Colorado could have a Third Party Governor

www.rasmussenreports.com... nor

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Voters in Colorado finds Hickenlooper with 42% support, while Tancredo, the candidate of the American Constitution Party, earns 38% of the vote. Support for Republican Dan Maes continues to fall and now stands at 12%. Two percent (2%) prefer some other candidate, and six percent (6%) are undecided.

Less than two weeks ago, Tancredo earned 35% of the vote to Hickenlooper’s 43% and Maes’ 16%. That shifted the race from Solid Democrat to Leans Democrat in the Rasmussen Reports Election 2010 Gubernatorial Scorecard. Now the race moves to a Toss-Up.

More Polling

Tom Tancredo

Tom Tancredo is a former Republican and 2008 Presidential hopeful, known for his hard-line stances on immigration and culture, he has scored a 99/100 meaning he voted 99% Conservative. What makes this so great? He is running not as a Democrat or a Republican or an Independent, he is running as a Third Party candidate after leaving the GOP this year.

He is running as the Constitution Party candidate, if he wins he will be their first governor and first major office holder in American history.

Constitution Party

Colorado citizen here:

if our menu options are strawberry cheesecake, blueberry cheesecake, and chocolate chip cheesecake, is it really that exciting if we get blueberry instead of strawberry since we'll still be getting cheesecake no matter what? My point is that we'll still be getting a politician and no fruit topping will make it better.

reply to post by Alora


But you will could have a governor who does not bow down to the corporations like Repubs and Dems do. Remember the Constitution Party is not a major party and does not recieve much money from corporate sources. Tancredo could be a real alternative for once.

Originally posted by Misoir
reply to post by Alora

 

But you will could have a governor who does not bow down to the corporations like Repubs and Dems do. Remember the Constitution Party is not a major party and does not recieve much money from corporate sources. Tancredo could be a real alternative for once.

Not really:

Member of Congress


Tancredo has been a player in Washington since 1976 (first as a legislature) and finally as a congressman starting in 1999. His move from republican to constitution party was more likely because he thought he stood a better chance of winning the government seat, than due to any love he has of the people.

He has been in politics as long as I've been alive. He hasn't stood out from the other politicians in those 34 years until now, when it behooves his career to do so.

reply to post by Alora


You have a point.

But it is good for the Constitution Party to get such a high political office, this will allow for them to recieve more coverage and more money thus allowing other candidates to get into office. Maybe the Constitution Party could become an influential third party.

reply to post by Misoir


That would be nice, actually. The two party system is in shambles, and maybe having another competitor will make people try harder. Ah, well, we can hope

reply to post by Alora


And I shall!

In 2008, the Constitution Party Presidential candidate, Chuck Baldwin, received 199,314 votes. I am proud one of those was mine!

reply to post by WTFover


I did not follow his campaign because at that time I was a Socialist, but now I reject Socialism. I have read a lot about the Constitution Party, Paleoconservatism and Traditionalist Conservatism lately. I think if he does win it will help to bring the party much needed publicity just in time for a very rocky presidential election in 2 years.

Originally posted by Alora
Colorado citizen here:

if our menu options are strawberry cheesecake, blueberry cheesecake, and chocolate chip cheesecake, is it really that exciting if we get blueberry instead of strawberry since we'll still be getting cheesecake no matter what? My point is that we'll still be getting a politician and no fruit topping will make it better.

why would you compare a politician to cheesecake

as if its a bad thing?

Originally posted by Misoir
reply to post by WTFover

 

I did not follow his campaign because at that time I was a Socialist, but now I reject Socialism. I have read a lot about the Constitution Party, Paleoconservatism and Traditionalist Conservatism lately. I think if he does win it will help to bring the party much needed publicity just in time for a very rocky presidential election in 2 years.

So this 'rejection' of Socialism happened in the past few weeks?

Originally posted by Alora

Originally posted by Misoir
reply to post by Alora

 

But you will could have a governor who does not bow down to the corporations like Repubs and Dems do. Remember the Constitution Party is not a major party and does not recieve much money from corporate sources. Tancredo could be a real alternative for once.

Not really:

Member of Congress


Tancredo has been a player in Washington since 1976 (first as a legislature) and finally as a congressman starting in 1999. His move from republican to constitution party was more likely because he thought he stood a better chance of winning the government seat, than due to any love he has of the people.

He has been in politics as long as I've been alive. He hasn't stood out from the other politicians in those 34 years until now, when it behooves his career to do so.

Yes, that is indeed and interesting background, eh? As I recall, the same is true for Christine O'Donnal. How many other Republicans are just changing their label? How am I supposed to believe they are now truly independent after all these years?

reply to post by justadood


It has happened gradually over the past couple of months. It started with me accepting Culture, then me accepting Patriotism, then not supporting very secular government, then I began to question the welfare state, then I began to no longer call myself Liberal or Socialist, finally I have begun to open my mind to the possibilities of Conservatism and Capitalism.

You cannot change overnight, everything is gradual. I believe it was building up, when you begin to learn things such outrageous beliefs begin to leave your head.

This should be exciting news on ATS.

Originally posted by Misoir
This should be exciting news on ATS.

Why?

It's already been pointed out above that this guy isn't actually an 'independent' by any reasonable measure. Hes been GOP for decades. Why should we believe we changed overnight?

reply to post by justadood


Well on his website he says all corporate donations are prohibited, I don't know if that is for his whole campaign or just for the event he is sponsoring. I think it is good that he will be bringing a Third Party to a high office.

reply to post by Misoir


Tancredo is still a Republican. He just doesn't want to be smeared with the same **** that Palin has brought down on the GOP/TPM so he changed to Consti.

Actually what will happen in this race is that Tancredo will split the conservatives GOP vote and the Democrat will win.

This always happens when you have moderate GoPers and Fundys competing for the same office.

I would like to see a 3rd party emerge, but one with a platform and a true charismatic leader. Tancredo is a loser with just a anti immigration platform. That's not enough imo to win. The educated/moderate Denverites see Tancredo as a fool and without Denver you ain't got Jack.

Originally posted by Misoir
reply to post by justadood

 

Well on his website he says all corporate donations are prohibited, I don't know if that is for his whole campaign or just for the event he is sponsoring. I think it is good that he will be bringing a Third Party to a high office.

I personally fail to see how such a gesture erases decades of history with his 'former' party.

All I see is a diffrent lablel on old merchandise.

What will happen if by some chance Tancredo does win? Like most things history still provide us a guide. In the nineties, when Jesse Ventura shocked the nation by winning the governorship in Minnesota, the Reform party was poised to become a viable third party. Perot had taken sizeable amount of the popular vote in the prior two Presidential elections. The Reform party was then infiltrated by political operatives from both mainstream parties, who managed to make sure the Reform Party was nothing either should worry about by the next election.

reply to post by jefwane


and that is because merely starting a new party means NOTHING!.

Think about it- the problems arent the 'parties', its the corruption in DC from corporate lobbyists, etc. ANY 'party' going into a corrupted system will be corrupted.

IT's like having depleted soil. You can switch your crops around, but until you adjust the defficiencies in your soil, everything will grow poorly.