CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

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

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

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

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

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

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg

30%↑

15%↑

10%↓

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

50%↓

50%↑

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

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

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

35%↓

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
May 10, 2022 03:34 PM UTC

Rejecting GOP Advice To Be 'Compassionate,' Saine Goes on Anti-Abortion Offensive

  • 58 Comments
  • by: Jason Salzman

(Can’t hide it under a bush oh no! — Promoted by Colorado Pols)

Defying the advice of national Republican leaders that GOP candidates should be “compassionate consensus builders” on abortion, Colorado congressional candidate and Weld County Commissioner Lori Saine, a Republican, went on the offensive today in a Facebook ad, accusing her Democratic opponent, State Rep. Yadira Caraveo, of “pro-abortion zealotry,” which Saine calls “murder.”

“It’s time to confront and expose radical pro-abortion Democrats for who they are and defeat them by standing strong for what we believe,” states Saine in her 30-second advertisement.

“I’m calling out my abortionist opponent Yadira Caraveo for her militant pro-abortion zealotry, which includes forcing taxpayers to pay for Partial-Birth Abortions up to and including the moment of birth and forcing Catholic hospitals and physicians and nurses of all faiths to do abortions against their will. That’s not health care. That’s murder. And I’m not afraid to call it out.”

Taxpayer dollars are not used for abortions in Colorado and abortion is not allowed at the moment of birth.

Caraveo, who is a medical doctor, is pro-choice, and recently denounced the draft Supreme Court opinion overturning Roe v. Wade.

“As a health care provider, I give the pregnant women and teens that I care for choices about their futures. To live in a world where I have to tell them they have no choices is devastating,” she wrote on Facebook.

She also stated on Twitter: “With Roe overturned and Republicans on a crusade to ban abortion across the country, millions of women will lose that essential freedom. I was proud to help lead the fight to guarantee Colorado women the right to choose. My opponents have pledged to not only ban all abortions, but IVF and birth control as well. Help me stop them.”

Caraveo and Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser during a May 3 rally at the Capitol following the leaked draft of the Supreme Court ruling that would overturn Roe v. Wade.

Caraveo’s campaign didn’t return an email seeking comment on the ad.

Saine is competing with three other Republican candidates to win the June 28 primary and the chance to take on Caraveo to represent Colorado’s new 8th Congressional District, which is located north of Denver and was awarded to Colorado after the 2020 Census.

One of Saine’s opponents, state Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer (R-Weld) ran an anti-abortion advertisement on Facebook in March, denouncing a law pushed by Democrats that codifies the right to an abortion in Colorado law. In a Facebook post, Kirkmeyer denounced Roe last week.

The stance of Saine’s two other opponents, possibly heeding advice from national Republicans, aren’t talking about their position on Roe, though Thornton Mayor Jan Kulmann has vowed to be a “voice for Life and the unborn” in Congress. Another opponent, Tyler Allcorn, a former Green Beret, hasn’t issued a statement on abortion.

Comments

58 thoughts on “Rejecting GOP Advice To Be ‘Compassionate,’ Saine Goes on Anti-Abortion Offensive

  1. My opponents have pledged to not only ban all abortions, but IVF and birth control as well. Help me stop them.”

     

    Doesn’t ever outright say she supports abortion. Saying her ‘opponents’ want to ban all abortions ≠ saying she condones all abortion. It very much leaves the door open she doesn’t want to ban ALL abortions, just the ones she sees fit. She is historically untrustworthy to her leftmost constituents. More worryingly:

    Caraveo, who is a medical doctor, is pro-choice, and recently denounced the draft Supreme Court opinion overturning Roe v. Wade.

    Pols, you guys are doing all her campaign legwork for her. She has an MD, let HER speak about what she plans to do with it, because I don’t trust that she takes a medical standpoint when all her comments are in terms of “family” values, the coded language of neoconservatives that only accept very limited cases like rape/incest. Why not mention she has been added to the payroll of BOLDdems a PAC that also supports anti abortion candidate Henry Cuellar.

    Of course, she took the sponsorship after insinuating she is pro abortion. 

    1. “I’m honored to have the support of

    @BOLDDems

    in our fight for Colorado families this year.”

    https://twitter.com/YadiraCaraveo/status/1523767268991143937

    2. “Congressman Cuellar was raised with strong family values”
    https://www.boldpac.com/members/henry-cuellar

    3. “My faith does not allow me to support extreme positions such as late term or partial birth abortions.”

    https://twitter.com/CuellarCampaign/status/1521614378637869070?s=20&t=OEp0hv00X4dh9S5cD_A5Wg

    Roe v. Wade is being overturned. The vague label of “Pro-choice” is not good enough anymore, and it’s alarming how obsequious dems are just b/c she has the same credentials as Dr. Oz but with runs on a blue ticket.

    1. “Protect a woman’s right to choose.” It’s on Caraveo’s campaign website. What do you think it means?

      May we assume that in your blind hatred of Caraveo for her cannabis-access-limiting laws, that you now support one of the Republicans who would take away that access altogether? 

      1. Caraveo , on the other hand, voted for three laws that directly benefit the cannabis industry: 

        Authorizes Dual Marijuana Businesses

        Rescinds Marijuana Possession charges, two oz or less

        Establishes a program to benefit entrepeneurs in the marijuana industry.

        That was just over the last 2 years.

        You think Kirkmeyer, Saine, or Kuhlmann gives a crap about cannabis shops?

        1. What are you on about? 

          Bully for Big Cannabis and the legislators greasing the wheels for them, but my concern is about abortion.

          To be clear, you are blindly fawning over her and don’t actually give a hoot about that issue. You’re trying to use it to discredit my legitimate (and better reasoned and sourced) worries about Caraveo.

          Kudos for your googling a few marijuana related yes votes. Or do you actually care? How do those three laws benefit the cannabis industry?

          I can google too, what do you think of this?

          “Protect Our Kids will engage as an independent voice in races for legislative and congressional seats nationwide. Its aim will be to take out candidates who support marijuana legalization and bolster candidates opposed to drug use. And the PAC backed a successful primary bid by Colorado’s own Democratic state Rep. Yadira Caraveo, of Thornton, in her run for the newly created 8th Congressional District.”

          https://denvergazette.com/opinion/editorials/editorial-countering-big-marijuana-s-big-bucks/article_76687754-b7c3-11ec-8814-57e587fb6c5c.html

          Weird. I seem to recall you and some other boomers on here some time ago picking on someone pointing out that she is being paid by anti-marijuana lobbyists via dark money. Kinda seems like they were right.

          Unless you have some specific source explaining otherwise? Or are you down to clown with dark money?

          1. Hmmm.  Posting an opinion piece from the Phil Anschutz-owned Denver Gazette.

            And insisting that Caraveo should say she "supports abortion" as opposed to her saying she supports a woman's right to choose.

            If it looks like a troll, and talks like a troll…

              1. Man!  So, if we don't agree with you, then we hate Jewish people?!?!  

                That's even more ridiculous than saying Caraveo is anti-choice because she says she supports a "woman's right to choose" as opposed to saying she "supports abortion".

                If you're so passionate, why don't you run for office?  Only people who think exactly like you can get it right. /s

        2. “Many within Colorado see this bill as a huge step backwards for a pro-cannabis state. It’s a big reason why Colorado’s “medical cannabis access grade” was knocked down to a C in 2022 by Americans for Safe Access (ASA) (see Weed Between the Lines, “Front of the medical middle,” March 3, 2022). HB 1317 harms patient rights and civil protections, according to Abby Roudebush, ASA’s director of government affairs. And it does so without just cause.”

          https://www.boulderweekly.com/features/attack-of-the-lobbyists-sam/

          Who does she help, you said?

          Again, just responding to your weedy accusations, kdubs. I only came here to talk about abortion.

      2. 1. “I’m honored to have the support of

        @BOLDDems

        in our fight for Colorado families this year.”

        https://twitter.com/YadiraCaraveo/status/1523767268991143937

        2.  “Congressman Cuellar was raised with strong family values”
        https://www.boldpac.com/members/henry-cuellar

        3. “My faith does not allow me to support extreme positions such as late term or partial birth abortions.”

        https://twitter.com/CuellarCampaign/status/1521614378637869070?s=20&t=OEp0hv00X4dh9S5cD_A5Wg

         

        Where’s the bit where Caraveo says she supports abortion?

        What do YOU think she means? And what are you basing it on?

          1. Jesus indeed.  That’s fine if you settle for second worst,  but get off your horse if you don’t know how to ride it. 

            The evidence game is hard for new right democrats, I guess. 

            1. "Support Abortion"?  Good grief, it sounds like the only way you MIGHT support her is if she were to either perform an abortion and upload it to YouTube…or actually have an abortion herself…and then you would likely demand to either be in the room or see a video of it yourself.

              She is on record as pro-choice, has carried pro-choice legislation in the legislature.  Your only evidence to the contrary is that she has been endorsed by a PAC that has endorsed one pro-life Democrat, Henry Cuellar…whom she has not endorsed or campaigned with. Your issue is with Cuellar and BoldPAC.  Not with Caraveo. 

              1. Gotcha.

                So Mark Kelly, Val Demings, and Tim Ryan are out by your standard.  So are Catherine Cortez-Masto and Alex Padilla.  So you are prepared to kiss the Senate good bye.  

                What a jackass.

    2. there's a bit of difference between accepting an endorsement and a donation from a PAC and being "added to the payroll of BOLDdems"

      There are a variety of Democrats taking issue positions I don't approve of.  Arguing that a candidate "isn't enough" of "my kind" of Democrat seems short-sighted to me.  Doing so in a district designed to be competitive seems especially unfortunate. 

      The choice NOW is Caraveo or one of the Republicans that emerges from their primary.  Which side are you on?

      1. JID: You expend a lot of energy trying to discredit the evidence without having anything to counter apart from “Don’t blame me, I voted for kodos”?

        She already squeezed out her dem opponent Chaz Tedesco because her pockets are lined by insurance companies, lawyer lobbyists, and “tough on crime” dark money groups. The choice NOW is a rigged game you’re mad at anyone for saying as much. Don’t demand others compromise values you never held in the first place, unless you have something solid to point to.

        Evidence persuades.  If you have anything substantial to counter my contentions apart from “not AS bad” and adhominem against myself then you would be worth a listen. 

        “Added to the payroll” is an accurate description. Pacs are payrolls. Walk me through how that is not the case.

        1. here’s the usual understanding of “payroll.”

          1. a list of a company’s employees and the amount of money they are to be paid.

            “there are just three employees on the payroll

          2. the total amount of wages and salaries paid by a company to its employees.

            “small employers with a payroll of less than $45,000”

          Thus, the “payroll” of the PAC are those people employed by the PAC. The work they do produces a financial resource to share, but those who get the donation are not a part of that workforce – they actually are a recipient of the “product” of the paid work. By your logic, apparently if I take a loan from a bank, I’m on the “payroll” of the bank. If I get a gift from my parents, I’m on their “payroll.”

          Tedesco didn’t get “squeezed out.”  “Adams County Commissioner Charles “Chaz” Tedesco missed the primary ballot in the race for the 8th Congressional District by the closest of margins, failing to reach the required threshold by less than 1 percent during Tuesday night’s Democratic congressional assembly.”  He couldn’t persuade 30% of the most active Democratic party members that he ought to be on the ballot. 

          Money helps, obviously, But a two-way race, resulting in “Caraveo received 70.720% of the delegate vote to Tedesco’s 29.279%” is not a “squeeze.”

          And I’m still wondering … at this point, which side are you on?

          1. That is a narrow and disingenuous definition, to be sure. Formidable if you want to play centrist political word games of the sort that allows supporting someone who is funded (or on the payroll) by a group that also funds and fully endorses democrats supporting republican policies it might be worth looking in the mirror and asking

            I brought up Tedesco only to compare how easy Colorado Dems (and y’all) have made it for her. He didn’t have as much money, ergo could not mount as extensive a campaign as her. Her campaign budget is much larger than his, and largely came from lobbyists in the healthcare industry who directly or indirectly benefit from reactionary public policies. She also had the benefit of years of campaigning alongside Republicans on a state level which greases the wheels of other legislators who she meets (as we know) behind closed doors with. While not carrying an exact monetary figure, is arguably harder to buy than ad time. That is a “squeezing out.” 

            Or does your dictionary definition of “squeeze” mention the percent threshold of delegate votes required too?

            edited to remove a rough estimate that isn’t relevant to the topic of her being secretive and friendly with the GOP, the party that is right now subjugating half of humans in the US.

             

            1. "Her campaign budget is 5-6 times what he had" …. what is your source?

              FEC reports as of 3/31/2022 showed

              Yadira Caraveo (D) raised $553,309 spent $226,712

              Chaz Tedesco (D) raised $241,193 spent $180,734

              As for sources:  https://www.opensecrets.org/races/industries?cycle=2022&id=CO08&spec=N

              Caraveo … top 5 "industries" Retired$109,056; Health Professionals$41,995; Education$41,373; Hospitals/Nursing Homes$18,010; Securities & Investment$17,508

              Tedesco … top 5 "industries" Real Estate$28,745; General Contractors$12,600; Retired$9,384; Business Services$9,247; Building Trade Unions$8,600

              and you can look at top contributors here:  https://www.opensecrets.org/races/contributors?cycle=2022&id=CO08&spec=N

               

              1. To my mind the two years of kid gloved free publicity and the support of every newspaper, attorney, and neoliberal PAC might have some dollar value. But I guess that’s a stretch for Pols!

                My larger point is that she openly sides with anti-abortion legislators and has a perfectly established history of backstabbing leftists. I think you supporters of hers are coming up short of anything but attacking me in lieu of having anything to respond with other than “yeah, so?” and it shows. 🤣

                1. She spent $226,712.  He spent $180,734.

                  Tom tom says she spent 2.5 times what he did.  Nope.  She spent just about a fourth more than he did while earning more than twice the delegates.

                  I'm afraid our boy has ruined his math skills by too many drugs.

                  1. You pro abortion, V?

                    Forgive me, I forgot sarcasm doesn’t land with the over 30’s. I was being hyperbolic.🤥 Amended for doddering codgers like you.

                    😇

        2. Bullshit.  Caraveo didn't "squeeze" anyone out.  Tedesco lost at the caucus and was too stupid to have a backup plan to access the primary ballot with petitions. 

          By the way, if he had gotten the nomination, do you for one second think he would have declined BoldPAC's endorsement?

          1. Actually, I donated to both Caraveo and Tedesco and there is a better than even chance I would have voted for him in the primary had he gotten himself on the ballot.  (I actually think his working class roots would have appealed to this district in the general….but he fucked up before he got to the ballot.)

            First, Chaz does identify as Latinx.  Second, BOLD-PAC does endorse candidates who do not identify as Latinx….Mark Kelly, Val Demings, and Tim Ryan have all been endorsed for the Senate…and they have a virtual rainbow of folks endorsed for the house…so even if he didn’t identify as Latinx, he likely would have both sought and received their endorsement.

            Now, given that we’ve already shot down a number of your idiotic assertions, how about you get off of here and do a bit of research so you have your facts straight before you dig the hole even deeper?

            1. Don't like Cuellar and assume that everyone accepting him is tainted by "anti-abortion" cooties? 

              Why are you here rather than spending time on the Texas run-off? 

              Incumbent Henry Cuellar and Jessica Cisneros are running in the May 24 runoff in the Democratic primary for Texas' 28th Congressional District. In the March 1 primary, Cuellar received 48.4% of the vote, followed by Cisneros with 46.9% and Tannya Benavides with 4.7%. This year's runoff is a rematch of the 2020 primary, which Cuellar won outright, defeating Cisneros 51.8% to 48.2%.[3]

  2. Perhaps Ms. Saine and Ms. Kirkmeyer can explain why the four "personhood" ballot initiatives since 2008 here in Colorado lost by landslide margins.

    Saine calls abortion "murder." I call Saine stupid. 

  3. Hey, KWtree: The forum hiccuped and moved my reply.

    You need more practice in la langue politique.

    “Protect a woman’s right to choose” means a hundred things to a hundred people and literally says nothing about the practical argument the nation is having. She could be construed as fully supporting abortion (in which case, say so? She’s had ample opportunity and is ducking questions) to only supporting the right to choose*

    *offer only applies to married people legally identifying as “women” over the age of 21 with the consent of their husband of course because this is a medical decision that affects the family, and the family is a patriarch, oh and no medicare coverage of course because that’s unfair to people uncomfortable with abortions. Plus, let’s leave room for excessive red tape to really really really discourage people from pursuing their free CHOICE.

    Obviously there are miles between fully recognizing a persons’ right to reproductive/sexual autonomy versus supporting restrictions.

    Please address the dark money she’s openly taking from people aligned with ANTI abortion politicians and how you square that circle. 

    1. Just curious, tim-tam …. do you have other tests for having someone be "a true Democrat" or do you limit yourself to being an absolutist on abortion, alone?  Are candidates supposed to check every donation to insure ideological consistency in all the other political donations made, or do you limit your concern to only PAC donations?

      A first term Representative will have absolutely NO influence on the legal doctrines from the Supreme Court and next to none on any legislative response to whatever the Supreme Court opinion defines.  As a candidate accepting donations, she has absolutely no power over whether BOLDPAC does or does not support Cuellar.

      You do you — but from where I sit, it looks like you would insist on someone be absolutely on your side, using your standard for accepting support and expressing themselves in ways you find acceptable, before you would accept them as a candidate.  Want a party that looks more like what you think is best?  Go win a primary. 

       

      1. As a candidate accepting donations, she has absolutely no power over whether BOLDPAC does or does not support Cuellar.

        crying What is she supposed to do, stand up for what's right and say "no I do not stand with anti-abortion legislators?"

        Where on earth do I get off pointing out morality when $$$ is on the line!

    2. Obsessive behavior, ranting, ridged moral code that excludes others… 

      tim-tam –

      Take a deep breath, look in the mirror, and ask “why can’t I get help?”. 

      1. John NorthO D

        timmy likes to play “forum flame wars”. If you don’t, leave him/them to stew in their own juices. No “debate” is possible with them. 

        1. Lol.  Flame wars rarely have sources backing up one side. 

           

          They do often resort to ad hominem when one side doesn’t have a case tho…🤔

        2. Im sorry that you have absorbed a directory of commenters. The last commenter you were apologizing for rambling about “the jews” you knew as well. I agree, to stop repetitive behavior, engagement should be cut off. I should have acted with the warning signs in mind. 

      2. Ridged moral code that excludes others

        Lol, wut? “Rigid” morals? Or do you think my morals are sinusoidal?

        You mean I have a moral code i use to judge things right or wrong? Do you not?

  4. Does anyone else on here share my suspicion that Flim Flam is a Barbara Kirkmeyer plant? (You know, another Denise Spencer.)

      1. Tim-tam…

        I have been reading your back and forth with others on this forum. I don't really have a dog in this fight as I live in the western hinterlands. With your kind indulgence, I have a couple of observations.

        You really suck at this. If you have to ask people to refrain from calling you a troll, you are losing. Your inability to refrain from a truly offensive habit of displaying your conviction that your argument (and your bad self) is superior, is a handicap that eliminates your credibility.

        You might consider revisiting your predilection for wielding ageism as a bludgeon. It will increasingly become a problem for you.

        I am engaging here because, if you are a progressive, as you say, I respect that. But it seems to me, the product you are selling ( Caraveo is secretly anti-abortion) isn't borne out by the facts. And, your sledgehammer approach to argument isn't serving you well.

        Good luck convincing anyone. You are off to a very slow start. 

        You're welcome.

         

         

    1. And then banishment instead of anyone actually responding to the substance of my issue.

      Why don't you write something of substance first.

      1. Again.  Write something of substance.   Then you can get a response of substance.

        You have yet to do the former.   Why don't you prove you have more to offer than you have shown.

        1. By your logic, I never called you a "troll".

          I said "If it looks like a troll and acts like a troll…" referring to you.  I did not say "You are a troll".  

          Kind of like how you said when Caraveo said "I support a woman's right to choose" still means that she is anti-choice because she never said "I support abortion".  

          Yeah, I know.  You won't get it.   It's over your head.

    2. That's my suspicion as well Lauren. 

      Yeah, Kirkmeyer has nothing else to do. Kulmann I guess is doing door to door. 

      I don't get either of their campaign other than they have some money for mailings… 

    3. Denise Spencer, that’s the name I was trying to recall! It definitely sounds familiar. So this troll is working for Kirkmeyer? I figured someone was paying them. I hope not much. Oh well, gotta make a living somehow. 

  5. There is an easy test of whether you’re a troll, tom-tom.  You’ve filed dozens of posts, attacking everyone in sight, then claiming you somehow defeated them.

    And in all that time, not a single post has supported you.

    Your claims of victories come from you. 

    Supported by no one.

    Your eructations are seconded by none.

    Nobody.

    Not a single voice in your defense.

    Sounds like a troll to me, and a racist/sexist/ageist one at that.

    Tee hee.

    1. You know, troll, your ignorance is overpowering. As you flail first one way and then another desperately seeking validation, I am amused by your inability to escape your designation as an obnoxious creature that should be living under a bridge, challenging passersby with riddles.

      I believe your mission and perhaps your job description is to convince others of some point you want to make. As I told you from the outset of this ridiculous exchange, you have failed. Who have you convinced? No one, I think. Let’s hear from all those you have swayed to your point of view.

      Certitude is a dangerous attitude to carry with you. So is your “I’m a Jerk” card. Maybe you can see where a change of strategy might increase you level of success.

      Of course, I don’t give a rats’ ass what you do…or say. Your irrelevance is obvious. You have “loser” written all over you. 

      Ideologically, I suspect we may be aligned. But try to work on your predeliction for arrogance and name calling. Oh…one more thing…

      I was serious when I cautioned you about your habit of invoking ageism at every opportunity. It is a bad look and will cost you if you keep it up. Not here, of course, because no one here cares what you think. But if disrespecting older Americans is your fun spot, you may find it won’t pay off in the long run.

      You may, and likely will, respond with the childish snark you display as your “go to” move.It is OK. You are nothing to me but an anonymous, annoying, troll.  No one takes you seriously. You haven’t earned it.

      1. 1…what is that rubber and glue thing..? Tiresome and weak. Really?

        2…what does your loser status have to do with Donald Trump? Are you intimating some support  on my part for The Orange Pretender in your 2nd paragraph?

        Gracious me…I thought you read this blog. So far, incoherence seems to be your strong suit. You are, though in uncommon moments, entertaining.

      1. “OK, paranoid boomers……..”

        “(Paranoia, the) Destroyer,” by the Kinks, 1981. 

        Don’t think any “boomers” around here are the ones with the paranoia problem, eh TT? 

        1. TT: if you’re trying to insult me, it’s not working. Try harder.

          You can also consider changing your script or finding better writers for your material. 

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

133 readers online now

Newsletter

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