View Full Version : Tom Tancredo
hurley842002
07-23-2010, 08:46
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/07/23/tom-tancredo-may-run-for-colorado-governor-as-third-party-candid/
Heard on the radio today Tom Tancredo gave Maes and Mcinnis an option to drop out of the race, or he's running as third party candidate. What do ya'll think?
OgenRwot
07-23-2010, 10:15
I think he's completely retarded. If he runs as a third party candidate he splits the vote and hands the election to Hickenlooper and Tom will get blamed. If McInnis or Maes don't drop after the primary (which they wont) and he doesn't follow through on his promise he's a liar and spineless. Either way he just commited political suicide. When even the most right wing nut job bloggers are saying that Tom is a fool for doing this (and they are) you know your career in politics is over. You even have Mike Brown who hates both Maes and McInnis on his radio show last night saying that Tom is stupid. Tancredo says he's "trying to save the party". How does running on another party's ticket save the Republican Party?
I've known Tom at arms length for a while and I like him and a lot of his views, but IMHO there is a reason why two presidential bids have gone down the drain. The only thing that puts him on the map is his stand on immigration, otherwise he's just a guy who spent a little time in Washington. In what I do for a living I get the opportunity to connect with a lot of politicians - I've had dinner a couple of times with Lickyourpooper - he's a super nice guy who is way left of me.
While I don't agree with portions of his stance or voting record (I'm pro-choice for instance) I have a ton of respect for the guy, calls it like he sees it and has the backbone to follow through.
http://www.ontheissues.org/Tom_Tancredo.htm
Zundfolge
07-23-2010, 10:31
If he runs as a third party candidate he splits the vote and hands the election to Hickenlooper and Tom will get blamed.
Because it will be HIS FAULT.
Well folks, we're about to live in East California with Gov Hick. [Bang]
I guess I should start job/house shopping in Utah or something. [Rant1]
Anyway I lost respect for Tom when he went crying to mama government looking for a cash handout because he got snookered by Madoff. I'm sorry but asking the tax payers to cover your losses to a con man is for liberal Democrats.
OgenRwot
07-23-2010, 10:39
Because it will be HIS FAULT.
That's what I was implying. A lot of folks talking about the issue are not looking long term. We need a Republican in office even if he's not your favorite. Do you want Hickenlooper or a guy you only agree with 75% of the time? We have the census this year, that means redistricting next year. If we have a liberal gov, senate and possibly house off Colfax we're going to have even more liberal control in the state house and from our Congressional delegation. We can't have them gerrymander the district lines.
Yeah, I know you have principals and so do I, but at the same time we have to be practical. You will never find a candidate that you agree with 100% of the time unless you're that candidate. Sometimes you have to take what you can get.
Zundfolge
07-23-2010, 11:11
I still contend that if Democrats are in control of Denver after this election that Colorado is done. Over. Doomed. Nuevo-California. Period.
So I agree that we need to put ANY Republican in the gov's office even if he doesn't meet my own ideological purity standards.
While I consider myself a tea-party supporter, I am concerned that the tea-partiers are suffering from the same myopia that the Libertarian Party has always suffered from. Certainly there are limits and you don't want an outright liberal Republican in office (frankly I think the country is better off with Obama over McCain since McCain would have done 90% of what Obama has done but without the hue and cry from the right) but if you don't win elections you don't get a say in how things are run.
Neither Maes nor McInnis are ideal Republicans as far as I'm concerned, but either would be better than Hickenlooper. I also don't buy this notion that Hickenlooper is unbeatable by either of them (people over state his popularity) But when Tommy comes along and has his little ego fit he is going to screw ALL conservatives over and ruin this state.
I love the Tea Party movement's ideals, but they can do more to split the party than anything else. We have to be very careful that we don't get a Tea Party candidate, because it's almost a guaranteed loss for republicans in that venue.
As for Tom, he needs to stay out of the race unless he can get the party nod, it will be giving the race to Hick.
Driftwood
07-23-2010, 13:07
So I agree that we need to put ANY Republican in the gov's office even if he doesn't meet my own ideological purity standards..
So how is Ah-nold working out for Kalifornia??
We bitch and whine about this farce of a 2 party system then when we see viable third parties and movements (TEA being one) we bitch and whine that we're fracturing the vote.
UHG... I detest both main stream parties so much that I'll fucking write in Bill and Opus again (yes I've done that) just out of fucking spite if Tom loses his nads and backs out.
Zundfolge
07-23-2010, 13:22
So how is Ah-nold working out for Kalifornia??
No worse than any Democrat would have.
Of course you cherry picked my post and conveniently skipped this part: Certainly there are limits and you don't want an outright liberal Republican in office (frankly I think the country is better off with Obama over McCain since McCain would have done 90% of what Obama has done but without the hue and cry from the right) but if you don't win elections you don't get a say in how things are run.
In the case of McInnis or Maes, neither of them is "too liberal" to be a decent Republican governor of Colorado.
Driftwood
07-23-2010, 13:41
Certainly there are limits and you don't want an outright liberal Republican in office
:rolleyes: Ahnold IS a freakin' liberal Repub! In every sense of the word!
OgenRwot
07-24-2010, 10:45
You gotta remember though, Arnold is a California Republican. Just like some people are pissed off at Scott Brown in MA. He's a Mass Republican which means he's much more liberal than you or I would like. But he is soooo much better than Kennedy. Same for Arnold, yeah he's pretty liberal and he's done some bad stuff but he has also done things that no Democrat would have ever done.
Multi party systems don't work well. Look at Europe.
You gotta remember though, Arnold is a California Republican. Just like some people are pissed off at Scott Brown in MA. He's a Mass Republican which means he's much more liberal than you or I would like. But he is soooo much better than Kennedy. Same for Arnold, yeah he's pretty liberal and he's done some bad stuff but he has also done things that no Democrat would have ever done.
Multi party systems don't work well. Look at Europe.
+1
I don't like politicians in general. They will lie, cheat, steal, whatever to get into office. Then once they do, they crap all over the people who put them there. We have been voting for bags of crap for a long time. Just picking the one that doesn't stink as bad. Our government is broken and needs some serious changes. Back to the way our founders intended it to be. And I think term limits for all branches of government needs to be imposed.
Troublco
07-25-2010, 11:08
Either way it's a committee and you won't make everyone happy at the same time, ever. I do agree that changes need to be made. I like the Term Limits idea, but it seems to me that politicians need to be limited from being politicians. Don't let them spend two terms as a congressman, two terms as a senator, two more as a governor, and so on. Being a politician was never supposed to be a lifelong career.
If I were re-writing the rules I think I would disallow anyone who has a net worth greater than 51% of the population, we have far too many millionaires in office right now, and once they gain office they have to freeze all their assets, just like the president has to.
Zundfolge
07-25-2010, 15:54
I used to be staunchly opposed to the idea of term limits ... if the people wanted politician X for 70 years than they deserve him.
However I've come to realize that term limits is a bad idea who's time has come.
Its not about "evil rich guys" or even about "too damn many lawyers", the problem is with entrenched interests. People get in, and build walls of power around themselves making it harder to get the bad ones out.
I say 2 terms in the Senate or 3 in the House (or one term in each) and you're done. Go home.
OgenRwot
07-26-2010, 10:28
Now Tancredo is saying that "the Tea Party and 9.12 groups are part of the 'establishment'" just because they wrote a letter pleading for him to not run. This guy has a bigger ego than BO. The only guy that thinks it's a good idea to run on a third party ticket is Tom. He's going to announce at noon he's in the race and we might as well kiss our asses goodbye. Introducing Governor Hickenlooper, we're fucked.
He's going to announce at noon he's in the race and we might as well kiss our asses goodbye. Introducing Governor Hickenlooper, we're fucked.
Ahhh, don't count on that just yet. First off, I don't think he'll pull THAT many conservatives away, second I think America in general is fed up with liberalism (as happens every time we get a liberal president) and that works FOR us. It's going to be a tough race no matter what, we just don't have a good pony in the race.
In modern history, democrats are unable to hold the office of the president for more than one term (Clinton is, of course, the exception) - the reason is the debt they get us into and their policies and high taxes. The country is very unhappy right now and I think that by itself is a good boost to our numbers this year.
No matter who runs against Hick, and it'll likely be McGinnis, I believe it's a 50/50 shot - there are no shoe-ins here. Just because McGinnis sucks doesn't mean that he can't pull down the vote - we really haven't seen HIS ads against Hick yet nor do we know what dirt he'll dig up.
OgenRwot
07-26-2010, 17:24
I thought we had a 50/50 shot when Tancredo wasn't running. I think this will be within 5 points, and now that Tom is in he will take at least 5% and if he does that McInnis is done.
I think Tom will grab 3-5% of the TOTAL vote, and I think many of them will be swing voters - not stealing from the republican ticket, but stealing from both. I think it will still be a close election.
Look at it this way, it won't be Ritter!
hurley842002
07-26-2010, 19:47
I think Tom will grab 3-5% of the TOTAL vote, and I think many of them will be swing voters.
I just hope all those swing voters I saw running out and buying firearms after the big O took over, will remember who will allow them to keep those firearms.
I just hope all those swing voters I saw running out and buying firearms after the big O took over, will remember who will allow them to keep those firearms.
I just hope all those swing voters I saw running out and buying firearms after the big O took over, will remember who will allow them to keep those firearms.
I hope so too. I actually hope they learned to use them, O may send us to civil war yet.
hurley842002
07-26-2010, 20:17
I hope so too. I actually hope they learned to use them, O may send us to civil war yet.
That makes two of us, because it was just plain scary hearing some of the questions they had, and watching them handle pistols. I know everyone has to start somewhere, but damn!
Either way, our only hope is that a good majority of the people are just plain fed up with the Dems at the state level. One would think the ridiculous taxes imposed by ole Bill, we be enough in and of itself. I really have to put it all on the back burner, I lose sleep over this crap, lol.
ChunkyMonkey
07-26-2010, 20:47
You guys realize hickenpooper is worse than Ritter right?
hurley842002
07-26-2010, 20:59
You guys realize hickenpooper is worse than Ritter right?
oooh yeah, and that's why I lose sleep, lol.
You guys realize hickenpooper is worse than Ritter right?
How so? We really haven't seen him really "govern" Denver, just run it like a business - and not that well either.
ChunkyMonkey
07-27-2010, 09:32
How so? We really haven't seen him really "govern" Denver, just run it like a business - and not that well either.
The fact that he runs the City based on his personal belief and plays favoritism are two major red flags for me.
My bone with him...
1. He is a staunch anti gun promoter. He is active in Mayors against guns.
2. He is heavily promoting 'Greenprint Denver' as part of Mayors climate protection group which is nothing more than advancing Kyoto protocol agreement on city level.
3. He is actively pushing 10 year homeless plan which is heavily corrupted and pushing the needy out of denver into the surrounding area.
4. Finally, his favoritism did go overboard by letting DNC delegations to purchase city owned gas at 30-40% off street value.
If you are a business owner located in Denver, you would know exactly what's going on. Obviously, all of his programs are paid for by taxing the businesses and just happen most of those are small businesses who are barely surviving in this economy.
And as far as the noble idea of eliminating homelessness? The real homeless are still homeless. My section 8 rentals are filled with city workers who makes decent money and gets GREAT benefits including getting approved for section 8 free rent I suppose.
OgenRwot
07-27-2010, 10:07
The fact that he runs the City based on his personal belief and plays favoritism are two major red flags for me.
My bone with him...
1. He is a staunch anti gun promoter. He is active in Mayors against guns.
2. He is heavily promoting 'Greenprint Denver' as part of Mayors climate protection group which is nothing more than advancing Kyoto protocol agreement on city level.
3. He is actively pushing 10 year homeless plan which is heavily corrupted and pushing the needy out of denver into the surrounding area.
4. Finally, his favoritism did go overboard by letting DNC delegations to purchase city owned gas at 30-40% off street value.
If you are a business owner located in Denver, you would know exactly what's going on. Obviously, all of his programs are paid for by taxing the businesses and just happen most of those are small businesses who are barely surviving in this economy.
And as far as the noble idea of eliminating homelessness? The real homeless are still homeless. My section 8 rentals are filled with city workers who makes decent money and gets GREAT benefits including getting approved for section 8 free rent I suppose.
Man that's some scary stuff. I don't know much about how Hick runs Denver because I used to stay the hell away from there. All I know is that if he's the Governor we're going to need to have the House and the Senate. House looks almost probable and the Senate is a maybe.
If you are a business owner located in Denver, you would know exactly what's going on. Obviously, all of his programs are paid for by taxing the businesses and just happen most of those are small businesses who are barely surviving in this economy.
I am a business owner, I have four of them here in Denver proper. I feel the heat of having Hick in office, but to say he's any worse than Ritter - well that is what I was debating - I don't want him in office but I think they both have issues. Ritter nearly bankrupted this state with his clean energy programs and now nearly all of them sit half finished because of lack of funds. And while you may think Hick is anti gun (something everyone seems to say about every opposing candidate), he has not - to my knowledge - done anything to support that belief as CCW licenses have gotten easier to get in Denver and he's not passed any crazy anti-gun law in Denver. Right now DEMS are becoming very pro-gun (reference recent news) as they see any efforts to do otherwise get defeated by the supreme court. The NRA is endorsing more and more democratic candidates as this trend continues and, lets face it, Colorado has been and will continue to be a very gun oriented state, it would take a lot of effort to change that and he would risk re-election.
So, all I'm saying is that Ritter sucks, Hick suck the same or slightly less and the only real thing we can hope for would be a win in the state congress.
OgenRwot
07-27-2010, 12:15
The NRA is endorsing more and more democratic candidates
This doesn't carry much weight considering their actions over the past few years. They made a sweetheart deal with Dems on the DISCLOSE Act probably in trade for endorsements. Not to derail this thread but the NRA is a joke. And this is coming from a Life Member.
hurley842002
07-27-2010, 13:04
Originally Posted by hurley842002 http://www.co-ar15.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.co-ar15.com/forums/showthread.php?p=224811#post224811)
If you are a business owner located in Denver, you would know exactly what's going on. Obviously, all of his programs are paid for by taxing the businesses and just happen most of those are small businesses who are barely surviving in this economy.
Why is my screename on this, I didn't post that. That would be MB888
bellavite1
07-27-2010, 13:21
No anti-gun laws in Denver??
You must be jocking!
How about the assault weapon ban still enforced in Denver Co (no magazines over 20 rnds), or denying the right to open carry?[Rant1]
No anti-gun laws in Denver??
You must be jocking!
How about the assault weapon ban still enforced in Denver Co (no magazines over 20 rnds), or denying the right to open carry?[Rant1]
STILL enforced is not the same to me as a new law. I agree with the rant, totally.
Originally Posted by hurley842002 http://www.co-ar15.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.co-ar15.com/forums/showthread.php?p=224811#post224811)
If you are a business owner located in Denver, you would know exactly what's going on. Obviously, all of his programs are paid for by taxing the businesses and just happen most of those are small businesses who are barely surviving in this economy.
Why is my screename on this, I didn't post that. That would be MB888
I like to blame people randomly :). Actually I don't know why it did that, I just hit "quote" :).
hurley842002
07-27-2010, 14:04
I like to blame people randomly :). Actually I don't know why it did that, I just hit "quote" :).
[Beer] Must be Chickenpooper already screwin with things.
[Beer] Must be Chickenpooper already screwin with things.
Actually I'm so distraught over the possibility of him winning that I'm distracted and, aside from being unable to eat, needlessly blame folks for postings they didn't post. Oh and I'm switching parties now since that's really a key platform (blaming others) for me now.
ChunkyMonkey
07-27-2010, 15:26
Chief Whitman is actually a great guy who stands his ground. He is responsible for the CCW process easement AFAIK. By far it is not due to Hicky. Whitman has been discredited in the past by Ritter and Denver DA. In my opinion The Denver PD chief is at odd with the city admin.
palepainter
07-30-2010, 16:29
This is some funny stuff. First I heard.. Lickenpooper, then came Stickinpooper, Then Chickenpooper. I can't wait to see some of his defaced election signs. I think Ken Fuck is going to have a challenge with that as well.
BPTactical
08-03-2010, 21:26
And while you may think Hick is anti gun (something everyone seems to say about every opposing candidate), he has not - to my knowledge - done anything to support that belief as CCW licenses have gotten easier to get in Denver and he's not passed any crazy anti-gun law in Denver.
For the simple fact this is an election cycle. Dickenpooper is not an idiot. He knows the Dems are slipping and knew way back he wanted the Governors slot when the chance came up. You can be assured this was because of the DNC & the good ole boy system is alive and well. He wouldnt dare go after a 2A issue in an election cycle.
Dickenpooper is very clearly anti 2A. He is a member of Bloombergs "Mayors Against Illegal Guns" coalition plus a few years ago he signed a letter to the NRA "dis-inviting" them from Denver for their convention. He has stated in the past he did not agree with "Shall Issue" but would not fight it at the city level.
The reason that CCW's seem easier to get is sheer numbers. Since Oboingo was elected all firearm ownership has skyrocketed and more people want to carry.
Make no mistake he is anti 2A.
He is a far left liberal and they are pretty much universial when it comes to 2A issues.
Lets not forget the fact that he has condoned a "Sanctuary City" policy as well.
Racially motivated attacks downtown last summer and you cant tell me he knew nothing of them. If he did know and did nothing he failed the citizens of Denver. If he didnt know it just proves how disconnected he is from his city.
Either way-Fail.
Besides- he cant manage the cities budget let alone the states.
Zundfolge
08-06-2010, 10:04
I think Tom will grab 3-5% of the TOTAL vote, and I think many of them will be swing voters - not stealing from the republican ticket, but stealing from both.
My "research" contradicts that hypothesizes. [Tooth]
http://www.co-ar15.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26461
IMO I believe that Tom has brought the depressing condition of the GOP to a head but ultimately the actions of Dick Wadhams is what is destroying it. Tom will bring more republican voters then will hickenlooper but mcinnis and maes have no chance to win either. its a messed up situation but I cannot fault Tancredo, the other two GOP nominations self destructed long before Tancredo decided to run. rest assured we will be under a democratic governor for the next four years fellas but blaming Tancredo is absurd this falls squarely on Wadham and hopefully he will step down so that the GOP can get new leadership and we can make a run at the next election and hopefully it will be Tancredo then as well back home with an R behind his name.
My "research" contradicts that hypothesizes. [Tooth]
http://www.co-ar15.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26461
Given some time to research this myself, I think you are correct and my initial assessment was off. I think he will get 15-20% - which is still not enough to win. Unless Maes/McGinnis really blows it, they will get the other 25-30% and WHOOP, we have Hick.
macrylinda1
08-19-2010, 22:11
That's what I was implying. A lot of folks talking about the issue are not looking long term. We need a Republican in office even if he's not your favorite. Do you want Hickenlooper or a guy you only agree with 75% of the time? We have the census this year, that means redistricting next year. If we have a liberal gov, senate and possibly house off Colfax we're going to have even more liberal control in the state house and from our Congressional delegation. We can't have them gerrymander the district lines.
Yeah, I know you have principals and so do I, but at the same time we have to be practical. You will never find a candidate that you agree with 100% of the time unless you're that candidate. Sometimes you have to take what you can get.
I still contend that if Democrats are in control of Denver after this election that Colorado is done. Over. Doomed. Nuevo-California. Period.
So I agree that we need to put ANY Republican in the gov's office even if he doesn't meet my own ideological purity standards.
While I consider myself a tea-party supporter, I am concerned that the tea-partiers are suffering from the same myopia that the Libertarian Party has always suffered from. Certainly there are limits and you don't want an outright liberal Republican in office (frankly I think the country is better off with Obama over McCain since McCain would have done 90% of what Obama has done but without the hue and cry from the right) but if you don't win elections you don't get a say in how things are run.
Neither Maes nor McInnis are ideal Republicans as far as I'm concerned, but either would be better than Hickenlooper. I also don't buy this notion that Hickenlooper is unbeatable by either of them (people over state his popularity) But when Tommy comes along and has his little ego fit he is going to screw ALL conservatives over and ruin this state.
The republican party, in Colorado, has had their head up their butt for several years. They lost because of stupid mistakes. Yea', the liberals manipulated the 527 organizations much more effectively than the repupublicans. This enabled them to funnel huge amounts of money into the campaigns. Mostly supplied by Tim Gill, Pat Stryker, Jared Polis and Rutt Bridges. However, the republicans (under Dick Wadhams) still cut their own throat by making stupid decisions. There is no one to blame but themselves. Just look at what happend with McInnis and Maes, talk about micalculation. It really is just incompetence. Tom Tancredo understands this and is making a stand. He is exactly the kind of person we want in the Governor's office. If you don't vote for Tancredo you are just handing it to Frickin' Stupor and the liberals.
hurley842002
09-29-2010, 12:34
The republican party, in Colorado, has had their head up their butt for several years. They lost because of stupid mistakes. Yea', the liberals manipulated the 527 organizations much more effectively than the repupublicans. This enabled them to funnel huge amounts of money into the campaigns. Mostly supplied by Tim Gill, Pat Stryker, Jared Polis and Rutt Bridges. However, the republicans (under Dick Wadhams) still cut their own throat by making stupid decisions. There is no one to blame but themselves. Just look at what happend with McInnis and Maes, talk about micalculation. It really is just incompetence. Tom Tancredo understands this and is making a stand. He is exactly the kind of person we want in the Governor's office. If you don't vote for Tancredo you are just handing it to Frickin' Stupor and the liberals.
Day late Dollar short, a lot has happened since most of these threads you are responding to were posted.
Tom has gained alot of points in the poll over the last week, if Maes will just bow out then we may have a chance at a gov. that wants to enforce immigration laws and cut state taxes.
hurley842002
09-29-2010, 20:46
Tom has gained alot of points in the poll over the last week, if Maes will just bow out then we may have a chance at a gov. that wants to enforce immigration laws and cut state taxes.
^^^^ this[Beer]
Day late Dollar short, a lot has happened since most of these threads you are responding to were posted.
There is a purpose to replying to these old threads. The purpose is to point out the error in some peoples thinking. These errors in logic are what get people llike Barak Hussein Obama or John Hickenlooper elected. Also, if you shoot off your mouth and you're wrong, you need to eat a little crow. Vote Tancredo.
OneGuy67
09-29-2010, 22:22
Oh, and here I thought it was a new guy cutting and pasting the same paragraph over and over to increase his thread counts! [ROFL1]
hurley842002
09-30-2010, 05:16
Oh, and here I thought it was a new guy cutting and pasting the same paragraph over and over to increase his thread counts! [ROFL1]
May as well be, seems he's got diarrhea of the mouth.
rockhound
09-30-2010, 21:06
tom is on a roll, if you will forget about the party and vote the man he will win
maes has imploded
cognitive dissonance
10-09-2010, 17:05
This is some funny stuff. First I heard.. Lickenpooper, then came Stickinpooper, Then Chickenpooper. I can't wait to see some of his defaced election signs. I think Ken Fuck is going to have a challenge with that as well.Dick in pooper.
cognitive dissonance
10-09-2010, 17:35
Getting serious about this for a moment, Tancredo could easily win this. I was intrigued by his choice for running mate - Pat Miller. I've known her for years, and she is probably the best friend gun owners have in this state. While she's one of the nicest people I know, don't be fooled - she's also tough as nails and has no fear of getting into the trenches. She's a fiscal conservative, a reliable originalist on Constitutional matters and has a good moral compass.
When she ran for US Congress the Republicans wouldn't give her the time of day. She's too conservative for them, so she had to petition onto the ballot without party support. Tancredo's choice of Pat Miller for lieutenant governor tells me he's planning on taking some strong conservative stands if he's elected, so he's surrounding himself with strong conservatives to back him.
Please look realistically at the mess we're in: Our financial system is a house of (marked) cards. Most people are living paycheck to paycheck. Every day we see people on here - people we know - who are selling their guns to make ends meet. It's like that everywhere, folks. Many Americans are upside down in their homes, and more still have lost so much value in their pensions that they'll never retire. Most municipalities are insolvent, as are most counties and most states. So is the federal government. The only time corruption is newsworthy anymore is when there isn't any. The Dhimmicrats have done more damage to America in the last two years than was done in the last two decades. Even if Republicans sweep, and then grow the backbone to repeal everything the boy king has passed (not likely) we're still several trillion further in debt, and the economy is shakier than ever.
It's FAR later than you think. (It may be too late, though we should never give up.) Regardless, this is no longer about us. We've screwed things up so badly the only question left for us is what (if anything) we can repair and leave to our kids and grandkids. At this moment in history, we don't need any business as usual candidates or any more half measures. We sure as hell don't need Loopey Duper spending untold billions more that we don't have, digging us in even deeper.
Tancredo/Miller is the most conservative gubernatorial ticket in America, and they can easily win. Let's all get behind them and see if some semblance of America can be salvaged from this mess, starting right here in Colorado...
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.