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%
December 11, 2017 02:10 PM UTC
20 Comments
That is a special kind of stupid. And really worthy of no response other than derision.
Well, but don't tell Jerry about how all them solar panels are sucking the energy right out of the sun… Pretty soon we'll all be shivering in the cold and dark.
Curse all you enviros!
How does that imbecile manage to dress himself?
Basic science that poor Jerry can't understand. Ahh, one day we'll have some scientific literacy from the right. Perhaps. Maybe.
This isn’t even “basic science,” . . .
. . . this is classic gee-I-wonder-how-trees-ever-managed-to-survive-on-this-planet-prior-to-our-industrial-revolution-Moderatus-level-fucking-stupidity?
😀🌳🌲🌳🎄🎄🎄🌳🌳
The real radical environmentalists are these guys, the ones demonstrably costing Sonnenberg's constituents millions of dollars annually. He's in good company; our favorite watermelon farmer deleted his infamous tweet on the subject but he couldn't scrub the internets entirely as he remakes himself.
In other news (about radical environmentalists…)
He's making an extreme example but the fact that CO2 is necessary for life on earth is not in dispute.
And NO ONE has disputed that, moron.
Salt is necessary for life, but too much in your blood can kill you..too much potassium ( a necessary mineral) in your blood can make your heart slow to a full stop.
Too much carbon dioxide is overloading the climatic system…that's why Sonnenbergs' stupid accusation is so incredibly lame.
The level of CO2 has fluctuated throughout earth's history and we're still here. One supervolcano could make everything we do to reduce man made carbon emissions meaningless. Why should we hurt the economy to prevent something that happens anyway?
Unless it's about hurting the economy….
Nutlid, you need to make Google your friend.
PS: "Coal is dead"
PPS: Trump's Plans for Fossil Fuels Will Shrink the Economy
Unless your plan is about shrinking the economy….
Go do your homework, Moddy. Or do you enjoy the fact that wildfires in Colorado now hit 10x more acreage annually than they did in the 1970s, or that climate change enabled the pine beetle to devastate our forests. As for hurting the economy, again, do your homework. Highest in-demand job these days is wind turbine technician. Isn't it time you packed up and moved to West Virginny?
Like I needed even to say it . . .
Does Sonnenberg happen to live in his grammy’s basement?
So is water. I'm not suggesting you submerge your head in a bucket for 30 minutes. Really, I'm not.
If you're practicing to be the next White House Press Secretary Moddy, you've got a ways to go yet. But it was a valiant effort.
Unfortunately, Moldy and far too many Republicans are OK with that notion 🙁
Exaggerated BS…
You're referring to Sonnenberg's comment, right?
A recent article in the Economist magazine offers that it is not only necessary to lessen carbon emissions, but equally necessary to get carbon that is in the air out of it. In his uneducated way, Sonnenberg is slightly right that reduced emissions may have an impact; albeit minimal; on growing plants. But carbon already in the air will keep them growing.