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) Jeff Crank

(R) Dave Williams



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
August 09, 2011 07:10 PM UTC

Gardner Town Hall Highlights 2012 Problems for GOP

  • by: Colorado Pols

We’ve regularly discussed in this space the problems that Republicans face in 2012 as they try to maneuver between Tea Partiers who want strict adherence to far-right ideals and Independent voters who don’t want big cuts to programs such as Medicare. As Bob Moore of the Ft. Collins Coloradoan reports, Republican Rep. Cory Gardner was smack in the middle of that dilemma during a town hall meeting on Monday:

Not all the criticism aimed at Gardner came from Democrats. One Republican from Loveland, who didn’t give his name, said he voted for Gardner because he wanted someone who would “stand for principles.”

“It seems like we always compromise, we on the Republican side,” the man said, to hoots of derision from Democrats in the room.

During the meeting, Gardner defended his positions on a number of issues, such as the recent compromise to reduce federal spending while raising the debt ceiling. Most of the audience was older than 65, and Gardner received criticism by some for his support of a Republican budget plan that would greatly overhaul Medicare.

“The only way that we are going to save and preserve a safety net program is if we take responsible reform and actions to make sure that it remains in place,” Gardner said, provoking some catcalls from the audience.

Gardner is already facing 2012 problems over his support of the “Ryan Plan”, and the debt ceiling debate hasn’t made things any easier. Gardner is one of many Republicans around the country who is going to have to ease voter fears over Medicare cuts while also maintaining support from Republicans, such as the man quoted above, who think that the GOP “compromised” too much during the debt debate. With public approval of Congress at an all-time low, 2012 is shaping up to be a difficult time to be a Tea Party-backed Republican incumbent.


53 thoughts on “Gardner Town Hall Highlights 2012 Problems for GOP

    1. “Let’s all be respectful to each other …”

      Followed closely by: “This isn’t the United States Senate, we actually do work here.”

      Yeah, that’s respectful all right: Republican style.

      1. They do the kind of work that brought us within 11 hours of defaulting which has led to our national credit rating being downgraded. Good work! Awesome job!  

      1. The cuts don’t kick in until 2013 because asshole we’re still trying to dig out from the disastrous Republican administrations who pushed ludicrous “Trickle Down” economic policies for decades.

        Try being honest for once you little bitch.  The cuts are real and they are coming.

        Your side is not a legitimate partner in Democracy.  Your side is a bunch of power obsessed bullies who assume that that 66% of our citizens don’t count and shouldn’t get a voice in our national discussions.

        What a stupid fucking asshole.  

        1. As many names as I’ve been called on this site, I think that’s a new one.

          The fact of the matter is that future congress will just pass whatever they want and will not be bound by this one. So cuts in out years are almost meaningless. We’re pretty much screwed – we’ll be Greece in no time, except it will be a lot worse because the U.S. is so much bigger of an economy. Prepare for worldwide depression, famine, etc. Thanks a lot progressives!

          66% of our nations citizens were bullied and lied to by progressives in an ultimately doomed attempt at class warfare. “Loot the middle class!” is not a viable economic strategy. How can you claim that big government totalitarianism is a “legitimate partner in Democracy”? Although in your interpretation, democracy means something like what goes on in Venezuela – socialism. This is why the founders had the good foresight to make us a constitutionally limited Republic rather than a pure “Democracy”. They wanted to protect the rights of the minority and individuals from 50% +1 mob rule, apparently your favourite form of government.

      2. And yet, the poor, the elderly, the disabled and the entire middle class are the ones that took it up the ass. Funny how that worked out.  

        1. The poor, elderly, and the disabled have more benefits than they ever did. The middle class was just screwed by Democrats, as they saw their life savings (or what was left of it) go up in smoke due to inflation.

          1. Like, historically low. There are numbers, you can calculate them. Or just watch this. We have lots of economic problems, but nobody who knows anything is complaining about inflation right now.

            I think MOTR is wrong. You don’t live in a parallel universe, you live in the late 70s when complaining about inflation helped get Reagan elected, and that was the last big success your movement was proud of (because the whole Bush revolution kind of turned to shit, didn’t it?). It’s kind of like the annoying hippies in the late 90s who kept trying to recreate the late 60s, except all twisted and evil instead of just embarrassing.

        1. Could you please explain to me why Democrats think that taking on more debt makes our economy stronger? Even after the inevitable downgrade by S&P, they just keep sticking their heads in the sand.

            1. We. Would. Not. Have. Defaulted. That was a lie made up by the leftist media. We have $200 billion a month coming in. The interest on the debt is only $20 billion. Plus, we had plenty left over to pay medicare, social security, veterans benefits, etc. It would have been a partial government shutdown. And it would have been resolved in a few days anyway.

              I didn’t say that we shouldn’t have taken on more debt. I said that it would not make our economy stronger. Currently, we are taking on way too much debt. We borrow 40 cents on every dollar we spend, so spending ultimately needs to be cut by 40%. Even a 5-10% cut this year would have started us on the right path to balancing the budget. And not a cut from the ridiculously inflated baseline. We need to spend 5-10% less each year than we did the previous year.

              1. We. Would. Not. Have. Defaulted. That was a lie made up by the leftist media. We have $200 billion a month coming in. The interest on the debt is only $20 billion. Plus, we had plenty left over to pay medicare, social security, veterans benefits, etc. It would have been a partial government shutdown. And it would have been resolved in a few days anyway

                Can you back up any, ANY of this claim with serious legitimate information ?

                Further, in the eyes of creditors, which debtor is more risky ?

                A) the one that looks like they may default, but in the 11th hour dosen’t

                B) the one who actually defaults

                Further to that, is it going to cost debtor A and debtor B more money to borrow, now that they are viewed as more risky investments ?

                Even further, will that extra money that is required to service debt going to cost the taxpayer more money ?

                Your party, or fringe subset of the party, are fully and wholly responsible for turning housekeeping business into a national crisis, and now you want to put it in Obama’s lap ?  Really ?  Can you all own up to anything, ANYTHING ?

                  1. Maybe his “commentary” would get interesting if he would – unlike all his kneejerk right-wing buddies – agree to discuss the disastrous financial policies of GWBush that got us into this mess.  If deficit spending and extreme debt are so bad, then he needs to address why it was “good” during the Bush years.

                1. Is that what you call it? You’re like a woman who goes on a massive shopping spree and then blames the credit card company when her card is declined because she’s maxed out her credit.

                2. The S&P has been very, very clear about the reason for the downgrade.  It has nothing to do with the timing of the deal.  It has everything to do with the continued refusal of the government to consider increasing their revenue.  The downgrade happened because this whole debacle proved that for the foreseeable future, it’s going to be very, very hard for the U.S. to raise taxes or let the Bush cuts expire, and that’s precisely what we need to do to get our economy strong enough to bet on again.

                  1. The Republicans say, “S&P downgraded the credit rating because Democrats refused to accept cuts to entitlement programs!”  The Democrats say, “S&P downgraded the credit rating because Republicans refused to allow revenue increases!”  

                    Here’s what S&P actually said:

                    We lowered our long-term rating on the U.S. because we believe that the prolonged controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling and the related fiscal policy debate indicate that further near-term progress containing the growth in public spending, especially on entitlements, or on reaching an agreement on raising revenues is less likely than we previously assumed and will remain a contentious and fitful process.

                    That’s right: BOTH containing growth in entitlement spending AND raising revenues.  They also criticized Congress’s political brinksmanship during the debt ceiling debates, which I suspect will be nothing compared to the budget debates.

                    It doesn’t do our side any good to point fingers at the Republicans and say “it’s all their fault, S&P said so!”  That may be true, but that is not what S&P said.

                    1. and the Republicans remind everyone that they’re just making up whatever shit is convenient in any particular ten-second interval, we can find a reasonable compromise!

                      Democrats claim the temperature today is 87 degrees based on temperature readings, but Republicans insist it’s negative 237 degrees based on their reading of the Book of Revelation. A reasonable compromise would be negative 235 degrees, but perhaps in November we’ll be able to get them to agree to negative 233.

                      When you play fair with cheaters, you lose.  

          1. No one is saying more debt makes our economy stronger.

            No one- but you.

            Your opposition is saying the a default is bad.

            From 1943 through 1955-ish the GDP?debt ratio was higher than it is currently. From 1955 through 1970 was one of the strongest periods of economic growth the USA or any economy has ever experienced.

            Those crazy Americans in the greatest generation – they were clearly loons because debt is bad.

            1. “Raising the debt ceiling and keeping the economy from catastrophe…”

              Raising the debt ceiling does nothing to address the underlying spending problem that is causing catastrophe in our economy.

              Yes, there was a post-war boom in 1955. Unfortunately, those days of strong economic growth ended when Carter took over. Sadly, we are seeing a repeat of his failed tenure in office.

              1. thats why Bill Clinton couldn’t balance the budget and erase the deficit, it was that goddamned Carter !

                You are one of the most ignorant people I have ever witnessed.

                  1. started with little lying bitches like you who truly believe that Democrats are the enemy and Democracy only works when your side gets to make EVERY decision.  God forbid that other people are included in the decision making process.

                    You are truly a traitor to the very concepts of Democracy and the compromises necessary for a diverse people to get along.

                    1. Generally our side wants to get elected and make the decisions. So does yours. But you’ve got some nerve to talk about compromise after what Dems rammed down the American people’s throats over their objections. Remember Obamacare?

                      “You are truly a traitor to the very concepts of Democracy and the compromises necessary for a diverse people to get along.”

                      Yes, I see that you’re so willing to compromise with me. ???

                  2. Here all this time I thought you were, “B.J. Wils on 83”.

                    I had no idea WTF “on 83” meant (maybe it was something like Ms. Choksondick from South Park? . . . anyway, it’s hard to keep up with all your strange perversions).  But, like everyone else here, I pretty much never have any idea what the fuck you’re talking about (. . . and, see, at least you too had this one small thing in common with the rest of humanity).

                    Now?  Now, it’s going to be very hard for me to think of you as anything other than that Wilson-Joke-Fuckface-A-Go-Go-What-A-Stupid-A-hole.

                    (However, if you meant the “Woodrow” part, well then . . . never mind.)

                  1. Yes, I do.

                    I understand your faith in your superior intellectual skills and knowledge base.  But I am sincerely doubtful that you are prepared or capable of having a substantive (no talking points nor bs one-liners) about the US federal budget process.

                    So you say “spending problem” and I point out that our debt /GDP ratio has been higher than it is now, and you say nothing, confident in your superiority.

                    I say that we spend a boat load on defense, and you say it doesn’t matter, confident  in your superiority.

                    I say the current debt situation – which is a problem – is partly a spending problem and partly a revenue problem, and you say “spending problem” even louder.

                    I say that the current debt problem is partly (mostly) a result of the Bush tax cuts, fighting two unfunded wars and a recession.  The expense of the wars should be ending, and historically recessions are cyclical (temporary).  And you whine about “spending problem” even louder.

                    So, yes, if you define what you believe “spending problem”  means we’ll see whether  you are a reasonable, informed citizen willing and able to have a reasoned discussion about how to address the debt problem or whether you are just a whiner, not willing nor able to engage in any useful way.

                    After that we can move on to how Stupid it was to risk a default, earn the down grade, and why the 2012 budget discussion, which should be starting any minute now, is the real forum in which to have the conversation, not the administrative, redundant and probably unconstitutional debt ceiling vote.

                    1. We spend far more than we take in. Government needs to learn to live within its means and not choke out the private sector. Confiscating more from the middle class in order to feed wasteful spending should not be an option.

                    2. Now I not only understand your faith in your intellectual and knowledge  superiority, I see it too.

                      Thanks for sharing.

                      I know, I know, others will point out that facts are pesky things.  I say, you just keep ignoring the inconvenient facts and focus on talking points.  What could possibly go wrong.

          2. Could you explain to me why the Republicans have had zero problem with raising the debt ceiling before? Particularly when President Stupid was busy starting two wars and cutting taxes to pay for it?

            The downgrade from S&P, by the way, was a result of right-wing intransigence. Not sure if you’ve been paying attention to the news. Sure doesn’t seem like it.

            1. Bush kept deficits relatively low. And that was with the Democrat supported wars included.

              Democrats have a problem with blaming other people for the problems they caused. The S&P downgrade is a result of one thing and one thing only – Obama’s spending problem.

                    1. If you take the average over 2001-2008 it’s probably smaller. I gave you the second to last year, because the $400 billion in the last year was due to loss of revenues from the Frank-Dodd-Clinton-Fannie-Freddie recession. However, even $400 billion is, as I have pointed out ad nauseum, only a fourth of Obama’s $1.6 trillion.

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

56 readers online now


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