U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

(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%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
February 15, 2017 10:42 AM UTC

Cory Gardner Makes Stupefying Ass of Self on "Paid Protesters"

  • 10 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols
Sen. Cory Gardner (R).

Last night, Denver7 aired an interview with Sen. Cory Gardner of Colorado that touched on a variety of hot topics–the resignation of National Security Advisor Michael Flynn and the Trump administration’s ties to the Russian government, as well as Gardner’s recent controversial remarks suggesting that citizens showing up at his offices in Colorado and flooding his voicemail boxes are “paid protesters.”

We’ve covered Gardner’s non-answers on the Flynn/Russia questions, but Gardner’s incredibly feeble attempt to defend these allegations of “paid protesters” is worth a note in the record all by itself:

On Tuesday, he addressed the insinuation he made last month that some people protesting him and calling his office were paid protesters. He clarified that he believes there are organizations that are working to connect politically-active people across the country with various lawmakers in Washington, citing a conversation his wife had with one organization.

“We have a number of Coloradans – a large percentage, if not a huge percentage of the people calling our office who are Coloradans. [They are] people who are concerned about nominations, people who are concerned about the price of their health care,” Gardner said.

“But we do have people from out of state calling the office. In fact, just the other day, my wife was contacted by an organized survey effort. She answered the survey and was immediately connected to my very own office.”

“She was not paid to do that, [Pols emphasis] but somebody was paid to make that connection happen not knowing that was my wife,” Gardner said.

Understand this, folks: Cory Gardner was given a wide-open opportunity to defend his insistence that “paid protesters” are responsible for the demonstrations and flooded voicemail boxes at his offices. But the “example” Gardner cites is not a “paid protester” at all, but one of countless automated contact campaigns run by activist groups connecting ordinary (and unpaid) citizens with their elected officials. There’s absolutely nothing inappropriate about that kind of activity, and the contacts between citizens and lawmakers facilitated by these campaigns are as legitimate as any other.

Presumably, this would include Mrs. Gardner as well.

For a politician known for being cool under fire and ready with a slick answer to any question, Gardner’s justification in this interview for accusing the thousands of protesters converging every week outside his offices of being “paid” is an insult to everyone’s intelligence. Gardner’s out-of-hand dismissal of the growing dissent against the Trump administration in Colorado and nationwide spread widely, and was picked up by conservative mouthpieces here and elsewhere as a way of rationalizing what is happening.

Every American who heard Gardner’s original statement needs to know he can’t defend it.

Comments

10 thoughts on “Cory Gardner Makes Stupefying Ass of Self on “Paid Protesters”

  1. When I have taken advantage of an opportunity to follow up a survey with a message or call to a Senator, every organization has made the effort to find out where I am and then makes a "connection" to an appropriate office. Gardner's spouse's experience seems to confirm that is how it is working for this particular episode.

    Gardner's responses to my emails have been generic defenses of his position, not responding to any specifics of my communication.

    I just hope media outlets continue to ask him to speak specifically and beyond his initial sound bite.

     

  2. If hounded relentlessly, Cory will lose his temper and fuck up. Cory is now an official "Big Shot". He should not have to be accountable and answer all these questions the way regular people do.

    All Cory has going for him is his slickness and his comfort with complete falsehood as a way of life and a professional imperative….oh, and he will do anything for enough money.  Just ask David Koch.

      1. I'll be quite happy with Senator Gardner if he votes 'no' on the Congressional Review Act resolution, passed by the House with 11 Republicans opposed, to delete the BLM's methane gas capture Rule.

  3. Why is it necessary to set up elaborate computer programs to "facilitate" citizens contacting their elected officials? Can't people just call their congressman?

    Democrats have been paying Progress Now and other liberal attacks groups for so long you can't tell the difference between paid work and volunteer protests. Maybe that's why you support a minimum income for all deadbeats.

    Minimum income for all protesters!

    1. Is there something wrong with facilitating contact?  Is it wrong to put voters in touch with their elected officials?  

      You probably have the same issue with things that make voting and registration easier, too, don't you? 

       

       

      1. So, Moderatus, are you saying that it's OK for Americans for Prosperity to pay organizers on the right, but not ethical for Dems to do the same? 

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

53 readers online now

Newsletter

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