« More Q&A Reminders | Main | Is Beauprez Next On The List? »



Went to the McInnis website -- amateur hour -- this blog even looks in comparison to the McInnis site -- McInnis is telling folks that he missed all those votes cuz he never thought he would run again -- but now the fire is back -- guess he should have thought about that before he ignored his Congressional duties while hustling clients --
But, all Dems should go to his site and thank his relative losing Congressional candidate Smith -- Smith helped and continues to help John Salazar after Smith lost the Rep primary -- you can see Matt Smith's picture in the dictionary next to "sore loser"


So,Red Hawk, as the token "Republican" on this site...why is it that most (all?) of your posts seem designed to start debate within our Party? Have you ever gone after a Dem? Don't Romanoff or Udall ever stir your interest, or are you just concerned about "Scotty-Boy" and "Marky-Marc"?


We should never be afraid of “debate within our Party”. We should also never refuse to critically analyze our candidates, their races and our future together as a Party.

Do Romo and Udall ever still my ire or interest? Sure – on many occasions. Though we should try to remember that the brilliance of this particular blog lies in its discussion of the mechanics of politics; and toward that end I will Report from the Right while trying to refrain from simply being a bullhorn for the Republicans.

Rock 5

Oh come on jimmy, McGinnis brings nothing to this race aside from being a spoiler and free marketing for his law firm. The only politicians backing him are the ones that are for sale and Bruce Benson hates the guy so he's got no future.


RedHawk - You want to bring up issues within the party, fine. Unfortunately then, there is little in the way of critical commentary regarding the Ds on this site. All one needs to do is look at the political attacks by the other posters (the latest Beauprez postings, DeLay etc...) to see the bias. Even when they are critical, it is of minor players (Conti) or lobbyists (Labor) and not of the major players on the D side.

Come on RedHawk, you don't need to be a bullhorn, but how about a critic!


"CD-3 is relatively minor in the total game of an election, as any race is won on the Front Range…" Where do you come up with this comment? I am die hard GOP from the rural Colorado and I can tell you that CD-3 and CD-4 are the make it or break it part of any state wide election for our party. You can split the front range easily each year, or the GOP can fall behind there and then you find out how important the rural parts of Colorado are to the GOP. That comment is literally the stupidest thing I have ever read from you Red Hawk. Next time, please think before you write.

Ter Ducken

Sorry, dude. The facts are the facts. Ken Salazar won his race because of Denver. 80% of the votes in Colorado are along the front range now. Times have changed. The Western Slope doesn't play the role it once did.


Even you said it yourself: "I can tell you that CD-3 and CD-4 are the make it or break it part of any state wide election for our party". Yep. The two combined. Three and four will tip any close election for the R's. But three alone? for a republican? no way.

Phoenix Rising

Blake - the fact of the matter is that Dems don't currently have a lot of hot scandals chasing them. But still, this site attacks just about every candidate that pops up on the radar. Perlmutter, Lamm, Bridges, Fitz-Gerald - all of them have come under some fire.

Just because Red Hawk isn't playing a game of "random target" doesn't mean he's a plant or a lamer. It stands to reason that Republicans have more to say about Republicans, etc.


jake - there have PLENTY of critisicms (both R and D) posted on this site. Just because you seem to be a "republican first and always", don't lump us all into the same pile. If I want Party Spin, I'll read the GOP Newsletter (assuming that ever comes out.)

Beauprez messed up with the DeLay thing. But at least it happened now - plenty of time to address it and move on.

Stengel is being goofy, trying to run for Treasurer. But best to nip that 'exploratoty thing' in the bud BEFORE the next session.

And Republcians made stupid mistakes last session. But at least we can talk about them and move on.

Why don't you do what Donald does? Post your thoughts, and sign with your own blog site, allowing readers to read your stuff if they want.


Ter Ducken- First off dude (what stupid word), I think you should rethink your Salazar comment, "Salazar won his race because of Denver". If Denver won the race for Ken, why in the hell is the guy always telling the story about where he came from? Or, wearing the cowboy hat and boots? I will tell you it is not to win over Denver votes. Ken is not stupid and there is a reason he wants to be called "Cowboy" Ken, the kid who grew up on a farm with a dirt floor in his house. People who vote (the rural population) relate to those stories.

Second, just because 80% of the population lives on the front range doesn't mean 80% of the vote does as well. Thats the problem with you Dems, you think of numbers not how people actually act. Salazar is a moderate and he targets the rural voters because they are dependable, Ken is also a Democrat and that alone will bring in the D's from the front range. Thus my point, D's will get D votes from the front range and R's will get R votes from the front range. The difference is found in which party can convience rural Colorado (CD-3 and CD-4) that they best represent their needs. Salazar was able to do that because he wears cowboy boots and drives a beat up old pick truck in commercials, Coors was just a rich guy from Golden who makes a decent beer.

Again my apologies to Red Hawk, just when I thought I had the stupidest posting, Ter Ducken comes along and blows you right out of the water.

3rd CD

You can't guarentee your win on the 3rd. Those Republicans will go wherever they want. They are independant and soft. We like 'em. We need their vote if it's close. But statewide - we just need to be competitite there.


RWN - Gee, thanks for the advice. You seemed to have missed the point completely, oh well.

As I said earlier, I have no problem with the R critics. I do, however, think that there is a comparative lack of discussion about certain Ds, and frankly I wonder why.


They were gluing difficult.

The comments to this entry are closed.