Top

blog

Stories

 

Tom Tancredo hasn't endorsed Michael Hancock, despite what pro-Romer tricksters say

Tom Tancredo.
In a Denver mayoral campaign that was supposed to be so clean, the dirtiest deed yet is tied to a man who does not even live in Denver and has not actually talked to either candidate.

"That's what you get for going to lunch with Peter Boyles," says Tom Tancredo.

I was at that lunch last week where, in a wide-ranging conversation that touched on everything from Tancredo's job at Elitch Gardens to the state of the newspaper and radio business, Peter Boyles talked about why he liked Michael Hancock and would be voting for him -- and told Tancredo that he'd like him to do so as well. "If I lived in Denver, I would vote for the guy," Tancredo says now.

Tancredo has never talked to the Hancock campaign; he has never endorsed Hancock. But even so, that lunchtime conversation -- repeated on Boyles's radio show the next day -- has now set off a series of dirty tricks. They include an e-mail from Romer deputy campaign manager Crisanta Duran in which she writes, "It's not surprising that Tom Tancredo endorsed Michael Hancock" -- although it certainly is, since he didn't -- and urging recipients to instead vote for Romer.

And then there's this robocall that two residents of southwest Denver got last week: "Chris Romer was being endorsed by former mayor Federico Peña. His opponent was being endorsed by Tom Tancredo. We all know that Tancredo has repeatedly attacked our community... Tancredo has supported devastating policies that lead to racial profiling and policies that make it more difficult for our children to receive affordable health-care coverage and access to quality education. We can't afford to have someone in the mayor's office who doesn't understand the issues we face. There is a clear difference in the candidates in this race. Please vote for Chris Romer for Denver Mayor."

For the record, the Romer campaign denies being involved in these dirty tricks. But so far, it hasn't denounced them.

For more, much more, on this, look for my complete column when the new issue is posted later today. And in the meantime, you might want to take a shower. This clean campaign is getting dirty.

More from our Calhoun: Wake-Up Call archive: "Police brutality is killing us, says ACLU of Colorado."


Advertisement

My Voice Nation Help
15 comments
Sort: Newest | Oldest
Crisanta Duran
Crisanta Duran

The Facts RegardingTom Tancredo’s Support of Michael Hancock - You decide for yourself. 

TRUTH: On May 19th,2011, the Denver Post reported that Tom Tancredo said he would vote for Hancockif he lived in Denver. In fact, Jeremy Meyer reported the statement as an “endorsement.” 

The definition of "endorsement" is "to give approval of or support to, especially by public statement." The story states that Tom Tancredo told Peter Boyles and Westword editor Patricia Calhoun over lunch that he would vote for Hancock if he lived in Denver. But the endorsement didn't come over that lunch conversation, Jeremy Meyer then called and received a public statement from Tom Tancredo himself who explained why he would vote for Hancock.

 To see the complete article, click here: http://blogs.denverpost.com/th... 

Reading-is-Fundamental
Reading-is-Fundamental

Oh, there's more.

Truth:  “It’s not really based on a hell of a lot more than his life story. It’s compelling,” said Tancredo, who lives in Lakewood. “I’m not that tuned in to some of the other issues. I don’t know how they differ. But he has an interesting and compelling and life story.”

Which means Tancredo "gives approval of or support to" Hancock's compelling life story....not his campaign or stance on any issue.

Your pants are on fire.

Crisanta Duran
Crisanta Duran

Michael’s position on “Secure Communities” is simply unacceptable.

“Secure Communities” has done little to make our neighborhoods more “secure.”

In fact, it has resulted in 5,880 American citizens being wrongly identified by Immigration and Customs Enforcement as being undocumented persons and subject to deportation in the past year alone.Racial profiling is never acceptable. No victim should ever be afraid to call the police for fear of being deported.

 The city has the ability to opt-out of this program right now. Chris Romer is the only candidate who has pledged to opt-out of the program, except for convicted felons. He believes this is the right thing to do because this program has lead to repeated instances of racial profiling.  On May 19th, 2011, the Inspector General for the US Department of Homeland Security announced an investigation of the program. This announcement comes two weeks after Illinois Governor Pat Quinn terminated the state’s agreement with ICE to take part in the program, California introduced the TRUST act to limit the program, and as criticism of the program from around the nation mounts.

With all due respect, dialogue about the differences between two candidate’s platforms does not constitute “negative campaigning.”  The racial profiling that has resulted from “Secure Communities” is real.

Max
Max

How would one "opt out of the program, except for convicted felons"?  Do you first get the felony conviction, then use the fingerprints with the ICE database?  The pledge doesn't make any sense, and if he can't opt out, his answer is worse....it's flat out pandering.  Making a pledge that has no consequence is worse than accepting reality and trying to deal with it.  Well, at least he's ruffling feathers, whatever the hell that means.

Debbie
Debbie

His position on a Homeland Security Program is unacceptable?  As of today, there is no opt-out option of the Secure Communities Program.  The program runs with law enforcement.  The only way an idivdual can opt-out of getting his/her fingerprints sent to ICE is to stay out of trouble with local law enforcement.

And why are you using a number from a 2009 "New York Times" article?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11...

According to the article, of the 111,000 people detained under this program, 5% were US Citizens.

Therefore, with all due respect, when you lie to try to get the upper hand, it's negative campaigning.

Reading-is-Fundamental
Reading-is-Fundamental

Truth:  "I had the impression they would use it against Hancock, Tancredo said."

Which means Tancredo, if he knew such a statement would be used against Hancock, actually endorses Romer.

STINGER
STINGER

I WAS GOING TO VOTE FOR HANCOCK UNTIL I SEEN WELLINGTON WEBB LURKING IN BACKGROUND OF   PICTURE OF HANNY,  DON'T NEED ANY MORE CRONIES OF HIS

TooSmart4TheirOwnGood
TooSmart4TheirOwnGood

I have been curious about Crisanta Durans involvement in this campaign. Isn't she already an elected official? Shouldn't she be doing other things....like you know.....her job? 

Chillax
Chillax

Her job is over for the summer.  The legislature closed for the season earlier this month, and most legislators take a summer job.  Relax.

Unchilled
Unchilled

And her summer job is lying to her constituents.

JoeVoter
JoeVoter

Enough.  I wasn't a supporter of either one, but now I hope Hancock wins this in a landslide.  And Crisanta Duran, my House District representative, just lost two votes from my household.  I'll vote and campaign for whoever runs against her.  Talk about shooting yourself in the political foot.  A large portion of her district consists of Hancock supporters.

The voters should send all nasty politicos a message: you will lose if you go negative, and lose by a large margin if you couple it with lies.

Chillax
Chillax

And yet, Tancredo probably likes Hancock because he's willing to turn all  immigrants over to ICE.  His stance on S-COMM stinks.  Why won't he sign the pledge to focus on felons only?

Now Trending

Denver Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...