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%
November 05, 2013 05:27 PM UTC
26 Comments
And we wonder where those darn kids get their disrespect and crude behavior. Someone running for governor should behave with awareness that young people are watching and learning from his example.
As a no-hope endless candidate for offices he'll never hold,Tanc has realized he might as well enjoy the notoriety, since it's all the attention he'll be getting for the rest of his life.
Basically, he is beyond caring about anything but his own gratification.
I think you nailed it, Davie.
Yep. He's simply found a way to make a living shooting his vulgar mouth off. He has no real political ambitions at this point. As long as he's keeping his crazy, hateful rightie credentials burnished it's all good.
10+
Stay classy Tanc
What the fuck? Tanc is threatening the protesters? This is totally beyond the pale. It's hard to fathom.
How hard would it be for Tancredo to roust up a gang of thugs to do his bidding?
How far are we from a Banana Republic, really?
We get incrementally closer to that banana republic with every republican elected or hired.
The few seconds of tancredo captured on film are a real indicator of how he'd operate while back on the taxpayer's dole.
I don't know why anyone would be surprised at this. That kind of faux-badass tough talk makes the Righties swoon. I'm sure the resident GOP trolls will be in soon to thump their chests and profess their admiration for him (in a totally not gay way, of course).
I love very near what looks to be ground zero of the petition/anti-petition interplay as both frequent the same busy intersection. I have not observed any intimidation or harassment. I have observed that the anti-recall folks are usually smiling and that cannot be said for most of those holding pro-recall signs.
Seems to me Tancredo is the one guilty of harassment.
I I've very near what looks to be ground zero of the petition/anti-petition interplay as both frequent the same busy intersection. I have not observed any intimidation or harassment. I have observed that the anti-recall folks are usually smiling and that cannot be said for most of those holding pro-recall signs.
Seems to me Tancredo is the one guilty of harassment.
Sorry about the double post. I thought I was just editing.
Gosh, Jason.
As I pointed out, many posts ago, one of the advantages of right wing control of public airwaves, is the ability to "fire up" the base. There was no way that boyles or tancredo was going to "apologize." This video is a "gift" to the ability to fire up the base. That is what this is all about.
Surely you know that. I think it would be good if you would come out and talk about what boyles is evidently holding over your head…something about a contest years ago. Then, you could stop "scolding" and maybe you could be more effective.
The real issue is not Tancredo, the real issue is that boyles bullied tom mauser to apologize when the audio that you posted here documents that mauser was right about the "brown shirts" comment.
Thanks, Dwyer. I'm always looking for ways to be more effective.
@Jason,
I hope to hell you were not being scarcastic, because I was not. Boyles is reading your posts here as well as some of the comments made. That gives you a real forum to challenge him. Your reporting on the Tom Mauser bullying is important. I would like to see you on boyles the way he is now on the anti-petition people. I think that he is intimidating because of the incredible power of being able to control his stations's public airwaves for three hours a day. He is currently using the power against Hudak and her supporters.
Would i like to see a contest between a blog and a radical right talk show? Ya.
And just how do you think you're being "effective", dwyer?
dwyer,
You're right in that Boyles will just use this, or anything like it, as "shock jock" material to enliven his show. And in fact, that's just what he did.
However, I notice a different leadership style on the recall hudak website – they try to keep profanity and their extreme crazies leashed. They tolerate my posts on there, although they never, ever answer any factual questions. I suppose that they consider me a "troll", although I am polite, civil…just very pointed.
I think that this behavior by Tancredo makes the genuine conservatives uncomfortable. As it should.
I'd like you, dwyer, to stop lecturing people about what they should do to confront the right wing, and start leading, yourself, by example. "You and him fight" isn't credible in my book.
@MJ55,
You are absolutely right about "You and him fight" isn't credible in my book."
I agree. But, it is one step up from what happens on this blog and that is that everyone piles on the radical right wing and that's it. I don't post reams of how awful the right wing is and then presume that something has been accomplished. It hasn't and that is one point I have made, over and over again. Now I will give you my excuses for not being out with a sign.
There is no open forum within the democratic party. The times that I have spoken up or attempted to organize some kind of unified response…nothing has happened..I hit a stone wall and the response is most typlified by Blue Cat chronic predicatable attack everytime I suggest that maybe the dems are not on target, or maybe we should try something different. It gets old after a while.
I can piss people off blogging without risking friendship or "shunning."
Speaking of "getting old," I am. I rarely call talk radio, because time was when I was a constant caller and my voice and name are still recognized and I usually am screened out. I also have some physical limitations. My first political regislration campaign was in Boulder, for Kennedy, when I was a college student in 1960.
I do what I can, even tho, as you rightly point out, it isn't much.
You can email Boyles. You can write to the station, without risking "shunning" by lefties. You can organize a social media campaign to boycott Boyles' advertisers. (Someone should).
I do understand risk. I'm probably unemployable as a teacher, in spite of two years in a row of more-than-expected "test score gain" by my students, because I've been an outspoken union organizer, and spoke up about other "stupid stuff" as I saw it. As I said, I'm a domestic violence survivor. One has to be brave sometimes, even in small ways.
This is how i see a response to the ongoing "monkey war" that boyles is waging against the anti-petition people.
1) First of all, emailing boyles just gives me more contact points which I think helps his ratings. Depending on the content of the email, if it is outrageous and can be used as "shock" stuff, then it is counterproductive.
2) I don't believe in boycotts, for a variety of reasons.
I do think that response should be be factual. I am presuming that the audio of the "brown shirts" remark is accurate. Therefore, I think that anyone reading Jason's posts could call the boyles show, contact the station manager, and write advertisers and request that boyles apologize to Tom Mauser. I think it appropriate to contact advertisers and make this request.
There are other issues that deserve a response, but only from those in the "support Hudak campaign" can answer. These are:
1) The contact person for Democracy Defense Fund who was called by the boyles show and said she didn't know where the $25,000 came from and who was behind the door hangers, needs to call the show and explain why the Enviromental Action (?) or whatever is supporting the effort and what information was behind the door hangers. She might also mention that when boyles called her the first time, he did not immediately tell her that she was on the air. She might also want to comment on being called a "dupe" and a
"useful idiot." I think she does have an obligation to correct the record, because she did say that she did not know anything about the money or the door hangers.
2) How many, if any, of the "support Hudak" effort are paid?
3) Refute or explain what boyles is calling the intimindation tactics of the "support Hudak effort."
When talking to Mauser, boyles kept saying he was in favor of background checks, that is a good point to emphasis if anyone is going to call.
Now, if I gave the impression that I am passive because i am afraid of losing friends or being shunned, let me correct that. Losing friends or being shunned just makes one ineffective. If it was one way to accomplish a goal, then I would not hesitate. But, as this blog illustrates, one can very easily can bogged down in personal attacks and defending onself. I won't do that.
I am sorry that you were a victim of domestic violence. But, I don't understand why the union does not support you from retaliation for being an organizer.
Your comments, as always, are valued.
I didn't share that I was a victim of domestic violence to get you to feel sorry for me. It was decades ago, and it doesn't affect my life today at all. What I want you to know is that you don't have to live your life in fear.
The union thing is a complex story that I don't feel like sharing on here. Suffice it to say that the union did help fight my case, but I am not in a union now, as my job classification, substitute teachers, is not welcomed into the CEA in most districts. Shortsighted, IMHO, but true.
I'll probably research and post on some of the recall-related things you said you wanted to know, just because I like to do that. Other than that, I'll take your recommendations for action seriously when you tell me what you, yourself, are willing to do.
I live in a community of old people. Most of us have had tragedies, etc. in our long lives. The expression "I'm sorry that happened to you," is heard all too frequently.
It is to be polite, not patronizing. As for your advice about "not living in fear," I will take it under advisement.
It is time to review the situation with boyles' "monkey war." Two weeks ago or more, he was offering general support to the recall people and making a general attack on the tactics of the anti-recall folks. At that point, calling the show, supporting Hudak in a variety of ways made sense. But, this is where we are now:
– Tom Mauser was on the show and was bullied. Jason's video shows that Mauser was right, boyles was wrong. An apology is in order. Demanding that apology from the station seems to me to be the right thing to do. I think that it is still good to call the show, or try to, and explain why one is supporting Hudak without getting into a fight over tactics…hard to do.
boyles has escalated his attacks on the anti-petition drive by endless talk about "bullying tactics" and "front organization" etc. He has responded to Jason's pix on Colorado pols. Calling the show now is a two edged sword, and demands a more careful response, IMHO.
Anything else or "action" depends on what the Hudak campaign wants to do and most of it can only be done by them. Only Kathryn Wallace can correct the impression of "I know nothing" that she gave when she was called on the air by boyles. Only the anti-petition
folks who are actually on the corners can refute the accusations. Only the Hudak people can explain the reasoning behind the door hangers. The Hudak campaign may want to just leave the whole thing alone. I disagree with that decision, if such it is. But, it is their decision.
Right now, to use football terminology, there are "unanswered points." The Hudak team has to answer them, not us cheerleaders, so to speak.
Public figures have been on the boyles show….
Gessler was talking about the election, but boyles drew him in to a discussion of "tactics" Caldera is deep in the recall movement and comes, as we all know, from his successful involvement with the Morse recall. Tancredo, despite is North Denver crudeness, was a long time resident of Arvada. (I don't know if he still lives there.) He represented Arvada in the state legislature thirty years ago. He and his wife taught high school up in Arvada for years. This is his old stomping ground. So the public figures engaged on the boyles show are part of the overall recall effort. There is nothing comparable from the Hudak side.
You, mj55, and I say this "con respecto" are from Pueblo and its horribly failed effort to counter the Giron recall. Unless you have had contact with the Hudak people, I don't think you should be promoting controversal tactics…like a boycott of advertisers. I do think that your expertise with VAN might be helpful to them.
Jason is a media correspondent. His reporting about what is said on the various talk shows is helpful. Monitoring the boyles show and posting salient points is good, IMHO. But, I think, right now, options for the rest of us are more limited than they were two weeks ago.
Dwyer, you calling anyone else a mere "scold' is priceless.
Correction:
"Just gives boyle more contact points."
Thanks for bringing that up. That's another choice the people of VA made that will no doubt be ignored by the NRA who will continue to claim that they represent the will of the people. Just like Cuccinelli is spinning his loss as a win for his agenda because the people have made a statement (of their opposition to the agenda of the candidates they actually elected?).
I think I've finally figured out why the rightie fringe keeps claiming that they represent "the people" despite all election results to the contrary. They mean the "real" people and to them that doesn't include minorites, women, "libtards" or "urban" folk no matter how many of us there may be. They still see their particular kind of people as the majority of everyone who ought to count. Voter suppression is just their way of clearing out the people who unfortunately have the right to vote but shouldn't. They hate that the democratic process isn't restricted to the "right" people.
Wow. Don't know what happened. I was on another page, the one where Mama brought ut the fact that the NRA spent spent loads to defeat McAulliffe and couldn't maange it, hit a wrong key and when I got back to my comment box I apparently wasn't in Kansas any more. Will repost where I meant to.