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%
October 22, 2010 08:03 PM UTC
53 Comments
before some idiots (who will not be named but you know who you are) post dumb stuff.
Carry on…
What ever happened to Jane Norton, anyway?
If she had held a unity rally with Buck early on, would Buck have developed a reputation as an anti-woman candidate? Hillary Clinton’s supporters often accused Obama supporters of sexism during their primary, but the very public makeup seemed to pretty much dispel that as a serious force. Norton disappeared for a month before finally, reluctantly agreeing to support Buck. Why?
How many of the women who are now supporting Bennet were former Norton supporters who found the “Because I don’t wear high heels” remark offensive? How many were formerly undecided and thought Buck’s demand that rape victims have their assailant’s baby was too awful for women to tolerate? And how many were former Buck supporters who realized he actually meant it when he told a rape victim she was asking for it?
Is there anything Norton could still say to convince women that Buck doesn’t think they’re second-class citizens? And if so, why hasn’t she said anything in the midst of all this?
and like other Republican women, she just can’t bring herself to come out and defend him? It may have been easier to support him before he started revealing how deep his contempt for women really was. Just because she’s a politician doesn’t means she stops being a woman.
Not saying I have any insight into Norton specifically, or women in general, but this is my take on why we haven’t seen Norton come to Buck’s rescue.
Jane Norton? A better candidate?
Really?
A quick autopsy –
1. Jane Norton, basically, declared war on all 56 Muslim countries in one, fell swoop – stateswoman? No…
2. Jane Norton never apologized for Ref C & D and actually defended it – fiscal conservative? No…
(and quick note – fiscal conservatism is the BEST, perhaps ONLY, reason to vote Republican lately… but even that’s fading)
3. Jane Norton trotted around Jan Brewer, celebrating the endorsement of the lady who authored racist 1070 – appealing to minority voters? No…
4. And lastly… John Bailout McCain personally flew out to endorse and help Jane Norton – ugh… nevermind on this one
Conclusion –
If Jane Norton was the GOP nominee, Michael Bennet would be winning by over 20 points
Autopsy Complete
it’s quite another for Ali to become a Christian.
I agree that Norton would have had plenty of her own problems in this election, but more narrowly she wouldn’t have had this problem, that people think she’s a sexist. She might even have done pretty well among women voters. That’s true despite her extreme positions on abortion and such, because voters have a hard time imagining a woman really despises women (while a guy who says the best reason to vote for him is that he doesn’t wear high heels is much more vulnerable on that front).
Buck had a better chance of winning because of teh crazy this year but doesn’t that speak volumes about the quality of the candidates the Republican have fielded.
Dan Maes – Another Republican failure
Tom Tancredo – Chronic Loser
Ken Buck – 1st pro-criminalization candidate to lose because of his misogynist positions
Jane Norton – Creepy loser
Scott McInnis – Amateurish plagiarist
Josh Penry – Coward
Don’t vote for incompetence
Vote Democratic
“Record campaign fine” Gessler
and
“No experience in public finance” Stapleton.
Hit and Run Stapleton?
Jane passed.
Opposing Ref C, and backing 61-62-101 isn’t fiscal conservatism. It’s nihilism.\
just because that’s what it means if you want to drown government in the bathtub. You don’t want government – period. The very definition of anarchy.
Fiscal conservatism would have been asking the public for money, at a specified amount, designated for specified projects
Ref C & D had little designation in how much money was being asked for, nor a decent amount of specific designation, in terms of where the money would be allocated
Ref C & D did not follow rules of fiscal conservatism one bit
Again – I’m not against the government needing money – just ask us for an amount and specify what it’s for – it’s not that hard
You favor direct Democracy for fiscal allocation as opposed to legislative allocation of tax receipts?
I’d bet even Republican legislators disagree with that.
The US Constitution requires states to have a representative form of gov’t, ala the federal model.
And this ain’t no mamby pamby amendment- it’s in the deal.
I spent years covering the Joint Budget Committee. You really can’t expect 5 million Coloradoans to pore over the line by line.
Actually, neither does TABOR.
Without C’s passage, this state would never have recovered from the last recession, let alone this one. The TABOR ratchet would have destroyed higher education root and branch.
If so, why not ask NYC voters if they agree a mosque should be allowed to be built near Ground Zero? (Nope, didn’t think you’d like that idea…..)
For that matter, why not subject ALL decisions currently made by the state legislature to public votes??
Etc., etc.
We do have a system of representative democracy, imperfect as it is.
That said, California has instituted a system whereby every taxpayer can receive a ‘receipt’ showing how many dollars of their individual income taxes go to which specifici departments of state government – a pretty cool idea IMHO.
of the people of NY want the community center at the old burlington coat factory building. I am from NY, you don’t know what you are talking about regarding the community center.
but the polls indicate otherwise. Can you cite a survey to back your view?
…but a great indicator is that every candidate who was for the Mosque won their primary (Cuomo, Gillibrand, etc)…
Lazio, who was most against it, went down in his own primary… and the same fate is about to manifest for Paladino, in the General
Cuomo and Gillibrand supported the Mosque early on – they won their primaries and they’ll win the General – all great signs
being built but said it should be built
“The level of opposition to building the Cordoba House remains very strong, with 63 percent of voters opposing it and only 27 percent supporting it, virtually the same as the 61-26 percent opposition in the Siena Poll two weeks ago. Voters, however, can clearly distinguish their personal view on whether the community center and mosque should be built near Ground Zero from their opinion on whether the developers have a Constitutional right to build the Cordoba House there,” Greenberg said.
“Nearly two-thirds of voters – 64 percent – think the developers do have a Constitutional right to build the mosque and Muslim community center near Ground Zero, compared to only 28 percent who say they do not,” Greenberg said. “A majority of every demographic group – by party, region, age, gender, political philosophy – agrees that there is a Constitutional right to proceed. Even a majority of those who oppose building the mosque agree by a margin of 51-42 percent that they have the right to build it.”
As long as Italians aren’t building it, right?
would not be part of the construction.
it was when it became a national thing, thanks to fox news that there was any negativity.
Because his mom and dad have enough money to influence the election.
He can’t. The hysterical ads don’t help. The dems have been yelling “wolf” for thirty years over this issue….real women, IMHO, are not scared anymore.
You want the women’s vote: Ask Buck about FMLA.
Young women may not know how the horrible history of back ally abortions, but if these far right extremist Republicans get in it is possible. Buck is one of the many white guys dictating what women have to do, including being breeding stock for rapists.
Women have no rights if Buck decides what they can do with their bodies.
so they don’t die alone. But she’s pro-choice. That always surprised me.
Turns out one of her classmates got pregnant at 17 and, not wanting to disappoint her mother, convinced a few boys to “help” her by beating her stomach.
She goes home to bed, much happier, but bleeding, she assumes it’s the fetus… no big deal.
She bled to death during the night. Her mother had to find her in a pool of blood. Like that wasn’t upsetting.
First point, that most pro-lifers don’t seem to get, is an abortion clinic wouldn’t have preformed the procedure for that reason. Instead the girl would’ve had counseling and eventually the mom would’ve been brought in. Everything would’ve been fine.
Second point is the fear of doctors in these situations. Turns out scared 17 year olds aren’t the best at medical tests. She hadn’t been pregnant.
mostly because I’ve said the same thing before and didn’t give you a very good answer when you made mention of it.
There are exactly how many black men in the Senate right now? One? And he’s leaving in November? How many men of color in the House right now? 42.
Moreover, there are currently 357 men and 78 women in the House. In the Senate, there are 18 women and 82 men.
For a great many of us, it appears that white men are still running the show.
all those white guys in the House and Senate – including a heck of a lot of Dems last time I checked – are in agreement with Ken Buck?
That they are all busy
Seems a bit over the top to moi.
Bad even white men and all, scourge of the earth…
There are some men, particularly in the Senate, which I’m more familiar with, that have been outstanding on women’s rights and are true allies.
From the inception of our United States, white males, in particular rich white males, ran our country. That is the part of the Constitution that has had a few Amendments to clear up the issue.
First big change: African-American men could vote. But, that brought the segregationist laws after the white men noticed they were not running the show the way they wanted. That came with the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments.
Second big change: Women were not happy letting the big lug make all the legislative decisions and once enough men realized they were cut off the 19th amendment passed.
Throughout the history of our country white males have run the whole salami. They make the laws and everybody has to follow them.
Colorado is of the tiny handful of states with a “high” number of women in the legislature. IIRC 38%. And, it is an expectation that once the blood is staunched after the election the number of women in office will drop for the first time since the 70’s.
You might be right that the anti-choice crowd are not predominately really white males. But, I am willing to stay with my original statement that the majority of anti-choice anti-abortion controllers are white males. You say, I say. He sez, she sez.
and suggesting (as you very clearly did) that white males in general believe that rape victims should carry their babies to term.
Touchy? Only to poor, paint-them-all-with-the-same-brush ‘logic’. Maybe you should measure your rhetoric a bit more carefully.
But a Senate with a Republican majority can. The only thing stopping them is the Supreme Court, which has an anti-abortion majority on it already, just waiting for a test case.
Partial-birth abortion was already banned by a Republican Senate, and the ban was upheld by a conservative Supreme Court. A lot of people thought it was impossible since there had to be a life-of-the-mother exception, but the ban is in place now.
Nothing is impossible as abortion law goes, and you calling everyone else dumb doesn’t make your weak argument any stronger.
Thanks for doing your part to sabotage Democrats though!
Hold on Pentagon Nomination Over Abortion Issues Hampering Military Health Care
for saving me the trouble of digging up that link.
Your “one senator has no effect on abortion policy” nonsense makes me think you’re drinking from the same fountain as H-Man, and dubious that you could be a woman.
I just grabbed it off your comment the other day
🙂
Their fears have proven to be well founded. Wadhams said it right to my face.
and pound him in the last week of the campaign on his climate change denier positions. If Buck rejects climate change as an important issue then he looks old and obsolete like John McCain.
Bennet should just hammer him on his abortion extremism coupled with his climate change denials and homophobia. Bennet can close the deal by detailing hot out of step with Coloradans Ken Buck really is.
The U.S. Supreme Court can outlaw abortion.
The U.S. Senate confirms Supreme Court Justices.
Thus, a Sen. Buck can indeed play a key role in outlawing abortion.
It would take a convergence of events for Buck to be instrumental in forcing the issue back to the States. I can see that happening…but in the broad context of over turning a whole slew of currently constitutionally protected civil rights. But the ads being run say in effect that Buck will outlaw abortion…that gives him too much power. And, it is an exaggeration which can back fire….encouraging the right wing….
show off