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%
August 26, 2010 11:25 PM UTC
206 Comments
Didn’t Romanoff support this concept at some point?
What do you have against the people on Mainstreet?
Why do you support the killing of inutero children?
Tell us what’s not accurate.
So what’s Michael Bennet do for me that he already hasn’t accomplished
Raise healthcare costs – check
Raise debt – check
Kill jobs – check
Raise taxes – check
I’ll wait for the 9News review of this … meanwhile from BuckforColorado.com
Back it up.
C’mon, don’t beset L with unreasonable expectations.
…so go fuck yourself ajb
You’re as lazy as BJ, but at least he has an excuse. He’s a mathematician, so facts don’t matter.
Don’t go trashing all of them just because you don’t like one.
1) Which concept?
2) We don’t. We love the people on Mainstreet and for that reason we don’t want Buck representing them.
3) Neither support nor oppose. Why do you support the government having a hostile takeover of women’s reproductive organs?
When children start crawling back into wombs, I’ll fully support legislation to punish killing them. So far, it doesn’t seem to be a problem, though.
into a persons most intimate decisions? What kind of a nanny state extremist are you?
Do you really think government is going to do any better at policing the womb than they are deciding which religion is more holy? How much higher are you willing to have your taxes to fund a bureau of miscarriage murder investigations complete with placenta evidence kits? How much are you willing to spend to intrude on the lives of people you’ll never know?
n/t
Two plus article a day bashing Buck and no mention of Bennet’s problems? You can understand why I call it BashBuckPols.
n/t
Try to stay on topic.
er… Reuters. Er… BUT BENNET’S OWN POLL SHOWS HE’S AHEAD BY 2!!! Stupid Tea Partiers, don’t they know we know what’s best for them?
I thought you were a mathematician. You do realize there’s a difference between single digits and double digits, and between 2 and 4, right? Or do the actual numbers not matter to you?
I got the Bennet push poll today, and believe me Bennet is nowhere close to the numbers he produces. I mean geez how far can these guys go? Even in push polls you’re not supposed to just completely make stuff up? “If Buck were spawned from the pit of hell, would you still support him?”, etc.
Keep telling yourself that Buck is up by 20% and is the anointed one. No one can beat Ken Buck. He is superman the invincible.
Don’t be concerned that Bennet is already spending money on advertising and has the funds to go full bore until November without being constrained by intra-party loyalties.
Your man has it in the bag. No need to worry about what Bennet does. This will be as easy as kicking Ritter to the curb and strolling into the governors mansion. Go ahead and laugh at us and don’t worry about those objects in the rear view mirror. Pesky Democrats spending a mound of money to paint your guy as an extremists. Moderates don’t care if extremists get elected do they?
Or they were just fooled really well. How else do you explain Obama, and his right hand man Bennet?
I got the Bennet push poll today, and believe me Bennet is nowhere close to the numbers he produces. I mean geez how far can these guys go? Even in push polls you’re not supposed to just completely make stuff up? “If Buck were spawned from the pit of hell, would you still support him?”, etc.
I don’t even have one “diget”! Then again, I don’t even know what a “diget” is. My vocabulary must not be as vocabularific as Libertad’s.
Is that the same as verbostic?
Your sig line is getting a bit verbostic. Is someone just feeding you a plethora of material?
Last I saw was a Reuters that had him up by 9 and and a Bennet internal that had Bennet up by 4. Link to double digit poll please?
aren’t those two digits?
about the ridiculously flawed push poll.
If you got the poll AFTER the results were released…
Oh never mind.
They never get promoted.
kind of sketch. All that “oohh oohh oohh you’re such a man Ken” is kind of icky stuff to read.
but I have to think that the crayon pictures might be engaging.
So let me get the gist of your whine:
1) this is a left-leaning site
2) people don’t promote, or give standing ovations, to your posts
You know what: if I went to Tancredo rallies and started hoisting a sign that said, “Viva Undocumented Immigrants!” — do you think I’d be brought to the front of the crowd by adoring masses?
But I suppose it sure furthers your persecution complex to post over 100 times a week on a left-leaning site and whine that you aren’t the most beloved poster. You’re like the crucified Jesus of the blogosphere, that’s what you are. In 2000 years I’m sure a billion BJWilsonians will praise you every Sunday.
I was answering a question as to why I didn’t post more on Buck to balance out the Bennet coverage. But logic is useless to you I guess.
Go ahead and hit us with some “logic.” We’ve been waiting since April for you to exhibit any communication style that suggested it employed logic.
Knock us out with your logic. I, for one, would welcome the change.
That’s the “logic” the Beej resorts to when his arguments collapse.
That’s the sort of logic I resort to when it’s clear that I’m not dealing with a sentient life form.
Perhaps the problem is not with my posts, but with your reading comprehension?
Mock Turtle diary?
Are you claiming the similarities are all coincidence?
I am actually a turtle, posting on this site with my flippers. Best not to mix shrooms with blogging.
And what would you know about mushrooms.
You are right, I wouldn’t know much about shrooms. Surprised you admit to using them though.
where I’ve admitted to using mushrooms. YOU are the one who claimed to be mixing “shrooms with blogging.” Project much? Or did you think your claim to wild drug use would elevate you in my eyes?
(Google mock turtle soup. Look at the pictures of the Mock Turtle in AiW. It’s a calf with a turtle’s carapace.)
I said I wouldn’t know much about shrooms. You said “and what would you know about mushrooms?” implying you knew a lot about them. 3 comments up, doofus.
Now I’m going to have the “mocking bird” bit from Dumb and Dumber stuck in my head all day.
“Mock”
“Ye-ah”
“Ing”
“Ye-ah”
“Turtle”
“ye-ah”
Beej, in this post here you clearly and unambiguously stated:
You brought up the subject of mushrooms. Obviously to try to impress me with your “worldly” “knowledge.”
Your apology is accepted, Beej. Thank you. That was really mature of you to recognize that you were in the wrong. Your behavior here just might start to change my opinion of you.
Duh.
Buck bashing himself seems more likely.
Are you saying he didn’t say those things?
He said “I’m an extremist?” Not “I’m an extremist.” He was pointing out, quite correctly, that Obama and Bennet are the extremists.
Buck worked for Dick Cheney and would return us to the policies of Mr.Rove and Mr.Cheney.
We shall see.
I like our chances.
It’s Bennetpols. Didn’t you read the Romanoff Team posts?
They hardly ever talk about Bennet. It’s bash Ken Buck 24/7. Of course I know Bennet is losing and they’re desperate and I shouldn’t get too upset, but really, I had thought the site administrators at least might pretend to be fair. Nope, I was wrong. The whole site is one giant shill for Bennet.
Grow up and get over it. You do know that posting here isn’t mandatory right? I believe you have the option that Wade favored; Go to SquareState and bitch about how unfair and biased ColPols is.
What exactly is the logic behind bitching about something no one cares about over and over every day?
It is enhanced by the fact that Bennet is able to use Buck saying his own words instead of a voice over with a “satanic” looking picture of the candidate.
This will be an effective ad….and this could also be the point that Bennet’s cash advantage is going to come into play.
From a political effectiveness point of view, this has got to be about as good as it gets for Bennet. It does such a great job of capturing issues that regular Coloradans will disagree with.
Have you gone to college? Do you want your kids to go to college? Are you old? Will you be old some day? Do you have sex for reasons other than procreation? That encompasses just about everyone…
I’m shocked you’d admit he really has nothing to run on except tired old negativity that may or may not be truthful … I’ll wait for the 9News test.
meanwhile…back in reality
What’s your point?
and I’m a member of PETA (People Eating Tasty Animals)!
was that it is going to strike a cord with the voters who decide elections here in Colorado, the moderates. Those who consider themselves Tea partiers would never vote for a Dem.
I wasnt putting value judgment on the ad, just saying it is bad for Buck.
think the Tea Party is a collection of whack jobs. I like that split!
I don’t have any facts to back up that insinuation, mind you. But it’s fair game, under the Libertad Debate Rules (TM), to insinuate that something “may or may not be truthful,” without a shred of fact backing up the insinuation — and then to state in sinister terms that we’ll have to “wait” for facts to emerge supporting the (bullshit) insinuation.
I was just posting my thoughts, much as you post yours.
… that under your make-it-up logic, I can insinuate that you poop your diaper daily and rape your cat weekly, at least until News9 reports otherwise. This is fun!
Who have always been conservative Republicans. It’s not 1 in 4 brand new people who never voted before. You could change your name, Libertad, but you’d still only count as one person. Same thing here – it’s the same people, just with a new name.
Dems fed up with the inside political class … even though AR was a card carrying member of that inside elite.
He threw up 1 ad linking Bennet to spending, taxing and bailouts … and the message caught on like wildfire.
are exactly who this targets and I’m glad it is out there sooner rather than later. I actually don’t question Buck’s honesty. But his statements truly do show that on things that matter to independent and center-right voters – like almost everyone in my family – he really is too extreme on things like education, student loans, and the right to choose. Better to get the debate fired up now. Good for the Bennet campaign.
Especially when his views are so far outside the mainstream.
If a 14 year old girl gets raped by her uncle, the thought of the government FORCING her to carry that pregancy to term is absolutely unfathomable.
Besides, who’s going to overturn Roe v Wade
I jumped the fence in 1992 when the Republican party became more about Christian values than fiscal policy.
I’m no longer a single issue voter, but I will never ever vote for a candidate who does not support my right to maintain total sovereignty over my body and my health decisions. Period. There’s nothing more personal than that.
The only thing that any administration can do that cannot be undone is pick Supreme Court justices. I sure as hell don’t want a pro-life zealot voting on Supreme Court nominations.
and since the Senate confirms SCOTUS justices, it’s a real threat.
Roe v Wade will never be overturned and if The President had his way we’d be able to kill’em late term and even post delivery.
Right or wrong abortion is permanent.
Realy, you think “if The President had his way we’d be able to kill’em … even post delivery.” If we can completely make up bullshit accusations of homicide, then I think you want to kill all immigrants because you’re a homicidal racist! I have as much support for that accusation as you do for claiming Obama wants to kill kids post-delivery.
… but thanks for trying.
The economy may be the biggest worry overall, but when bank bailouts and financial stuff is too complicated to digest, I know plenty of people who will let sound bite social issues such as the rape/incest argument be a deciding factor in which candidate is more “like them.”
… lets get to the root cause here
Lets take a layer off that Democrat onion … priests, illegal alians, child molesters are all courted by Democrats.
Besides the fact that your post makes absolutely no sense.
1. It’s Democratic, not Democrat. As you damn well know.
2. It’s “incest”, not “insest.” As you may or may not know.
3. During the great Clinton economy years, abortion went way down.
So what’s that again about Dems being responsible for incest and rape?
Where the fuck do you get these ideas? MSU overload? Your overlords?
were probably anti-abortion.
I have no idea WTF you’re talking about here — and let’s face it, neither do you.
How exactly are priests courted by Democrats? Child molesters? Again: I’d ask WTF you’re talking about, but clearly you have no idea WTF you’re talking about; this is what happens when you’re up past your bedtime — you sound even more moronic than usual.
Oh, and again: your fourth grade teacher is crying, seeing you rant about “alians.”
Female voters of the moderate to liberal persuasion (even a few conservative types) don’t believe the government has any business in their reproductive decisions.
There’s more at stake than a “reproductive decision”.
LOL beej, knee-jerk reaction without knowing the first thing about Ellie.
Pro-abortion is a left wing position.
having the government keep its hands off our most private decisions is a left-wing, centrist and right-wing position.
encompasses all Americans, what do you think the baby’s “private decision” would be?
The embryo doesn’t.
You guys are cowards and bullies. You prey on the defenseless. Since a baby can’t talk or have a say in the matter, you find it easier to take a life out of convenience, so you can have sex with a woman without any repercussions. You have no shame, and no honor.
Sorry about the yelling. Sometimes you make me cyber-scream.
I never, ever knew anyone “pro-abortion.” Most voters, about 2/3rds, are for keeping your fucking “conservative” government out of the bed room.
that are pro-abortion, and some vehemently so. NARAL, Planned Parenthood, etc. Nobody’s “in your bedroom”, we just want the government to protect life.
Even NARAL is not “Pro-abortion.” The are “Pro abortion RIGHTS.”
Ever hear of a women choosing to get pregnant and then getting an abortion so that she can go through the experience?
I thought so.
This whole construct of the nowhere near born as some sanctified cells is a 20th century phenomena. Before that, it wasn’t anyone’s business except the woman and the doctor. The way it should be.
I’d be a lot more impressed with you meddlers if you also believed in a decent life after being born. You know, good health care, good educational opportunities. At least the Catholic church is consistent, from conception to death with no death penalty.
… held by every one of the four female Republicans in the U.S. Senate. BJ thinks everyone who’s not a Christian Jihadist (like he is) is a left winger, just like his soulmate Osama thinks everyone who’s not a Muslim Jihadist is an infidel. It must be cozy in your Crudaser/Jihadist mental bunker.
I find that offensive. You can call me a lot of things, but “Jihadist” and “Osama” crosses the line. You sir have no respect for life, either in the womb or out of it, and I frankly am disgusted. Why don’t you go live in Somalia? You go to hell.
yes, you are the Christian equivalent of the Wahabist Muslims: imposing your religious views on others; denying peaceful muslims their religious rights; peddling obvious lies about opponents and thinking you’re still justified because God is in your side. You, not I, see eye to eye with the Somalian warlords who want to live in exactly the sort of neanderthal theocracy you do. But since you object to Jihadist, I’ll pick a more apt analogy: Bj = Ted Haggard, a freak-show fundamentalist whose personal dishonesty shows his professions of Jesus-loving to be total hypocrisy, the sort that would’ve led Jesus to vomit on you. You’re welcome for my switch to finding a fellow Christian who’s your soulmate.
You run around spewing forth your drivel, not realizing what you’re saying. God have mercy on your soul.
this ought to be good. O god-fearing mathematician, show me how the universe is 5000 years old given the carbon-dating evidence and the evidence stars exist billions of light years away. Basically God told you to ignore all facts and evidence that dont fit your creepy freak-show cartoon version of religion? I have just enough faith to assure you that God thinks you defiles His name by claiming the Lord wants people to be judgmental assholes who refuse to use the brains He have us to accept obvious facts. At least you get to go to bed witb your delusion that I’m going to hell while you get 72 virgins in heaven, or Ted Haggard’s boytoys, or whatever Wahabists like you think you deserve.
I hope for your sake that you find him soon. Your own hate will consume you if continue to let it grow like this.
You know that’s not just a random insult like “Go fuck yourself.” That’s the sort of insult that gets directed to people who hate functioning government. Specifically, you. It doesn’t make any sense otherwise.
I feel kind of sad that I have to explain this to you.
Please now use “the sad voice of explaining” in all your future posts, you malfunctioning little artificial intelligence program.
It’s in the Declaration of Independence.
is 3.8 billion years ago.
Now replace “cambrian explosion” (which, by the way, was invented to explain away why evolution doesn’t match the scientific evidence) with “creation, delete everything to the left, and you’ve got it. And please, spare me the phony “you’re a creationist and you believe in God so nobody should take you seriously” games.
It has little to do with what you claim (without evidence) to be your religious beliefs.
I mostly posted this timeline to highlight how the question “when does life begin” is the wrong question. Life doesn’t begin at any individual conception or birth. Life has “merely” continued, becoming incredibly rich and varied, for billions of years.
So, not only is the above a great hypothesis, it is one that is supported by (literally) tons of real evidence based on first principles of physics and chemistry. (In other words, it’s a scientific hypothesis.)
Come up with a falsifiable hypothesis for “creation” that has any physical support for it, and then we can have a serious discussion.
Face it Beej, your home schooling experience has left you several eggs short of a dozen.
It’s a lefty site. My role is to challenge unsupported assumptions and provoke debate.
If life has indeed continued, why you ever support snuffing it out?
Evolution is a worldview and a religion just like any other. It is inherently unprovable via experiment (macro, not micro), and as such must be taken on faith. The reason for its widespread acceptance is that atheists must have something to answer the obvious question of where did life come from? Sadly, they find no meaning in life, and many are driven to suicide as a result. I am not arguing that creation is a scientific hypothesis; I am arguing that neither can be scientifically tested unless we can figure out a way to travel back in time (which we probably can’t, because otherwise someone from the future would already have visited us).
My home schooling has left me light years ahead of everyone else and I get tired of the drivel I must face every day. Ok, maybe that’s a bit presumptuous, but it’s how I feel sometimes.
But this is true only in the echo chamber between your ears.
And all you are doing in this thread is showing your complete and total ignorance of science. You are doing quite the bang up job of this. You definitely are skilled at demonstrating your ignorance. It’s good to go with your strengths.
But then, you drop back into demonstrating that Logic is only an imaginary friend to you.
Not only is this completely illogical (since, life being continuous and all is only true if it has never been snuffed out). Also, all individual living beings cause death and discomfort to some other living beings through the act of staying alive. It’s one of those things you learn about when you study biology. Maybe you’ll have this opportunity some day.
Finally, find a link that says I support “snuffing it out.” I think you are getting confused in the delirium of the first week of the semester. You repeatedly make the logical error of assuming that because you disagree with me on one point that you can infer my position on other points. Don’t make this mistake when you have to defend your dissertation – you’ll get eaten alive.
You are really a sad sad case. I hope you get some help. And maybe someday you’ll realize you have grounds to sue your parents.
Why waste my breath (or in this case, button pushing)? Some people are just determined to be idiots no matter how you try to help them. Come back with some real arguments and I’ll be happy to debate.
Well, now we know what your limits are.
Maybe you need to stop being patronizing and thinking that we need “help” from you. You truly have demonstrated that you know very little about science. It also appears you are unable to learn about science.
I understand the comfort you can find in mathematics – it’s not nearly as challenging as the real world.
Go get some sleep.
Science isn’t about debating skills. It’s about evidence. The fact that you lack both leaves you in a world of hurt.
10 different ways, and they just repeat their unsupported claims over and over, there’s just no use continuing.
Rhetorical question. Don’t geez on it.
We just think you’re a blithering idiot.
Wow, It must have really stung when you didn’t get voted Homecoming King at your (home) school. (Lot’s of questions now answered.)
. . . “to infamy, and beyond”!
Damn you! Spewed coffed on my keyboard!
That explains a hell of a lot.
Another home school brainwashed freak. Fuck evidence, I’ve got my plastic Jesus (“I don’t care if it rains or freezes…..”)
Reading all your statements here makes me want to scream (as I’ve cyber-done) as see what we are dealing with here. And lest you think I’m some uber-atheist, I’m not.
I’ve spent half a lifetime wandering the halls of religion and even getting a masters degree in theology because a force greater than myself insisted I do so. (Unfortunately said force has not ponied up for repaying my student loan.)
Do you have any familiarity with Fowler’s “Stages of Religious Growth?” (May not be exact title.) He says that people go through identifiable stages of growth, but mostly stop at one or another. Only Jesus and the Buddha, to cite two major examples, get to Stage 7.
I like the work of M. Scott Peck in this matter as he outlines in “People of the Lie,” IIRC. He uses only four stages which I find much more parallel to the real world. First stage is the self-centered “People of the Lie.” Then comes “Conventional Religion.” That’s where you are stuck, Beejers. Big Daddy in the sky, black and white thinking, authoritarian.
If you were to continue your growth, it would lead to “Questioning,” because an open mind can see the contradictions, hypocrisies, and problems in Conventional Religions. The final stage, I can’t recall the exact name, but let’s call it “Mystical.” That’s when we can see that for all the outward appearances of being different, there’s more in common than different. And that it’s OK, even, to go back to or remain in a Conventional Religion community. But at Stage Four, one has often, literally, seen The Light.
I have, and it’s nothing like your narrow fundamentalist way, Beej. I’ve had a number of experiences of overpowering joy and mystery (“Mysticism”.) That’s why I know we are not just molecular machines. But those experiences have also informed me that no one, no one faith, has all the answers. And I would say other than the social teachings of Jesus – which seem to have escaped almost all of his fundamentalist followers, see Matthew 25 – orthodox Christianity makes the least sense of any major faith in this country.
Are you now disputing that the earth was created?
I’ve…I’ve never seen anything like it. Is there anything you won’t lie about?
to say that I said the opposite of what I said. Ridiculous, really.
What do you believe instead? That there’s no such think as gravity, or that we’re all actually floating in space?
Lay off man. Just say no to drugs.
the “Cambrian explosion” had nothing to do with the start of life or creation. It has only to do with when the chemistry of the ocean and organisms evolved to the point that organisms acquired hard parts.
There is now ample evidence in the fossil record of life existing before the “Cambrian explosion.”
But that evidence was probably just put there by the Devil to tempt us.
it’s just a glob of genetic gunk.
Even after that, the life and HEALTH of the mother take priority.
There are a lot of people who post here that I consider to be globs of genetic gunk. Is it OK if I off them, too?
And if the cut off is develped enough to live on their own, does that mean the lost generation that are living in their parent’s basement because of the Obama/Bennet job creation strategies can be offed too?
Just askin’.
🙂
Hating babies is about as bad as it gets.
If you believe life begins at conception, I totally respect your belief. I don’t happen to share that belief. Moreover, I REALLY don’t want your religious beliefs to be the foundation of laws to be imposed on every American citizen.
According to Genesis, life begins at first breath.
If your 14 year old daughter gets raped by some diseased thug behind the high school and becomes pregnant and you choose to FORCE her to carry that baby to term, that’s your business. It would be a pretty abhorrent thing to do, but it’s a decision to be made within your household alone. I resepct your right to make that decision. I do NOT however, want you to make that decision for MY family.
does not supersede the life of another. Would you force people to donate kidneys, etc.?
to go spend 2 weeks in a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit and witness these “…glob(s) of genetic gunk…” fighting for their lives. As the parent of a beautiful, healthy 6-year old daughter who was 9 1/2 weeks premature (well within the zone for late-term abortions supported by NARAL), I ABSOLUTELY know that even though she was not able to live on her own for her first days out of the womb in this world, she was NOT some “…glob of genetic gunk…” when she was delivered.
So, go spend some time in a NICU, then let’s see if you still believe that unless a baby has reached “full-term” and is delivered, it’s fine to shove a needle into their skull and suck their brains out.
is to “ColoDem Di”
Cite, please? The “partial birth” ban is opposed by many because it applies as early as 14 weeks. I would oppose an abortion after the roughly 24-week point of remotely conceivable viability, and abortiins a few weeks earlier than that are troubling too The problem with 62 is that it would ban even forms of birth control that affect only the one to eight cell stage, as well as all abortions as early as the 1-6 week point. So I’m glad things worked out so well for your family, but youre dishonestly attacking a straw man when you complain about abortions occurring in week 31.
http://www.prochoiceamerica.or…
attack; re-read my post. I am merely outraged at the disdain for an infant’s life demonstrated by those who believe that “Until it has developed enough to live on its own it’s just a glob of genetic gunk…”
They will never get old.
Mr.Buck has nothing to offer on economics but more don’t tax the rich, and spend on his own earmarks.
How is the Obama/Bennet job creation plan working for ya?
What does Bennet offer but more tax the rich and wonder why they don/t create jobs here stuff?
9.5% Unemployment. $7 trillion in debt.
When do you think we should call it an unqualified success – 11% unemployment and $10 trillion in debt?
The prescient majority has figured out this is not working.
Obama was elected (and so was Bennet) AFTER Bush rang up the vast majority of our current debt. Way to blame Obama for shit Bush did.
From the Wall Street Journal: CBO: Stimulus Lowers Jobless Rate By Up To 1.8 Points
Of course a better stimulus plan would have done more, but Democrats did what they could while the Republicans tried to block them.
Have a nice weekend.
I hate those ads where the opponent is in monchrome and looks like the devil incarnate.
This is much stronger as it shows an image of someone who appears to be a nice guy, but is “too extreme for Colorado”.
The tone is perfect.
Some 527s could learn from this.
If the first ad an incumbent candidate puts up is not about their record, accomplishment or plan but is about their opponent, they have concluded that they can not run on their record.
If a Democratic incumbent can’t point to anything positive they have done, in this election cycle they are toast.
It is over. Bennet will lose. It won’t be close. I was hoping for better from him.
You won’t see an ad from him that he did anything positive
if he was just honest and ran on a straight spending campaign. Not that he’d win anyway.
is our next governor!;-)
Your creds as a political analyst, as opposed to cheerleader, are pretty frail, Beej.
You don’t get to say that until November. Want to bet on Buck too?
But Tin Foil Danny is a lock. Your inability to distinguish between the two is why you have no credit as an analyst. When money is on the line, you need to learn to distinguish between your fantasies and reality.
that must be why Bush ran the ads with Kerry windsurfing and he lost—he didn’t want to run on his own record.
Silly, silly boy. This is called “defining your opponent before they have a chance to define themselves”.
…say anyone ever hear if he paid his taxes on that yahct
crawl back under your leaf
i bet that you hope that your candidate wasn’t such a right wing tin foil man?
You should have had Cheney and Rove coach him better.
Who was running all those ads since the Spring?
I thought Romanoff refused to take the job Mikey had Barry offer him.
President Dwight D. Eisenhower wrote in 1954:
“Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear from that political party again in our political history.”
– Washington Monthly, Aug. 13, 2010
This uses video, the gold standard, of the candidate saying things himself, not just being accused of them. Considering how fond Buck seems to be of shooting his mouth off in front of friendly crowds and how he and Norton kept trying to out-rightie each other during the primary, there’s probably plenty more where these came from and the Bennet campaign can afford to keep putting new ones out there.
Buck ads will mainly just have to say things about Bennet because they aren’t going to be able to produce much video of Bennet saying anything extreme. Bennet ads, whether from the camapign, the DSCC, 527s, what have you,can keep on letting Buck himself do the talking. The contrast should be striking.
It’s easy to say “everything that guy says about me is a lie”. Much harder to say “Don’t believe the video” or “That was what I said before I was running for Senate. Believe I mean what I say now”.
I think we’re going to be seeing some movement in the polls as a result of a very well planned and executed TV ad campaign. I’m sure Bennet will also include many positive ads. Best of all, we’re seeing the Dem putting the R on the defensive from the start. Buck will have to spend more time and money defending, less getting his own message out. It’s about time. Rs have been doing that to Ds since Reagan with a lot of success during most of that time.
Clearly the choice to counter an anti-DC, anti-incumbent pitch with a too extreme for the good sensible people of Colorado pitch is the right choice this cycle. Especially since Bennet is still new, not a firmly entrenched life time pol at all. I love it.
Really?
Democratic, Unaffiliated, and moderate Republican women don’t take kindly to men like Buck trying to take away their rights. That plus declaring Social Security unconstitutional should pretty much do Buck in.
Extremists? Hell, we might get a balanced budget.
We’re talking about ads, what’s effective,what’s not, etc. Your talking points are irrelevant. Never mind the idea of a GOP majority balancing a budget is entirely unsupported by anything that has actually happened when they’ve been in the majority. That isn’t the subject at hand.
The average low info not very partisan voter, a huge chunk here in Colorado, thinks all the mean stuff the pols say about each other in ads are probably lies anyway. But this ad just asks them to believe their own eyes. Is it a good ad? Yep. You really haven’t said one thing in this thread about the ad.
Try to forget the talking points for a second or two and focus on an evaluation of the ad. You know. As if it was selling anything. But I’m not being fair. Righties like you and Beej and marilou could never manage that. You don’t address points or answer specific questions. You just pull out another talking point. I won’t say from where.
Then figure out a way to elect Bill Clinton again.
Then just maybe if Obama can pull himself back from the brink we’ll have the same situation under which “Clinton” (i.e. the Republican congress) got the budget balanced.
Buck is the most pro-liberty candidate that’s run in years.
Did you type that with a straight face?
Should have been running on August 11
After the last days of a primary people are sick to death of this stuff. What counts is he is succeeding in taking the upper hand and putting his opponent on defense. That’s the kind of timing that counts most. Once the other guy is doing all the grilling and you’re doing all the defending it’s very hard to turn that dynamic around.
on point
Has to be good. It’s got ‘Tad sweating and posting to the point. Not a graph in the thread.
And BJ, still in the sandbox, trying to get positive feedback from uncle ‘Tad.
I guess Bennet learned a lesson from the primaries.
Define Buck and get people asking the questions.
“Mr. Buck, why do you want to do away with Social Security and student loans?”
“I don’t want to do away with SS and student loans.”
Next ad; “Both ways Buck”
Dems have long been a step behind, letting Rs define the terms, the opponents and ask the questions. This shows somebody finally got a clue and that somebody is working for Bennet. Lets hope this catches on.
This election is about a choice between Bennet and Buck. This ad clearly provides the viewer with Buck’s extremist positions, mostly in his own words. (BTW – What kind on birth control measures does he want to ban?)
Recent canvassing I did to R houses suggests a lot of them are not happy with the Tea Party candidates of Buck and Maes. This ad will help Bennet garner moderate R voters as well as Independents, similar to the Obama campaign. And, it should scare any remaining recalcitrant Romanoff supporters to join the Bennet campaign.
I think there will be more of these to come, along with positive ads introducing Bennet to the general election voters.
are considered abortificants by the anti-choicers. Even though birth control pills work by preventing ovulation in the first place they argue that it’s possible for an egg to be released, fertilized and then fail to implant successfully. So that’s abortion. Any method that prevents a possibly fertilized egg from implanting represents abortion to them. I suppose condoms are OK as far as that goes but for those who oppose anything but leaving it to God, that’s no good either. They seem to want even married people to not have sex if they can’t afford another child. The idea of anyone anywhere enjoying sex just for fun seems to be very threatening to them.
Amendment 62. No running around it. When abortion-ending, pill-hating, sex-policing religious activists put a measure on the ballot that is about banning abortion, the issue can’t be avoided.
candidates don’t like to talk about abortion. voters don’t like to talk about abortion. nobody does. it makes them uncomfortable, they’re afraid they’ll offend someone, they know someone who has had an abortion, and they know that abortion is stigmatized in society. in a nutshell, everyone will willingly ignore the issue… until someone raises the question. once the question gets raised, though, there is no shortage of opinions… and for the vast majority of people, the logic goes something like this:
1. i don’t agree with abortion. i think it’s wrong to kill a baby.
2. but i also know people who have had abortions — and they’re not bad people. like when they were in high school and really could not have been a parent. or when they were raped. or when the pregnancy ended up with severe complications, and they really wanted to keep the baby, but they found out the pregnancy could kill the mother.
3. so those people probably would have had abortions anyway — and I would want to know they were having safe abortions, not a back-alley abortion.
4. so abortion should still be legal. it shouldn’t be used as birth control, but it should be legal.
5. because if it’s not legal, it’s going to be worse.
6. so i don’t agree with someone who wants to make abortion illegal. i don’t think abortion is right, but i don’t want to take away someone else’s right to make that decision — and their ability to have a safe abortion performed by a doctor. this really isn’t the government’s business. it’s a private decision.
All the way to the Senate office building. It doesn’t matter how outraged you pearl clutching sissy liberals get, Buck is going to plant his shit-crusted bootheel on your heads.
Abolish Social Security, let the people invest their own money. OH NO! THIRD RAIL!
History passes you by…
That might be a little long for a bumper sticker, but maybe it’ll work as a jingle.
… by the way, any more hot tips for us on Sarah Palin’s next endorsement? That was awesome stuff.
BTW, is whining like a bitchy middle-schooler really all it takes to be a “warrior”?
I was about to blow a gasket reading this thread until I read your post. Maybe there’s some hope that the world hasn’t gone completely insane yet.
Isn’t that act prohibited somewhere in the Bible?
It’s an automotive term.
It’s something you do to yourself?
I don’t need to know anymore, Beej. Please, keep these secrets to yourself.
not autoerotic. Geez, it really is like talking to a rock.
You really are getting gross, Beej.
I was kidding when I said you were on shrooms, but I really am concerned that something isn’t right in your head tonight.
I apologize for picking on you. I should back off since you clearly can’t detect humor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A…
Another polster and I suggested to Beej that he get tested but he immediately saw it as an insult rather than do any research.
If you look at Beej’s responses to humor, rhetoric, hyperbole, etc. as a whole, you can see why we would think this.
There are numerous statistics of mild mental retardation, Asperger’s, and various learning disabilities going undetected and therefore undiagnosed in kids who are home-schooled. Parents often will see any of these issues as a personal failure so will willfully ignore symptoms, also.
Social skills are also lacking, but that comes as a surprise to no one who has interacted with Beej on this site.
I was thinking about this last night. The Beej’s incessant and predictably literal responses to light ribbing (such as in this exchange beginning here) is what brought it home for me. This behavior reminds me so much of a relative.
Just because you can’t hold a candle to my logic doesn’t mean you have to try to label me with a disorder. It’s ok Emerald, you try hard, and maybe you’ll get there someday.
It’s very hard for me to “hold a candle to your logic”. I can’t dispute that. Have you ever tried to hold a candle to something that doesn’t exist? It’s impossible.
… I think you’ve nailed it with (a) the asperger’s diagnosis (though in defense of asperger’s folks, I know a few who are lovely human beings, who don’t channel their single-minded focus and tendency toward absolutism into pissing off and crapping on others), and (b) this awesome quote, which I’d make my sig line were my sig line not populated by BJ winners that need constant publicity:
Is that it?
No wonder everyone I am meeting, (16,546 toe-to-toe, face-to-face, eye-to-eye on the issues thats keeping them up at night), laugh, when I mention:
The Buck N’ Bennet show.
I guess I am in the wrong places, maybe I need to go to some 912 group (whatever that is) or find out where that DEM Bunker Senator Bennet is hiding out in, but I am not finding their supporters out there.
Looking at all these comments you guys are struggling with this too. Hey, try that “Balance Budget Amendment” on Joe or Jane Public of Colorado…
anyway…more of this and again, the public, lets call them the masses will start the “political dry heaves” again.
.. but don’t let that stop you from your delusions of adequacy, thinking you’re an actual candidate, despite your utter lack of (a) specific policy positions, or (b) any support.