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%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
July 01, 2009 09:27 PM UTC

GOP settles for robo-call, Web ad to hit Markey on cap and trade

  • 10 Comments
  • by: BobMoore

( – promoted by Colorado Pols)

Republicans think Rep. Betsy Markey’s vote Friday on the cap and trade bill will cost her votes next year. Politico, in a breathless and at times inaccurate piece Tuesday, even described it as a “career-ending vote.” The article included the National Republican Congressional Committee’s plans for attacking Markey and other potentially vulnerable Dems with TV and radio spots.

The NRCC’s offensive was unveiled today. They’re targeting Markey with robo-calls and a Web ad. As I discuss in my Coloradoan blog, that seems like a pretty light response, especially after the buildup. See my blog here: http://tr.im/quL5

In my blog, two Colorado State University political scientists discuss how important this vote might be next year. The obvious conclusion — it’s way too early to tell.

Bob Duffy, the CSU political science chair, is particularly dismissive of the NRCC: “”Who cares what the NRCC says-they have no credibility at this point.”

His colleague, John Straayer, said Markey’s votes could create vulnerability, but much of that will depend on how she responds.

“If Markey finds herself on the defensive, she’s in trouble,” Straayer said.  “If she proudly owns her votes and casts them as pushing to solve serious problems for which the R’s have no solution, she may well be just fine.  And she can’t let her opponent define Betsy Markey.”

Tweet
Share

Comments

10 thoughts on “GOP settles for robo-call, Web ad to hit Markey on cap and trade”

  1. Even if they hadn’t completely destroyed their credibility in 2008, the NRCC would still be pretty weak right now just because it’s an off year.

    Why are they wasting money on crap like this? People hate getting robocalled, and anyone who would watch an anti-Markey NRCC ad online would probably never vote for Markey anyway.

    This is just another sign, IMO, that the establishment Republicans have no idea how to use technology.

    1. has been splashed across Colorado Pols too.

      As to career ending votes – EFCA sponsorship –  didn’t Larimer or Weld vote down some rediculous Union Boss employment measure a cycle or two ago?

  2. The average voter doesn’t understand cap and trade. Career-ending votes are those that deal with very clear, unambiguous issues that are easily explainable to voters. This is too complex of an issue to be anything close to career-ending for anyone.

    1. MM claims it would add jobs, but I don’t think that’s true.  It might add “green” jobs, but would cost more standard jobs. [emphasis mine]

      Calzada says Spain’s torrential spending — no other nation has so aggressively supported production of electricity from renewable sources — on wind farms and other forms of alternative energy has indeed created jobs. But Calzada’s report concludes that they often are temporary and have received $752,000 to $800,000 each in subsidies — wind industry jobs cost even more, $1.4 million each. And each new job entails the loss of 2.2 other jobs that are either lost or not created in other industries because of the political allocation — sub-optimum in terms of economic efficiency — of capital. (European media regularly report “eco-corruption” leaving a “footprint of sleaze” — gaming the subsidy systems, profiteering from land sales for wind farms, etc.) Calzada says the creation of jobs in alternative energy has subtracted about 110,000 jobs elsewhere in Spain’s economy.

      1. trying to sell something along these lines not too long ago?

        If you are looking for some talking points to copy & paste that are, you know, applicable to this country, you should try and dig it up.  

      2. that today’s economy is the same as tomorrow’s economy. That won’t be true on a number of accounts. One, oil prices will continue to rise and carbon intensive jobs will become more expensive regardless. Two, ACES will use a market based approach to include the price of environmental externalities (re: rising sea levels and changing precipitation patterns) which will cost more jobs if unaccounted for. Really, if you believe in the free-market, you support ACES or something like it (carbon tax anyone?), pure and simple. If you believe in effective public subsidies for corporations that hurt our competitiveness and put us behind in development of the new energy economy that the rest of the world is already adopting then fine. It’s crazy, but that’s fine.

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

93 readers online now

Newsletter

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