CO-04 (Special Election)
See Full Big Line
(R) Greg Lopez
(R) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Biden*
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%↓
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
90%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
90%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
(R) Ron Hanks
40%
30%
20%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(R) Deborah Flora
(R) J. Sonnenberg
30%↑
15%↑
10%↓
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Dave Williams
(R) Jeff Crank
50%↓
50%↑
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
90%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) Brittany Pettersen
85%↑
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
(R) Janak Joshi
60%↑
35%↓
30%↑
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
July 26, 2010 06:34 PM UTC
70 Comments
SD 20 (Lakewood, Golden, Arvada) between Cheri Jahn and Dave Ruchman, I think Ruchman is going to pull of a surprise here as well. Jahn has the institutional support but Ruchman has been doing the door-to-door campaigning and has labor support.
I agree with you on Romanoff; I think Buck may have shot himself in the foot a few too many times over the last week, he may still pull off a win, but it will be closer than it would have been if the primary were two weeks ago and with his latest slam of the tea party, he will be limping going into November.
I saw yard signs all over west metro for him this weekend, even this morning. I think I have seen a few for Cheri over the past few months further East, but Dave has really worked the West side. I agree, I think Dave has the Ruchmentum going.
The Ghosts’s headline was, not surprisingly for that newspaper, incorrect.
And cast its misinformation in a way that reflects badly on the Tea Party?
I mean, What are the Odds?
Once again, the Beej lets his quaint beliefs get in the way of the facts. The quote from Buck was, “tell those dumbasses at the Tea Party to stop asking questions about birth certificates …”
It should be “tell those dumbasses at the Tea Party to stop asking questions about birth certificates …”
Those who are not asking questions are not dumbasses.
but you’re arguing with a Kevin-Bacon-has-an-a**hole denier.
http://www.coloradopols.com/sh…
Best of Luck.
two sides of the same coin, so thinks I and apparently so thinks Ken Buck.
He said, “Tell those dumbasses at the Tea Party to stop asking questions about birth certificates when there are cameras around”, if he isn’t calling the Tea Party “dumbasses” then why bring them up.
He could have said, “tell those dumbass (democrats, Norton supporters, birthers) to stop asking me questions about birth certificates….”, but he didn’t—he specifically cited Tea Partiers.
I would think you guys would be all in for Buck now.
clock get it right twice a day….still doesn’t mean I’d buy one.
gets it right all the time.
well never has to apologize for saying something incorrectly….given Bucks recent rash of apologies, I guess we can figure out which type of clock he would be….were he a clock.
If someone said “here’s a multiplication table from zero times zero to twelve times twelve,” and then proffered a mislabeled addition table, exactly one cell out of 169 would be correct: The one defined by the juncture of “two” and “two”. For someone to then argue that that one cell serves as proof that it really is an accurate multiplication table would be absurd.
Buck got this one thing right. It’s proof that he got one thing right. One thing isn’t enough for most of us.
The juncture of zero and zero would have been correct too!
What the fuck are you talking about? (rhetorical)
If you submit a list of numbers that are multiplied, a “times table” , if you will, but suddenly changed the symbol to a + instead of a x, there would still be two right answers, even though your entire process is now bogus.
Or perhaps you could use the old, “even a blind squirrel…” thing.
Is that close, Steve?
It was a little over-elaborate of a metaphor, but I was analogizing arithmetic operations to personal-political ideologies, casting addition as an oversimplistic one and multiplication as a more robust and useful one. Everyone claims that theirs is the more robust and useful one, but even when it’s not, someone else can say, “but look at these two instances; since the answers are the same as the ones you believe are more robust and useful, then this must be the ideology you support.”
In fact, it’s kind of how scientific paradigms work; the oversimplistic (from our modern perspective, just plain wrong) physics paradigm of Aristotle, with different “elements” being “heavier” than others, and so forming concentric spheres of earth, water, air, fire, and ether, is displaced by the paradigm which emerged in the early modern era culminating in Newtonian physics. If a die-hard adherent to Aristotlean physics were to say “according to my way of thinking, objects are drawn to the earth,” and a chorus of Newtonians responded, “yeah, that’s right,” that means that the oversimplistic thinker happened to get that one observation right, not that his way of thinking is right.
The “broken clock” and “blind squirrel” are simpler and more to the point, but I shared my analogy because I like the idea of comparing two different systems of thought, one more simplistic than the other.
I think it shows..
You think the rest of the state knows Andrew Romanoff better? Is that because he was Speaker of the House? Voyageur put that myth to rest when he asked us who was the previous House Speaker — virtually no one on even this blog knew the answer.
Bennet will maintain his double-digit lead (per the non-Rasmussen polls) in the primary.
How can anyone dispute that? I wonder if he places money on these races in Vegas? If I had a 90% record, I sure as hell would!
At least I don’t think he’s on the payroll
I have the worst luck gambling. I do very well guessing lotto numbers for example, but when I actually buy a ticket I bomb.
The same is true with card games. I play very well until there is money on the table.
So I never jinx elections by betting on them.
No Bennet signs, but Romanoff signs in Southern Colorado. He also supports no funding for Pinon Canyon, which goes a long way outside of Colorado Springs. It is classic David (Romanoff) against the Goliath (Bennet) of money.
Denver is AR’s base and he carried it heavily at the assembly. An even split in Denver and Bennet, who is definitely better known outside of Denver as the incumbent and the man who has advertised more extensively, wins comfortably statewide. I agree with Caroman with this caveat…even the Rasmussen poll showed Bennet beating AR, though it showed AR doing better (but still losing) than Bennet against Republicans.
Anybody who thinks AR is not well-known outside of Denver has not spent much time outside of the Metro area. AR is about as well-known and liked in rural Colorado as any Denver Democrat can be — including MB. I’ve seen it firsthand.
That said, I’m not going to chime in on the predictions. I’ve not a clue how this will play out in the primary — it’s the classic case of money versus grassroots organization. And I honestly don’t know who wins in that evenly-matched battle.
Dan Willis said, and I don’t necessarily agree, that the two would split Denver. If that happens, Bennet wins — because AR is unquestionably stronger in Denver than statewide. If you split your strongest base evenly, you lose statewide, it’s that simple.
That said, I’m sticking to the polls despite a good — but belated — close by AR. Bennet 55, AR 45.
Some Denver-centric folks simply are not aware of the statewide work that Romanoff did for years.
I’m not making any predictions either – the Primary is not only money vs grassroots, but it’s tough to get the vote out in August, PLUS it’s a very odd year politically.
AR is very popular in the outlying areas.
I am not given to predictions either. So I won’t.
but I live in District 6 — Lois Court is unopposed. Thune seems to have some strong support in the gay community, which is a significant and positive force in my capitol hill neighborhood. I just don’t know if that District 6 support is exportable to District 5.
the portions where I live and where my neighbor’s yard signs are is definitely district 6. the neighbors in question are gay and just probably want to show their solidarity. That’s fine, I just doubt that it will translate into any votes in 5.
I’ve see yard signs way out of district. Often because the volunteers have no clue where they really are. And as you point out solidarity is a good reason to post signs. I had my yard signs in neighborhoods all over the city, friends are helpful. And I’ve had some great volunteers do sign placement in locations I never would have dreamed of.
I suppose you never know where your potential voters are driving around.
She is supporting one of the HD5 candidates and has a sign in her yard even though she does live in the district.
However, she is on a major thoroughfare that goes into the district so her theory was lots of people in the district will see the sign.
AR has no chance Dan, I think your success rate is about to come back to earth.
You’re right on about Angela William, she’s going to clean house.
I don’t know why you think Thrun has the better strategy. It seems to me as though he has the gay community but that’s where it ends. BTW- it’s interesting to see that Thrun doesn’t include his partner in his mailings. Is it intentional?
Coken is a great candidate, however i think Pabon has the momentum and the grassroots to get him over the finish line.
Stapleton will win.
Thrun has much more support than simply the gay community. Many older voters value his health care experience and young families identify with his personal background. BTW, his partner is pictured in some mailing and on his website. Don’t read too much into that.
Seems like the guy is running on a single issue, health care. There are countless other issues that voters care about and I don’t think he’s made the case that he can tackle the big issues of the day.
…if you have actually heard him. He speaks intelligently about the budget and higher education funding, for example. He also stresses his knowledge of fiscal management in running a local non-profit. His opponent simply does not measure up in terms of breadth of experience.
It’s true that he plays up being a doctor but why shouldn’t he when trying to introduce himself to impressionable voters in an open primary?
Please elaborate on the HD-5 prediction. Both Thrun and Duran have waged solid campaigns. The race may come down to which direction undecided voters break in these last two weeks. Duran could win based on name identification from her yard signs that blanket NW Denver. Thrun might win based on a eye-catching mailer featuring Sarah Pailin. I’d be surprised if the margin is more than a few percentage points.
The two of them have only been campaigning to Republicans so far, so it makes sense that you wouldn’t have seen it.
The fact is, Bob Lane is not only a criminal, but a very abrasive individual who has been making absolutely no friends with the active republicans in the district. He barely sqeeked onto the ballot with only 32% of the vote at the assembly and he’s had donations from less than a dozen people. Any advertising he is doing, he is paying for himself.
Garbo, meanwhile, has raised a lot of money from supporters, instead of his own pockets, and is generally well liked by all of us who are active. He has a base of volunteers and has been spending a ton of time making calls and walking door to door. He visited me a couple of weeks ago and I was very pleased with his thoughtful approach to the issues. Even when I asked about Lane, he was hesitant to even acknowledge the fact that Bob is still on probation.
If Garbo has been doing as well on the phone and walking as he did on my doorstep, he’s got this one locked up.
Any of us who remember Lane’s last embarrassing campaign for Senate 38 have no interest in putting him forward again.
Andrew will win in Denver by less than ten percent. Bennet will win overall, with good numbers coming from suburban areas and the western slope. It will still be close. That’s my guess.
With his head up his ass?
he can see the whole grand strategy of the Romanoff campaign!~
Biggest Dem stronghold in Denver with addition of Stapleton. Even at the Denver County Convention HD 7 when almost 50%/50%.
…that Williams has it sewn up?
I think AR will lead MB considerably in Denver, but I am not too sure how the rest of the state will look. I don’t think that the MB grassroots effort is there. The visibility effort isn’t there and AR benefits from long standing loyalties. The caucuses were pretty homogeneous statewide in all major Democratic population centers, so I’m inclined to think that the results will be similar statewide.
I’m also surprised that neither party has released polling in the race; AR may not have been able to afford it, but surely MB has done some and if it was good I’d expect that it would have been released.
In HD 4, I would be surprised if JC won (not unpleasantly, JC is a good leader and a friend), given the near miss on the petition onto the ballot. I don’t have a good feel for who will win, however.
I concur on Buck, in light of polling diaried at this blog showing him comfortably ahead of Norton.
I have a hard time seeing McInnis winning the GOP primary for Governor. Primary voters are embracing extremes, particularly in the GOP this year, and no other “establishment” candidate in the GOP is so tarnished. The criticisms of Maes posted by the newspaper that shall not be named won’t resonate with GOP primary voters. There will be a large undervote, but it will come from people who would have voted for McInnis. A just as events were breaking poll showing McInnis with more support than Maes probably didn’t fully reflect the impact of the ongoing meltdown.
GOP Treasurer: Expect a big undervote here as well. Lots of people are voting based on the top of the ticket and won’t vote because they don’t have a strong opinion. It will probably be a close race.
GOP CD-7: Fraizer. Sias is an unknown (not that Fraizer isn’t) who hasn’t done anything game changing, so the first in the game and lead in money raising from Fraizer probably translates into a primary win. Republicans are not interested in unknown quantities in this election cycle in Colorado after having already experienced so many unfortunate surprises.
show AR with a slight lead, although a lack of head to head polls make that polling problematic.
probably the most cogent thing on this thread including the post. that had not occurred to me and it is interesting to consider that bennet hasn’t been touting polling like almost every campaign I can recollect in Colorado. . . Wonder what Paul Harstad is showing??
He knows the score. Take nothing for granted and work hard, but he knows the score.
I hope he wins by 1 vote and takes that as a reason to reflect on his world view. He’s a smart guy but he has a couple of blind spots.
goes like this:”I said i’d vote for it afer I called all the others cowards. but I checked wih the DLC first but forgot to remember that Pres.Clinton got rid of the separaion of bankers and investment bankers, so I then said that since the public reaction last thursday was bad that what I said is that I’d not vote for it oh wait that I’d vote for it.
On the flip side? Any other DPS board members want 5k?”
Can I correctly claim that 1 vote was mine?
But I’m going to go along with you and say that Romanoff wins by a hair on a nose, despite the polls. I think in the end, given a lack of clear choice, enough Dems will remember Romanoff’s time as Speaker (prodded on by the immense number of yard signs and talking to their more involved Dem friends) and fill in the bubble for Andrew.
On the GOP side of the Senate contest, Ken Buck retains the lead despite the “dumbass” comment; I just don’t think Norton can pull it together in time.
On the governor’s race, hard to call. The plagiarism scandal put McInnis’s on the front page for days. My Republican co-workers were joking about it, and not in a flattering way. Maes has issues, but they haven’t been hashed out on the front page like the McInnis scandal(s). Also, I think the GOP base is less than enthusiastic for McInnis in the first place. If he pulls this out, my prediction is that it will be by less than 5%.
If Romanoff takes the primary and limps through to the general on the no-PAC platform he MUST win. If he doesn’t win everyone watching will realize you can’t win a Senate seat without PAC money. Romanoff will have made it even harder to change the campaign finance system.
That’s my prediction.
is that, even if he loses the general because of the money, it verifies the message that the system is broken. I think it will even make it easier to effect eventual change.
The “fact” that you can’t win a senate seat without tons o’ PAC money is a BAD thing. It is SOOOOO…wrong. That is precisely the message.
Do you suppose that K Street will change the system? No, EK76, Bennet supporters don’t want to face up to it when it comes to this particular incumbent, because, as well connected, aristocratic politicians go, Senator Bennet is a very nice man and has done a pretty good job, except when it comes to his prediliction to favor the well placed and well funded. I cannot support his continued allegiance to Big Money.
I am convinced that only the voting public, individually and in toto, can turn the tide by making it an issue. By insisting that our elected officials refrain from taking corporate money, and forcing our government to give us publicly funded elections.
We can do this by voting for and contributing our meager dollars to candidates who refuse to work for the Corporate welfare. We can take the issue to our neighbors and friends. We can help them to see that the ONLY solution is in the hand on the lever in the voting booth.
That is one of many reasons I support AR. And I particularly support Stan Garnett for making the same pledge. Stan obviously gets it.
I am a Bennet supporter and would love to see campaign finance reform. Don’t assume that all Bennet supporters turn a blind eye to the problem. We just see it as one in a long list of issues. Romanoff supporters seem to see it as the only issue. I wish fixing the broken system were as simple as a hand on the lever in the voting booth.
Publicly funded elections would be nice. After the Republican/Conservative victory that was Citizens United, I don’t see Republicans getting on board with publicly funded elections. And when the “voting public” hears publicly funding what they really hear are higher taxes. And if they don’t the Republicans and Tea Party will make sure they do.
This will be a fight. Think health care reform. Think months of back and forth, town halls, lots of misinformation, that will probably lead to a watered down bill that people on the left and right will hate and the “voting public” won’t understand. And after all that, the executives of O&G, big business, and the insurance companies will have found all the loopholes to still protect their shareholders’ self interest.
I could be wrong though. Maybe it will be as easy as Dems taking pledges to not take PAC money. It’s a fight I think we need to fight, but we need to be realistic about. And we need to make sure we have majorities in both House & Senate who are willing to go with this.
we wouldn’t even have to run the race. But then, we could all just go fishing. Unfortunately, this shit is important.
You certainly hit the nail with this comment, BTW.
You make some excellent arguments for your POV.
I used to routinely attend a lunch with the Garco Dems, and there was the most intriguing elderly lady, in her 80s I would guess, who showed up one day. I asked her how long she had been involved in the Democratic Party, and she replied, “Ever since I was old enough to vote”.
She went on to say, “When I started learning about politics, I quickly realized how damned important it is. I’ve been hooked ever since.”. And I suppose, EK76, that would explain my fascination with it.
Politics is the modern expression of the struggle to stay close to the campfire. The difference between the winners and the losers can be life and death. I know that may sound overly dramatic, but the outcomes of political accomodation are so sweeping and potentially impactful, it tears at credulity to think that so many of us don’t participate…or participate with inadequate information.
It is in that matrix that my belief regarding election reform is rooted. If we, the voters, don’t clean up the process of electing our leaders, the ones we have will not do it. I have said before that my observation of business in Washington DC is that the vast majority of decisions are made for the wrong reasons. The influence of money on access, information, and human nature is incalculably huge.
I am not a one issue kind of guy, and my support for AR is based in my knowledge and experience with his skills as a legislator, negotiator, and compassionate human being.
The fact that he shares my conviction about the need to wrest as much influence from the Corporate-ocracy, (its’ soul rooted in profit, not humanity), just makes my conviction even stronger that he is the right man for the job for the next 6 years.
Political diatribe concluded. 🙂
What the Romanoff supporters seem to forget is that the general election is against a Republican who, most assuredly, WILL be well funded with PAC money and lots of it. We still don’t know what impact the Citizens United decision will have. I’m inclined to think it is more favorable to Republicans.
Risking a senate seat to make a point, however noble that point may be, is just lunacy. If you want to change the system, first and foremost, you have to get elected. Period. Otherwise, you might as well be writing letters to the editor.
campaign finance. I think we differ on how to get there. I totally understand why you support AR and can accept that. I just don’t happen to agree that he can win in November. If he can’t win in November, how can he “build coalitions” to get through Republican obstructionism to get any sort of reform passed?
Honestly, I think if Romanoff were really serious about cleaning up politics of corporate money’s influence he should start small and work his way up. He should have run for Governor on the no-PAC platfform. Once in the Gov. seat he could work with the State House to pass legislation for Colorado. Once that gets passed we can be the model for other states to follow. At the same time he could work with the US Congressional delegates from Colorado to introduce the same legislation in Washington.
I don’t think Romanoff is serious about this though. This is just my opinion. I think he used it as a platform. We’ll see after Aug 10th how serious Romanoff is/was.
better than I.
DEM Senate: Romanoff by a hair
REP Senate: Buck by a close margin
REP GOP: Maes by a close margin
REP Treasurer: Stapleton by a few points
REP CD-3: Tipton barely
REP CD-7: Frazier by a few points
I barely managed to get more right than wrong.
Out of 9 races I made predictions for, only 5 turned out to be accurate.
I need to work to redeem myself in the General!