Circling The Drain: Gardner Invokes Secession Farce Against Hick

Sen. Cory Gardner (R).

As the Republican National Convention got going this week, as readers know, Sen. Cory Gardner wasn’t in attendance–but in a remote interview with CBS4’s Shaun Boyd on Monday from his home in Yuma, Gardner still had plenty to say:

“I’ve never spoken at a convention before and I don’t think anybody would want to listen to a boring speech by me,” he answered. “I love to do this, to be in Colorado to go across the state. Today alone I was in four different counties talking to people across Colorado. I’ll continue to do that.”

[Boyd] asked for his thoughts about the couple from St. Louis who stood outside their home with guns as protesters marched by. They called those protesters Marxist liberals and were part of a theme that the Democrats would ruin suburban America.

“What do you say to those who feel like President Trump is pitting white suburbs against Black Lives Matter for votes?” Boyd inquired.

“I don’t think it’s right to pit anyone against anyone,” Gardner said…

For the most part, Gardner was careful to sidestep the opportunities he had to say something noteworthy in either direction, despite his ability to fill long stretches with empty platitudes. But when it came to that “silent majority” President Donald Trump says will deliver for Republicans on Election Day, Gardner called us back to one of the wackiest moments in the last decade of Colorado politics:

“I think a lot of the silent majority that people may talk about is off the I-25 corridor,” he said. “It’s the Eastern Plains, it’s the Western Slope. It’s 20 percent of the counties in Colorado who tried to secede [Pols emphasis] under John Hickenlooper because he called rural Coloradans ‘backwards’ and they just needed to get rid of some of their beliefs so they would fit in with the people of Colorado. I think they are people who feel like they’ve been forgotten.”

So, for those of you who weren’t around in 2013, yes–technically there was what we guess you’d call…an attempt by 11 counties in Colorado to begin the process of seceding and forming their own state of “North Colorado.” But while it may be true that 11 Colorado counties do arithmetically total up to to 17% of the 64 total counties that make up the state–Gardner was rounding up, we guess–Gardner forgot to mention that those 11 counties make up a whopping 7% of the total population of Colorado.

When you’re through being underwhelmed by the tiny sliver of the state who even voted on secession, consider the results. Six out of the eleven counties voted no, including Weld County, the most populous and would-be host of the “capital city” of North Colorado, Greeley. Across all 11 counties, 55% of the total of just over 91,000 voters who participated in the Great North Colorado Secession Movement of 2013 voted no. Net support for secession in 2013: 40,757.

Folks, that’s not even a “silent majority” of Greeley.

This isn’t the only way we can show that the half-baked North Colorado secession movement was in no way representative of anything remotely close to a majority, silent or otherwise, of Colorado voters. The secession movement was driven by a range of issues from backlash against renewable energy mandates to gun control, and on every such issue it was the secessionists who were out of the mainstream. For a candidate trying to run to the center, invoking the crackpot secession movement of 2013 as anything other than a punchline is probably the dumbest move Gardner could make.

If this is how Cory Gardner really feels, he should run for Senator of North Colorado, after leading the campaign to secede! Unfortunately, we’re pretty sure he’d lose the primary.

P.S. Gardner never did say how he voted on the secession question.

4 Shares

14 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. MichaelBowmanMichaelBowman says:

    What an embarrassment.  

    PS: land doesn't vote. 

    • JohnInDenverJohnInDenver says:

      well, land doesn't vote in a Senate race.   But doesn't it have representation in other sorts of races?  I know that in my mid-50s original deed, each lot got one vote on the questions of neighborhood policies.

      • MichaelBowmanMichaelBowman says:

        I think that applied in the last vote to re-name Stapleton?  Wasn't it only property owners that got to vote? 

        • harrydobyharrydoby says:

          I believe that was true of last year's vote that failed to change the name.  But this year's vote included adult members of the household (renters too I believe).

           

          • MichaelBowmanMichaelBowman says:

            I think you're right.  When the property owners were the only ones allowed to vote the Stapleton name was deemed to stand.  When the people spoke….not so much. 

            • Bartels-James says:

              This is mostly right. However, the vote didn't stand for "property owners," but rather a per-property vote. My house, with two adults, received one vote. Business owners, property owners, and developers received one vote for every 500 square feet of property they owned.

              The people who live here wanted to change the name. The people who don't, who would have to pay to rename businesses and signage, did not.

              (they also did a piss-poor job of letting people know the vote was happening, or even marking the envelope with anything indicating there was a ballot inside. It looked, quite literally, like junk mail.)

      • MichaelBowmanMichaelBowman says:

        Didn't Caldara use a scenario like this once in the early days of our mail-in ballots, alleging our system was flawed?  Showing a picture of two ballots being sent to the same address, same name, but one was for the general election and the other was for a special election that only property owners had a say?  

  2. MADCO says:

    64 counties.

    Why?
    Who pays all those county comissioners to duplicate each other's work?

    Seems like they are mostly Republican led – why don't they practice their preachin' and reduce a few.

    • MichaelBowmanMichaelBowman says:

      Kansas has 100.  I’m going to venture that 80% of their population lives in five of those. 

      We could easily collapse the eastern Colorado counties into 6 new ones. Sedgwick-Phillips; Yuma-Washington; Kit Carson-Cheyenne; Kiowa-Crowley-Otero-Bent-Prowers; Elbert-Lincoln; Las Animas-Baca.

      • Mike W. says:

        Takes 22 of the biggest counties to get to 80% of Kansas's population. Only takes 10 to get to 80% of Colorado: El Paso, DougCo, JeffCo, Arapahoe, Denver, Adams, Broomfield, Boulder, Larimer, and Weld. 

        • MichaelBowmanMichaelBowman says:

          As a percentage pretty close then: 22% for KS; 16% for CO.  Thanks for the info MW – I like to store factoids like this in my gray matter.   

          The 80/20 rule /- strikes again (rounded to the nearest 10).

  3. RepealAndReplace says:

    Perhaps if the secession is successful, then after Cory Gardner loses in November, he can run for governor in the 51st state of Northern Colorado.

    • harrydobyharrydoby says:

      Wouldn't they prefer a dictator able to build a cult, based around his personality?

      Oh wait — Cory would need a personality.  Never mind.

      • RepealAndReplace says:

        Maybe if he does not leave in January, the Orange-Haired Emperor will make Kimberly Guilfoyle a Grand Duchess who will reign over the Duchy of Northern Colorado.  Ken Buck can become prime minister.

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.