Posted on 09/12/2013 5:10:57 AM PDT by cotton1706
When establishment Republicans wish to pretend they were wiser than tea party types in 2010, they’ll mention Sharon Angle, Christine O’Donnell, and Ken Buck as examples of “trust them.” They ignore Marco Rubio, who they opposed. They ignore Mike Lee, who they opposed. They ignore Rand Paul, who they opposed. They ignore Pat Toomey, who they opposed even after Arlen Specter jumped to the Democrats. And to include Ken Buck they must have you ignore all the facts.
It is true that in 2010, conservatives rallied to Ken Buck and the establishment rallied to Jane Norton. It is true that Buck lost the general election. But that is where the establishment’s truth ends.
In fact, in 2010, Ken Buck outperformed the Colorado Republicans. The party imploded. It’s gubernatorial candidate was plagued by scandal. A third party candidate bested the GOP in the gubernatorial race. Buck, in his race against Senator Bennett, actually won the self-identified independent voters according to the exit polls. He only lost by two points. The Republican nominee for Governor lost by 40 points.
Ken Buck was dragged down by a party that had imploded, a scandal plagued Republican nominee for Governor who had himself seen the original chosen Republican nominee for Governor forced out due to scandal.
What the establishment does not tell you as well is that the National Republican Senatorial Committee (“NRSC”) threw its weight so fully behind Jane Norton in the primary that it spent money attacking Ken Buck in the primary that it did not have to spend for him in the general. Jim DeMint and his Senate Conservatives Fund had to pour money into the state to help make up the funding the NRSC wasted attacking Buck.
So yes, Ken Buck lost — but only by 2 points in a fantastically horrible year for the GOP in Colorado and he did so while still winning independents and facing the NRSC hit men.
Buck then battled cancer and beat cancer. He has continued on as a Colorado District Attorney. Now he is looking to run again.
I intend to be there for him this time as I was last time. A good bit of the establishment that was against Ken Buck last time recognized how close he came and they are with him too. Conservatives are threatening to divide into many ways in Colorado in 2014. If so, they will lose to an establishment candidate who will not fight against Obamacare.
Ken Buck will fight. He is a fighter. I know Ken Buck personally and I am so proud he’s going to give this another shot. I hope you too will support Ken Buck for Colorado. In an age when so many of our political friends get to Washington and stab us in the back, Ken Buck is one who will have our backs.
I hope you will join me in having his.
Excellent points. Keep fighting!
I had forgotten about Ken Buck and had been under the impression he committed gaffes in the campaign. But it is CO, and nothing positive comes from there politically.
There were what the media called ‘gaffes’.
Mainly his statement that people should vote for him becease he ‘didn’t wear heels’, which was in fact a response to something his primary opponent had said.
There was also controversy over a rape case he had been involved with where the guy got off.
That being said, I agree with the article that Ken Buck did not ‘implode’. It really was the state GOP that failed miserably, as they continue to do (their heart wasn’t in the recall elections we won). They’re becoming the Illinois GOP.
I agree that Ken Buck is a strong conservative, and he can work a crowd. Not sure if he can unseat Udall, who is well established.
I think the outcome of this race is less certain than the pollsters make out and will largely depend on the backlash against state lawmakers who have angered many Coloradans with their moonbat agenda.
Buck and Tancredo can both win in 2014
“Buck and Tancredo can both win in 2014”
I think so too. The liberals would go into absolute hysterics!!
Ken Buck was a bad candidate, period. That he lost to an ultraliberal nobody seatwarmer was inexcusable. The worst candidate since Pete Coors. Jane Norton would’ve handily won had she taken the primary.
We need someone else in Colorado.
Personally, I’d want Sheriff Terry Maketa to be our Governor.
He impresses the HELL out of me.
Erick Erickson continues to support retreads for Congress like Mark Sanford and now Ken Buck. Udall is a tougher opponent than Bennett. In fact, Buck had a favorable political climate 2010. The CO GOP gained control of the legislature and picked up Congressional seats. If Buck can’t win in a favorable climate than its time to find someone new. OTOH, if would give me pleasure for Karl Rove to have heart burn over Tancredo and Buck running as a ticket in CO.
Buck and Tancredo would be a complete retread of 2010, which saw both lose. Buck was a second-tier candidate from the get-go when the CO GOP should’ve nominated a first-tier candidate. That he’s remotely considered a front-runner again shows the state party has learned nothing.
As for Tancredo, even if the GOP had removed its damaged nominee in 2010, Hickenlooper still got a majority of the vote (it’s funny, ex-Gov. Ritter was so certain he would lose, he didn’t bother to run for reelection, and given the dynamics as they played out, he couldn’t have lost). I still am a bit wary of Tancredo’s candidacy, though he obviously would have a better chance this time around since there won’t be two candidates splitting the non-Dem vote.
Last poll that I saw on the Gov race (taken in June) from Quinnipiac showed Hickenlooper leading Tancredo by 1% (42-41) and Sec of State Scott Gessler by 2% (42-40). A Republican poll from the same month also showed Gessler trailing by 1% (44-43).
In a Senate poll taken a year ago, Buck was the worst performing Republican against Mark Udall, losing 50-35%. Bill Owens, the ex-Governor, trailed by 4% (47-43). In the most recent poll in April (also PPP, a Dem poll) showed Bob Beauprez the closest to Udall, but still trailing by 7% (48-41). I personally think if Buck is the nominee again, Udall will win by at least 10-15%.
Erickson is full of it, Buck is loser who blew it, not as badly as Angle but he ran a bad race and does not deserve another chance against a more difficult opponent. Tancredo is unelectable, not because he’s a conservative but because he’s a jerk that no one likes.
Nominate them again and we lose, simple as that. Why expect a different result? Time for fresh blood.
LOL DJ, you pinged someone named “Bullyboy”.
Damn it ! This auto spelling correct ALWAYS changes billyboy to bullyboy, so I have to double-check to make sure it’s entered right. GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR....
Can you turn it off?
Mine just gives a word a red underline.
I don’t know how to. It seemed to automatically download recently with a Microsoft updates. It is helpful to a degree, but a pain with the “billy/bullyboy” thing. :-P
What browser do you use?
IE 10 ?
http://www.askvg.com/how-to-disable-built-in-spell-checker-feature-in-internet-explorer-10-ie10/
That looks like the answer, you aren’t the only person bothered by this “experimental” spell checker.
Thanks. I really don’t want to get rid of it, I just wish there was a way not to have it “correct” name IDs or a few other intentional gaffes on my part.
A PPP poll of Giron’s former district has Tancredo and Hincklepooper tied there, large gender gap. Something good has gotten in the water in Pueblo, at least the men have been drinking it. These same pollees voted for Obama by a 50-38 margin.
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2013/SD3Results.pdf
Of course, Limousine Liberal Willard didn’t exactly motivate blue collar types that make up a good % of Pueblo to turn out for him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.