Tom Tancredo

[hurley842002]

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/07...-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]

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?

[Ranger]

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.

[Zundfolge]

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.

I guess I should start job/house shopping in Utah or something.


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]

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]

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.

[Ranger]

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]

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??

[macrylinda1]

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.

[runoma]

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.