We Lost Big In Colorado

[Old Fuff]

The last election offered no pro second amendment candidate.

I can't believe that in the entire body of Senate and House of Representative candidates they're were absolutely no candidates that were supportive of gun rights.

Also as far as I can learn, when these gun control bills moved from introduction to Committee Hearings all of the votes were along party lines, with the Republicans voting "no" and the Democrats "yes." But the Republicans always lost because they were outnumber by Democrats. Clearly, if the Republicans were not supportive of gun rights they were at least neutral, and the majority of Democrats were not.

Of course in our perfect world all office holders would be pro-gun advocates, but it is far better to support someone who is neutral then to do otherwise and see a dedicated anti-gun candidate win.

When it comes to the way the government is run they're is a big difference between theory and practice. Unfortunately too many voters don't understand this.

 

[MErl]

Fuff, there were two Democrats that voted against but there had to be 3. Lots of pressure there I'm sure. The way things are setup here the non-dominant party has no power at all so once it came up it could not be stopped (except the conceal carry part that they screwed up).

 

[Old Fuff]

The Committee Votes I followed generally went: Democrats 10, Republicans 8.

So 1 Democrat voting with the Republicans would have made a tie, and with 2 Democrats on the Republican side they would have won, and the bill would have died in committee.

I hope that Colorado voters will make some changes this year, but to have this happen the pro-gun side will have to get out a large - and unified - vote. The recent recall elections proved that it could be done.

 

[MErl]

Oh the committees are stacked by the party leaders. It is decided before a bill gets there if it will get out again. I meant the floor vote.

 

[Old Fuff]

Oh the committees are stacked by the party leaders. It is decided before a bill gets there if it will get out again.

So that means our side has to get out enough votes to be sure the "party in question" doesn't get a majority again. Unfortunately it's a matter of winner-take-all. Hopefully everybody will understand what's at stake.

 

[Dr.Rob]

I am not happy with the results of the primary re: beating Hickenlooper.

The fight isn't over, and it was never going to be easy.

 

[MachIVshooter]

I am not happy with the results of the primary re: beating Hickenlooper

Agreed. The GOP here has been wasting the capital and momentum on non-starters. Brophy was far and away our best chance, and the strongest 2A ally. Second choice was Tanc, who might have won in '10 if the GOP had backed him instead of that idiot mayes.

Beauprez is alright, but he's failed before. He lost to Ritter in a landslide in '06, and Hickenlooper is more likeable than Ritter was.

The party really is shooting itself in the foot these days. I had a tremendous amount of confidence in our victory a year ago, but the party is pulling the same stupid moves that have been costing us for a decade. Let's hope we can at least take congress, because I feel the GOP has basically handed re-election to hick on a platter.