Hickenlooper Toupee

After Colorado’s Democratic legislators rammed through their knee-jerk magazine ban last year, angry Centennial State voters kicked two of the bastards out of office and forced a third to resign before she was voted out, too. A recent Quinnipiac University poll suggests that Democratic governor John Hickenlooper is feeling the heat of gun owners’ wrath as well. In an ominous signal of his re-election chances, his approval rating has dropped to below 50% for the first time in his term. And it’s not just because voters are offended by that horrible rug on his head, either . . .

Last month’s Q-poll revealed that Hickenlooper’s overall approval rating had dropped from a high of 66 percent just after the Aurora theater shooting, to a low of 48% in November 2013. Almost half of Coloradans (49%) say that he does not deserve a second term in office, while only 42% say he does.

Most Colorado voters rank jobs and the economy as their #1 concern, and the departure of thousands of skilled firearm-related jobs from the state wins the governor no love in this crucial regard. Entirely apart from economic concerns, Colorado voters strongly oppose (by 55% to 40%) more stringent gun control laws. The 15-round magazine limit is only supported by the slimmest possible plurality, 49% in favor to 48% opposed.

This is all good news for People Of The Gun, but potential disaster lurks in the fragmentation of Hickenlooper’s Republican opposition. The Colorado GOP is split between pragmatists and tea party activists,and Hickenlooper currently holds statistically significant leads of 4% to 6% over each of his potential GOP challengers.

If Hickenlooper is going to get the unceremonious dumping he deserves, the Colorado Republican Party needs to pick a credible candidate and stand behind him. Let’s do this, people.

Recommended For You

108 Responses to Q-Poll: Colorado Governor Hickenlooper In Big Trouble

        • Coming from Little Napoleon, it must have been a Brinks truck full of “holiday campaign contribution” cash. Shannon was driving the truck.

        • @Jus Bill

          And the Brinks truck was filled with armed guards. You know, to protect them from people with guns.

    • I see Hickenlooper in person regularly at various events around Colorado and, believe it or not, that is his real hair.

      • SURE it is! 😉

        It’s about as “real” as the “hair” of Johnstown Chiefs’ owner “Charlie McGrath” in SLAPSHOT. 🙂

  1. Hopefully the Democratic Party Leadership in Congress is making plans for private sector jobs after 2014.One blessing in disguise regarding Newtown ,is that it enticed the Democrats into slitting their own throats regarding gun control.

    Im confident in saying that the American electorate now knows what happens to their wallets and their gun hobby when Democrats are in the legislature, and will soon correct that mistake in less then a year’s time.Bring on the gnashing of teeth in the media!

    • Nice dreaming ST. ain’t gonna happen. Simple math. Look at the numbers of people benefiting in the pocket book by Dem’s. Biggest voting blocks. Welfare types and the soon to be legit immigrants.

      Yeah, conservatives may pick up a few seats. We have brain dead leadership of Tea Party, Republicans, and Libertarians, Do you harbor any thoughts those idiots can work together or produce legitimate, electable candidates in 2014 or 2016??

      Good luck with that. 2008 and 2012 is a good history lesson.

      • I believe that the Democratic party is led by rocket scientists and brain surgeons either.

        I feel truly bad for America if this three ring circus is the best we can do for leadership. There hasn’t been an actual statesman elected since the Eisenhower administration.

      • Soon to be legit immigrants may not be all that happy with the new status, especially if they didn’t want the legal responsibility of taxes.

  2. The republican party in general needs a revamping in its entirety.
    More so we need a legitimate 3rd party alternative.
    This county is so split between its people.
    Very few can really say they agree entirely with any one sides platforms.
    Its comes down to most I have spoken with is a one issue vote for most people.
    It has for me that’s for sure.
    Its seems to be a vote for whoever represents one issue and only one side of anything these days.
    If there are 80 million gun owners eligible to vote.
    There should be no issue if they all show up and vote for once.

    • There’s a legitimate reason why 3rd party doesn’t work. If a simple numbers example will suffice; 26% vote for A, 25% vote for B, 49% vote for C. C wins election, but 51% of the people disagree with C’s politics or preferred something different.

      You are correct, the conservative party needs a reform.

      As to party politics, Democrats will typically vote for their party candidate, even if they disagree with 30% of the politicians platform. By contrast, Republicans will ONLY vote when they agree with 90%+ of their party candidate’s platform. They stick together, even if they don’t agree with the politician’s platform. This is extremely telling, when you look at the numbers/statistics.

      • That’s why coalition governments exists. It also means that in order for the coalition parties to stay in power, they HAVE to negotiate and get things done. No coalition, no power, new elections. Granted, that is the parliamentary system, and I’m just waking up, so I haven’t thought out if or how it would work in ours. I have, however, figured out breakfast sounds like an amazing idea.

        • I don’t object to federal stalemate…..I don’t want both sides to “negotiate” so that the federal government can “do more”. The government “did enough” by spending us into debt for every man, woman, and child to the tune of about 1/2 million dollars per person.

          Face it, both sides are going to bankrupt this country, the only real question is do you still want to be in possession of your firearms when the house of cards crumble?

        • Yes, but sometimes those coalitions cause more problems than the compromise is worth. Consider recent moves in Germany to consolidate power but the compromise includes dropping the retirement age to 62 and increasing pension payments, which is driving their economists crazy. Hell, the ruin of modern Greece – the birthplace of democracy – is, wait for it… democracy! Majority votes for ever increasing social welfare is destroying Europe’s future. The salient fact there is absence of constitutional constraint or a government that works “too well”.

          We all need government to work better, but when things work – they start passing laws – damned if the state doesn’t get bigger and more powerful and our freedom gets nickled and dimed to death. I like how the legislature works (or mostly doesn’t) in NM – part-time legislators, odd years get a 60 day session, even years a 30 day session. Get it done within that timeframe or it doesn’t happen. Nice constraint, though not workable perhaps in a more populated place.

        • Part-time legislators does have a certain appeal. Force them out of the Capital for more than a couple weeks every once in awhile.

        • We already have part-time legislators. Just take a look at your Senator’s or Representative’s attendance records. Their staff does 99.9% of their work anyway. They could phone in their votes and be just as productive.

      • There’s a legitimate reason why 3rd party doesn’t work. If a simple numbers example will suffice; 26% vote for A, 25% vote for B, 49% vote for C. C wins election, but 51% of the people disagree with C’s politics or preferred something different.

        This is overlooked by many folks, but it is a very important point. The plurality voting method we use in most elections (i.e. you can vote “yes” for one candidate, “no” for everyone else, and the candidate with the most votes received wins regardless – of whether or not it’s a majority) is one of the WORST voting methods available.

        Switching to what’s known as “approval voting” would be the easiest way to make the system a lot better. In that case, you’d vote “yes” for everyone you approve of (or can tolerate) and “no” for everyone you don’t approve of (or will not tolerate). It certainly wouldn’t make everything perfect, but it is a much better and fairer voting method to use.

        All of that said … the biggest problem is that many of us don’t mind our own @#%ing business. We want to mind everyone else’s business.

        • Or even easier would be a simple “1,2,3” system. You put down 1 by your top choice, 2 by your second choice, and 3 by your third choice. The 1st choice is worth 3 points, 2nd is worth 2, and 3rd is worth 1 point. Add them all up and whoever has the most wins. This completely negates the “voting third party is throwing away your vote” bullshit because those folks can still put the 3rd party candidate in slot number 2.

        • “This completely negates the “voting third party is throwing away your vote” bullshit because those folks can still put the 3rd party candidate in slot number 2.”

          So if I only vote for 1 and not 2 then I indirectly give a vote to 3…no thanks, besides 25% Republicans and 55% Democrats won’t understand how it works. 65% of independents couldn’t make up their minds on what order to put them in. Finally 33% of libertarians would vote for the marriage can be anything candidate-1st, another 33% of libertarians would vote guns are ok candidate-1st, and the other 33% of libertarians would vote for the weed candidate-1st.
          It seems the Libertarians only want smaller government to the extent that it will relax restrictions on their particular issue. No common platform wins no Statewide or Federal Offices.

        • “It seems the Libertarians only want smaller government to the extent that it will relax restrictions on their particular issue.”

          Then, like most Americans, you don’t have the slightest clue what you’re talking about. Keep on voting for more big-government “rule with an iron fist” types. That philosophy has worked our really well for the nation, don’t you think?

        • @Totenglocke — what you’re describing is a “Borda count” voting method (which is currently also used in college sports Top 25 polls). That, IMO, is not the system I would pick first, but it is far better than plurality and I’d certainly prefer it to the current method. I think Approval Voting is simpler – “yes” for the candidates you like (or can tolerate), “no” for everyone else. Only thing you have to decide is where you draw the line between “yes” and “no.”

          @Model 31 — you wrote “if I only vote for 1 and not 2 then I indirectly give a vote to 3” … I’m not sure how you come to that conclusion. But the potential confusion is why I prefer Approval Voting as the first step to take, since it is very close to what we already have, but substantially better.

          As for “the Libertarians only want smaller government to the extent that it will relax restrictions on their particular issue” … no, I see that behavior much more from Republicans. Most libertarians I have meet want freedom for all issues, not just their important issue. And the problem isn’t the LP platform as much as the fact that the voting method currently used essentially forces the creation of two major parties, so people believe their vote is “wasted” if it isn’t for one of the two big parties.

        • As long as the Electoral College exists we don’t have plurality voting anyway. Assuming that even the first vote reflects the will of their home district…

        • “Then, like most Americans, you don’t have the slightest clue what you’re talking about”…Fail 1…
          There are a fair number of Americans who are aware but do no get pi$$ed off when someone doesn’t agree with them and therefore “deems” someone clueless.
          As for clueless…Fail 2…
          I do know what I’m talking about. One of my three BS degrees is in Political Science and another is Geography with an emphasis on population prediction and planning (for municipal engineering purposes). One could say my understanding of politics has been imparted to me by the very people that make lawyers that later become politicians.

          “Keep on voting for more big-government “rule with an iron fist” types. That philosophy has worked our really well for the nation, don’t you think?”..Potential fail 3…
          To be honest, I don’t care how big a government is that leaves my rights alone. The reality proves that a big government does eventually infringe on everyone’s rights and this brings up my desire for a small but effective government: one that honors the Constitution and all of the amendments, one that keeps the interstates running, mail running, and the sovereignty of the Federal boarders enforced.

          “don’t you think?”
          I think the US gov. works better than all the other governments Earth has come up with so far. I think it worked better in the past.

          Finally, Libertarians are a fractured bunch. A libertarian that wants gov small so he can marry his pet chicken does not vote the same as the libertarian that wants to own a registration free firearm.

  3. Isn’t it funny how libs like Hickiegoober constantly stress the “will of the people” when it comes to election results when they’re in their favor, and then throw baby fits and demand a higher court ruling when The People don’t tow the liberal line?

      • +1

        Just like when one side gets caught doing something wrong (or illegal) and instead of owning it, they point to a similar wrong doing by their opposition as vindication of their actions… as if that is some sort of moral yard stick. Blind partisans are, for the most part, illogical and inconsistent.

        • That drives me nuts. “Bush did it first!” Great, so that means we’ve had asshole Presidents from both parties. 16 years of “NATIONAL SECURITY!!!!1!1!!!111!1one” over any and all other concerns.

  4. Departure of what jobs? Last time I checked, Magpul hasn’t made good yet on their empty threat. What jobs have taken flight?

    • I believe Magpul has moved all of their manufacturing out of the state at this point. I think the only thing left is their headquarters. I don’t know what their plans are.

      As Bill said, HiViz moved, and I’ve talked about a couple others in the Digest over the past couple months, but I can’t recall who they are right now.

  5. You can shuffle politicians around all you like, but the offending laws are still on the books. If the people of Colorado don’t elect individuals who can get those laws repealed, then it matters little as to which party the butts warming the seats belong to.

  6. What do you think are the chances of the GOP sabotaging this election too resulting in another Dem governor? I think they’d do it. Mitch and Boehner know their number is up.

    • The Colorado Republican Party does have a history of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. I’m not optimistic.

      • It isn’t just the Colorado Republicans.

        The Republican party needs to stop fighting the culture wars of the 70’s and move on.

        Put up a candidate who is a fiscal conservative and a constitutionalist, stop alienating the millennials with last-century social ideas (“Family Values” ain’t playing any more), and realize that the vote of a person in their 20’s counts just as much as someone in their 60’s.

        Or, continue preaching to the choir and complaining about the Dems getting elected.

        • +100. Democrats may have their brain dead voters. But they are matched by conservatives. As long as Republicans, Tea Party, and Libertarians continue to have little issy fits, they succeed in electing Democrats. GENIUS! You disagree with 10% of one candidate, so you vote 3rd party. RESULT: You help elect the guy who is 90% against everything you believe. See Virginia Governor race. Conservatives at their finest!!!!

        • @JPD … “You disagree with 10% of one candidate …”

          You underestimate how much some of us disagree with some of these candidates. Too many Republicans are as power-hungry as Democrats … they simply want to wield the power in different ways.

          Republicans shouldn’t vote to continue government-enforced gender discrimination (having “traditional” marriage legally recognized and having homosexual marriage declared illegal); it creates special privileges for some people and prohibits others from having those privileges. They should either make all marriage involving consenting adults legal, or they should (my preference) vote to separate marriage and the state.

          Republicans shouldn’t vote to continue the drug war, which has been used to justify massive civil rights violations and government intrusions upon liberty. You don’t like people using drugs, that’s fine. But drug prohibition is as stupidly misguided as alcohol prohibition was, and has done enormous damage to the country.

          Too many Republicans support corporate welfare. Too many of them also justify atrocities in the name of a “war on terror” that ends up creating more terrorists when our drones kill innocent families (aka “collateral damage”). Too many Republicans support “big government” (just a different version of it than the Dem’s version).

          You may overlook these things because you agree with some (or all) of them, but they are destructive towards liberty. I have no interest in voting for a candidate who wants to use government as a club to prevent peaceful people from smoking a joint, wants to have government-enforced gender discrimination, or support some businesses over others.

          I will not vote for a candidate who still sucks, but just “sucks a bit less” than the other idiot candidate.

        • Chip, I refuse to vote for the idiot who sucks the least, because they’re ALL idiots. I try to vote for the least fascist of the bunch. And don’t try to blame me for this administration.

        • JPD,

          First, I have never agreed with 90% of the bullshit any politician, from any party, spewed, not once.

          Second, the Rep party is the victim of its own undoing, don’t blame the Third Party for your party sucking at the poles. I’ve considered myself an Independent for my entire, voting age, adult life, but somehow I’m beholden to your party because you think I agree with you more than Dems, get real.

          If the Reps want to stop losing then they need to stop trotting all the McCain and Romney types (RINOs) out of the stables to run on race day.

        • ” don’t blame the Third Party for your party sucking at the poles”

          YAHOOOOO! MOUNTAIN DEW!!!!

      • Even worse is that Udall could be vulnerable and it looks like Ken Buck could be the Republican candidate again. Must be his reward for losing last time.

  7. I’m a registered Colorado independent voter so I get occasional opinion survey phone calls, including from Quinnipiac. I always hang up on them, so I suspect many others do the same and the real anti-Hickenlooper sentiment is much greater than the polls show.

  8. The longer this idiot stays,in office, the better chance the new gun “laws” will stay in place. The anti gun dems need to go or Colorado will not be changing anytime soon.

  9. Two boots & a scoot. Folks in CO demonstrated just how powerful people are and how smart the dems are in pushing a resignation to maintain control.

    I voted Ross Perot wanting fiscal responsibility, reduced government and will never waste my vote on Third party again.

    • You know, after the ’92 election my father said the same thing about voting for Bush Sr. and that he should’ve voted the way he wanted to (for Perot). I often wonder just how many people believed the “wasted vote” BS from the two main parties during that election and how different it could be if people actually voted for someone instead of against someone.

        • I thought Gary Johnson would have made a good President. If the GOP picked him instead Mitt, at least there would have been a distinct difference in who to vote for instead of the Mormon Obama. That being said, I know Johnson wasn’t savvy enough for prime time debating and that our “neutral media” would have made every effort to call him a right wing extremist because he was for smaller government.

    • “Folks in CO demonstrated just how powerful people can be and how smart the dems are in pushing a resignation to maintain control.”

      Fixed it for ya.

  10. By “pragmatists”, I’m assuming you mean “RINO’s”? This is why the Republican party is doomed, because they only allow two types of candidates to make it through the primaries – RINO’s (who conservatives and libertarians despise and won’t vote for) or religious wackjobs (who moderates and libertarians won’t vote for). If they’d just run a damn candidate on the things the party CLAIMS to support (less government and following the Constitution), they would have no problem with elections.

    • I think Republicans are doomed (overall) for an entirely different reason. The simple fact is that an agenda of less government just isn’t popular with a majority of the population.

      All of Romney’s faults aside, his “47%” comment was dead on.

      • > All of Romney’s faults aside,
        > his “47%” comment was dead on.

        But Romney actually dismissed the importance of those voters, although white, working-class voters who are unemployed or underemployed, and pay no taxes, could make the difference between victory and defeat for him. So could retired people too poor to pay taxes, who are often social conservatives.

        In Romney’s view, his role “is not to worry about those people (the 47 percent). I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.” If this is not outright contempt, it comes very close.

        It was especially reckless of Romney to couch the whole discourse in terms of who pay taxes or doesn’t. This from a man who has refused to release more than the past two years of his own tax returns. Why endure all the criticism about not releasing the past five years, say, if there was nothing to hide in the returns for the preceding years? Like, maybe, the possibility that Romney paid no tax at all in those previous returns.

        The people who pay no taxes in the United States are the very poor and the very rich, and Romney certainly falls into the latter category. If he paid no tax at all in 2007, 2008 and 2009, say, he would have fallen into the 47 percent in those years. So should we conclude that he voted for Obama in 2008?

        – from “Is Romney One of the 47 Percent?
        by Gwynne Dyer ⋅ September 22, 2012

        As long as Republicans deify “vulture capitalists” like Romney as a “producer”, instead of the “looter” he really was, the Democrats don’t need to take away your guns, because the GOP has already disarmed you — in your mind.

        • So recognizing that someone who has a lot of faults made one accurate comment is “deifying” them?

          Got it.

    • The problem Republicans is that they are the only “big tent” party left. However, the Libertarian extremists and the real RINOs won’t vote for people who they disagree with on a few issues. The Democrats have evolved to the point where they are a full blown Fascist Party where their members follow a straight party line.

      • Libertarians won’t vote for Republicans because Republicans have spent decades lying and saying that they support XZY and then voting for the exact opposite once in office. Just like every jackass Republican who claims to support following the Constitution and defending our freedoms, yet then voted to continue funding the NSA’s unconstitutional spying on all Americans.

        • Libertarians don’t support the Constitution because if they ever bothered to read it, particularly Article I, they would reject it. If fact there is a entire school of Libertarian thought that says that Constitution was an authoritarian power grab. In their alternative universe the Articles of Confederation were working just fine. Hyperinflation, Shay’s Rebellion and impending war between several states not withstanding.

  11. “And it’s not just because voters are offended by that horrible rug on his head, either . . .”

    It’s a good thing I wasn’t drinking anything when I read that … I would be looking for a new keyboard right now. Thank you for the laugh!

  12. And hence the problem with the current state of GOP politics in blue states and on a national scale. A lack of unity amongst the base that prevents the inclusion of swing center left voters

  13. There needs to be a third party that stands for this: Leave people alone and let them all do what they want. Fix the economy. Decrease the debt. Bring home all soldiers and use the military as a defensive for now. Drop welfare. Get rid of many 3 letter agencies. Follow the Constitution. Get rid of religion in the Government. Get rid of illegals. Can not be that hard

    • A third party could certainly be started with that agenda…and it will never get more than 5% of the vote, tops.

      The American people want big government.

      • …well…we will see if the folks in Colorado can guide the country back towards freedom and The Constitution….perhaps if the elderly GHW Bush….GW Bush… and his Bush House Guest, BHO..can be convicted of treason and hung before their natural deaths…perhaps that may even-out the score a bit….I say we confiscate all of the Bush / Saudi / Petrol Firms wealth and property…..anyone involved in 911…Dick Cheney … Rumsfeld …Yohn Yoo…. (torturing- bastard)…Karl Rove….convict and hang them all….

        RJ O’Guillory
        Author-
        Webster Groves – The Life of an Insane Family

        • DJ….

          I presume the Jack Daniels comment is directed towards myself…on your part….I’m a bit confused…? First of all I quit drinking Jack Daniels when (as a teenager) I awoke in the campfire, drunk as a skunk…with my sleeping bag melting around my ankles and feet….so…other than a bit of Script-Based-Weed that I use for my seizures….I have not a bit of intoxication….though I am still unsure as to what that had to do with my comments?

          RJ O’Guillory
          Author-
          Webster Groves – The Life of an Insane Family

  14. Without liberal or at least moderate Republicans, liberals like myself will at best sit out elections.

    Too bad the GOP seems hell-bent on a civil war between the unpalatable and those even more extreme.

  15. The problem is people will get all stupid and have a bunch vote Libertarian (which I’m a big fan of the Libertarian party, but at the same time I’m a realist and know that most people won’t vote that way), which will then push the vote in favor of a democrat/socialist. Sort of like what happened in VA.

  16. Any statistics yet on how much of a hit Colorado took from loss of tourism, hunting, jobs and any other problems associated with their gun control policies, anyone?

  17. I see my 3rd party didn’t go over too well.
    I don’t see having another legitimate real candidates points being wasted.
    If there is to be another legitimate view on things………………………………my views.
    Id like to see someone who does represent me.
    Not a lesser of 2 evils thing.
    That seems to be working really well lately huh??

    • The third party problem will eventually be solved with the appearance of fourth, fifth, sixth, and more parties on the ballot.

      • Unfortunately, as long as the two major parties keep the plurality voting method in place, 3rd parties have very little chance to succeed.

  18. “The 15-round magazine limit is only supported by the slimmest possible plurality, 49% in favor to 48% opposed.”

    That’s bad news… when people support that they can’t be that opposed to gun control… and it’s not easy to repeal laws like this.

  19. > If Hickenlooper is going to get the unceremonious
    > dumping he deserves, the Colorado Republican Party
    > needs to pick a credible candidate and stand behind him.

    If the future depends on the Republican Party picking a credible candiate, then we’re doomed to another 4 years of Governor Bloomberglicker.

  20. Totenglocke said:
    > Or even easier would be a simple “1,2,3″ system. You put down 1 by your top choice, 2 by your second choice, and 3 by your third choice. The 1st choice is worth 3 points, 2nd is worth 2, and 3rd is worth 1 point. Add them all up and whoever has the most wins. This completely negates the “voting third party is throwing away your vote” bullshit because those folks can still put the 3rd party candidate in slot number 2.

    Very wrong. First of all, this is not “easier”. Quite the opposite. This would require a new ballot, lots of money in voter education efforts (like we use here in the San Francisco bay area, where many cities use Instant Runoff Voting), investment in new voting machines, etc. And it would lead to a lot more spoiled ballots (http://ScoreVoting.net/SPRates.html).

    Further, it’s mathematically proven that no ranked voting system can solve the spoiler problem. In your system, there could be a case where you favor X>Y>Z and Z wins, but if you insincerely vote Y>X>Z, then Y wins. Approval Voting is a cardinal (rated) system rather than an ordinal (ranked) system, so it makes it 100% safe to vote for your favorite candidate. Always. It’s also radically simpler than Borda (the system you describe) and more resistant to tactical voting.

    Clay Shentrup
    The Center for Election Science

  21. Why is this man’s family letting him walk around looking like that?

    Don’t they love him enough to tell him how ridiculous he looks with that monstrosity on his head?

  22. I agree that the Republican Party needs to be revamped but here is my beef…

    If the Republicans believe that nominating more and more politicians that would rather compromise than stand for principles, and become Democrat-lite, then that is their business. I will just not vote anymore. In their desire to expand the voting base, they may loss more than they gain.

    Why do you never see the Democrats pulling this kind of stuff? The Democrats are PARTY FIRST. They will circle the wagons around a blue dog or a open socialist/communist. They march and vote lockstep in the Congress, but are never challenged on it.

    If the Republicans want to be the party that “gets along”, then let them. I will stop voting.

  23. RUG, indeed! I want that thing on my wall. I keep wondering if I could snatch it off and outrun his security detail.

  24. The 40% who are supportive of “more stringent gun laws” are welcome to leave with hickenblooper. They can go live in Chicago, or New York City, the libtard utopia.

  25. it’s so strange that people that support abortion on demand that kills 1,400,000 babies in their would be mother’s womb are anti-guns. guns usually kill bad people. like when a drug dealer kills another drug dealer we shouldn’t throw those folks in jail, we should give them a plaque.

  26. I really don’t like hickendorker at all. he was elected by illegal aliens. i mean i saw hickendorker on a hunting show and he could hit the broad side of a barn if he was standing in it and the barn doors were closed. what a dork.

    • I fear I’ll see Virginia slide down the chute the same way. I’ll fight against it, but if the same bastards win here, it’s back to NM for me. Or Arizona. People know how to stay within their boundaries there.

      So far. This battle is for the rest of our lives.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *