Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You just don't get it do ya? This wasn't a vote against a politician who voted for gun laws, it was a recall of a politician who ignored the will of their specific constituents
In this case, that's a a distinction without a difference.
Not to mention it's not even necessarily true. Had the constituency voted in it's normal, general election numbers, these elections easily could have gone the other way. This was a well conducted recall effort by a very vocal and very angry set of constituents - perhaps a majority, perhaps not.
In this case, that's a a distinction without a difference.
Not to mention it's not even necessarily true. Had the constituency voted in it's normal, general election numbers, these elections easily could have gone the other way. This was a well conducted recall effort by a very vocal and very angry set of constituents - perhaps a majority, perhaps not.
Who voted does not matter. Who gets the seat the next go around does not matter. Whether the rest of Colorado agrees with the recall or not does not matter.What matters is the message that was sent matters.
Who voted does not matter. Who gets the seat the next go around does not matter. Whether the rest of Colorado agrees with the recall or not does not matter.What matters is the message that was sent matters.
Gross misuse of the recall. The recall is a mechanism to remove corrupt officials from office. It's not suppose to be used to remove politicians because of their votes on political issues. The mechanism for that is called THE NEXT ELECTION.
The Morse recall was especially gross in the cost to taxpayers - the man was term limited and couldn't seek re-election next year anyway.
Someone should tell that to the Democrats in Wisconsin.
This was not just about Colorado. To use an old analogy, it was a "shot across to bow" to all of the authoritarian control-freak politicians, both left and right, who think that they can ignore their constituents and shred the Constitution without consequences. Their days are numbered.
This was not just about Colorado. To use an old analogy, it was a "shot across to bow" to all of the authoritarian control-freak politicians, both left and right, who think that they can ignore their constituents and shred the Constitution without consequences. Their days are numbered.
amen, its alot like who hard working, successful, freedom loving, gun owning Americans are leaving California, Going Galt.
Just curious how exactly did this change the gun laws in Colorado? Oh they didn't, hmmmm, does not sound like a win to me, especially since the probablity is those two seats will end up being filled by to people that will still support the laws. I do find it interesting that the same people that scream States Rights all the time are up in arms when a State actually uses their political power to pass laws those same people disagree with, is it States Rights only when you agree with what they are doing?
This was not just about Colorado. To use an old analogy, it was a "shot across to bow" to all of the authoritarian control-freak politicians, both left and right, who think that they can ignore their constituents and shred the Constitution without consequences. Their days are numbered.
The majority of their constituents agree with the law. You were saying?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.