President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(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%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
September 09, 2008 06:44 PM UTC

Schaffer vs. Udall YouTube Debate (Belatedly) Posted

  • 13 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

As the Denver Post reported yesterday:

Colorado’s is the third YouTube Senate debate, and the candidates were required to answer five questions submitted by users, including one from a man who – holding a rifle on his lap – asked their views on the original meaning of the Second Amendment.

“We thought with the massive amount of attention the (Colorado) race is getting nationally and how close it’s been, it was really a natural fit for us,” Steve Grove, the site’s political director, said of the Senate contest between Republican Bob Schaffer and Democrat Mark Udall.

“YouTube is a different format, and it will be interesting to see how they react to that,” Grove said.

It’s likely to be a little less spontaneous than the presidential version, however. Those debates were broadcast on live TV, with the candidates responding immediately to videotaped questions that ranged from the thoughtful to the bizarre…

Editor’s note: The YouTube debate scheduled for today between Senate candidates Mark Udall and Bob Schaffer has been delayed until Tuesday because of unspecified problems, YouTube officials announced this morning.

We heard the delay in posting the debate was requested by the Schaffer campaign–did they need a few takes to get it just right?

Anyway, check it out and decide for yourself, post the more interesting responses in the comments. We haven’t watched all the question videos yet but are still hoping to see some real-life sock puppets.

Tweet
Share

Comments

13 thoughts on “Schaffer vs. Udall YouTube Debate (Belatedly) Posted”

  1. Question on Renewable energy:

    Udall really answered this question well, I thought. He definitely has the edge on this issue.

    Bob is so unbelievably bad talking into the camera. How many tries did it take to get a good one? Was that the best take? Oh man, Bob is so much better live than on camera.

    Oh, and that kid with the rifle asking about the second amendment is priceless.

  2. During his acceptance speech last night at the Republican National Convention in Minnesota, John McCain told the audience, “We believe in a strong defense, work, faith, service, a culture of life, personal responsibility, the rule of law, and judges who dispense justice impartially and don’t legislate from the bench.” Most American voters (60%) agrees and says the Supreme Court should make decisions based on what is written in the constitution, while 30% say rulings should be guided on the judge’s sense of fairness and justice. The number who agree with McCain is up from 55% in August.

    While 82% of voters who support McCain believe the justices should rule on what is in the Constitution, just 29% of Barack Obama’s supporters agree. Just 11% of McCain supporters say judges should rule based on the judge’s sense of fairness, while nearly half (49%) of Obama supporters agree.

    Link

    2. About a year ago Time or similar did some research as to which justices had a record of overturning Congress’ laws.

      It was the conservative justices, hands down.  

      1. of judicial activism documented in Page Smith’s six-volume “People’s history of the United States.”  Overwhelmingly, it is right-wing activism in defense of capital against Labor, with the Warren Court being about the only exception.  

            1. I knew that in recent history the court’s conservatives were activist, but I didn’t know it’s a long term trend.

              You are a font of knowledge, Bob!

      2. It was bad law, it let the right-wing offf the hook because they didn’t have it decide people’s votes, and that single decision let the right hang “judicial activism” around the left when it is mostly the right.

        I’d like to see we Dems take the lead in getting it overturned as bad law (yeah, right, that’ll happen).

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

139 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!