U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Jena Griswold
60%
60%
40%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Alexis King
(D) Brian Mason
40%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) George Stern
(D) A. Gonzalez
(R) Sheri Davis
40%
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(R) Kevin Grantham
(D) Jerry DiTullio
60%
30%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(D) Somebody
80%
40%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Somebody
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(D) Joe Salazar
50%
40%
40%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
December 17, 2009 08:23 AM UTC
55 Comments
Loading ...
Ritter’s campaign manager sent out an almost identical plea for answers from McInnis yesterday afternoon, with the same three questions. He wanted folks to send McInnis e-mails, but I suppose posting on Colorado Pols is a rough equivalent.
From Kenney’s e-mail, titled “Stop Being Coy”:
and Spartacus. But not that other guy who shall remain nameless until and unless.
Like the Guv., I don’t think Scott McGinnis reads this blog. Like the Guv, McGinnis will use mass media to give interviews. Right or wrong its people like Adam Schrager at 9NEWS that will get the choice McGinnis opportunities.
You’re a great guy David, fair and balanced, but the numbers aren’t with you.
This site is run by left leaning liberals for left leaning liberals.
Yeah sure, insiders come here to monitor what those on the outside are saying, but the meetings they are having this morning on the 1st floor, at some lobbyists office or at the local resturant won’t be blogged about here for weeks or ever.
Right or wrong that’s the deal here. I think you’ll have more success in getting Joel Judd, Claire Levie, Morgan Carroll or going to work as a real reporter.
The above is asking him to answer the questions. Wouldn’t you like to know where he stands on those before voting?
ps – thank you for the nice words 🙂
and when he wears the right hat no one can see it.
And I don’t think he wants answers to the above questions that are nuanced or complicated. As any decent (electable) answers would be.
Own the web. Own the web. Campaign, fund raise. Own the web.
Repeat.
You are right about that.
getting Republican candidates for top office to sit with him. Do your homework.
and ask the erstwhile DeLay-era Congressman cum Lawyer-Lobbyist why he spells his own name incorrectly.
my bad
Er, McInnis…
From what I read, it seems McInnis has answered the questions posed.
He will wait for the governor to publish his new budget and respond. Opponents of incumbents always wait for the incumbents to commit to various policies and then try to pick them apart. Smart politics.
McInnis has told the Post and bloggers that he hasn’t decided on the tax cut proposals that will be on next year’s ballot. Why commit before you see how voters feel about the proposed tax cuts, which don’t look very likely to pass. Smart politics.
You need to explain FASTER for your readers. It’s about funding pork barrel spending on roads and bridges. What do you want to know about it? Where do you stand on motherhood and apple pie?
If you Google “McInnis,” I think you’ll find that a lot of papers and some bloggers have interviewed him.
It’s cynical politics, not smart politics, to wait until voters form an opinion. Are we electing a weather vane or a six-term congressman (and multimillion dollar lobbyist!) with some principles and judgment?
cannot be equated to good governance.
The latter is far more important. Why should I vote for someone who won’t tell me what he will do in office?
The executive branch agencies submit their budget requests in early December. Mr. McInnis already has access to those requests. Govrernor Ritter has already published his next budget.
Further, the revenue projections are already public information and there is a budget in place right now. Can’t Mr. McInnis tell us what he objects to in the present budget and whether he agrees with the cuts Governor Ritter has already made.
Mr. McInnis has specfically stated he will increase funding for higher education and repeal the $250 million from the FASTER bill earmarked for CDOT but he will replace the FASTER funds with general funds from other agencies. Since he is going to increase funding to higher education, there is only one other agency with $250 million available and that is the Department of Corrections (the prisons). Since he has made these policy pronouncements he can certainly tell us what his early release policy for prison inmates is going to be because his budget ideas lead to only one conclusion . . . he has to close prisons and release the inmates. If he can’t tell us any of the consequences of repealing FASTER and increasing higher education funding then he obviously made policy pronouncements without thinking about them. That can hardly be called leadership.
The information for him to answer the questions has been available in most cases for months. Either he has a plan or he doesn’t and since Sen. Penry and Rep. May are against the three tax initiatives which means they no longer want to repeal FASTER, then where is Mr. McInnis at on that issue since the leadership of his party, the Republicans, have decided that isn’t a good idea.
It is time for Mr. McInnis to answer the questions. Waiting till after the 2010 election is a vacuous answer.
Why do you have jump into an emotional, sound bytey based rant and discussion with reasonableness and actual facts to support you.?
C’mon at least …swear, or call someone a name or something. You …you… reasonableist!
Just today. I know, right?
Attackers get to pick their times and places.
Right now, McInnis probably is smart to let Ritter stew awhile. Ritter created the mess and deserves to see how voters react to his budget. McInnis will go with the popular sentiment and await better information about the economy and budget. Smart politics. Smart leadership.
What is the mess and what did he specifically do to create it?
I’m interested in how he is going to fulfill the budget promises he already made to the voters. That has nothing to do with his attacks on Gov. Ritter. Surely, when he said he would repeal FASTER, replace the $250 million loss to CDOT with general funds from other agencies, and simultaneously increase funding for higher education, he had examined the budget and knows how he will accomplish all of that. Since he knows how he will do that shouldn’t he let us know his budget plans. How he intends to attack Govenror Ritter during the campaign isn’t relevant to fleshing out his budget and tax plans.
These questions should be easy for him to answer since he has already thought through the answers.
He’s not governing the way he campaigned.
So do candidates’ answers mean much?
Where do you see him diverging greatly from what he campaigned on.
As to your comment “So do candidates’ answers mean much?” – it’s sad that you don’t expect that from the candidates you support.
Their answers are meaningless.
Anything they say is meaningless.
We should ignore everything but the really important stuff, like … criminal background, private sector experience, and party affiliation.
Of course the answers are meaningful.
I enjoy reading interviews and wish more candidates did more interviews and that interviewers asked better questions.
I was just wondering.
Ritter is not the governor I voted for.
Granted things never play out as predicted. But I’ve yet to feel like Ritter has done anything substantially different from what I expected. There were places I hoped for more, but that’s different.
I followed the 2006 campaign closely and posted here several days on the gubernatorial race. I voted for Ritter.
Shortly after he was elected he showed he not only was from a union family, which I knew, but that he was so scared to death of the unions, who he temporarily defied, that he gave the state’s workforce to them. That disappointed and outraged me big time.
Then Ritter supported Obama’s health care reforms even though they will put huge burdens on the state’s budget and are just bad ideas.
And he began promoting green jobs and alternative energy, which are a fraud. At a time the country needs to produce more energy to slow imports, he made energy exploration and development more costly and difficult in Colorado. This not only killed Colorado jobs but also hurt the whole country.
Ritter’s a lawyer. And he’s acting like a lawyer who doesn’t appreciate the roles, trials or tribulations of small employers. He doesn’t understand private enterprise. And he believes in big government more than I ever dreamed.
I can’t support him for re-election.
I think we all tend to read what we want in to politicians statements – which is a large part of why they try to keep it vague.
On the unions, I think Ritter was pretty close to what he promised – he gave state employees a central representative but vetoed the unemployment for locked out workers reinstatement. So he honked off both you and the unions.
On green energy he talked about it, but I do think most of us were surprised that he truly has put a lot of effort in to it. Again, I think this is in line with what he ran on.
On his fighting the O&G industry – there I think you have a very legit point that he has done a lot more than anyone expected. I’m thrilled he has, you’re upset. But I will agree this was far more than we heard about in the campaign.
If this is the election theme- Ritter wins.
And the house and senate majorities remain in place.
When was the last time an incumbent Governor in Colorado lost his seat?
I rely on One Queer Dude, the resident historian, for this answer, but it has been a long time.
was 1974, when John Vanderhoof lost to Dick Lamm in a Democratic sweep (other Republican incumbents who fell were Sen. Peter Dominick to Gary Hart and Rep. Don Brotzman to Tim Wirth). But Vanderhoof wasn’t an elected incumbent — he took over when John Love was picked to be Nixon’s first energy czar the year before.
Love, incidentally, was the guy who defeated the most recent elected governor to lose for re-election. That was in 1962 when the attorney ousted Democrat Stephen McNichols.
David it’s hard to advocate an interview with someone that is so obviously biased. (As I recall you thought Penry was going to kick McInnis butt last fall until the fundraising numbers came out.) It’s a bit like a supporter of Obama’s advocating he set down for a Q & A with Glen Beck.
I will give you this – your letter makes great theater for so early in the morning.
McInnis could just answer the damned questions.
Oh wait… he did.
Obama and White House weren’t going to give Fox News a scrap other than the daily briefings and then changed their minds after getting negative feedback on boycotting the whole network.
I used Glen Beck for a reason..has he interviewed Obama? Frankly I don’t watch Beck’s show. He’s a showman – not a credible newsman.
Because Obama sat down with him during the campaign.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…
McInnis is ducking the interview.
He has to come up with answers to impossible questions, such as how to cut highway funding and still fix the highways.
It is a problem.
I thought about asking McInnis when he was in our neck of the woods last time but decided the time wasn’t right. He’ll answer a lot of questions including these between now and next Nov. You know as well as I do timings everything. The answers may not come through an interview with David but when they do I lay odds most of the bloggers on Pols will deride them. It’s the common denominator that keeps COPols going. (That and the Friday music which I thoroughly enjoy.)
and so far his ‘ideas’ are pretty worthless too
You wouldn’t know the truth if it popped you in the eye. That was no excuse. I pick my battles and advocating an interview with you is getting terribly low on my list.
Just above Another Skeptic said McInnis already answered the questions. You say he’s waiting for the right moment.
Are there are answers or not?
If not- when would be the right moment? Nov? Oct? How about before the next legislative session when it could make a difference?
His answer on the “Dr. Evil” anti-tax initiatives is that he’s going to wait to see whether he supports them or not. That’s not an answer.
Maybe he was an early riser and liked to pack in the morning, maybe he had no friends … I’m an educated man, but I haven’t the first damn clue about the travel habits of Private Santiago.
Are these really the questions….
However the newsman I’ve most been compared to here is Larry King because my interviews are so soft & gentle. The liberals on this site wanted me shot for my interview of Penry because I treated him fairly.
Anyways, I understand your guy McInnis not wanting to interview with me – he’s had a hard time even with fawning sycophants like Dan Caplis. That’s fine, every candidate should pick and choose who they talk to based on how it plays for them.
What I don’t think is ok is for a candidate to run away from the fundamental questions they will face as governor. What happens if they are then elected and McInnis is unwilling to determine where to cut the budget – do we just shut down the state?
I wouldn’t talk to you. Absolutely nothing good can come out of an interview for a far-left-leanng blog where many of the people can’t even be civil to Jared Polis.
Nothing against you, at all. You’re a fine man and I think you do a great job with your interviews, but it’s in his best interest to sit back and let the Dems continue to self-destruct a year out from the election.
That politicians will only interview with a guaranteed supportive interviewer? Do you really want someone that afraid of being challenged as governor. I don’t.
This is the same reason I am contemptuous of Udall – he was so scared of Code Pink that he stopped making public appearances. You are contemptuous of DeGette because she minimizes her public appearances.
It’s not just a game of political advantage – we’re electing a Governor of the state. I don’t care (that much) if he interviews with me. I do care if he’s capable & willing to answer the above questions.
I want Ritter out of the Governor’s mansion.
McInnis talking to lefties that wouldn’t vote for him if he walked on water serves no purpose for him.
Do you think DeGette would give me an interview?
As I’ve said here before, I respect Owens (primarily his second term). I’d vote for Ritter over Owens (probably) but I would not say Owens was unqualified.
But McInnis concerns me that he’s not of Governor caliber. Politics aside, we need someone who can step up and make hard decisions. If he runs away from questions like this, what are we going to have when he’s Governor.
self-destruction will be more grand does not favor the GOP I am afraid.
About “David, you can’t expect McInnis to sit down with someone who doesn’t love him.” Interesting because no where in my post did I ask for an interview.
All my post asked was for McInnis to give direct answers on three fundamental questions. Questions I think we should expect answers on from any candidate for Governor.
So I’ll put it out there again – should we even consider someone who won’t answer those questions?
Good point, I did throw that in at the end.
funny that Ritter’s asking the same questions of McInnis. I would tend to say that it’s a growing concern that McInnis won’t answer the questions. At some point, if he continues to evade, that will become the meme about his campaign. He has plenty of time to change it but if we roll around into the springtime with this same attitude, I expect we’ll have another Republican flameout.
Which, considering it’s McInnis, is great by me.
Just don’t do it. What’s the point of giving answers to questions that could kill you in an election when you are raising money like he is and poling favors you. Scott doesn’t need the interview from his vantage. The interview or answers could only hurt him. Stay on the phone, raise money and keep those numbers up with the voters.
If elected what would you do about pressing issues?
Or don’t answer- play it quiet. And Let the campaign define you.
OTW, OTW, OTW
From a strategic point of view, trying to reconcile all of this at this point in the campaign is idiotic. The only thing that could be worse for him would be if he tried to debate Ritter.
McInnis is up in the polls, incumbents are unpopular, Ritter is having trouble reconciling his own issues, why do something that will hurt him?
From my personal point of view, however, I think it’s pretty awful that he’s avoiding answering these questions. I really worry about what he would be like as Governor.
I’d prefer to see him figure that out before the election, not after the inauguration.
It also worries me that his supporters are fine with Scott not laying out what he will do before being elected. They have no idea what they are getting.