Don't we have someone better than Ken Buck in Colorado?

[Bastiat's The Law]

I heard he's running for Senate again and poised to win the primary, again. He strikes me as a Santorum/Social conservative type that will say something completely stupid and the Dem will beat him in the general again. These churchy types are very easy to make look foolish and out of touch. He's also anti-marijuana legalization. He's a big drug war zealot, no?

 

[eduardo89]

He's also anti-marijuana legalization. He's a big drug war zealot, no?

From what I remember during his 2010 campaign is he said it's a state issue. He was against Colorado legalising it, but he said that's a choice the state should make on it's own, not the federal government.

So if he's running for federal office with that position, I'm fine with it. Rand says he's also against legalisation, but thinks it's a state issue that the federal government should stay out of. So they have essentially the same position.

 

[eduardo89]

Owen Hill is also running, and I think he's been endorsed by Ron Paul and the RLC.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

Owen Hill is also running, and I think he's been endorsed by Ron Paul and the RLC.

We need to raise his profile.

 

[jj-]

Ken Buck is an anti 10th amendment, pro-centralization authoritarian on the drug issue, if I recall correctly, or at least he was against legalizing it.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

So is Buck probably a 1 star or 2 star liberty candidate?

 

[jj-]

So is Buck probably a 1 star or 2 star liberty candidate?

Pat Robertson is more of a liberty candidate that Buck. Buck is an authoritarian.

 

[eduardo89]

Ken Buck is an anti 10th amendment, pro-centralization authoritarian on the drug issue, if I recall correctly, or at least he was against legalizing it.

He's not anti-10th amendment, even though he is anti-legalisation. He think that states should decide that issue themselves.

Ken Buck: Medical Marijuana In Colorado Is "None Of The Federal Government's Business"

The Republican hopeful bucked convention on a number of other fronts during his stump. When asked for his views on the complicated legal issues surrounding the medicinal use of marijuana, as permitted in the Colorado Constitution, Buck emphasized state's rights.

"If the State of Colorado decides it wants to legalize marijuana, the marijuana is grown in Colorado, it is distributed in Colorado, it is used in Colorado, it is none of the federal government's business what happens here," he said. "The federal government needs to understand what the 10th Amendment says."

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

Owen Hill is also running, and I think he's been endorsed by Ron Paul and the RLC.

Is Owen a 4 or 5 star candidate?

 

[MichaelDavis]

Ken Buck is not a bad candidate. Look up his Campaign For Liberty survey. Buck is so far ahead that it's not even worth promoting Hill (Buck is polling at a near majority with 45% while Hill is at 2%).

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2013/PPP_Release_CO_120613.pdf

 

[AlbertJNocke]

Ken Buck is not a bad candidate. Look up his Campaign For Liberty survey. Buck is so far ahead that it's not even worth promoting Hill (Buck is polling at a near majority with 45% while Hill is at 2%).

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2013/PPP_Release_CO_120613.pdf

Go through their issue pages on their websites (Buck's is nonexistent) and then tell me it's not worth promoting Hill. I'm not confident that Buck would go to DC and stand with our people. He reminds me much more of a Jeff Sessions than a Rand Paul. Not to mention the fact that due to his past statements he has very little shot of making this seat competitive. Polls right now are meaningless as they only represent name ID. Buck is known throughout the state which is why he polls best- but because he is already known it will be close to impossible for his numbers to ever improve. If he wins the nomination the Dems will destroy him, all it's going to take is a couple of ads focusing on buck's past statements to due him in.

Hill obviously needs to increase his name ID to make this competitive, but if he can do that, not only would he make a better liberty candidate than buck, he also would have a much greater chance of putting this seat in play in the general.

 

[T.hill]

From what I remember during his 2010 campaign is he said it's a state issue. He was against Colorado legalising it, but he said that's a choice the state should make on it's own, not the federal government.

So if he's running for federal office with that position, I'm fine with it. Rand says he's also against legalisation, but thinks it's a state issue that the federal government should stay out of. So they have essentially the same position.

Rand said he was against legalizing all drugs during an Iowa press conference when asked to specify a difference with his father.

So, no, I don't think he has come out against legalizing marijuana.

 

[devil21]

Not this stupid Ken Buck shit again.

I covered anti-weed, interventionist DISTRICT ATTORNEY Buck in the Liberty Candidates thread. Owen Hill is the Liberty candidate in the CO race.

 

[MichaelDavis]

Go through their issue pages on their websites (Buck's is nonexistent) and then tell me it's not worth promoting Hill. I'm not confident that Buck would go to DC and stand with our people. He reminds me much more of a Jeff Sessions than a Rand Paul. Not to mention the fact that due to his past statements he has very little shot of making this seat competitive. Polls right now are meaningless as they only represent name ID. Buck is known throughout the state which is why he polls best- but because he is already known it will be close to impossible for his numbers to ever improve. If he wins the nomination the Dems will destroy him, all it's going to take is a couple of ads focusing on buck's past statements to due him in.

Hill obviously needs to increase his name ID to make this competitive, but if he can do that, not only would he make a better liberty candidate than buck, he also would have a much greater chance of putting this seat in play in the general.

Buck is polling at a near majority with 45%, while Hill is at 2%. Please explain to me Hill's path to victory. Buck cannot be portrayed as too liberal, so Hill is dead in the water. Our time and money is better spent in other races like Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, etc.

 

[TaftFan]

Buck is going to run away with the primary IMO so I see no reason to get worked up about him. Hill really shot himself in the foot with Kenya comments.

I truly believe we have the momentum to win in three races: Greg Brannon (NC), Paul Broun (GA), and Chris McDaniel (MS). On a purity scale, Brannon is probably a bit better than Rand (since Rand has to be careful if he wants to run in 2016) and Broun and McDaniel are probably somewhat better than Mike Lee.

Brannon and Broun need the most resources devoted to them. McDaniel close to Cochran in polling already and has the backing of everybody.

I feel if we keep pushing them and also try to see what we can do unseat Lindsey Graham (with Lee Bright preferably, Nancy Mace would be fine as well), then we will be in great shape.

I'm putting Stockman/Stovall (TX), Bevin (KY), and Wolf (KS) on a lower priority. Their races are in the hands of national conservative groups.

 

[Brett85]

So if he's running for federal office with that position, I'm fine with it. Rand says he's also against legalisation, but thinks it's a state issue that the federal government should stay out of. So they have essentially the same position.

I don't think that Rand would actively campaign against legalizing marijuana like Buck did in Colorado, though. Rand simply hasn't come out for full legalization because he thinks doing that would hurt him in Iowa.

 

[erowe1]

I heard he's running for Senate again and poised to win the primary, again. He strikes me as a Santorum/Social conservative type that will say something completely stupid and the Dem will beat him in the general again. These churchy types are very easy to make look foolish and out of touch. He's also anti-marijuana legalization. He's a big drug war zealot, no?

Ken Buck is a churchy type? I definitely didn't get that impression from him during the last snafu we had with him.

 

[AlbertJNocke]

Buck is polling at a near majority with 45%, while Hill is at 2%. Please explain to me Hill's path to victory. Buck cannot be portrayed as too liberal, so Hill is dead in the water. Our time and money is better spent in other races like Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, etc.

Hill's path to victory is tricky but doable. Needs to portray Buck as unelectable in a general election (which many would agree with) and then make the case that he and not Stephens is the only electable true conservative in the race.

I agree that the poll is not good for Hill but I think it's too early to pronounce him dead especially since the people behind the CO State Senate Recalls have announced that they will be working for Hill to get him onto the ballot. Should give him a lot of street cred with the grassroots.

http://coloradostatesman.com/content/994615-gop-candidates-petition-ballot

Hill has also done a good job keeping pace fundraising wise with Buck. All he really needs is 1 or 2 outside groups to get behind him to raise his name ID and then he's in the game.

Like I said, difficult but doable.

 

[AlbertJNocke]

Buck is going to run away with the primary IMO so I see no reason to get worked up about him. Hill really shot himself in the foot with Kenya comments.

I truly believe we have the momentum to win in three races: Greg Brannon (NC), Paul Broun (GA), and Chris McDaniel (MS). On a purity scale, Brannon is probably a bit better than Rand (since Rand has to be careful if he wants to run in 2016) and Broun and McDaniel are probably somewhat better than Mike Lee.

Brannon and Broun need the most resources devoted to them. McDaniel close to Cochran in polling already and has the backing of everybody.

I feel if we keep pushing them and also try to see what we can do unseat Lindsey Graham (with Lee Bright preferably, Nancy Mace would be fine as well), then we will be in great shape.

I'm putting Stockman/Stovall (TX), Bevin (KY), and Wolf (KS) on a lower priority. Their races are in the hands of national conservative groups.

I actually think that out of all of our candidates McDaniel has the best shot of winning. I think Brannon and Broun could both very easily win their primaries, although the general may be tough for both of them, especially Broun because of all the establishment GOP money that will come in to help Nunn. I also think that the Wolf race may be a sleeper this cycle.

Still, IMO none of that means that we should totally give up on Hill at this point.

I think Hill is worth watching. If he starts building momentum then people should give him a look, and on the other hand, if he continues to poll at 2% then I agree that we should leave him behind and focus on others.

 

[eduardo89]

Hill made himself completely non-electable with the idiotic Kenya comment.