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
March 25, 2024 03:05 PM UTC

Boebert Ripped To Shreds For Same Old False Credit Taking

  • 4 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

It was a recurring theme during carpetbagging calamity Rep. Lauren Boebert’s term representing Colorado’s Third Congressional District that, after voting against legislation containing line items beneficial to her district, Boebert would take credit for these benefits with (at least at first) no attempt made to bridge the factual gap between her votes and press releases. Over time, Boebert developed with some air cover from House Republican leadership an alibi in which he had advocated in some internal way for these appropriations before voting against them. After Republicans retook narrow control of the U.S. House last year, Boebert suddenly found a moral path forward to support “earmarks” again–but not to actually vote yes on the bills containing them, otherwise known as the thing that actually counts.

Last week, and although Boebert has slipped in our order of coverage priority we didn’t want it to go unmentioned, Boebert tried once again to take credit for spending she voted against, and got immediately smacked down for it from the White House on down in full view of her new CO-04 would-be constituents:

The Democratic National Committee’s Stephanie Justice tore Boebert a metaphorical new one:

“Lauren Boebert has tried to take credit for the achievements President Biden and Democrats have delivered for Coloradans so many times you might wonder why she keeps voting against the bills since she supports the president’s agenda so much. But whether it’s Boebert or Donald Trump, MAGA Republicans refuse to put their extreme politics aside to actually fight for the working families President Biden and Democrats do every day. No matter how many times Boebert attempts to lie to her constituents, President Biden and Democrats are the only ones delivering real results for Colorado families and the American people.”

9NEWS’ Kyle Clark explains, as best he can since there’s really no explanation that makes sense:

 

Having decided that “earmarks” dispensed by fellow Republicans were not sinful, Boebert actually made the spending requests she once refused to partake in, only to vote against the bill that contained them. But instead of that small distinction making things better for Boebert, the blowback against this latest attempt to claim credit for programs she voted against is even more fierce than before.

One of the metrics commonly used on social media to gauge the popularity of one’s opinion is the ratio between “likes” and replies to a post, more replies indicating greater disagreement with the expressed opinion. And although Boebert routinely enjoys a thick padding of friendly interaction from her legions of social media followers, that wasn’t the case this time:

That is what losing a flamewar looks like. The UK Independent’s Eric Garcia reported today on the closest Boebert has formulated to an excuse:

“Sure did, I fought to get it in there, did I not,” she said. “If I wasn’t working on it, then it wouldn’t have been in there.” [Pols emphasis]

Unfortunately for Boebert, that’s simply not true. In Boebert’s own press release, you can see that most of the projects Boebert took credit for were also sponsored by both of Colorado’s Democratic U.S. Senators.

Although the appropriations that Boebert is taking credit for are benefiting her old congressional district, the lesson of Boebert taking credit for projects she votes against shouldn’t be lost on CO-04 voters, for whom Boebert’s ability to effectively represent their interests as an “incumbent” really is their only legitimate attraction. Boebert’s claim to have “influenced” the legislation she voted against was novel and audacious enough that it set critics back in speechlessness before her hypocritical re-embrace of “earmarks,” but this trick was only ever going to work once–twice at most with friendly press giving her the benefit of the doubt.

At this point, we honestly don’t know why Boebert bothers because the voters she needs to swing do not buy it, and her base voters don’t care enough to require the subterfuge. But it’s an insult to the intelligence we’ll be glad to see retired with Boebert.

Comments

4 thoughts on “Boebert Ripped To Shreds For Same Old False Credit Taking

  1. I suspect Boebert does not know it, but she has been played for sucker by the Republican leadership in the House. She has Trump’s and Speaker Johnson’s endorsements for her 4th CD campaign, but with the very slim Republican majority in the House, the only thing that counts at the RNC, NRCC and House leadership is keeping the majority. With that sole goal in mind, the powers that be knew in all likelihood Boebert was going to lose the 3rd CD race to Frisch which could jeopardize their majority. Their only hope of winning that seat was to convince Boebert either to retire or run in a different district. When Buck announced his retirement the wheels started turning and they persuaded her to switch districts which improved the Republican prospects in the 3rd CD. House leadership, the RNC and the NRCC could not care less who wins the 4th CD Republican primary because with a plus 27 district, they know victory in November in the 4th CD is assured. From the perspective of the national committees and the House leadership, the main goal in Colorado was to remove Boebert as the Republican candidate in the 3rd CD. She would be far better off fighting it out in the 3rd district, but she thought she was taking the easy way out moving to the 4th CD. Her political demise is at hand. 

    1. She's going to end up winning the primary in the 4th: Most of us don't want to believe it, we hope otherwise, but she has Trump's endorsement and for the dittoheads who turn out to vote in primaries in districts like CO-4, Trump's word is the only thing that matters. It's not even going to be close.

      1. I think it will depend on how crowded the ballot is. The committee's decision on a special election nominee may prompt others to bail on the primary leaving just BoBo and the "nominee " (likely Sen Sonnenberg) which I think may doom her. If there is still 4 or 5 candidates on ballot, I think you nay be right 

  2. Here's a test…. who are the water commissioners, county commissioners, and city officials thanking for working hard to get the needed money? 

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

38 readers online now

Newsletter

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