Our Secretary of State and Attorney General are both statewide and both Republicans.Quote:
Originally Posted by Circuits
Printable View
Our Secretary of State and Attorney General are both statewide and both Republicans.Quote:
Originally Posted by Circuits
Knock yourselves out.
Only one way to prove it. I think that the defeatist sentiment from some on here is the most worrisome though. The margins are close as it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shiro
So you've thrown in the towel before the fights even started?Quote:
Originally Posted by milwaukeeshaker
I voted for him last time and I will vote for him again.
I'm all for Tancredo. I may not agree with absolutely everything he believes in, but at least he's very open his views. I don't see a lot of deceit there.
I was fortunate to have had a phone chat with Tom several months ago concerning the currently passed gun legislation. He is a humble focused honest man in my opinion. It is a rare thing nowadays for a political leader to to be as frank and honest as he was in our conversation.......he was pretty hard on himself. If we as a non democratic party voting base can come together, he would really help restore the sanity to Colorado.
Sent from my GT-N8013 using Tapatalk 2
I heard on KHOW this morning that Senator Brophy and SOS Scott Gessler were going to run for governor as well.
Senator Brophy would be worthy of a vote too. I'll have to look at SOS Gessler.
It's a little early in the game, but if Tancredo is the R candidate for governor, I'd vote for him.
But I don't get all giddy about him...he's not my ideal candidate though we'll see if anyone better will apply for the job. I'd still like to see Terry Maketa run though I don't know much about him other than his stand on the recent gun control issues.
Seems like a few of you have some short memories about Tancredo:
Yeah, Tom...we're all about those "common sense" and "reasonable" gun-control provisions...just like it says in the 2A. He also scores a B+ from the NRA which indicates he's had some problems at times with his stance on gun issues.Quote:
April 5 [2000] - Conservative Republican U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo, the congressman from Columbine, is supporting the statewide gun-control initiative to close the "gun-show loophole." "I support anything that is designed to keep guns out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them, and this fits," Tancredo said. "This is a reasonable gun-control provision."
But, I'd vote for him all day long and twice on Sun over ANY democrat.
ETA: Just saw the post by roberth...Brophy would be a good candidate as well. I'd consider him over Tancredo.
I was thinking the same thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey Guns
It will be interesting to see how the GOP receives him. Willthe GOP try to find someone that more fits the Coors profile or finally start listening to the people.
There are some fences to mend with the GOP. I think it is possible to fix them if all come to the table and act like grown ups. I think Tom would do his part in this process. There is too much "what about me" in conservative Colorado, to much butt hurt personal bickering is why we are getting our a$$es kicked. It is join or die time for us........hopefully our political talent pool is up to the task......I'm too old to move to Wyoming.
Sent from my GT-N8013 using Tapatalk 2
Sorry, I like Tom and his stances when he was in the House but I think he split the party and gave the governorship to Hickenlooper in 2010. I'd rather draft Terry Maketa so he can stick a big old veto pen in Mark "What Jessica's Law?" Ferrandino's eye.
You got it. I won't stop trying, but I'm sure it's a waste of time with the Repubs. Libertarian would probably be a smarter choice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KS63
Let's see. It's hard enough to elect a republican when half (approximately) the state is republican. And you think it's smarter to vote for a libertarian?Quote:
Originally Posted by milwaukeeshaker
Yeah. We're fucked.
Heard on the radio this morning that Steve Laffey has put his paperwork in to run for the R ticket... It might be between these two in the primary, and I think Tancredo will get my vote.
He withdrew from the primary today.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin13
http://www.denverpost.com/breakingne...al-gop-primary
I just knew if I said the dreaded "L" word somebody would get their panties in a wad. Yeah lets just stick with the same old tired BS that'll do it. I'm a staunch lifelong Repub but I'm sick of the lousy candidates, the left leaning go along policies, the general wishy washy crapola my party doles out. If there is not a major change, I'm gonna change and vote my for the person that is aligned with my ideals, and to hell with voting for "my" party. Party voting has not gotten us anywhere in at least 4 elections. Ok, flame on, I'm done.
I think you said before that you're not on Facebook, but Sheriff Maketa's FB page has blown up over the past few months with hundreds of people BEGGING him to run for governor. It's a good sight to see.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey Guns
This is where I'm at as well. I'd much rather a libertarian in charge philosophically, but it isn't going to happen and the libertarian party is still a joke: The party of pot and no license plates and whatever other goofy ideas.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey Guns
Why can't the libertarians transform the GOP with the tea party types?Quote:
Originally Posted by milwaukeeshaker
It worked for the radical left to hijack the democrat party.
Nobody got any panties in a wad, libertarian boy. You said voting libertarian would be smarter. I disagreed. If you can't understand why what I said makes sense, knowing the L party will get just a few percentage points at the polls, then you're beyond reasoning with. And you're wrong about party voting. It may not have gotten "us" anywhere in the last few elections but it's working great for republicans in other states and the dems have been doing a bang-up job with it here. Vote how you want. Nobody cares. Except the democrats that will be re-elected.Quote:
Originally Posted by milwaukeeshaker
Cool. I guess we'll see what happens with that.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoneyBadger
Clearly you don't have a clue what the Libertarian party is about. It's not about policy, it's about the principles of liberty.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffrey Lebowski
I'd say I have the Libertarian Party pegged dead on.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoneyBadger
When they come around to the principles of liberty and stop being such a joke, I'll be more on board.
Until then, best of luck with the Michael Badnarik and Ron Paul shenanigans. I'm going to vote with the grown-ups.
Edit while I'm thinking about it: The problem with the Libertarian Party, as alluded to, is the faces they trot out and I mentioned them above, and also just a bit of exclusivity to them. Just reading your post, which I might interpret as, "Oh you don't get us, be gone!" And this isn't my own observation, Wilkow and Levin have spent hours on that exact same topic. OK, fine, I'm plenty happy with that. I may be very libertarian economically (especially!), and socially (while it isn't my thing, gays, abortions, pot, etc etc shouldn't be the government's thing either), but it isn't about my politics. I'm happy to never public identify with this freak show while you have Badnarik driving around with licenses and plates to make a liberty point, college libertarians blasting the cypress hill and carrying on about TJ and GW's quotes on hemp, and Ron Paul basically damning Chris Kyle, MLK, black males, and insisting on near isolationism and the whole thing carrying 3% of the vote. Uhh, yeah, I guess I would rather hang out (or vote!) with the "bible beaters" and tea party types.
The democrats have managed to somehow bring in all these differing opinions and groups (and a few former 3rd parties!) into their "big tent." I'm not sure why we want to split hairs on the less important BS. So, sure, count me a repub. That's fine.
That is because they all share in a couple of greater goals and they'll set aside their own personal goals to advance the greater goals of their party. These people are collectivists, they run with the herd and they like the power that being in a singular group gives them. These people aren't individuals and they don't do anything without approval from their leaders.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffrey Lebowski
Conservatives and Libertarians are naturally more difficult to herd because we're individualists who have much stronger bonds to our personal goals and to compromise is an affront to our individuality. We tend to run in smaller groups or alone because we like being our own people (singular).
I'll argue the "greater goals" bit. The Democrats have a bunch of mind-numbed robots who will adopt any knee-jerk anti-traditional/Christian/Western/capitalist stand. They recite "Roe v. Wade" repeatedly like it was some magical chant regardless of whether any Republican has said anything about it (when was the last time "Roe v. Wade" was a part of the Republican Party platform?). The biggest problem is we've allowed this lack of intelligent focus or critical thinking to permeate the education system so kids grow up believing this Marxist, anti-Western pap. I deal with teenagers regularly and steadily and even ones regarded as intelligent surprise me with their inability (or unwillingness) to just walk through a problem to a solution. I ask a question or pose a problem and they'll just sit there dumbly expecting that I'll give them the answer if they just wait long enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by roberth
The Dems toss out "answers" so anyone conditioned to this way of "thinking" accepts it blindly. To be fair, the Republicans and Libertarians do this too but their answers typically imply work or are less fun so less popular.
If the Conservatives and Libertarians are forced to compromise with each other or continually split and lose to the left and face being told what to do with our healthcare, our weapons, our businesses, our money, our land, our children, etc, etc, etc - I really like to think we can sacrifice a bit of individuality, but it seems probably not. Living with either conservative or libertarian principles a lot easier than this extreme progressivism, imho.
On this whole liberal vs conservative thing- I really wish the Conservatives (namely republicans) would stop, shut up, and actually explain once in a while instead of letting the libs say all this crap and the LIVs believe it as gospel and then go out and vote against the R ticket. Explain why your policies are better. Explain what that 43% is. Explain why you want to lower taxes. Stop assuming everyone is smart, start remembering that a lot of people are just a dog hair away from needing to wear a helmet. And get the hell off the abortion thing- the left sucked Romney into that pit and he couldn't possibly escape. On things like that, you shut up, don't say anything, and then after you're elected you go ahead and start considering your stance on those slippery issues.
x2Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin13
Until the Republican party can leave their religion based, social conservative views alone, we are in trouble...
Yeah, and the media will go along with that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin13
Y'know, idiots keep saying that despite the fact that the biggest complaint against Romney was that he wasn't conservative enough, that he was another Massachusetts liberal. Republicans stomped all over the Missouri moron who pulled defeat out of the jaws of victory. Please cite one aspect of the Republican Party plank that was religion-based or seriously pushed social conservatism.Quote:
Originally Posted by wrestler034
We're in trouble until people realize the Marxists are the enemy and are able to unite instead of talking down at social conservatives -- the country's decline maps quite neatly to the growth of social liberalism (of course, it also maps quite neatly to available horsepower, available firepower and a bunch of other unrelated factors).
No one was "talking down" to anyone. If the republican party will not back off on abortion and same sex marriage, among others, we will continue to see the map turn blue. But as expected once religion was brought up we made it two posts before the name calling started... so I'm out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aloha_Shooter
This strikes me as funny.... It is exactly what was being said about Republicans in 2004. You know... Where to get political postings you had to swear allegiance to the party? The D's have not gone that far but again... Both parties have lost their way...power corupting and all. Lots of stones and glass on this thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by roberth
This is the problem. And the fact that so-called "conservatives" buy into the media driven hyperbole that republican candidates are "anti-women's health care" (against abortion) and other such nonsense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aloha_Shooter
In case some of you who are calling for republicans to tone down the "social conservatism" I have two points:
1) Republicans/conservatives ARE socially conservative. That's the whole idea. Very, very few of them actually publicly speak about things like "gay rights" and "women's health care" until it's brought up by the media as a tool to use against them. Most socially conservative republicans believe these issues should be left in the hands of the state and they aren't federal gov't issues. But the leftist media types KNOW the simple-minded can be easily swayed when they label that particular candidate as a right-wing religious nutjob who doesn't care about women, minorities or gays or whomever. And it works. This thread is proof of that.
2) Conservatives need to campaign and govern as conservatives. Look at the feedback...most republicans are blasted for NOT being conservative enough (this has been pointed out several times here). Even on this forum that's the biggest complaint I've seen. Don't believe me? Go back and search for Romney threads. How many times has someone written here that dems and repubs are the same? Reagan seems to be the conservative standard by which others are judged. And he sure as hell preached conservative values while campaigning and during the 8 years he was president and people freakin' adored him...still do.
Well said.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey Guns
^^^WHAT BG SAID^^^^
So what you're saying is that until Republicans start championing infanticide, worshiping Gaia and reject their own deeply held beliefs (particularly on what is and is not acceptable behavior among civilized humans) they're going to continue to lose?Quote:
Originally Posted by wrestler034
Problems with that are two fold 1) becoming Democrats kind of defeats the purpose of being a Republican to begin with and 2) every time a Republican runs as a rock ribbed, hard right conservative they win in a landslide whereas when they become mushy minded, middle of the road moderates (Romney and McCain are the two latest examples) they die on the vine.
Even the Atheist/agnostic Randians recognize objective reality (what with calling their philosophy "Objectivism" and all).
The truth is that until Republicans return to their Constitutionalist AND social conservative roots they're going to continue to lose.
^^ Why does it always sound better when you say it?
No... This right here is an example of the reason Republicans will continue to loose their base. Unnecessarily taking the conversation to the highest extreme possible, that is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zundfolge
Recognizing the rights of a woman to own her body isn't championing infanticide, respecting the desire of two people of the same sex to enter into a legal contract / social union (even if you don't agree with their lifestyle) isn't waving the banner for homosexuality, and being open people with different beliefs doesn't mean you yourself are rejecting your own deeply held beliefs.
Mark my words: the upcoming generation will be known as the generation of skeptics. The age of information has bombarded them from birth with a continuous stream of half-truths and illogical inconsistency, and just to keep their brains from imploding, they will have to develop finely tuned bullshit detectors. The conservative movement / Republican Party will either adapt and evolve (and that certianly doesn't mean becoming Democrats, Socialists or Communists), or they will go the way of the whigs and other once-significant parties.
If you agree 100% with what your political party preaches you are either very lucky or forcing yourself to.Quote:
Originally Posted by RiderGeek
It is what I deal with most times in political discussions: how can you be a Satanist AND a Republican?
Well, although I disagree with several views of the GOP, self determinism and personal responsibility are to me much more important than what God you choose to believe in.
As with anything else in life, it is about taking the parts that fit your own beliefs and are most important to you and ignoring the other ones.