Welcome to the Colorado AR-15 Shooters Club Discussion Forums.
Chuck and Julie played a support ad for Y and Z by........Eric Holder. Pat Stryker (wealthy communist who wants to inhibit your ability to get wealthy too) also contributed $$ to advocate Y and Z.
Vote NO!!
Last edited by roberth; 10-22-2018 at 14:07.
How is this worse than a Democrat House, Senate, and Governor controlling districting in 2021? That's the most likely scenario. Does anyone really think they won't gerrymander?
To even apply, you have to be registered same party for a minimum of 5 years and vote in 2 general elections. The fact that there are 2 lotteries for 6 of the 12 (first to weed it down to 300 D, 300 R and 450 U candidates; then that 1050 is weeded down to 50/50/50 list from which lottery picks 2/2/2 with no existing district having more than 2), to get on the commissions make stacking the deck even harder. The remaining 6 are picked from a list of 10 D and 10 R candidates by a panel of judges.
I get the knee-jerk reaction to anything touched by Bloomberg. But Yes seems better than the alternative of Dems just controlling it entirely.
They will certainly gerrymander! You are right!Originally Posted by Mtneer
Imagine a "Trump" scenario in CO. This is what they are protecting against. Given the flatline trajectory, Dims control the state. But they can't win every election every time.
If it snaps back to GOP control, however briefly, the commission would still control districting.
As we've discussed, you can safely assume those "independent" members will be hard core Libs as well.
What this also signals is that CO is up for grabs at some level. They don't need to do this kind of stuff in CA and NY and spend money promoting it.
Always eat the vegans first
Isn't part of that assumption what got Trump elected? I have yet to form an opinion on this issue, but you hear that "independents are just [insert other side]" from both sides I feel like.
As others have said, it seems like a good idea in theory, but extremely leery with those that are supporting it.
"There are no finger prints under water."
No, you're misinterpreting what people mean by the "independent" members being libs. Its not that "independents are just [insert other side]" its that one can go online and change their party affiliation in a matter of minutes so there's a good chance that the "independent" (and maybe even the Republican) members of the commission will be former Democrats. Because the commission will be picked by a bunch of retired judges hand picked by the chief justice of the CO Supreme Court (who is a leftist).
Modern liberalism is based on the idea that reality is obligated to conform to one's beliefs because; "I have the right to believe whatever I want".
"Everything the State says is a lie, and everything it has it has stolen.
-Friedrich Nietzsche
"Every time something really bad happens, people cry out for safety, and the government answers by taking rights away from good people."
-Penn Jillette
A World Without Guns <- Great Read!
I don't think "independent" means what it used to mean just a few years ago. I think there are "independents" in Colorado who are actually to the left of the Democrat party.
As a reminder, here is some info I found on the "independent" member of the CO Human Rights Commission which bungled the Masterpiece Cakes issue...
I have no problem with fence-sitters being represented, historically, they are 1/3rd of registered voters in CO. And I have no problem with a fence-sitter going against my personal beliefs. I would have a problem with Dims controlling the state and strategically appointing Libs in those independent spots and pretending this is a balanced commission.
Elected representatives are in the public eye and information like the above has to pass a sniff test, although imperfect, is better than people hiding their agenda and representing themselves as fair or middle-of-the-road.
Always eat the vegans first
We all remember my rant that created your last signature. I believe part of that is that the D tent is so wide and encompassing, that any person who wants to feel different and have a cause, and then usually just become a pain in the ass to normal society ends up under the biggest tent. Seems that being "Independent" is at a risk, in the very near future, of creating the largest tent we've seen yet and the meaning will change yet again.
"There are no finger prints under water."
This isn't better or worse, it is just different.
What it absolutely does do is add to the bureaucracy, instead of 1 person making a decision, we'll have 12 people making the same decision. Those 12 people will expect to be paid so now the budget is increased and our taxes will go up to fund it.
None of the sponsors would fund and back this if there wasn't money in their pocket on the back end.
When they do that under the current construct, it's transparent. Under Y & Z, they'll point to the supposed "independent" commission and shrug.
Pat Stryker, Jared Polis, Tim Gill and Rutt Bridges spent MILLIONS to make CO blue, they are not going to spend money to make it fair
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
