CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese



President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump



CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*


CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*


CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks




CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg




CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank



CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*


CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen



CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi




State Senate Majority See Full Big Line





State House Majority See Full Big Line





Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
October 21, 2010 07:36 PM UTC

Is Ken Buck TRYING to Lose?

  • by: Colorado Pols

UPDATE #2: The League of Conservation Voters turned this funny retort right around:

UPDATE: That didn’t take long. This story has now gone national, with Politico and The Hill, among others, recounting Buck’s week of bad press.


We know that headline sounds absurd, but we don’t know what else to say after Republican Senate candidate Ken Buck’s latest misstep. As the Fort Collins Coloradoan reports:

After his meeting with supporters, Buck headed to a Loveland fundraiser that featured Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma.

“Sen. Inhofe was the first person to stand up and say this global warming is the greatest hoax that has been perpetrated. The evidence just keeps supporting his view, and more and more people’s view, of what’s going on,” Buck said.

Coming off of Sunday’s comments during a “Meet the Press” debate in which Buck compared homosexuality to alcoholism and essentially said that being gay was a “choice,” you’d think he would be a little more careful about what he said out loud. But nope, there’s Buck again last night, talking about global warming as a “hoax.”

Given that a vast majority of Americans believe that global warming is a serious issue, and considering that the vast majority of Unaffiliated voters in Colorado have yet to cast their ballot, these type of absolutely foolish comments may very well cost Buck the election. Think about how Colorado voters may now view Buck compared to this time a week ago — you know, before he started publicly calling homosexuality a “choice” and global warming a “hoax.”

Not good, Ken. Not good.


126 thoughts on “Is Ken Buck TRYING to Lose?

  1. as though he’s still in the primary. As though all he has to do is keep throwing red meat to the Tea Party base.

    I may as well state the obvious–he really is this extreme. There’s no other way to interpret his views. He’s just about as far right as you’ll get in this election cycle. I don’t see much difference, at this point, between him and Angle or O’Donnell.  

    1. These are all things that Buck must truly believe. But you’d think he would be smart enough to just not talk about them for two more weeks, right?  

      1. I’ve come to the conclusion, after watching him in debates, that not only is he out of sync with most Coloradans but also that’s he’s not all that smart, either.  

          1. Rick Wagner, the wingnut who for reasons I can’t fathom has a column every week in the Grand Junction paper, is just one of many examples that the Colorado bar exam is WAY too easy.

          2. I’ve never seen Ken Buck live and Sunday was my first shot at seeing him televised live. He didn’t seem all that sharp and he got that deer in the headlights look when asked about paying for tax cuts. The Sunday MTP appearance confirmed for me that Senator Bennet is very sharp and way sharper than Mr. Buck. I would call Mr. Buck book smart, but not intellectually agile enough to win.

              1. Your friendly local veterinarian.  A spoonful of sugar makes the right wing dogma go down.  Buck is managing to be dogmatic without the affability.  And don’t forget, Allard had Dick Wadhams — in his prime — running his campaign.  

                  1. in chess the Knight=horse…OK, I know YOU know that.  But I once made that same joke to Campbell and he just stared at me before saying “what do you mean?”  So I had to laboriously explain the in chess the knight = horse thing.  As they say, humor can be dissected, but the patient dies in the process.

                    So, yeah, maybe not that agile.  But who was his foe?  Was that Terry Considine?  If so, Terry actually was pretty smart.

                    1. In the general against Considine he of course had the turquoise jewelery bloc and the all-important judo bloc in his corner, V.

                      Gary Hart’s the most policy-smart guy Colorado’s sent to the Senate in 30+ years. But like that other policy-smart guy from Arkansas, had certain personal foibles…

                    2. I used to talk defense issues with Hart and we could just use the shorthand.  

                      I also agree Lamm was very smart, but he had pissed off the latinos by the time he faced nighthorse.  Since most latinos are mestizo, a mix of indian and spanish blood, his Native American heritage gave Nighthorse a leg up in that primary.  Josie was a bright lady too.  People don’t really know how important the job of county commissioner in a big urban county issue.  Maybe that [primary split the smart democrats two ways and opened the way for campbell.  

                    3. ….and right too about Lamm/Heath splitting the ‘smart Dem’ vote.

                      I still remember standing on top of cafeteria tables at some HS in C. Springs, exhorting Dem delegates at the county assembly to vote for Ben (ugh, in retrospect)

                      As for the Native American thing if I remember correctly (I may not) Switch-horse is as much Portuguese as he is N/A – so I guess he got the Pote vote too. 🙂  

                    4. but that’s enough to qualify for tribal membership.  My wife is part cherokee, but below the cutoff, as are my kids.

                    5. I can’t remember him campaigning in full Portuguese headdress.  Is there a portuguese headress?

                    6. Nighthorse coulda tipped a few NattyLites with some fellow Quahogs?  Huh, did not know that.  

                      Ben was affable but never not smart enough to be a swampuh.  

            1. Buck should have been well prepared for the “how you gonna pay for 4 Trillion (BIG T) in tax cuts? What you gonna get rid of?”

              That has been asked on almost every talking head quiz show the last two weeks. Including Fox.

              Too bad Ken, sorry you got lost after the bullet point.  

              1. He couldn’t answer because there is no answer.  He was right to be scared.  Unfortunately, at the same time he proved he has a correct thought in his head, he also proved that he was too stupid to know not to say the talking point in the first place.

                Poor bastard just can’t win.

            1. When I was a moot court competitor at CU, we went to a regional competition at BYU.  CU law students in Provo were like fish out of vodka.  However, the good ol’ boys from Wyoming came to our rescue.  They invited us out onto the patio and shared their flask with us.

              From this I concluded, they may or not be smart, but they most definitely are kind, generous, and well-prepared!  Well, except for Buck….

      2. Ken Buck should make hay with the intellectual scandals that have come out of the Gorean global warming alarmists.

        Gorean alarmism is the mark of the left. It is an international scandal for the left, and Buck should talk about it, because Bennet clearly is a a Gorean alarmist.

    2. at least he’s not lying about his whackjob positions anymore.

      Though you can kind of hear the conflict in him, every time he says “let’s just not talk about this, let’s talk about the economy instead” despite having no specific plans to deal with the economy.

    3. Can’t remember the last time any major candidate closed out a campaign worse than Buck.

      I thought Walt Klein was running Buck’s campaign. Klein has won so much because he’s all about Main Street Republicanism, not fringe campaigns. Or is the mainstream GOP whacko these days?

        1. But McInnis’ campaign closed out with events that were out of his control (plagiarism scandal over a long-ago paper).

          Buck has control of his own finish, but he’s screwing it up with his own recent words about rape, abortion, sexuality, and now climate change.

          1. And one we’ve been saying repeatedly. Nobody is doing this to Buck. He’s doing it all to himself. Nobody is making him say these things in front of reporters.  

  2. the man never saw a drilling rig he didn’t love. One day in a meeting he sighted the daily rig count for the past week as an example of what type of businesses we should put into a new office business park.    

  3. There once was a teabagger named Buck

    Who won his primary purely by luck;

    Thinking he could never be beat

    He opened his mouth, inserted both feet,

    Proving he’s really just a dumb… duck.  

  4. He has been losing the enthusiasm of the tea party.  He has disappointed the R in general for running a “flawed” or “poor” campaign.

    Maybe this shakes up R’s and tp’s.

    Anyway – it doesn’t anywhere near as much as his support of Ref A.

  5. Come on Coloradopols, clearly you are taking Buck’s comments out of context.  Clearly he meant to say “hot” and not “hoax.”  As in, global warming is “hot.”  This is no different than when you took Buck’s abortion stance out of context or his privatization of social security and veteran’s hospitals out of context or his “buyer’s remorse” out of context or his “cloud of suspicion” out of context.  

    1. was that global warming is so awful that only the “hoary host of hell” would deny it, but that’s kind of a tongue-twister so he accidentally said “hoax.” Really Pols? Like you’ve never had an rape victims should have their rapist’s baby or go to jail awkward malapropism? See, look, it just happened to me!

  6. This is clearly playing to the tea party base – according to the article, only 14% of tea baggers think that climate change is actually an environmental problem, while 49% of the public does (and I’ll bet it’s higher in Colorado). However, remember that all the money for those groups come from Big Oil.

    1. The base is full of people who don’t really give a shit about “positions” on “issues” and will just vote for anyone who promises to oppose that black dude in the White House. They’re already going to vote for Buck no matter what he says.

    2. Then Buck is a fool. If he doesn’t have the base now, then it’s too late. He can’t win with the base alone — he has to have the moderate Independent voter.

      1. If he is trying to lose the race it isn’t working.  He is still ahead of Bennet in the polls.  

        In fact when you look at the poor Dem turnout it looks like it will not be so close.  El Paso R+6,614 and Douglas R+4,286 more than offset Denver D+5,360 and Boulder  D+3,271.  If the Dems don’t take Denver and Boulder by more than the Republicans take El Paso and Douglas a statewide Dem can’t win.

        What happened to the famed Dem turnout machine?

  7. when he’s in front of his base.  He can’t help but let lose with even more of his seriously extreme views.  But he doesn’t have a good “governor” on his speech in any case.  No ability to read an audience, to access whatever intellect he has when he’s in front of cameras, and speak appropriate to the venue.  Nor to talk to a rape victim in a way that won’t come back to bite him in the ass.

    Arrogance/hubris plays a big part as well.

  8. Buck has thoroughly discredited himself and this independent voter will be voting for his opponent.

    That said I have one tiny issue with the comment that the “vast majority of Americans believe global warming is a serious issue.”  The cited poll states, “Most voters (59%) continue to regard global warming as a serious issue.”

    That is a majority, but not a vast majority.  I would contend a vast majority would be more than 80%.

  9. Despite most delirious opinions to the contrary posted here, saying “global warming is a hoax” isn’t going to hurt outside of ColoradoPols.  Fewer people are believing it and most don’t put it in their top 10 things they care about.

    Here’s just one example, from this spring.  I’m sure they would be even less favorable now.  

    Sometimes you guys make it too easy to mock you…

    Americans’ Global Warming Concerns Continue to Drop

    Multiple indicators show less concern, more feelings that global warming is exaggerated

    PRINCETON, NJ — Gallup’s annual update on Americans’ attitudes toward the environment shows a public that over the last two years has become less worried about the threat of global warming, less convinced that its effects are already happening, and more likely to believe that scientists themselves are uncertain about its occurrence. In response to one key question, 48% of Americans now believe that the seriousness of global warming is generally exaggerated, up from 41% in 2009 and 31% in 1997, when Gallup first asked the question.


      1. Is Ken Buck TRYING to Lose?

        … these type of absolutely foolish comments may very well cost Buck the election.

        While you all have your circle jerk about the dangers of global warming and Buck’s apostasy – NO ONE ELSE CARES.

        The original post was in political context.  Not scientific.

                    1. I think me and you have pretty much the same sense of humor. Which is a good thing because we’re both so awesome.:)

    1. People may think the danger of global warming is exaggerated, but they don’t think it’s a “hoax.” Those are two different questions entirely.

      1. in political application.  Global Warming is an afterthought in the average voter’s mind.  The fact that no one gives a shit about it makes your entire argument moot.

        1. Those that think AGW is a hoax are going to vote for Buck.

          Those that think AGW is a serious issue are going to vote for Bennet.

          Among the undecideds, one’s position on AGW (on its own) probably won’t move the needle.

          However, calling it a hoax does reinforce the narrative that Buck is too extreme. Politically, it was a dumb move and could have been handled much more adroitly.

    2. Why make the claim at all? Buck has the vote of the conservatives – IIRC 95% are voting for him. It’s the moderates he needs to win over. And, according to your poll, the majority of moderates still believe Global Warming is an issue –

      You have to agree, to some people Global Warming is an issue. Maybe not the most important issue, but it still matters to them. Why then, would Buck make a claim like this? Just stupid.

      1. He definitely didn’t need to press so hard on that front.  It isn’t going to get him any more votes.  Though I’m sure that there are few that are sitting on the fence until they know more about where he is on global warming.

  10. That wasn’t a gaffe. Most people understand global warming is a hoax and oppose cap and trade. It’s funny that the things Pols thinks are campaign killers are actually the things that will win the election for Ken.

    1. Even Rasmussen says 59% of voters think global warming is a serious threat.

      The NSF poll on the subject this year shows 74% of respondents believe global warming is happening, and (odd result warning) 75% believe human behavior is to blame.

    2. MOST people understand global warming is a hoax?  Unless by “most” you mean you and your three friends you sit around in your basement with.  Then you would be right.

      Here’s a link to a poll showing 75% of Americans believe in Global Warming, done just a few months ago.

    3. Politics is about belief, not science.  It  needs to be analyzed as part of the art of sales.  

      People buy based on emotions and then justify the purchase based on reasoning.  It is not the other way around.

      The best ad in the campaign is Buck’s they heard us but they ignored us ad.  It doesn’t mention Bennet or any position Buck takes.  But it is the ad that makes the sale in the race.

      Meanwhile the polsters are all thrilled about how Buck is wrong on the science of things. Buck is a trial lawyer.  He is trained in persuading people.  He is focused on what people believe and how they think. It doesn’t matter what the science is. Polsters would rather be right on the science and lose the election. It may well turn out that way, which will be just fine by Buck.

      1. Brilliant!

        Anyway, the source that bj was unable to produced was produced by others.  It’s not the science people are disagreeing with, it’s that the majority of people believe that there is a problem here.  Who’s argument are you trying to make?

        And if this is Buck at his lawyering best, he should stay well away from court rooms.

        1. Jeez H-man, play to the Republican stereotype much?

          How do you think the meme that facts have a liberal bias was born? Chalk that one up to Colbert’s critique of the Bushies and the 2000-2006 Congress.

          What’s the old saw about repeating history?

  11. CSU is becoming home to one of eight U.S. Department of the Interior Climate Science Centers, announced today by Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar.

    Colorado State University will lead and host a consortium of nine universities and other affiliated national laboratories, to be up and running by early next year. The center is designed to put science to work to help federal, state, local, private and non-profit natural resource managers understand current and future impacts of climate change on critical natural, cultural, wildlife and agricultural resources, CSU and Interior officials said.

    The North Central consortium includes the University of Colorado, Colorado School of Mines, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, University of Wyoming, Montana State University, University of Montana, Kansas State University and Iowa State University. In addition, other federal partners in the consortium include the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, National Center for Atmospheric Research and others.

    Yeah — I’m really sure all these people from all these universities, the CDC, the NOAA, Dept. of Ag., NCAR — every damn one of them is perpetuating a HOAX!  They’re all, all I say, getting paid off by Soros and the Bohemian Foundation lady and Jared POlis.  It’s all a horrible liberal conspiracy!  Where’s Glenda Beck when we need him?!!!!

  12. Using the criteria of hoaxes that dramatically affect public policy, my mind turns to the following choices:

    1) WMD in Iraq hoax

    2) The USSR is a credible military threat hoax

    3) Democrats can’t balance budgets hoax

    My fav is #2. All the AGW hoax has done so far is pollute a lot of scientific inquiry and create a lot of global drama. With the Cold War we built craploads of nukes and created a nation of sheep.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments

Posts about

Donald Trump

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo

Posts about

Colorado House

Posts about

Colorado Senate

41 readers online now


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