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%
September 17, 2014 10:12 AM UTC
11 Comments
Jason, I think Cory's gonna go right to the wall on this one, and not remove his name.
I figure he figures cynically that most of these "dumb voters" won't hear about the federal bill he clearly still supports, so he can leave his name on it, providing wink-wink tacit support to his CO Personhood buddies and the national Personhood organizations, pulling off the perfect political sleight-of-hand.
Sadly for Cory, almost nothing has gone according to plan in his Senate run. I see no reason to think this move of his will succeed either.
This is all foolishness. I believe now that Gardner should never have flipped on Personhood. There was no need. Neither Personhood nor the federal legislation Gardner sponsors SAY A WORD ABOUT BIRTH CONTROL. The truth is, they are both statements of principle, and it would be up to the courts to interpret.
Gardner doesn't need to take his name off the federal bill. Gardner should stand on principle, and his principles will win the election.
It doesn't have to, modster. Once you declare a fertilized egg to be a person, that fertilized egg has the same rights as any other person. It's no longer a question of birth control. It's a question of murdering a person.
The same people who promote personhood also claim that many forms of birth control are abortifacient, meaning they kill an already fertilized egg. It would definitely make all abortion, including for rape and incest, illegal if the Supremes agreed and overturned Roe v Wade in light of the fertilized eggs rights. Forms of birth control judged to be abortifacient would be as illegal as abortions, because abortifacient means using them is abortion. But you and Gardner and the other anti-choicers already believe all that, right?
We're not making any of this up. And we're pretty sure your side knows exactly where they want this to go because they do want all abortions to be considered murder under the law, do want them banned, do want Roe v Wade overturned and do want many of the safest and most effective forms of birth control banned. The fact that those who want all of that support Gardner with few complaints means they know that he's with them, regardless of what he feels he has to say for political purposes. Pro-choice voters think they're right. Gardner will lose.
If you don't believe me, ask Fladen. Ask him if he considers all abortion murder. Ask him if he wants Roe v Wade over-turned. Ask him what the legal status of a fertilized egg would be, once declared a person under the law. Ask him if he believes certain forms of birth control are abortifacient.
Stand of principle? Wouldn't that be a change……..
Nobody is claiming that personhood (which is the federal legislation that Cory supports) would ban contraception (which Griswold would prevent). It would only ban the most effective means of contraception (which Griswold allows, as the state has an interest in regulating drugs fatal to people). If a zygote is a person the moment it is formed by the joining of the female gamete (egg) and male gamete (sperm), then any method of contraception that prevents that zygote from moving on to form a blastocyst or to implant in the uterus is, by definition, ending the life of that human person.
Because IUDs, implants, the pill, and Depo-Provera injections work to prevent pregnancy, in part, by toughening the uterine lining and preventing implantation, any doctor prescribing them or pharmacist providing them is knowingly providing a lethal dose of drug to a purchaser to use in a murder.
By the way, saying "you believe now" that Gardner shouldn't have flipped is a crock. You never believed he should have flipped. Also stop with the law– you're terribad at it..
According to Griswold vs. Connecticut, Personhood's statement of principle cannot ban contraception. This is all a big lie perpetrated by Democrats to scare women.
So Cory wants to ban the birth control that he wants to make available over the counter.
Makes perfect sense to me Moddy. I mean, it is Cory we're talking about.
Must bite on this one:
Sage constitutional lawyer, please explain to me what in the Griswold decision makes this so.
Vote yes on personhood and we can all convert to rhythm methodism!
Maybe he'll split the difference here to. Take his first name off but leave his last name on the bill. Or delete all of the consonants but leave the vowels.
He's giving Both Ways Bob a good name…..
Same Cory,
Different story.