482
submitted 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

After Boebert’s Beetlejuice embarrassment, Adam Frisch hopes he can wrestle the Colorado congresswoman’s seat from her

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] [email protected] 133 points 8 months ago

If only they'd put his name in the freaking headline. Give him some easy name recognition...

[-] [email protected] 39 points 8 months ago
[-] [email protected] 20 points 8 months ago

His platform is very lackluster. He’s basically running on not being her. :-/

[-] [email protected] 33 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Interesting … because let’s be honest, that’s pretty much enough reason for most people to vote for him

[-] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

But you're talking sense... Not 'Murrican...

😜

[-] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago

Would it be “talking sense” if he were for dropping a nuke somewhere?

[-] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

You have a point.

[-] [email protected] 7 points 8 months ago

When your opponent is making a series of bad decisions, that is enough. People really are sick and tired of the blatant BS.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago

I've looked at the republican candidates in my local elections the last few years and that's pretty much the entirety of their platforms. Most of their websites literally listed zero platform at all, it's annoying as hell

[-] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago

There's a whole page of his views and plans for different issues here https://adamforcolorado.com/issues/

[-] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago
[-] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago

I'm reading the document provided by killeeronthecorner. This is what I see:

  • He will fight for Western Colorado water rights.
  • He will push for an 'all of the above' energy plan which likely includes solar, wind, hydro, nuclear, and petrochemical.
  • He will push for farmer-friendly policies, which ties to the above plus opposing 'bad' regulations and opening markets.
  • He will take actions in support of small businesses.
  • Opposing 'bad' regulations, again.
  • Job Training.
  • Upgrade (presumably power and internet) infrastructure
  • He will tackle inflation (albeit without a good plan on how to deal with the current causes of inflation...)
  • He is pro-choice.
  • He is pro-environmentalism.

He's definitely a blue-dog Democrat, more conservative than I'd like, but this is CO-03 we're talking about. You're NOT going to get a progressive firebrand to represent that district. You're going to get somebody who is on the Conservative end of the spectrum. Getting a Pro-Choice Moderate Democrat who is in any way open to Green policies in the district that includes Farmers and Oil Men and places like Rifle would be a godsend, considering the person who CURRENTLY represents CO-03 is rabidly anti-choice and quite interested in pushing radical MAGA policies. You get what you can take out of a place like CO-03.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

I mean, I think we’re too late to prevent global environmental catastrophe, but we should try hard. Otoh, I understand you.

[-] [email protected] 7 points 8 months ago

He's a former banker who lives in Aspen. Of course he has no strong opinions other than maintain status quo.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago

The sword of truth, at last! Thank you.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

How very dare you brings facts to this discussion!

[-] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago

For me personally that would suffice lol. It doesn't get much worse than Bobert

[-] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago

If there is anything the last 3 years has taught me, it can always get worse.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago

It's just about good enough for me, but I don't live there.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

And they thought MAD was a good* deterrent. :-/

Edited word

[-] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

The election is a year away. And why make an unforced error?

[-] [email protected] 10 points 8 months ago

It's UK newspaper. Literally none of the readership will know his name.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago

Imagine thinking that in 2023 an UK newspaper is restricted to only UK readers.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

Imagine thinking that just because a paper is available on the web, the editorial style isn’t dictated by its domestic audience.

I expect you will also be shocked that when they reference ‘The Prime Minister’ they quite often don’t even bother to reference which country’s prime minister they are taking about. Shocking, eh?

[-] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago

I'm in the US and, surprisingly, I'm seeing it. Weird place. It's like we have this web around the world connecting people. Maybe we could call it the Global Net, or GN for short.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Yes, I sort of guess led you were American. I think the giveaway is the assumption that everyone globally should know the the minutiae of American domestic politics, and the shock that minor political figures might not be known by name.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

Sure, but if you're writting an article on them you at least think it's important enough to write an article on them. I don't think anyone outside of the US, or even outside Colorado, should care about this, but the author here did. If it's that important to them, the least they could do is include the name in the headline. Either that or it isn't important and both the creation of this article, as well as the posting of it, was a complete waste of time. Idk which one it is.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

No. Because the purpose of the article is to bring the person to the reader’s attention for the first time. It is ‘here is this person who is new to you, who has doing something interesting’.

They might come out of the article knowing the person’s name, but they are not going into it that way, so leading on the name would be a failure of a headline

[-] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

Gotta leave some bait in the title.

this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2023
482 points (97.4% liked)

politics

18138 readers
3679 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS