President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump



CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta



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

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson



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

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd



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

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese



CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen



CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore



CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk



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

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans



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 04, 2007 04:00 PM UTC

Weekend Open Thread

  • by: Colorado Pols

Is the Tour de France over yet?


51 thoughts on “Weekend Open Thread

    1. gets a few seconds to make an impression on national television and what does he say?……

      “My task as president of the United States is primarily to do one thing – by the way, not to make sure everybody has health care or everybody’s child is educated – my task is to do one thing: to protect and defend this country … and that means to deter – and I want to underline deter – any kind of aggression, especially the type we are threatened with by al-Qaida, which is nuclear attack.” 

      I think Tipsy Tom would make a good Blackwater mercernary but he does not have the first clue of what it means to be President of the United States. And I’m sure there is a reason he hates education and health care.  Maybe he will share it with us in the next debate.

      1.   If he was too depressed to fight in Vietnam in the 60s, how qualified is he to be Commander in Chief today in the fight against al Queda?

        1. I have moved her about 1.5 years ago, and was surprised at how many of my neighbors support this guy. I guess that I should not be, considering how much he won by.

          The funny thing is that several shops in this area are making HEAVY use of illegals. The local long john silvers is staffed by more than 1/2 illegals, and yet, these folks do not care about that, and support an idiot who himself hired illegals. All in all, I am trying to decide who is worse, tancredo or those that voted for him?

          1.   Tank is simply reflecting the values of his supporters in hiring illegals while ranting against them and the threat they posed. 
              And here I (like former Wyoming Senator Alan Simpson) thought that the Democrats were the party of hypocrisy while the Republicans were simply the party of stupidity.

            1. The more that I see ppl sterotyping one of the major parties, the more that the other party shows up with the attributes. When I was growing up in the 60’s/70’s, I was taught that the republicans were conservatives who did not cause wars (in spite of ‘nam), believed in balanced budgets, fought corruption, believed in personal responsibility, but were the party to be involved in bribes and business corruption. Likewise, it was the dems who had new progressive ideas, was protecting our rights, and was willing to fight against horrible ideas, but was the one caught in the wrong bed. Now, I see that none of the positives are true and the negatives apply to both :).

      2. xenophobic demagogue: The defense of, and advancement of, his tribe is the ONE AND ONLY imperative. As much as I hate casual comparisons to Hitler and Nazism, in this case, it really does fit: His statement could well be part of a speach rallying the nation to the cause of “lebensraum.” Even actual tribal chieftains throughout history, in what most of us would consider less enlightened times and places, were generally more enlightened than this jerk.

        1. his own heritage is Italian, one of those southern European nationalities that was considered undesirable and not quite white enough not so many generations ago.  “Real” Americans were expressing the same concerns we’re hearing now from T.T. about their Northern European culture being diluted by swarthy Italians, Greeks and Eastern European Jews.  Hard core white supremacists may make nice to him now but ultimately he’s not really their type, just a pathetic wannabe.

    2. In Colorado, outside of CD 6, we tend to dismiss Tancredo as a clown…an earnest and sometimes funny clown and our clown, but still a clown. That is a big mistake.  He must be taken seriously and denounced.

      His remarks about “nuking” Mecca are outrageous.  He evidently is attempting to recreate the MAD strategy of the cold war…which worked because both parties understood each other….and lines of control were firmly established and rigidedly controlled…..that is not true with the Islamic terrorists….
      Tancredo is stupid, reckless and without any moral compass.

      To suggest the annihilation of hundreds of thousands or even millions of innocent people is morally reprehensible. It is not okay to laugh or ridicule hinm any longer.  Decent people should turn their backs when he enters a room. 

      Republicans should repudiate him and his remarks.  God knows how the rest of the world is taking his comments. God knows what that might mean for all those good people in the rest of the world who are working with the United States in any capacity…..what does that do to them in the eyes of their fellow countrymen.? I think of our soldiers.  I think of NGO people.  I think of Peace Corps Volunteers.  And, all the people in the world who work with them…..

      1. …that the other R candidates did a great job of not only distancing themselves, but repudiating TT’s insanity.

        We here in CO and Pols are sort of used to his stupidity, but nationally, his antics are not so well known.  For instance, on Mike Malloy, “Who IS this Tom Tancredo?”

  1. State Dept. to Tancredo and others: Stop the threats

    Tough-talk from presidential candidates — particularly Republican Rep. Tom Tancredo’s statement that the U.S. should threaten to bomb Islam’s holiest sites if there is another terrorist attack on the USA — has spurred the State Department to urge the contenders to tone down their rhetoric, the Associated Press writes.

    …Today, State Department spokesman Tom Casey took particular exception to Tancredo’s remarks, the AP writes:

    “It is absolutely outrageous and reprehensible for anyone to suggest attacks on holy sites, whether they are Muslim, Christian, Jewish or those of any other religion,” a clearly agitated Casey told reporters, shaking his head in disgust.

    1. CD 6, full of apparently nice, better educated than average people keep re-electing him.  I’d like to know how collective punishment against all Muslims and incinerating innocent families in these cities would be any different than when the Nazis stood entire villages full of men and boys against a wall and slaughtered them in retaliation for suspected acts of resistance on the part of one or two people. Oh yeah, it would be  on a millions of times larger scale, kind of like the holocaust, also brought to us by those same Nazis.  Come on, CD 6, stop making us a national very bad joke.

      1. I fervently wish that I could comply with your request. However, I am at the mercy of democracy. And, in this country, that is often a very embarrassing place to be.

      2. CD 6 has the lowest Hispanic population of all Colorado CDs (I recollect about 6%), so the folks Tancredo rails against and who would vote against him don’t live in his district.  There’s probably nearly no Muslims in his district, and probably very few CD6 residents who have kids and spouses actually fighting in Iraq or Afghanistan.

        A large percentage of folks in CD 6 who registered to vote don’t bother to vote.  Here’s the voter turnout of registered voters by county in CD 6.

        Arapahoe  67%
        Douglas 58%
        Elbert 74%
        Jefferson 72%
        Park 34%
        TOTAL 64%

        1. I’m a CD 6er too.  But is there no limit to how whacko a candidate here can be as long as there is an R after the nut job’s name?  Just venting.

          1. None whatsoever……I suspect that Duke Cunningham would win if his name appeared on the C.D. 6 ballot w/ an “R” after it.  Or even Doug Lamborn…..

        2. Where did those numbers come from? Was that 2006? I don’t remember the numbers myself, but in 2004 Douglas had over 94% turnout.

          How do I know? I was the Democrat running against Ted (Hot Air) Harvey in HD43. Sadly, TH now seems to believe that he has been anointed by God to succeed Tommy T in 2008

          It’s a mystery to me why these whack-jobs continue to get elected down here. When I talk to somebody about the issues, 75% of them disagree with most of what TT and TH preach. For example, HD43 went for Referendum C by a margin of 54% to 46% in 2005, even though TH was a vocal opponent. In 2004, voters in Highlands Ranch approved issues 4A and 4B, as well as Amendments 35 and 37, which TH opposed. Yet TH, continues to be re-elected by large margins. On top of that, TH has one of the worst attendance records in the Colorado legislature.

          Go figure.

          1. …..maybe a lot of Douglas County voters got tired of waiting, figured that “Both Ways” wasn’t worth spending three hours in line for, and figured that Tancredo and the local right wingers were gonna win anyway.
              On top of that, IIRC Ritter got about 45% in Douglas County… extraordinary result in what is probably the second most Republican large county in the state.  (El Paso, obviously, being Numero Uno.)
              Most of the no-shows on Election Day had to have been disappointed Republicans.

          2.   BTW, did you see this week’s Westword Kenny B cartoon about security at the state Capitol.  Check it out. 
              Hot Air Harvey makes a cameo appearance going through a body scanner!

          3. Here’s the link to the document …


            Page 96 has the CD 6 turn out by county.

            The 58% figure is the percentage of persons registered to vote who actually cast a vote.  If we used the total number of potential voters (which would include the number of folks who did not bother to register), the percentage would be even more discouraging.

            People bitch about their elected officials, but when they actually have to do something, like cast a ballot or attend a party meeting and express an opinion, then they are too busy, not interested, the lines are too long, etc.  That’s how we end up with piss poor leaders in both parties.

  2. I know one of these were floating around a couple weeks ago, but I found this one…

    Here’s my results for which candidates I most agree with:

    Candidate Total Score
    Mike Huckabee 90.99 %
    Duncan Hunter 88.37 %
    Fred Thompson 87.21 %
    Mitt Romney 85.47 %
    John McCain 83.72 %
    Tom Tancredo 80.23 %
    Rudy Guiliani 73.84 %
    Sam Brownback 72.09 %
    Ron Paul 65.41 %
    Joe Biden 42.44 %
    Chris Dodd 36.63 %
    Bill Richardson 33.72 %
    Hillary Clinton 29.07 %
    Barack Obama 27.62 %
    John Edwards 25.58 %
    Dennis Kucinich 10.47 %

    I was kind of surprised to see Duncan Hunter so high on the list, but I wasn’t surprised to see how the Dems shook out.

    And Political Party:
    Candidate Total Score
    Republican Party 87.79 %
    Democratic Party 19.77 %

    So now I can say exactly how much I agree with the Republican party!  Hope y’all have fun with the site!

    1.   I took it, and at least one of my matches surprised and disturbed me.

      Kucinich  87.35%
      Edwards  80.00
      Dodd  80.00
      H.R.C.  79.41
      Richardson  75.88
      Obama  75.00
      Biden  74.41
      Giuliani  47.65  (you can see why he is my favorite
      BROWNBACK  42.94  (OMG)
      McCain  40.88
      Romney  32.35
      Huckabee  32.06
      Paul  30.29
      Tancredo  24.71  (no surprise on this one!)
      Thompson  23.24  (this was something of a surprise)
      Hunter  23.24

        It was a fun test to take and I surprised myself with my answers to at least two questions.  But I’ll never understand how Brownback ended up as my second closest Republican match.

      1. I had Kucinich at the top too.  I think those questions are a bit “one or the other”.  Thus, I find myself in line with a left-wing tree-hugger. 

        When I am clearly a moderate tree-hugger.

    2. which question(s) caused John McCain to end up #2 on my list. I would’ve expected Rudy up there, but not McCain.

      Barack Obama 67.72 %
      John McCain 64.56 %
      Hillary Clinton 63.29 %
      John Edwards 62.66 %
      Joe Biden 62.03 %
      Bill Richardson 61.39 %
      Chris Dodd 61.39 %
      Dennis Kucinich 60.76 %
      Rudy Guiliani 60.76 %
      Sam Brownback 58.86 %
      Mitt Romney 54.43 %
      Mike Huckabee 52.53 %
      Fred Thompson 51.90 %
      Ron Paul 49.37 %
      Duncan Hunter 43.04 %
      Tom Tancredo 39.24 %

      Democratic Party 58.23 %
      Republican Party 43.67 %

      It’s true, I am a left of center moderate.

    3. Note: I did not take the quiz because you have to register.

      The problem with these things is they don’t ask some of the most critical questions:

      1) Will they approach problems with an open mind?

      2) Will they encourage differing points of view to reach the optimal solution?

      3) Will they take the politically difficult route when necessary?

      4) Will they not over-reach?

      While Reagan and Bush arguably had similiar politics they would rate very different on the above questions. That is what made Reagan is good (not great) president, even though I disagreed with a lot of his politics. And it is what makes G.W. Bush a horrible president.

      And it’s for those questions above that I would find both Kucinich and Brownback a horrible candidate.

      1.   But I appreciate your point.  All of the positions which a politician takes are meaningless if he or she will simply bargain those positions away or if they flip flop on positions.
          Which made me wonder which of Mitt Romney’s positions they went with:  his historical positions taken over most of his adult life, or his more recent positions of convenience taken to appeal to the right wing base of the GOP….

      2. I, personally, prefer candidates who start with universal (or near-universal) values and goals (e.g., violence bad, peace good; poverty bad, prosperity good; injustice bad, fairness good; etc.), combined with an awareness of and some insight into the systemic nature of social institutions, and says “here are some of the best and most promising ideas about how to navigate those social systems in order to realize those values and goals,” even naming ideologically contradictory ideas at times (e.g., “One idea for improving the quality of public education is a voucher system, in order to create a market in which schools which attract clients thrive and those which don’t die. Another idea involves investing in whole-community approaches to education, in which kids do not have school choice, but in which there is an investment in community-school integration, so that the community is more involved in the school and the school is more involved in the community. I believe that communities and districts should be allowed to experiment with these different approaches.”). We adhere to a cultural delusion that strong opinions strongly expressed are a sign of strength and conviction, and that qualifying one’s opinions are an indication of weakness. I believe just the opposite. Wisdom, and wise action, begin with a recognition of not yet knowing the answers.

        1. I am more concerned with process and how we get some place.  For me, a candidate has to have a commitment to uphold the Constitution of the United States before all other gods…..

          I find your discussion about the role of community in education thoughtful.
          The parochial school system which the catholic church ran…had elementary schools parish based and so you had a seamless line between school and the faith community….worked well……except for those poor kids who were abused and had NO place to go….the point being that when a child lives in a situation  where school and community (and family) combine,  the danger is that there is no independent institutions, no difference of opinion, no diversity….no safe haven outside the “school/community”…..

          You would have to define community…..what is its legal definition, it legal boundaries…what would be the rights of parents vis a ve a “community”…
          I speak as a survivor of some nasty infighting on so-called school councils….
          community can be a trojan horse…..

          1. Who should have ultimate responsibility for the health and welfare of children, their parents or the state? Pick one, and I’ll tell you why it’s a disastrous choice. Pick any balance, and I’ll tell you why it’s the wrong balance. And yet, such or choice, or such a balance, is necessary.

            Small, tight communities are wonderful environments for raising children, except for their tyrannical aspects, and the hit-and-miss luck-of-the-draw unfairness of it. Their absence is wonderful for sparing kids (and adults) from those defects, but terrible in many other ways (e.g., increased anonymity = less informal social control = increased rates of predatory behavior). There is no perfect solution.

            I agree that process is paramount, and that the constitution is our surprisingly admirable blue-print for process, but I am reluctant to contribute to its sacred status. The final voice should be collective reason, in whose service the constitution is a mere tool. The time may (and hopefully will) come when we must negotiate with other sovereign entities to form more extensive federations, and to declare that it must adopt our constitution, verbatum, would make such an eventuality even more remote than it already is.

      3. In today’s world where sound-bites and info-tainment passed as news, I can’t honestly tell what a candidate stands for or what their character is or is not.

        I’ve tried to make an effort to actually meet the candidates, buy ’em a beer if I can, and talk with them a couple times face-to-face.  That’s why involvement in party politics (whether D or R) is important in my view.

        With Presidential candidates, it’s true that none of them will likely be shaking hands with crazies from Colorado, but more often than not, if you scratch the party surface you’ll find somebody who works for your candidate.  Who a candidate hires often says as much about a candidate’s integrity as anything reported in the press.

        I think the following are important:

        1.  Personal integrity, moral grounding  (if you don’t have this, you should not be in public office)

        2.  Commitment to individual liberties and individual responsibilities (i.e., will I be treated as an adult or a ward of the state to be protected from myself?)

        3.  Belief in free markets, and free enterprise (does this person believe in capitalism or does s/he believe that government should be the primary economic driver/provider)

        4.  Belief in limited government, and a government committed to fiscal responsibility  (the individual ought to be able to clearly articulate what is and is not a proper role of government)

        5.  Belief in the law and our institutions (i.e., does this individual believe that our laws/constitution work or does s/he disrespect our instititions)

  3. Dennis Kucinich 90.05 %
    John Edwards 80.58 %
    Bill Richardson 77.67 %
    Barack Obama 77.43 %
    Hillary Clinton 77.18 %
    Chris Dodd 72.82 %
    Joe Biden 70.15 %
    Rudy Guiliani 43.69 %
    Sam Brownback 42.72 %
    John McCain 38.59 %
    Ron Paul 35.19 %
    Mitt Romney 27.67 %
    Mike Huckabee 27.43 %
    Fred Thompson 20.15 %
    Tom Tancredo 19.90 %
    Duncan Hunter 17.72 %

    1. just thinking about the answers. Very hard quiz, with very easy answers to make a guy feel smart! You start off the thread with humor and then you try to make us think…c’mon David it is the weekend!

  4.   First, let me preface this by saying that I did not watch the live GOP debate on ABC w/ Stephanopolous this morning.  (Don’t laugh…..I was actually on my way to church.)  But I did read the excepts on line.
      I am correct in understanding that when asked what was each candidate’s biggest mistake in life, Romney said that his mistake was telling people he was pro-choice when in fact he was very much against abortion?
      This is yet another shift in position by the flexible one.  Originally, he was pro-choice and proud of it.  Then there’s the story that he was pro-choice but had an epiphany that abortion was wrong sometime after he was elected governor but before he announced for president.
      And now he is saying that was against it all along but that he lied when he said he was pro-choice in 1994 and in 2002?

  5. What happened to the rumor-mill diary attacking Fitz-Gerald? I read it this morning and posted what I thought; being the post was completely unsubstantied and that it only makes Polis look unprofessional, even if an “over-zealous volunteer” (or paid campaigner) of his posted it annonymously.

    While many people are going nuts already with the Presidential there is no reason for primaries to get dirty this early (if at during a democratic primary); unless of course it’s in CD-5 where they can just let the crap flow.

    The Polis camp. has a long way to go to show the “integrity” that Jared likes to “talk” about. Do something different Jared, don’t just talk about it, exemplify it. 

    1. And you probably saw my post in that same thread. But I am not ready to assign blame to Jared, or an unknown staffer, at this point. If it were the two of them than yeah, but it maybe one of shafroth’s people or a college republican looking to cast aspersions on JFG.

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

73 readers online now


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