under scrutiny – The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_22971620/inaccurate-remarks-gun-magazines-put-rep-diana-degette#ixzz2zAcLPxN4
Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content: http://www.denverpost.com/termsofuse
Follow us: @Denverpost on Twitter | Denverpost on Facebook
I thought those comments were so ignorant, about a matter she was trying to lead on, that she demonstrated that she is also not fit for office.
Absolute bullshit,
AC. It's a gun-nut tactic to claim super knowledge, such as claiming that assault weapons aren't assault weapons because they are semi-automatic instead of full auto, which is a horseshit distinction. The fact is that banning high capacity magazines will lead to their slow reduction. They do wear out, get lost, etc. I have three 17-round Glock magazines and while they are grandfathered, it's just for my ownership. The gun can't be sold with those magazines.
V,
My point was not to go down the path of gun control, but rather one of being a competent legislator. If you are going to propose legislation learn enough to understand the subject you are legislating about. That is not too much to ask.
I don't care if people don't know how guns work. But if you are not willing to put in the time to learn, find someone else to lead the fight.
You chose……poorly.
Wrong topic to pick a fight. And gunzzzzzzzz and stuff.
You’re a useless human being.
One wonders how a human (non-troll-bot) can claim a statement was made last week and cite an article from 2013.
And DeGette is one hell of a fundraiser (increasing her clout in the caucus.)
And the very fact that DeGette is an Assistant Minority Whip gives her tons of credentials which Lamborn has none. Most Useless Congressman is his title. Sorry, but its the truth.
Uh yeah, that deadwood being Labor. Irving Halter will be the next Representative from Colorado Springs since Lamborn is deemed the most useless Congressman from Colorado along with Tipton Gardner and Coffman.
Lamborn questions Secretary of defense Hagel, about missile defense, in a vain attempt to establish his military bona fides, for a mindless photo op. After voting for sequestration, Lamborn tries to look knowledgeable, asks the Generals about defense capabilities under sequestration, and ends up looking like a complete putz:
And here is General Irv Halter:
vs. Irv Halter:
Which one would you vote for?
Oops- put wrong Lamborn idiot video up. Here's Lamborn questioning Hagel about the ill effects of sequestration on the defense budget (after voting for sequestration):
I wondered about that. The other one didn't seem to fit the topic.
I know I'm going to regret this, but AC: Why are you bringing up Diana Degette (CD1 Metro Denver) in a thread about Doug Lamborn (CD5 C Springs area)? Or is it just the usual Hey! I don't like what we're focused on, so look over there! tactic.
I believe he is say that both DeGette and Lamborn are weak safe seat representatives. I happen to agree on both counts. There's no way Democrats can win CD-5 any more than a Republican can win CD-1, but I wouldn't mind a stronger Republican in the seat.
Mod, you got the point.
Lamborn is weak, but not unique.
When you have one party rule, in favor of either party, competition is not allowed to work its magic.
I subscribe to the notion that representatives reflect their constituents, regardless of party.
Irv Halter has bona fides while Lamborn is a confirmed chickenhawk.
So, if the distinguished Congressman from Colorado's 5th CD begins to feel a little threatened this year, with a strong primary opponent and a strong General Election opponent, perhaps we'll see one of these possible responses from him: