President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Kamala Harris
(R) Donald Trump
80%↑
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) V. Archuleta
98%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Marshall Dawson
95%
5%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd
(D) Adam Frisch
52%↑
48%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(D) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank
(D) River Gassen
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) John Fabbricatore
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen
(R) Sergei Matveyuk
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
60%
40%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
July 26, 2007 03:25 PM UTC
18 Comments
is really embarrassing.
“I will never ever” have a dream where little hispanic boys and hispanic girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.
it takes a lot for Tancredo to embarrass himself
He’s keeping illegal immigration out front, much to the discomfort of the other GOP candidates and Dems.
I never knew that terrorism and speaking multiple languages were on the same level. Thanks Tank…youre an inspiration to us all… 😛
Some people can deal with only one subject, or sub subject at a time I guess.
Terrorism poses a far weaker risk to the health, safety, and well-being of Americans than a long list of other more systemically integral problems, such as education and health care. No calculation of the economic and human costs of terrorism in the United States, no matter how inflated, can match any calculation of the costs of our inadequate systems of public education and health care, no matter how deflated. The difference is that terrorism engages the public imagination more forcefully through the sudden, dramatic nature of the harm it causes, not by the actual quantity of the harm it causes. That’s an error in perception which we would do well to transcend. (The type of terrorism which merits not only as much, but actually more attention than we currently give it is nuclear/biological/chemical terrorism. The costs of a successful attack using such weapons would be astronomical. But we need to be precise about what we are talking about in that case. 9/11 was a not an event that would fall into the same category).
“Illegal” (i.e., liberal) immigration involves a complex balance sheet of pros and cons. The illegality itself is a nominal problem that can be legislated into non-existance: We all know that the real issue is the debate over how much and what distribution of immigration to permit. The de facto open immigration policy embraced by the current status quo, in terms of our own immediate self-interest, creates some problems and solves others. The demographic problem it solves may be the most pressing systemic problem facing America today, one whose eventual catastrophic consequences are well known and carefully disregarded by politicians who can score easier points by focusing on the boogie-men toward which we direct all of our inchoate fears.
By no reasonable analysis are these two issues “top priorities.” That’s just blathering non-sense, the kind of blathering non-sense that the right-wing employs so often and so effectively (inciting humans’ baser instincts has always been an easy task). It’s just a lynch-mob mentality writ large, not a well reasoned analysis of the relative severity of the social challenges we face.
what’s new? Absolutely nada, from the looks of it.
CD6 keeps re-electing him. Are we that backward or just that written off by the Dem party? It’s people like Tancredo who make those of us with legitimate concerns about illegal immigration sick. The thought of being even partially, one tiny bit, on the same side of any aspect of the debate as this hate-mongering, fear-mongering hypocritical bigot is pretty repulsive.
because the numbers of registered Republicans are overwhelmingly on his side.
I do know what you mean–his rhetoric, literally, nauseates me. I’d like to have a real conversation about illegal immigration and what we can do to come together and find some common ground and pass a bill that works for a majority of us, but with people like Tancredo banging the drum, that conversation is doomed before it starts.
Tancredo has led the country to the point where a majority want to solve the illegal immigration problems created by Reagan, Bush, Cinton and Bush, who haven’t enforced our border security laws or labor laws.
That really ticks off the advocates of illegal immigration who have no interest in the rule of law and don’t care that illegals depress wages for our poorer workers, when they can get jobs.
Not all people who think immigration is a problem a racists.
However, Tancredo is a racist.
Here’s the percentage of Hispanic residents by Congressional District in Colorado (from the 2000 Census, so the 2006 figures differ, but I’m too lazy to look them up)
CD1 30%
CD2 14%
CD3 21%
CD4 17%
CD5 11%
CD6 6%
CD7 20%
The anti-Hispanic message in Tancredo’s works because his district has the smallest percentage of Hispanic voters, but in the process, he trashes all other Republican candidates by making the issue a Republican issue.
In my view, the anti-Hispanic message inherent in the illegal immigration wedge issue may explain much of why Republicans lost in CD1 (DeGette), CD3 (Salazar), and CD7 (Permutter), and why Musgrave barely squeeked by in CD4. It may also explain why Beauprez lost (the state is 20% Hispanic).
but they also lose CD1 by failing to even place a candidate’s name on the general election ballot!
Brownback, who is a true conservative, is being criticized for pointing out the obvious: that Mitt Romney is an opportunistic conservative.
Brownback supports open-borders and amnesty until he started running for President. He also has a questionable record on the Second Amendment (no getting an “A” rating with the NRA means absolutely nothing to me).
Brownback is another wolf in sheeps clothing when it comes to being a true conservative. He’s waffled just like Romney, except it’s just not as public.
And he’s a stiff.