Skip to comments.Tea Party favorite Ken Buck is back for a run at U.S. Senate
Posted on 02/03/2014 8:02:55 AM PST by SoConPubbieEdited on 02/03/2014 9:14:42 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
WOODLAND PARK - Ken Buck is watching what he says.
The Republican prosecutor became a symbol for his party's political overreach in 2010, when he beat the establishment pick in a U.S. Senate primary, only to lose to Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet.
(Excerpt) Read more at gazette.com ...
Sure glad Abe Lincoln didn’t listen to similar sage advice.
Was Ken Coors unavailable ? Here’s another race for Buck to blow.
Buck is a bad choice....he has no self-discipline, does not comprehend the concept of “messaging” and with his severe cancer, probably will not live out his first term (which will last until January 2021).
I’d rather re-run Ryan Frazier.
Did he file to run in any primary in 1968? No.
Perfect. Stay on target and just keep hitting it.
Correct, that’s another safe topic in CO.
Conservatives lost in states where Romney won. Too many were not ready for prime time. If you or someone you know is thinking of running for office start here:
“Did he file to run in any primary in 1968? No.”
Sometimes there are people who have to be right, 100% of the time.....even when they know they are wrong. ;-)
Isn’t Frazier pro-abortion or pro-same-sex-marriage or something like that? We need a candidate that can hold the entire GOP coalition together—if we don’t get a huge turnout from social conservatives we can’t win statewide in CO.
Frazier might not be a bad candidate for Perlmutter’s CO-07, though, since it’s less socially conservative than the state as a whole and we may need to think outside the box to win there under the new lines.
Yeah, I know, those people are terrible. Some even go as far as to change the definition of words in an attempt to maintain that they are correct.
We need to find a better Tea Party candidate for this race.
“I gave the guy a $1000.00 because it was such a sure win. But he blew it.”
For some reasons, our candidates are really good at this. Go back to the 2012 cycle and there was Richard Mourdock in Indiana and Todd Akin in Missouri.
Both of them simply had to keep their mouths shut and stay to the script - but they couldn’t or wouldn’t. We pretty much had both of these seats nailed down before each of them opened their mouths.
I gave money to Mourdock too.
Yes, that is true.
That’s what caused us problems in 2010 and 2012... TEA Party candidates wandering off message. They tend to have a penchant for shooting from the hip.
There are numerous other credible Republicans seeking to challenge Udall. Owen Hill or Amy Stephens might be a good choice. Conservatives need to pick one and get behind them. Buck doesn't deserve another chance after he screwed up a winnable race.
“He ran for the republicans nomination and did not win that nomination until his third try.” He mae a good run for it and as such deserved it. Buck did not and does not. He blew
a golden oppurtunity that should of been won.
If Boner and Yertle the Turtle manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory this election by pushing the "immigration reform" that the amnesty scumbags Gutierrez, Schumer, Dear Leader, and the entire Demoncrat Party, GOP-e, and the Chamber of
Commerce Horrors like, the Senate maybe ain't goin' nowhere except back to Hairy Reid's clutches. The GOP base is apt to stay home and let the entire Stupid Party ship sink so they can continue to play the part of the abused girl friend.
Frankly, they will deserve it but we won't.
He ran for the republicans nomination and did not win that nomination until his third try.”
“He made a good run for it and as such deserved it. Buck did not and does not. He blew a golden oppurtunity that should have been won.”
I was not trying to be a history buff or look down upon anyone.
My point was that just because someone loses on his first try then he should not necessarily drop-out forever. The way the poster worded his post is that anyone who loses on the first try should simply give up.....or at least that is the way I read it.
Sorry for the confusion. ;-)
Did the low information voters understand Obamacare in 2010?
There is also the gun control issue.
You are so right. He may have won in 2010 had he not taken David Gregory’s bait about whether homosexuality is a choice. But he wasn’t bright enough to turn the question into an opportunity to go after the Democrats by saying “David, this isn’t what the voters of Colorado are voting on in November or what they’re concerned with. They’re worried about keeping their jobs if they have one, or finding one if they don’t. Coloradans are worried about what will become of their healthcare under Obamacare and their kids having to pick up the tab for this and so much other wasteful deficit spending coming out of the Obama White House and Pelosi/Reid Congress. These are the things that are driving Coloradans, not speculation about homosexuality.” Had he said that it would have been a slam dunk and he’d probably have won. That he wasn’t smart enough to know how to handle the media and how to not fall prey to their snares tells me he’s not ready for prime time—then or now. The fact is, much like where I live in California, Colorado has no decent GOP candidates. Sad.