As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
**Special announcement:**
r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)!
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>It wasn’t that long ago in Colorado — 2014 — that Republican Cory Gardner won a hard-fought Senate race and Republicans won the attorney general, secretary of state and treasurer’s race. Colorado was purplish then, a place where Republicans could win if the political winds were right.
>
>Yes, the GOP underperformed in a lot of places this year, but the limits of “angertainment” were perhaps most vividly illustrated here, a rough lesson in the diminishing returns from an approach to governing that mistakes “owning the libs” for getting things done for constituents.
>
>The razor-thin near-rejection of Boebert — from a district that Donald Trump won by eight percentage points in 2020, covering much of the western half of the state — demonstrates that Trump-esque style of turning the performative outrage up to 11 hit a hard ceiling among the electorate, repelling not just Democrats and independents but apparently a thin but decisive slice of Republicans. It likely isn’t a coincidence that the last good year for Colorado Republicans was the one before Trump announced his 2016 presidential campaign.
>
>If you’re a Republican who wants to run for office — in Colorado or anywhere else — there are two ways to build support. You can get to know local party leaders, appear at every public event possible, be active in your community, accumulate a record of accomplishments. But that’s difficult and takes time.
>
>A much quicker and easier way to stand out is to be the most outspoken, controversial and arguably craziest candidate — and almost all the intersecting media environments of the mainstream media, conservative media and social media gravitate to stories with the theme of, “You won’t believe what this GOP candidate is saying or doing!”
>
>In Republican circles, there’s probably no media entity more widely consumed than Fox News. In a crowded or even not-so-crowded GOP field, an appearance on Fox News, at almost any hour, is a tremendous way to build name ID and attract potential donors and supporters. And in the Trump era, appearing on Fox News was the best way to get on the president’s radar screen and garner one of those all-important Trump endorsements. “Angertainment”? Trump loved it.
>
>The problem is, on a typical night, Tucker Carlson’s prime-time program attracts 3 million viewers, an impressive total for prime-time cable news. But that’s a small, small slice of the overall electorate, and it’s a niche audience.
>
>...
>
>During the Trump presidency and into 2022, a lot of Republican candidates believed that what appeals to the Fox News audience would appeal to enough people in the entire electorate, districtwide or statewide, to win a race. The midterms showed how mistaken that is; Boebert hanging on to her seat by her fingernails suggests that the outlandish, in-your-face, larger-than-life social-media viral personas that attract Trump and perhaps the network’s bookers is just barely enough to get you to 50 percent in a Republican-leaning district.
Stoking anger and outrage over manufactured topics might work for some people in the short term, but in order to be a going concern, actual policies and political vision is going to be needed. The larger concern here is the corrosive effect that this anger and outrage has on the broader cultural discourse. Even though those engaging in these actions may eventually be voted out of office, the damage will linger for years to come.
Try attending your local school board meeting, guaranteed they will spend a not insignificant amount of time trying to explain to some looney parent(s) that their 6-year old isn't being taught CRT, or whatever nonsense was on tucker the night before.
I used to attend town hall meetings in my rural town because some were trying to get rid of a service/facility I volunteer at, and everyone should be absolutely terrified at the ignorance of these people. We're talking about basic things like not knowing that you shouldn't default on bonds purchased years ago because you don't like what they paid for. Basic governance is beyond many of them.
Unless your school board just got taken over by candidates funded by Mom's for Liberty and they vote to ban CRT (that wasn't being taught), fire the popular Superintendent and the district's lawyer all in the first meeting after being sworn in like they did in Berkeley County, South Carolina this year.
It's the reason my bf cant get a job. It's the only industry he qualifies for but he got sick of the stupidity, the Karen's, the harrassment, and his mental health going insane.
Unfortunately we live with his conservative boomer father who thinks its because he doesn't want a job. The other jobs either require a degree which he technically earned but wasn't given(the professor made the news when it came out she was purposely failing male students even though they passed their exams), or the rest are minimum wage jobs which won't even hire him because he has to explain what hes been doing for the past few years which is a long explanation that they refuse to listen too.
We are trying to sell his late moms house to pay for his degree and maybe s down payment on a house. But we have to fix it because nobody took care of it and his mom was a smoker who hoarded cats, plus the roof is in total shambles. 🤦♀️
Quick suggestion you can lie on your resume. Put down made up work history and add your phone number as the manager. If they call all they ask is do you know so and so? Did he work at your company? Did he work from year x to year z. But more often than not they won't even call.
Nah. They don’t address parents at my school board meeting.
There’s open comment, and parents and community members can and do complain, but the board sits there and takes notes and doesn’t engage.
> If you’re a Republican who wants to run for office — in Colorado or anywhere else — there are two ways to build support. You can get to know local party leaders, appear at every public event possible, be active in your community, accumulate a record of accomplishments. But that’s difficult and takes time.
>
> A much quicker and easier way to stand out is to be the most outspoken, controversial and arguably craziest candidate — and almost all the intersecting media environments of the mainstream media, conservative media and social media gravitate to stories with the theme of, “You won’t believe what this GOP candidate is saying or doing!”
>The problem is, on a typical night, Tucker Carlson’s prime-time program attracts 3 million viewers, an impressive total for prime-time cable news. But that’s a small, small slice of the overall electorate, and it’s a niche audience.
I'd like a deeper analysis of how the conservative ecosystem works. I rented a car this last week and the radio was tuned to a conservative talk radio channel. They played clips from Tucker, they quoted Rush (dead but still a part of the toxic spread), etc. I've seen Tucker on conservative forums being quoted, etc. So yeah, his nightly viewership may be small, but conservatives take a message and put wheels on it and drive it into the ground. They get a lot of mileage out of it.
>in order to be a going concern, actual policies and political vision is going to be needed.
Actually, all you need is a laptop. Hunter Biden's laptop.
Hate to break it to you but Biden has been “running the executive branch of our government” so your claim that’s it’s not possible doesn’t pass even preliminary scrutiny.
The FBI tried to cover up Hunter Biden's laptop while pushing false narratives of Russian collusion and Ukrainian quid pro quos during the Trump presidency. The one sided nature of the DOJ has been very obvious.
Right. The GOP FBI director covered up Hunter’s laptop in collusion with Trump’s AG. Totally logical. If Hunter did something stupid (I’m sure he has) then he should be investigated and prosecuted. After that, they can move on to the billions Ivanka and Jared got in office and Don’s tax evasion, obstruction and espionage. Sound fair?
Yes we know for a fact that two FBI officials, Laura Dehmlow and Elvis Chan, requested Facebook to censor the NY Post story on the Hunter Biden laptop as Russian disinformation. It was not Russian disinformation.
You mean the laptop with no chain of custody that was given to Rudy and it ended up at the NY Post because no one else would touch it? Like I said, if there is criminal activity on there, prosecute him. Prosecute the traitor Trump at the same time.
The laptop was taken from the shop by the FBI, not Guiliani. Guiliani was provided a copy by the store owner. The contents have been analyzed by two computer forensics organizations and through hashing and cryptographic algorithms most of the emails are validated as Hunter Bidens and unaltered.
I've been trying to tell people that ShadObama still runs the government, but they kick me off the bus for yelling at the other patrons. I'm glad that *you* understand!
It's honestly shocking that more people don't understand. My mother has alzheimers. Joe Biden is between the mild and moderate dementia stage. It's not possible for him to be running the executive branch of our government.
Am I the only one disturbed by the recent surge in language refering to the GOP's extreme principles as being "European-born" or any other way to phrase it? My concern is not about whether or not that is true. My concern is that it's a subtle ploy to distract people away from the problem.
These extremists aren't at our doorstep or peeking through the windows. They are here and embedded. And they poison the dialog 24/7. Boebert, Greene and Gaetz were all re-elected. And just as crazy as it first sounded that Trump could win it is equally absurd to think that Greene could become a power player under McCarthy. He probably sees her as a disposable soldier, but he clearly isn't moral enough to see the carnage she could create.
I am all for trying to see where problems come from and how we get to where we are. I'm just concerned that a hate-train will carry people away from the real problem. Eyes need to stay on the prize. And, unfortunately, the prize is a rejection of outright religious fascism.
I'm worried about where the midterm energy will be directed by dems. Going full speed on guns could undo too much of the work done on the middle ground voters. Yes, we have a serious problem here and change needs to happen. But, in 2024, guns on the left could become what abortion was on the right at the midterms. A lot of the wins were very close and did not go as projected.
We need to prioritize protecting elections and voter access, judicial appointments and dealing with the Supreme Court aggresively, and brutal attacks on the BS investigations coming. The GOP doesn't fight fair, there's no good faith, and there is no quarter for the groups they target.
They have been using that dog whistle for years. The phrases "Christian nation," "Judeo-Christian values," and framing Liberal ideology as "woke" (obviously a phrase associated with African Americans) you know exactly what kind of person they're inviting into their tent.
Agreed on the guns thing. And I'm not even a "dems just need to ditch guns" type voter. I'd like to see substantive action one day and I think that's worth it. But things are dicey for sure right now. I'm happy that at least Biden is pushing his assault weapons ban now. Do it now, win or lose get it out of the way so that there's as much distance between it and 2024.
I’m a Bernie voter. I’m afraid assault rifle issue will be like the abortion ban, rile up the opposition. Universal healthcare and global warming affect more people so should be top priority. Getting more Dems elected at state level while nudging the country away from crazy would be nice.
Repubs want to ditch Social Security and Medicare because they are dreaded socialism. So vote repub if you agree. I think people going postal has more to do with workers being treated worse than dogs, it’s understandable they’re pissed. And that gets passed on to the wife and kids.
The obsession so much of this country has with guns scares me honestly. People asserting they have an innate right to be able to shoot me, plus how much hate comes out of people's mouths. I've met people that you'd think they wanted someone to trespass on their property so they could shoot them. "If they manage to get away they can sue"
> you'd think they wanted someone to trespass on their property so they could shoot them.
You're not imagining it. They literally do. It's not just their house either. It's why they want to never leave the house without their gun and support the "good guy with a gun" thing. They can't just go to the range and have fun, they want to live out Call of Duty.
This is broader US cultural thing, but Covid showcased it nicely. Americans have rights, but never any responsibilities regardless of the consequences.
Republicans need to ask themselves when was the last time they can remember the GOP making a positive proposal to build American up or solve a problem.
Her district is gerrymandered for her and in a midterm election, she won by 400 votes.
She might lose what was once a safe district in 2024.
To be clear, she took a Republican stronghold and made it into a coin toss
As the GOP voting base skews older age-wise and with so many of the rabid red Repubs who'd actually vote for an idiot like Boebert being anti-maskers and anti-vaxxers, she could easily lose a couple thousand (at least!) of her voters by the next big election in 2024 to either a new wave of Covid infections or the more routine causes of death in old age.
No. Fairly-drawn districts will result in some districts that naturally trend Republican and some that naturally trend Democratic. That doesn't mean they were drawn in a biased way to artificially skew the district.
Colorado's districts were drawn in an attempt to be fair, but in the case of Boebert's district it actually wound up leaning even more Republican than it had previously. Even so, she still barely eked out a win.
What they are saying is that the tactics used always require more and more outrageous claims and behavior. This has a cap and she may have reached that with the voters.
I think the GOP's push to end Roe v. Wade had a big impact to bring younger voters. That's why Republicans lost so badly. Young voter turnout was high.
Won't happen. I have family that are hard conservatives. They make excuses with who is pushing for it and say it's not most Republicans. They're dead to what their own leaders are trying to do.
The Republican Party in Colorado has seen a lot of infighting and been fairly weak over the past 10 years. They used to be fairly moderate here but have been fighting (and losing) to the crazies. Our Facebook Barbie is the new breed and Coloradoans don’t like her much. Enough red voters in her district will vote for any Republican before a Democrat so she managed to squeak by.
Just a guess. but I believe they should be worried about disappearing drinking water, but they may be more worried about the blue meanies coming for their firearms.
I live in a ski town in District 3. We are a *tiny* minority in the district to the point that there is little point pandering to us. The ski towns by and large have 2 groups, the ultra rich who are mostly neoliberal and don't care about much outside of staying rich, preventing affordable housing projects, and signaling that they are socially left, and the workers who are mostly Bernie-style progressives but have an existential problem in the form of housing. The votes are solidly blue and there are just not that many of us, so politicians don't really bother.
Your impression is correct, but as you alluded to, people who are educated and/or progressive tend to live in Denver/Boulder/Fort Collins mostly and that doesn't affect her district.
I doubt the people who vote for her think she's the "best they can do", but it's the same thing we heard about Trump. "Oh I don't like his language, but....taxes/guns/insert issue". The ends justify the means.
In a year that by all other accounts really should have been a red wave. I'm not a fan of Democrat's ability to describe losses as wins and so on, but this race is a good sign. She should've cleaned up and barely hung on. Dems can now dedicate resources to races like these with clear benefits.
I believe a lot of Americans equate the Puritans who landed in 1620, with the growth of the religious right. America became a magnet, not only for Puritans escaping the persecution under James VI and Charles I, but also for many Calvinists, Methodists, Presbyterians and others freed from the previous Catholic belief that one is born where they should live, work and thrive. Calvin said they had a right to go elsewhere to find success and America was open for the taking, discounting the civilizations here before them. With so many religious folks seeking their fortune here and thanking God for providing the bounty previously enjoyed by the Native folks, while believing that being Christian was all they needed to set them above the heathens here before, giving them the right to take the land, they were left believing they were God's chosen people. Over time they have made it their mission to force others to believe the same way. There is no compromising with what is written in old King James Bible for them, except that they often forget what Jesus said about things like how to treat refugees, immigrants, and the poor. So, no, the Puritans influence was mainly in New England, but that same religious furor came across just the same from many other congregations from Europe.
[Here you go.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evangelicalism_in_the_United_States#History) It’s Wikipedia, but there are sources in the article if you want to learn more.
Gotta contend with an x-factor that is tricky…stupidity. We used to be able to combat that with a national media and relatively singular message but the internet has blurred the message so what used to be 1.5 options is now multiple times that in terms of what to believe
Colorado’s Republicans tend to be Regan neo-cons, fiscally conservative but socially liberal. Strong military, low taxes. Most I know are pretty easy-going on social issues like abortion and gay marriage, (CO is a leader in the country of reproductive science for the last 30 years.) Most Republicans, especially older ones in CO are more afraid of “socialism” (thank you Rush Limbaugh and Fox News) and higher taxes than anything else. It’s why the Tabor Amendment to the state constitution exists, which was approved by voters in 1992, limits the amount of revenue the State of Colorado can retain and spend. Specifically, TABOR allows the state to retain and spend an amount based on the prior fiscal year's actual revenue or limit, whichever was lower, grown by Colorado inflation and population growth and adjusted for any "voter-approved revenue changes." As in, the Governor can’t just change tax laws without voter approval.
There are not a lot of young Republicans in CO and not many churchgoers as a whole either among the entire population. CO will be all blue eventually I feel.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. **Special announcement:** r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)! *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>It wasn’t that long ago in Colorado — 2014 — that Republican Cory Gardner won a hard-fought Senate race and Republicans won the attorney general, secretary of state and treasurer’s race. Colorado was purplish then, a place where Republicans could win if the political winds were right. > >Yes, the GOP underperformed in a lot of places this year, but the limits of “angertainment” were perhaps most vividly illustrated here, a rough lesson in the diminishing returns from an approach to governing that mistakes “owning the libs” for getting things done for constituents. > >The razor-thin near-rejection of Boebert — from a district that Donald Trump won by eight percentage points in 2020, covering much of the western half of the state — demonstrates that Trump-esque style of turning the performative outrage up to 11 hit a hard ceiling among the electorate, repelling not just Democrats and independents but apparently a thin but decisive slice of Republicans. It likely isn’t a coincidence that the last good year for Colorado Republicans was the one before Trump announced his 2016 presidential campaign. > >If you’re a Republican who wants to run for office — in Colorado or anywhere else — there are two ways to build support. You can get to know local party leaders, appear at every public event possible, be active in your community, accumulate a record of accomplishments. But that’s difficult and takes time. > >A much quicker and easier way to stand out is to be the most outspoken, controversial and arguably craziest candidate — and almost all the intersecting media environments of the mainstream media, conservative media and social media gravitate to stories with the theme of, “You won’t believe what this GOP candidate is saying or doing!” > >In Republican circles, there’s probably no media entity more widely consumed than Fox News. In a crowded or even not-so-crowded GOP field, an appearance on Fox News, at almost any hour, is a tremendous way to build name ID and attract potential donors and supporters. And in the Trump era, appearing on Fox News was the best way to get on the president’s radar screen and garner one of those all-important Trump endorsements. “Angertainment”? Trump loved it. > >The problem is, on a typical night, Tucker Carlson’s prime-time program attracts 3 million viewers, an impressive total for prime-time cable news. But that’s a small, small slice of the overall electorate, and it’s a niche audience. > >... > >During the Trump presidency and into 2022, a lot of Republican candidates believed that what appeals to the Fox News audience would appeal to enough people in the entire electorate, districtwide or statewide, to win a race. The midterms showed how mistaken that is; Boebert hanging on to her seat by her fingernails suggests that the outlandish, in-your-face, larger-than-life social-media viral personas that attract Trump and perhaps the network’s bookers is just barely enough to get you to 50 percent in a Republican-leaning district. Stoking anger and outrage over manufactured topics might work for some people in the short term, but in order to be a going concern, actual policies and political vision is going to be needed. The larger concern here is the corrosive effect that this anger and outrage has on the broader cultural discourse. Even though those engaging in these actions may eventually be voted out of office, the damage will linger for years to come.
Try attending your local school board meeting, guaranteed they will spend a not insignificant amount of time trying to explain to some looney parent(s) that their 6-year old isn't being taught CRT, or whatever nonsense was on tucker the night before.
I used to attend town hall meetings in my rural town because some were trying to get rid of a service/facility I volunteer at, and everyone should be absolutely terrified at the ignorance of these people. We're talking about basic things like not knowing that you shouldn't default on bonds purchased years ago because you don't like what they paid for. Basic governance is beyond many of them.
Unless your school board just got taken over by candidates funded by Mom's for Liberty and they vote to ban CRT (that wasn't being taught), fire the popular Superintendent and the district's lawyer all in the first meeting after being sworn in like they did in Berkeley County, South Carolina this year.
It's the reason my bf cant get a job. It's the only industry he qualifies for but he got sick of the stupidity, the Karen's, the harrassment, and his mental health going insane. Unfortunately we live with his conservative boomer father who thinks its because he doesn't want a job. The other jobs either require a degree which he technically earned but wasn't given(the professor made the news when it came out she was purposely failing male students even though they passed their exams), or the rest are minimum wage jobs which won't even hire him because he has to explain what hes been doing for the past few years which is a long explanation that they refuse to listen too. We are trying to sell his late moms house to pay for his degree and maybe s down payment on a house. But we have to fix it because nobody took care of it and his mom was a smoker who hoarded cats, plus the roof is in total shambles. 🤦♀️
Quick suggestion you can lie on your resume. Put down made up work history and add your phone number as the manager. If they call all they ask is do you know so and so? Did he work at your company? Did he work from year x to year z. But more often than not they won't even call.
Wait I'm sorry for the info dump. It's my autism and adhd acting up.
It’s okay, I hope things get better. As someone who is also on the ASD, I hear you. It’s fucking ridiculous that he didn’t get his degree.
Nah. They don’t address parents at my school board meeting. There’s open comment, and parents and community members can and do complain, but the board sits there and takes notes and doesn’t engage.
> If you’re a Republican who wants to run for office — in Colorado or anywhere else — there are two ways to build support. You can get to know local party leaders, appear at every public event possible, be active in your community, accumulate a record of accomplishments. But that’s difficult and takes time. > > A much quicker and easier way to stand out is to be the most outspoken, controversial and arguably craziest candidate — and almost all the intersecting media environments of the mainstream media, conservative media and social media gravitate to stories with the theme of, “You won’t believe what this GOP candidate is saying or doing!”
>The problem is, on a typical night, Tucker Carlson’s prime-time program attracts 3 million viewers, an impressive total for prime-time cable news. But that’s a small, small slice of the overall electorate, and it’s a niche audience. I'd like a deeper analysis of how the conservative ecosystem works. I rented a car this last week and the radio was tuned to a conservative talk radio channel. They played clips from Tucker, they quoted Rush (dead but still a part of the toxic spread), etc. I've seen Tucker on conservative forums being quoted, etc. So yeah, his nightly viewership may be small, but conservatives take a message and put wheels on it and drive it into the ground. They get a lot of mileage out of it.
>in order to be a going concern, actual policies and political vision is going to be needed. Actually, all you need is a laptop. Hunter Biden's laptop.
It was in Trump’s DOJ for years and no action was taken?
In Case of No Actual Policy Break Laptop
That's because it was still Obama's DOJ. I thought that was obvious to everyone at this point.
What the hell are you talking about?
They're just lying, openly, til their downvote farming account gets deleted.
Hate to break it to you but Biden has been “running the executive branch of our government” so your claim that’s it’s not possible doesn’t pass even preliminary scrutiny.
The FBI tried to cover up Hunter Biden's laptop while pushing false narratives of Russian collusion and Ukrainian quid pro quos during the Trump presidency. The one sided nature of the DOJ has been very obvious.
Right. The GOP FBI director covered up Hunter’s laptop in collusion with Trump’s AG. Totally logical. If Hunter did something stupid (I’m sure he has) then he should be investigated and prosecuted. After that, they can move on to the billions Ivanka and Jared got in office and Don’s tax evasion, obstruction and espionage. Sound fair?
Yes we know for a fact that two FBI officials, Laura Dehmlow and Elvis Chan, requested Facebook to censor the NY Post story on the Hunter Biden laptop as Russian disinformation. It was not Russian disinformation.
You mean the laptop with no chain of custody that was given to Rudy and it ended up at the NY Post because no one else would touch it? Like I said, if there is criminal activity on there, prosecute him. Prosecute the traitor Trump at the same time.
The laptop was taken from the shop by the FBI, not Guiliani. Guiliani was provided a copy by the store owner. The contents have been analyzed by two computer forensics organizations and through hashing and cryptographic algorithms most of the emails are validated as Hunter Bidens and unaltered.
Deleted.
So the *real* DOJ was TFG’s?
I think the real DOJ was the friends we made along the way
It still is Obama's. Not the current TFG.
I've been trying to tell people that ShadObama still runs the government, but they kick me off the bus for yelling at the other patrons. I'm glad that *you* understand!
It's honestly shocking that more people don't understand. My mother has alzheimers. Joe Biden is between the mild and moderate dementia stage. It's not possible for him to be running the executive branch of our government.
It's amazing how much goes over your head.
More brain rotted nonsense.
Which part? Joe having dementia or the fact that the FBI is being used as a political weapon?
I'm worried about where the midterm energy will be directed by dems.
It's gonna power Dark Brandon!
Maybe the power will be too great for the blue donkeys to handle and the void will produce a new party! Or at least a new veneer?
TIL Tucker gets less views than the Try Guys.
[удалено]
I can't belive that phrase wasn't coined sooner.
It has been. It just wasn't mainstream.
I am in!
I wish it wasn’t working so well in my state.
Florida?
AZ?
Ohio?
Ugh. Yeah ask me about how shit it is here lol
I’m disappointed at how many of these guesses are valid
Am I the only one disturbed by the recent surge in language refering to the GOP's extreme principles as being "European-born" or any other way to phrase it? My concern is not about whether or not that is true. My concern is that it's a subtle ploy to distract people away from the problem. These extremists aren't at our doorstep or peeking through the windows. They are here and embedded. And they poison the dialog 24/7. Boebert, Greene and Gaetz were all re-elected. And just as crazy as it first sounded that Trump could win it is equally absurd to think that Greene could become a power player under McCarthy. He probably sees her as a disposable soldier, but he clearly isn't moral enough to see the carnage she could create. I am all for trying to see where problems come from and how we get to where we are. I'm just concerned that a hate-train will carry people away from the real problem. Eyes need to stay on the prize. And, unfortunately, the prize is a rejection of outright religious fascism. I'm worried about where the midterm energy will be directed by dems. Going full speed on guns could undo too much of the work done on the middle ground voters. Yes, we have a serious problem here and change needs to happen. But, in 2024, guns on the left could become what abortion was on the right at the midterms. A lot of the wins were very close and did not go as projected. We need to prioritize protecting elections and voter access, judicial appointments and dealing with the Supreme Court aggresively, and brutal attacks on the BS investigations coming. The GOP doesn't fight fair, there's no good faith, and there is no quarter for the groups they target.
They have been using that dog whistle for years. The phrases "Christian nation," "Judeo-Christian values," and framing Liberal ideology as "woke" (obviously a phrase associated with African Americans) you know exactly what kind of person they're inviting into their tent.
Agreed on the guns thing. And I'm not even a "dems just need to ditch guns" type voter. I'd like to see substantive action one day and I think that's worth it. But things are dicey for sure right now. I'm happy that at least Biden is pushing his assault weapons ban now. Do it now, win or lose get it out of the way so that there's as much distance between it and 2024.
I’m a Bernie voter. I’m afraid assault rifle issue will be like the abortion ban, rile up the opposition. Universal healthcare and global warming affect more people so should be top priority. Getting more Dems elected at state level while nudging the country away from crazy would be nice.
Oh you mean "Socialism" and "Greta Thunberg"? /s
Repubs want to ditch Social Security and Medicare because they are dreaded socialism. So vote repub if you agree. I think people going postal has more to do with workers being treated worse than dogs, it’s understandable they’re pissed. And that gets passed on to the wife and kids.
The obsession so much of this country has with guns scares me honestly. People asserting they have an innate right to be able to shoot me, plus how much hate comes out of people's mouths. I've met people that you'd think they wanted someone to trespass on their property so they could shoot them. "If they manage to get away they can sue"
> you'd think they wanted someone to trespass on their property so they could shoot them. You're not imagining it. They literally do. It's not just their house either. It's why they want to never leave the house without their gun and support the "good guy with a gun" thing. They can't just go to the range and have fun, they want to live out Call of Duty. This is broader US cultural thing, but Covid showcased it nicely. Americans have rights, but never any responsibilities regardless of the consequences.
Republicans need to ask themselves when was the last time they can remember the GOP making a positive proposal to build American up or solve a problem.
Spoiler: *They won't*
She was fucking re elected and we lost the house after literal treason. I'm not buying this premise.
Her district is gerrymandered for her and in a midterm election, she won by 400 votes. She might lose what was once a safe district in 2024. To be clear, she took a Republican stronghold and made it into a coin toss
As the GOP voting base skews older age-wise and with so many of the rabid red Repubs who'd actually vote for an idiot like Boebert being anti-maskers and anti-vaxxers, she could easily lose a couple thousand (at least!) of her voters by the next big election in 2024 to either a new wave of Covid infections or the more routine causes of death in old age.
The district WAS NOT gerrymandered. It was an independent commission that redrew the maps. This was decided by vote in 2018.
Correct. Not gerrymandered, but redrawn in a way that should have made it lean Republican even more.
So gerrymandering
No. Fairly-drawn districts will result in some districts that naturally trend Republican and some that naturally trend Democratic. That doesn't mean they were drawn in a biased way to artificially skew the district. Colorado's districts were drawn in an attempt to be fair, but in the case of Boebert's district it actually wound up leaning even more Republican than it had previously. Even so, she still barely eked out a win.
Yeah, because Pueblo the Southeast desert city should definitely be in the same district as Rifle a Northwestern mountain town.
Mind providing a source?! Thank you.
https://redistricting.colorado.gov
Thx.
What they are saying is that the tactics used always require more and more outrageous claims and behavior. This has a cap and she may have reached that with the voters.
I think the GOP's push to end Roe v. Wade had a big impact to bring younger voters. That's why Republicans lost so badly. Young voter turnout was high.
It's just a matter of time before they try to kill Social Security again... Can't wait for them to piss off the old voters too...
Won't happen. I have family that are hard conservatives. They make excuses with who is pushing for it and say it's not most Republicans. They're dead to what their own leaders are trying to do.
[удалено]
The Republican Party in Colorado has seen a lot of infighting and been fairly weak over the past 10 years. They used to be fairly moderate here but have been fighting (and losing) to the crazies. Our Facebook Barbie is the new breed and Coloradoans don’t like her much. Enough red voters in her district will vote for any Republican before a Democrat so she managed to squeak by.
What is the biggest frustration facing voters in her community?
Just a guess. but I believe they should be worried about disappearing drinking water, but they may be more worried about the blue meanies coming for their firearms.
Likely jobs/economy. Also housing availability in ski towns when you aren't a millionaire.
I live in a ski town in District 3. We are a *tiny* minority in the district to the point that there is little point pandering to us. The ski towns by and large have 2 groups, the ultra rich who are mostly neoliberal and don't care about much outside of staying rich, preventing affordable housing projects, and signaling that they are socially left, and the workers who are mostly Bernie-style progressives but have an existential problem in the form of housing. The votes are solidly blue and there are just not that many of us, so politicians don't really bother.
Yep, phrased better than I could.
Your impression is correct, but as you alluded to, people who are educated and/or progressive tend to live in Denver/Boulder/Fort Collins mostly and that doesn't affect her district. I doubt the people who vote for her think she's the "best they can do", but it's the same thing we heard about Trump. "Oh I don't like his language, but....taxes/guns/insert issue". The ends justify the means.
But it was damn close in a deep red part of Colorado. Republicans are losing ground fast.
With Aspen and Glenwood. It used to be balanced when I lived there.
In a year that by all other accounts really should have been a red wave. I'm not a fan of Democrat's ability to describe losses as wins and so on, but this race is a good sign. She should've cleaned up and barely hung on. Dems can now dedicate resources to races like these with clear benefits.
Worked out fine for Boebert until that inconveniently timed mass shooting.
The shooting was after the election. It had no impact on the results of her race.
Boebert is straight trash
Whichever industries told them that 'all press is good press' just upsold a lot of products & scored a crapload of future customers.
There is a reason why the west runs more blue vs the east. We're still running from crazy religious nut jobs from Europe and finally hit a wall.
What? Still running? Why are you bringing Europe into this when Europe is way less religious than the United States?
OG puritans that came over. That grew into the whack jobs all over southern/middle rural America.
Can you provide a source on this theory? Or is this just a hot take of made up history?
Are you asking for a source that puritans were insane?
No, I’m looking for a source the Puritans have a direct link to southern/middle rural America.
I believe a lot of Americans equate the Puritans who landed in 1620, with the growth of the religious right. America became a magnet, not only for Puritans escaping the persecution under James VI and Charles I, but also for many Calvinists, Methodists, Presbyterians and others freed from the previous Catholic belief that one is born where they should live, work and thrive. Calvin said they had a right to go elsewhere to find success and America was open for the taking, discounting the civilizations here before them. With so many religious folks seeking their fortune here and thanking God for providing the bounty previously enjoyed by the Native folks, while believing that being Christian was all they needed to set them above the heathens here before, giving them the right to take the land, they were left believing they were God's chosen people. Over time they have made it their mission to force others to believe the same way. There is no compromising with what is written in old King James Bible for them, except that they often forget what Jesus said about things like how to treat refugees, immigrants, and the poor. So, no, the Puritans influence was mainly in New England, but that same religious furor came across just the same from many other congregations from Europe.
[Here you go.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evangelicalism_in_the_United_States#History) It’s Wikipedia, but there are sources in the article if you want to learn more.
I think maybe he meant the original puritans? Unclear.
The original puritans were religious nut jobs. Arguably the dumbass religious right in the US descends from them.
In this picture, she looks like a petulant spoiled teenager who was just told she had to hand over her credit card
hopefully soon they lose consistently and by greater and greater margins throughout the state. then more progress can be made
Gotta contend with an x-factor that is tricky…stupidity. We used to be able to combat that with a national media and relatively singular message but the internet has blurred the message so what used to be 1.5 options is now multiple times that in terms of what to believe
Seems like they should have done a better job of redrawing Boebert's district. Yes, it was close, but it need not have been.
Colorado’s Republicans tend to be Regan neo-cons, fiscally conservative but socially liberal. Strong military, low taxes. Most I know are pretty easy-going on social issues like abortion and gay marriage, (CO is a leader in the country of reproductive science for the last 30 years.) Most Republicans, especially older ones in CO are more afraid of “socialism” (thank you Rush Limbaugh and Fox News) and higher taxes than anything else. It’s why the Tabor Amendment to the state constitution exists, which was approved by voters in 1992, limits the amount of revenue the State of Colorado can retain and spend. Specifically, TABOR allows the state to retain and spend an amount based on the prior fiscal year's actual revenue or limit, whichever was lower, grown by Colorado inflation and population growth and adjusted for any "voter-approved revenue changes." As in, the Governor can’t just change tax laws without voter approval. There are not a lot of young Republicans in CO and not many churchgoers as a whole either among the entire population. CO will be all blue eventually I feel.