President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Kamala Harris
(R) Donald Trump
80%↑
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) V. Archuleta
98%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Marshall Dawson
95%
5%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd
(D) Adam Frisch
50%
50%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(D) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank
(D) River Gassen
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) John Fabbricatore
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen
(R) Sergei Matveyuk
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
52%↑
48%↓
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
June 10, 2010 02:00 AM UTC
43 Comments
I wish I could vote for Norton in the primary.
.
all ya gotta do is register Republican 30 days prior.
hey, do you speak Portuguese ?
.
.
http://blogs.denverpost.com/th…
She needs something.
Since she doesn’t have much, if anything, it might as well be this.
Meanwhile, an acquaintance of mine, a staunch Mormon conservative, has just found out that her daughter is pregnant. Under “Obamacare” her daughter is eligible to be covered under mom’s health insurance. Under “Bushcare,’ not so much. She’d be on medicaid, a ward of the taxpayer.
No comment necessary
If it’s her first- it can be a big deal.
As for health care- prenatal for mom and baby and so on- glad to hear she can be covered.
.
I thought that it was going to take 3 years to roll out, what with the rule-making process and the time the health insurance industry needed to respond.
.
Much of this ad seems like it was ripped straight from Buck’s talking points. Since when has she been against the Washington D.C. Republicans? That’s where she gets all her money! She’s flip flopping all over the place.
Intended for people who don’t know any better. Tell a lie, make it big, keep telling it.
I would refer you to your name.
http://www.janenortonforcolora…
A Rasmussen poll that favors Republicans?
Stop the presses.
To quote the rasmussen report:
If you are going to refer to the Jane C Norton website, can you explain how they also come up with Buck worked for Bill Clinton?
Norton seems to have a problem with honesty.
That looks like a Josh Penry truth twisting job. He will do anything to get what he wants – even twist the truth. Oh, yeah, and vote for higher and higher electric rates.
and Magellan’s poll today, it is clear that Ken Buck is way up over Norton.
Should “the Republic[an] is in jeopardy” be followed by such stirring music? Cymbal crash, really?
For those of you that don’t know, SEO (Search Engine Optimization) is where you load the beginning of a blog post or web page with key terms so people will find it when they search for a topic.
That is hyperbole at it’s best. I can’t stand when people say it. Do people who say this stuff REALLY have so little faith in their country that we can’t get through a recession??
before Obama quadrupled the deficit. Now we’re pretty much screwed.
turned Clinton’s massive budget SURPLUS into a staggering Deficit, we could have gotten through it? That’s true.
(and this only caused by 9/11), but Obama’s 1 trillion dollar deficit is just hunky dory. Bush’s deficit was survivable; Obama’s is not. Such hypocrisy!
however, the idiotic response to it did.
It caused one fifth of the deficit. Obama caused the other four fifths.
In your eyes, Republican deficits are good, Democratic deficits bad. Period.
You wouldn’t say Republican Surpluses are good, because you know they haven’t had one since Ike.
by the way, 9-11 had little to do with Bush’s deficits. The moronic decision to launch a major war against Iraq, which did not have anything to do with 9-11, and pay for it with tax cuts made the deficit.
Yes, your boy was actually stupid enough to think he could finance a major war with tax CUTS.
I think Republican deficits are just as bad as Democratic deficits; it’s just that Democrats have increased the deficit more. That’s why I don’t like the Republican establishment either. In fact that’s the whole point of the TEA party, deficits from both parties are bad. “The moronic decision to launch a war against Iraq.” Almost everyone supported this at the time in response to 9/11. Wasn’t it a unanimous vote in the Senate or something like that? It’s funny now when Dems try to act like the war was all Bush’s fault.
You still haven’t answered my one overarching question about what Obama and the Dems plan to do against deficits.
In fact, there was no linkage and no reason to think there was. The rationale for invading Iraq was , later discredited, that they were building weapons of mass destruction.
Look, kid, I know you are too young to have lived through this. But try doing a few minutes of research before blowing opinions out your ass. You won’t look as stupid that way.
.
BJ Wilson appears to be conflating two different AUMF’s. One he is referring to was the 18 Sept 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force, which led directly to the invasion of Afghanistan, not Iraq. The vote was lopsided, as very few Senators or Congressmen wanted to get steamrolled by the false patriotism of the day.
Under this AUMF, Bush was given carte blanche to do whatever he wanted. In effect, the Congress voted to suspend the Constitution indefinitely.
Pure cowardice.
What did Bush do with all this power ? Did he attack Saudi Arabia, who was the nation most responsible for the 9/11 attacks, through their support for extremist extremists ?
No, he attacked Afghanistan, the nation ruled by Taliban religious fanatics who had just weeks before refused to sign over the rights to build a pipeline to a Houston cabal.
.
The other AUMF that BJ has mixed up with the first one was dated 16 October 2002, specifically authorizing an unprovoked invasion of Iraq.
I do not have much respect for Robert Byrd, the comatose Senator from WVA. But in that debate, he fought long and hard for maintaining the Constitution as the foundation of our system of laws. He lost.
.
From my warped viewpoint, I say that we have waged TWO SEPARATE AFGHANISTAN WARS under the rubric of “Operation Enduring Fredom:”
The first one started in September 2001 and wound up in late 2002.
Then we just kinda hung around afterwards, waiting for President Bush to order a withdrawal. But he had a short attention span, and completely forgot we had soldiers still there, while he was gearing up for the war to take Iraq’s oil.
The locals got tired of Americans running their lives. They asked us to leave, then told us to leave, then started killing our soldiers to encourage us to leave. Bush was so determined to get his Iraq war adventure that he neglected Afghanistan.
By about mid-2004, the US military ramped up “kinetic military operations in Afghanistan, fighting to suppress the indigenous resistance forces, to where we now had a second Afghan war. I don’t have a specific date for the start of this second war, but that’s the one we’re still fighting today.
Through these 2 AUMF’s, the Congress has abdicated from its Constitutional duties. The only way that we ever stop the endless war is if the Congress acts, since NO president is going to voluntarily give up the perks or power that go with being a war president.
Bottom line, BJ is basically right when he says the Congress is ultimately responsible for getting us into both wars, and only Congress can get us out. Now it is up to us to elect responsible adults to these two camerals.
.
And that one man, Obama, is to blame for it?
Really?
REALLY?
I hate hyperbole. Partly because I always want to read it as “hyperbowl”, but mostly because it’s a waste of words.
If you’re really buying into the “America is falling apart” crap, I’m not sure I can even take you half-seriously.
67 votes in the Senate?
People are gullible.
Hmmm. When you have to actually remind people you are a conservative while you continue to dive further into the deep end of the right wing pool to save your political career, you’ve got a problem with your campaign.
Jane Norton will be lucky to get 30% of the primary vote. Six more years for Michael Bennet.
are showing Buck up over Bennet as well.
Sounds like she doesn’t want to cut non-discretionary spending – Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare – and I bet most of the new Health Care Reform bill falls into non-discretionary spending.
Hmm.
If you don’t cut Medicare and Defense, bringing the deficit under control is a bad joke.
Just one more example of Norton’s inability to keep a consistent message…
There’s her support of Ref C and her budget increase, which got hit by both sides ( http://coloradopols.com/showDi… ), while she’s trying to sound like the fiscal conservative.
There’s her refusal to let anyone record her, which just seems like a cheap way to not have to own up to what you say.
And there’s her beltway backers and her brother in law throwing fundraising gigs, and she’s still trying to sound like the small-government-outsider-fiscal-conservative.
I’m waiting for her to say something that doesn’t contradict herself.
Cinamon, what else? ( http://coloradopols.com/showDi… )
PS-any tips on embedding links and such, I’d be happy to learn from you pros…
This ad is getting heavy rotation here in Greeley, too. Seems like a total waste to me. Lots of Buck faithful in the 4th CD
Latest poll shows Buck over Norton by 34 points in CD4. I suppose I should have posted this link in my earlier posts:
http://www.magellanstrategies….
I concede that there are problems with the health-care law, but it is a good start.
Say for the sake of argument, you succeed in repealing the law. What do you do then? Does Norton want to revert back to a system where people to declare bankruptcy (or even die) because they cannot afford medical bills?