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
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
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
70%↑
30%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
July 18, 2008 11:55 PM UTC
26 Comments
And neither of them will make the dailies because they’re so shopworn and cliched by now:
“Boulder Liberal.”
the sun rises, Bob Schaffer lies, Wadhams repeats the Boulder Liberal rosary, the sun sets…
On few occasions have I been prouder of Mark Udall than that day. I wish he would speak on the floor of the house more often.
His even temper and thoughtful approach lie in stark contrast to those like Bob Schaffer who blasted heading into this ridiculous war at the cost of over 4,000 American lives and hundreds of billions of dollars.
It was Mark’s finest moment. He stood up to do his job and did the right thing at a time when there was a lot of pressure to just go along on the march to war.
and the voters will see through this nonsense.
I continue to believe that a near-majority of Colorado voters don’t look past the “R” after a candidate’s name before they mark their ballot (or touch their screen, or do whatever they’ll be doing in November to cast votes).
waiting in line at the Denver and Douglas County voting centers
Mr. Schaffer is on the wrong side of the Iraq war issue, so his and Mr. Wadhams’ strategy is to put Udall on the same side with Schaffer through misrepresentations and lies in order to neutralize the issue.
To them, it doesn’t matter that they are making it up as they go; but for us what is important to recognize here is Messrs. Schaffer and Wadhams’ cynicism toward us, the voters of Colorado. They believe they can fool us. They believe we are not intelligent and can be lead by the nose to believe anything they publish. Their attitude is full of arrogance and contempt for us, the citizens of Colorado. Since they think they can get away with this in a campaign there isn’t any doubt Mr. Schaffer will treat the voters with the same contempt if elected.
Both of them should be ashamed of themselves and in the future they should follow Abraham Lincoln’s admonition about trying to fool the voters.
Even their ideological allies are having trouble with the Wadhams-Schaffer campaign strategy this year!
What type of action was it when the congress passed the “Gulf of Tankin Resolution”? Maybe it is just either incompetents or someone who has a different ax to grind. Maybe the Constition got changed for responsibilities in the last forty years so that it could display the new politics of Texans. How does a Larimer/Weld representative get involved with Kurdish oil? Might, on a larger scale, explain the new thought patterns.
I can’t remember Carroll ever coming out so strong against a GOP candidate. Kudos to Vince for having a set…of scruples.
Did you edit that and do the voice over yourself?
It works better manifest if you don’t appear to be a hack for your own canidate. Some on this board are better at it than others, but I know its hard, keep trying.
.
Schaffer was using the Udall resolution to demonstrate that almost the entire Congress was beating the drums:
some louder, some more rapidly,
but almost all were rattling allegorical sabers.
Even Udall.
.
but Udall was clearly going for diplomacy first, military action only as last resort. There hasn’t been a significant change in Udall’s steady 9 point lead for quite some time and the Schaffer campaign gets into some new jam every few days like clockwork. It’s looking very good for your favorite “Boulder Liberal”.
.
Don’t really have one.
Maybe Terri Steinborn.
But if you were asking about my favorite Boulder Libertarian, that would be a cinch.
Trygve Brev Bauge.
Except you folks deported him.
.
but why quibble about a zip code.
The Baron must have a thing for cryogenics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F…
Boulder-ness encompasses much more than the simple zip code.
Schaffer omits the parts about UN approval and allowing the UN weapons inspectors time to complete their mission. Big difference in that resolution and what Udall voted against.
Maybe Schaffer can now make a big deal about Udall supporting a time line for withdrawal which Schaffer opposes while ignoring Bush’s acceptance of time “horizons” for withdrawal.
Too bad Schaffer can’t get elected by telling the voters how devoted he is to right wing solutions. I guess being honest with the voters about who “he” is isn’t going to get him elected. I wonder why he can’t run on his own record?
.
But I think Schaffer made the point that most everyone in Congress believed that something had to be done about Saddam and his WMD.
Many folks who paid attention all along knew the “intel” furnished by the White House to the Congress was bogus.
Most folks who post here know that a scientist from Oak Ridge fully refuted the stuff about the aluminum tubes.
Most Pols-sters know that the 500 tons of yellowcake that was just removed from Iraq did not come from Niger,
it was mined right in Iraq.
But not everyone knew.
Based on the speech, it appears that Mark didn’t know.
Can’t really blame him, when the President completely politicizes the CIA and the intel that he allows Congress to see.
It is a lie that Congress saw the same intel as the President.
He cherry-picked it and slanted it.
He know there was no case for war.
But Mark didn’t,
and presumably Bob didn’t.
That’s what I think Bob was trying to get across.
was a completely dishonest slam on Udall. Not that I blame him. He’s carrying so much baggage now his only hope is to make Udall look even worse. That won’t be easy. Udall didn’t shill for scumbags who force their near slave labor force to have abortions or do oil deals contrary to US interests during wartime, just for starters.
by inferring that Udall was for it before he was against it. If you took the time to view Udall’s speech you would have heard the term “absent the evidence of an imminent threat”. If you want to be hypnotized by Schaffer’s rewriting of history OK but don’t BS us with this cockamamie idea that Udall didn’t know what he was voting on. Udall opposed giving Bush unlimited powers to wage war and history has proven that all of his concerns about unilateral nation building were warranted. Schaffer if not an outright liar is being disingenuous. It is bad campaigning and has persuaded me that Udall is the better candidate. I’m done griping about Udall’s move to the center. Schaffer campaigns as badly as Beauprez.