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
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
50%
50%
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
70%↑
30%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
May 21, 2008 03:27 PM UTC
55 Comments
Something seen all too rarely in politics – someone being true to their principles
Chuck Hagel Takes on McCain
What are the odds Hagel will attend the Convention… in Denver?
…Hagel has turned out to be a very good senator. He often takes his own position.
I am referring to him being an officer in ES&S voting machine company. IIRC, he was behind in the polls but won the election…..on “his” machines, mostly.
Who knows? I am certainly grateful for his moderate tone. Another too rare competent Republican.
WOuldn’t that blow people’s minds – a moderate Republican as Obama’s VP.
Yes, he voted against the war but he has a dismal record on social issues. Brush up before you start falsely labeling potential “candidates” please.
I want to scream when people like Hagel and McCain are labeled as moderates. They might seem moderate to the far right of the Republican party, but they are not moderate when considered against the general population and with the full spectrum of issues.
Just because an elected representative — D or R — works with the other side on common sense legislation does not mean that person should automatically be branded with a label that would give the appearance that person’s politics come from the middle.
People assume he’s moderate because he’s an outspoken war critic but his voting record is pure conservative on all domestic policy. You can look it up, as they say.
How could Obama or HRC run on a ticket with someone who strongly opposes them on pretty much all economic issues, on health care, taxes, you name it? Agreeing on the Iraq war by itself isn’t enough if the VP can’t support the top of the ticket on any of the other issues so important to Dems, moderates and Dem leaning indies. How would such a campaign work? My VP thinks I’m dead wrong most of the time? Some message.
McCain and Hagel are both self proclaimed conservatives, not moderates, and their voting records bear them out. Since the one area of agreement between Dems and Hagel is the war and many aspects of foreign policy, Hagel would be a good unity choice for Secretary of Defense but not a viable running mate.
If Hagel can support the ticket – and it sounds as if he’s at least toying with it – then he’s a strong symbolic gesture to the other side. He may disagree with the President – and most VPs have at least some disagreements with their boss – but so long as he’s willing to promote his running mate, it’s not a non-starter.
The VP doesn’t have any power beyond that which the President gives him, and sitting in the Senate watching the Dems pass bills. Most VPs are given stuff to do, and I’m sure Obama could find a few things Hagel would be good at accomplishing. So in that respect he’s not harmful to the party or the Presidency, either.
Note, I’m playing Devil’s Advocate here. I’m not personally in favor of a Hagel VP run – I think there are a number of Democrats who are better fits for the job.
Otherwise, I’d have to ask you to put down the crack pipe and get a clue.
Putting a conservative Republican on the Democratic ticket–one heartbeat away from the presidency–doesn’t appear to be a good idea…not for Democrats, anyway.
when a Karry-McCain ticket got the same plaudits. Bad idea then (though no one could have predicted how bad), bad idea now.
I think what you just said will be the final nail in the coffin. There are too many people out there who think Obama’s a prime target for assassination already. Putting Hagel in the VP slot, however honest his intentions and however honorable his supporters, would open any assassination or assassination attempt up to untold levels of conspiracy theory, if not actual conspiracy.
when Lincoln dumped his vice president, Hannibal Hamlin, to put a “war Democrat” on the ticket, Andrew Johnson. It probably did help re-elect Abe, though Sherman’s capture of Atlanta did a lot more. But after Lincoln’s death, the result was catastrophic. Johnson was an apologist for slavery and did everything he could to shore up the power of the southern oligarchy against reconstruction. An object lesson here. LBJ, if anything, was to the left of JFK and certainly part of the Democratic mainstream. Andrew Johnson as president was against everytyhing Lincoln stood for, other than preservation of the Union itself.
So much for Hagel.
Gee Bob, I knew you were old, but I didn’t think you were that old. 🙂
Bob, your memory stretches back further than mine.
For all the talk about either ticket including a centrist governor, supposedly to add executive weight to the senators’ policy strengths, when was the last time a governor was nominated for vice president?
(Hint: He was elected but also gained another, less noble, distinction)
(And this one comes with an asterisk)
you are referring to that great moderate Republican (as he was then billed) the honorable Spiro T. Agnew of Maryland!
Depending on how you define nominated, I could also cite Nelson Rockefeller, who filled out the vice presidency after Ford took over following Agnew’s resignation and Nixon’s resignation. You need lots of asterisks to keep up with the Nixon years, RedGreen!
In addition to being the most recent governor nominated by his party for vice president, Agnew’s other distinction: He was the first vice president to resign because of criminal charges. When Agnew was governor of Maryland, he solicited more than $29,000 in bribes from construction interests to approve projects. (The only other vice president to resign was John Calhoun, who stepped down to take a seat in the Senate, back when senators were appointed by state legislatures rather than elected by voters.)
Asterisk: Rockefeller was the other recent governor to be vice president, although the long-serving New York governor was out of office when Gerald Ford picked him to be his vice president. He asked Ford to pass him by when selecting his 1976 running mate, so Ford went with Kansas Sen. Bob Dole (who later secured the GOP nomination for president two decades later).
* And you’re right, I misstated the question because both were “nominated,” Agnew by the Republican party at its 1968 and 1972 conventions; Rockefeller by Ford to the Senate, who begrudgingly confirmed the liberal Republican. (Goldwater, who defeated Rockefeller for the 1964 GOP nomination, voted against his old foe.)
Back before vice presidents had secret bunkers, set national energy policy or declared themselves a fourth branch of government, Nixon tasked Agnew with attacking the press and the hippies.
Here’s a great quote from Agnew’s heyday:
nattering nabobs of negatism.
He said this stuff, but I don’t think he wrote these lines. They came from a speechwriter’s pen. Just not sure which
one(s)
wrote most of the alliterative phrases.
Safire once wrote about which ones were buchanan’s and which were safire’s, but I forget the allocation. I remember covering Agnew on a trip to Colorado to address the federation of republican women (national, if I recall correctly) It was long after the storm broke and he gave a fiery speech attacking the justice department for leaking stuff on him and swearing he’d never resign. He resigned a few days later, meaning he had been working on the plea bargain even as he lied like a trooper to the Republican women.
Odious toad, Agnew.
and he took credit for nattering nabobs of negatism.
Boy, he really spanks Boosh on his recent charges of appeasement with real history lessons.
http://www.humanevents.com/art…
Like the proverbial broken clock, sometimes he is correct.
an effete corp of impudent snobs
and I’ll pummel you with my purse!
No pusillanimous pussyfooting about it.
That is also why Lieberman will never be McCain running mate. It presents the mirror-image problem.
SUSA put up polls of McCain/xxx vs. Obama/xxx pairings for Pennsylvania and New Mexico yesterday. Hagel fares better than Sibelius, but worse than Edwards.
He just opposes the war.
I once saw his brother (who served with him in viet nam) who is a liberal law professor (in Ohio?) talk about how different their domestic/social world views were, but how similar their views on the use of military force were.
I do think that SecDef is a possibility (Kerry, Webb (if he isn’t vp), and outside shot Bob Gates are also high probability choices)
It appears the vast majority of men who actually saw combat know what price glory….and don’t want anyone to have to pay it…
McCain is unique….he flew over war…..and then he was POW….a special circumstance….
I have met a number of Vietnam Vets over the years who wanted to fight the war over even if they saw ground combat. They want to do the gambler’s thing and try to make up the loses of the past with another few hands at the table. Or something like that. Though you are right that it mostly seems to be Chickenhawks still supporting the war in congress.
But I think I read that McCain is the only viet nam vet in the senate (and maybe house)that supports the continued ocupation.
McCain, because of his personal courage in refusing repatriation, never saw how war was tearing the country apart. History has shown the strategic value of vietnam wasn’t worth the many bills that we are still paying for.
He won in 96 by like 15%. That’s a pretty big margin to “steal”…especially in Neb…so to speak.
Regardless, he has been a solid Sen. He and Ben Nelson have been quite the duo.
Just because he was behind in the polls at one point and then won doesn’t equate to stealing an election. He spent a ton of money, ran a good campaign, and won in a red state.
Debbie Stabenow was behind in the polls in 2000 by 15 points and ended up winning. By her logic, she stole the election.
Not hers. Sorry
Wasn’t Barack Obama behind in the polls at one point and is now the clear front-runner for the dem nomination?
Did he steal it as well?
…blogs (like TalkLeft), that is exactly what he did.
And darn it, they’re going to vote for McSame just to teach him a lesson.
“You sexist people stole my coronation…”
Hillary Clinton – May, 2008
Is an excellent Senator and an excellent man. I wish he would’ve thrown his hat in the ring. Very difficult to get the best of the best to make the sacrifice required to run.
Do you know where your State Convention Results are?
CD’s 3, 4, and 5 were released yesterday. The State ballots are still being counted
sorry – couldn’t resist 🙂
That was pretty funny
Not a word here on the new Radio Ads from Focus? I thought this was the place where COLORADO Politics were discussed?
Hum I guess not. All Obama All The Time
Would have thought OQD would have something to say about it.
Post a link or a transcript or embed them or something. Everyone doesn’t always know everything that’s going on before discussing it here.
Does it say, “I’m Jesus Christ and I approve this ad” at the end?
Just when Schaffer was running out of enough head aches, he’s going to have to answer for this as well! Where does Schaffer stand on discrimination against a person of a certain sexual orientation?
Are they broadcasted anywhere or anytime other than on KOA during one of the bathroom breaks during Rush Limbaugh’s show?
I thought he did that open-mic, or is that another show I’m thinking of.
http://www.citizenlink.org/con…
I tried to imbed the acutual audio stream but that didn’t work very well. Here is the FOF page with the Audio imbedded.
I started a diary here:
http://coloradopols.com/showDi…
Have at it.
one of my dogs barked and ran out of the room.
The Westword had a story back in the ’90s about a transgendered employee working for Gale Norton, including the issue of how to deal with the restroom problem.
I can’t recall what exactly the solution was, but it sounded like everyone in the office was satisfied that individual privacy was respected while the particular employee was treated fairly and in a dignified manner.
If the Defender of Amendment Two could solve the problem in her office, so can the rest of the state’s government.