Any good source of information on candidates? (Denver, Thornton: how much, house)

[emm74]

Originally Posted by mic111

The reason prop 112 is on the ballot is that they are trying to drill concentrated fracking pads in the suburbs of Denver. It is a big issue in Broomfield/Thornton and I would imagine also Aurora. Any place over a gas deposit. Please vote yes on it. The gases will contaminate all of the front range's air.

The only reason unsafe fracking is occurring is because it is the cheapest way to get the resources out right now. There will be other technologies in the future that are safer for our environment. Colorado should hold out for safer technologies and keep the environment as clean as we can. You can't go back and undo the contamination.

I agree with this. And when there are safer ways to do it, the boundaries can be changed again.

But go online, look at video of what these sites are like. If you are honestly willing to have one a few hundred feet from your house, go ahead and vote No and keep the boundary at 500 feet. But if you don't want it near your home or your child's school, don't expect other people to put up with it either, and vote Yes to make it 2500 feet.

[mic111]

Emm74,
I think we are both saying the same. YES puts the 2500 ft limitation in place. NO lets the oil and gas industry put it a few hundred feet from people houses.

I have run across many people thinking NO will protect people from having it next to their houses. You have to vote YES to put the protections in place.

[emm74]

Originally Posted by mic111

Emm74,
I think we are both saying the same. YES puts the 2500 ft limitation in place. NO lets the oil and gas industry put it a few hundred feet from people houses.

I have run across many people thinking NO will protect people from having it next to their houses. You have to vote YES to put the protections in place.

Absolutely, I am saying to vote YES on 112.

I said it backwards in my post and just went back and edited for clarification. Thanks for the heads up.

[SkyDog77]

Originally Posted by emm74

I agree with this. And when there are safer ways to do it, the boundaries can be changed again.

But go online, look at video of what these sites are like. If you are honestly willing to have one a few hundred feet from your house, go ahead and vote No and keep the boundary at 500 feet. But if you don't want it near your home or your child's school, don't expect other people to put up with it either, and vote Yes to make it 2500 feet.

The one thing I can’t seem to sift through is what is real and what is hyperbole in the oil and gas companies’ threats about the financial implications of this passing.

[emm74]

Originally Posted by SkyDog77

The one thing I can’t seem to sift through is what is real and what is hyperbole in the oil and gas companies threats about the financial implications of this passing.

Depends on who you ask, really.

This gives a bit of info on both sides, with the ultimate conclusion being that no one will really know unless 112 passes and we see what actually happens - which I personally think is a bit of a backdoor way of saying that the No on 112 claims are perhaps a bit overblown

https://kdvr.com/2018/10/24/411-on-p...rados-economy/

[McGowdog]

Originally Posted by davebarnes

Is not.
The GOP has become the party of hate.
It deserves to die a fiery death at the ballot box.

For 48 years of voting, I researched candidates and voted for Republicans and Libertarians many times.
No more!
I will never vote for a GOP again.

I'm voting R straight down the board.

I would vote for Manchin if I could. He's the only decent democrat on the planet at this time.

Originally Posted by davebarnes

It is not naïve.
The GOP is the Party of Hate®.
The party needs to die.
You cannot kill it if GOPers are elected.

P.S. Qualifications for the job are a luxury we can no longer afford.

Originally Posted by COcheesehead

And emotional.

Originally Posted by Joey2k

Your hyperpartisan hysterics aren't what was asked for and aren't welcome here. If all you are going to do is mindlessly bash Republicans please do it somewhere other than my thread. I'm not a Republican but you are actually making me more sympathetic to them.

otowi, thanks for the link.

I hear ya, but good luck with that.

[mic111]

Originally Posted by SkyDog77

The one thing I can’t seem to sift through is what is real and what is hyperbole in the oil and gas companies’ threats about the financial implications of this passing.

I think they are way over stating the financial implications. There are work arounds. They can buy the homes within the 2500 ft and knock them down. They can use different technologies to extract the material and/or located them in areas with the required set backs.

112 is all about set backs to protect home owners and school children. It is a shame that the oil and gas industry does not take it upon themselves to protect people's health but they don't. As a result 112 was formulated.

If we get earth quakes from the fracking it won't just be the homes within 2500 ft that are impacted. It is a shame that 112 doesn't actually ban fracking. It just requires a larger set back than is currently required.

A YES on 112 doesn't actually harm O&G except it sets a precedent for other states which is why they are spending the big $s on misleading ads. And they have to spend a little more money acquiring sites because they have to buy more land. This is the real reason they don't want it to pass. They don't want to have to spend the money to buy land for their sites. They would rather be able to plunk the mega pads they are planning right next to existing residential developments.

To the extent that existing home owners won't sell them their homes to make into fracking mega pads and accommodate a 2500 ft set back, I applaud them. People looking out for their neighbors is one of the things that makes this country great.

Edit: Wanted to add that the oil and gas industry not only doesn't want to pay for the land around the wells they want individual home owners to take the hit to their house values. Who is better equipped to bear the cost of the safer set back that a YES on 112 would provide? Obviously the oil and gas industry and not individual home owners.

What happens to individual home owners that suddenly find a fracking mega pad planned close to their house? They can try to sell but at what loss in price? Who are the buyers who would buy such a home? If their kids get leukemia because they couldn't sell then who has to find a way to pay the medical bills? Obviously the parents, but all our insurance rates will be affected. There are many important reasons to vote YES on 112.

[BarryK123]

Originally Posted by emm74

Absolutely, I am saying to vote YES on 112.

I did, even before you said what you said.

The odd thing is I've seen no advertising FOR 112; just all the oil and gas industries' lies about how it will affect the economy.

[mic111]

Originally Posted by BarryK123

The odd thing is I've seen no advertising FOR 112; just all the oil and gas industries' lies about how it will affect the economy.

Sadly that is true. It is because 112 was put together because oil and gas wasn't listening to the people on our city councils or the citizens in the neighborhoods they want to build their mega fracking pads. Basically our neighbors. They can't afford big money for ads. They have generously donated their time for the benefit of all. It is a grass roots effort by concerned citizens and not backed by any industry.

[Katarina Witt]

Originally Posted by davebarnes

You elect a GOPer county clerk who becomes a state rep who becomes a US rep and there you are—a
Dumpster® lover affecting the lives of millions of people.
Evil needs to be stamped out early and often.

"Slippery Slope" is a logical fallacy. Our president never moved up the ladder like that; he just decided he wanted to be POTUS. Maybe we need a new party, but there has to be some "loyal opposition".