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 07, 2006 08:00 AM UTC
46 Comments
Saw Herb Rubenstein’s commercial on CNN this morning. It is a powerful spot. It is good that one candidate is willing to take such a strong stance on the War In Iraq. Democrats have lost too many elections by trying to duck the War. Democrats must not only take back the Congress but do something when they take it back. It was a Democratic Senate that voted for this madness to begin with in 2001. The result was that Democrats lost the US Senate in 2002. Democrats will win in November by opposing the war and calling for the withdrawal of US troops now.
I heard the ad about Lionel Rivera on radio this morning exploiting him as the liberal he is. It too is very effective.
Rivera is a liberal??? ROFLMAOPIMP…..Well, maybe by Colo. Springs standards, but they grade on a sharp curve down there.
Anyone know any fundraising numbers from CD5?
Does anyone care to speculate on why Senator Ken Salazar says that he’ll not only campaign on behalf of Joe Lieberman in Connecticut, but that he’ll support Lieberman as an Independent if Lieberman fails in his primary bid to be the Democratic candidate for the Senate? Somehow I don’t buy the suggestion that Salazar is following his “conscience.”
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_4824684,00.html
Salazar has always seen himself as something of a maverick and a bit above party loyalty. That’s probably what’s behind his support of Lieberman.
Matt Smith blasted for his support for Democrats and his anti gun stance in the Daily Sentinel this morning, and it was all Smith’s doing.
http://www.gjsentinel.com/news/content/news/stories/2006/07/07/7_7_1b_Smith_attacks_critics.html
Smith may be the worst candidate this year just ahead of his friend Marc Holtzman. Attacked in a mailer, he answers in the newspaper. Attacked by gun advocates, he answers by attacking the local DA. Attacked for not being loyal to the Republican Party, he answers by splitting hairs. Most West Slopers know Smith campaigned for John Salazar in Durango and the San Luis Valley.
Good bye little Dutch Boy (his chosen nickname, not mine).
I am sure Dudley will be the attempted scapegoat. But Matt Smith brought his Achilles heal right into the debate on page 1B of the local fish wrap.
I heard Fawcett was $110 K roughly, Bremer had more money – but that included a $200K he made to his own campaign. The last report out from down here was the Gazette in April story here. Jay’s numbers were up from the article and I heard that he was endorsed on dailyKos and got a good chunk in one day.
….Lieberman was a big supporter of Salazar in ’04, they’re both part of that “Gang of 14,” and their career paths are very similar: Lieberman was Conn. A.G. for two terms, big on consumer protection and environmental issues, was planning to run for Gov in ’90 but got talked into running instead for Senate when Lowell Weicker looked vulnerable in ’88 and won, making himself the Big Cheese in the state Democratic Party.
Sen. Ken Salazar is a died-in-the-wool liberal, and votes that way on anything that really matters.
To get the press to call him a “centrist” as the Rocky Mountain News did on the Lieberman endorsement, Salazar takes lost causes, non-essential votes on bills and endorsements that mean nothing, to make himself look more conservative than he really is. How much political standing do you think Salazar has in Connecticut? Does this really matter or make any difference? Of course not.
Sen. Ken Salazar is a died-in-the-wool liberal, and votes that way on anything that really matters.
To get the press to call him a “centrist” as the Rocky Mountain News did on the Lieberman endorsement, Salazar takes lost causes, non-essential votes on bills and endorsements that mean nothing, to make himself look more conservative than he really is. How much political standing do you think Salazar has in Connecticut? Does this really matter or make any difference? Of course not.
Sen. Ken Salazar is a died-in-the-wool liberal, and votes that way on anything that really matters.
To get the press to call him a “centrist” as the Rocky Mountain News did on the Lieberman endorsement, Salazar takes lost causes, non-essential votes on bills and endorsements that mean nothing, to make himself look more conservative than he really is. How much political standing do you think Salazar has in Connecticut? Does this really matter or make any difference? Of course not.
Sen. Ken Salazar is a died-in-the-wool liberal, and votes that way on anything that really matters.
To get the press to call him a “centrist” as the Rocky Mountain News did on the Lieberman endorsement, Salazar takes lost causes, non-essential votes on bills and endorsements that mean nothing, to make himself look more conservative than he really is. How much political standing do you think Salazar has in Connecticut? Does this really matter or make any difference? Of course not.
Gee Dan… Is Salazar really a died-in-the-wool liberal? Really? I couldn’t tell from your post smart guy.
WS, I find it more meaningful to wrap my dog’s crap in that yellow rag.
Yes Dan. The flag-burning amendment, which lost by ONE VOTE, was really a lost cause.
matt smith never campaigned for salazar, never helped him raise money, never endorsed him. that’s all there is to it. dudley brown, kook that he is, would believe any rumor–even one phase line and the governor cooked up– if it helped him raise his profile. if josh penry were smart about this, he’d tell his buddies to can it. but I don’t see that happening, as josh seems to enjoy the support of kooks like dudley and the bjorklunds.
Iron Mike, I thought you were too busy out canvassing precincts and putting up yard signs for Marc Holtzman to denigrate other bloggers.
Corrections: I understand what you’re saying, Kooks=2nd amendment champions. I get it.
Another Mesa County (HD 55) representative to watch: Bernie Buescher. From the governor’s office to Congress, seems like he’s stoking the fire under the Republicans about immigration impacts.
http://www.gjsentinel.com/news/content/news/stories/2006/07/07/7_7_1A_special_session.html
I am with Matt on this one. The 2nd Amendment did NOT allow just anyone to carry guns. Thanks for standing against those kooks that want to carry guns. My vote is for Matt Smith – I want to see fewer of those harmful weapons on the street.
Guns kill people and I am GLAD that Matt Smith Opposes them.
So STICK THAT IN YOUR PIPE AND SMOKE IT DUDLEY – WHOEVER YOU ARE!!
George W Bush, frustrated with diplomacy? Pshaw!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060707/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_15
Anyone know who is behind the 527 ads in Colorado Springs that are running every 30 minutes against Rivera for increasing taxes?
Tom – that’s Steve Durham.
So the House Dems started passing bills on second reading while the R’s were in caucaus this evening. Is this how Romanoff welcomes in the new era of civility?
Andrew knows how to get things done……..
Middle of the Road-
google Steve Durham Colorado
Oh come on, man, I’m feeling lazy.
Okay, okay, I’ll go do it.
Oh, ick, THAT Steve Durham. My, he certainly keeps busy, doesn’t he.
Here’s a fun quiz to keep in mind when voting for Governor:
Which of the two candidates for Governor was forced to settle out of court for a massive sum of money to avoid being charged with racketeering under the RICO Act?
A) Bill Ritter
B) Bob Beauprez
(The correct answer is B- Bob Beauprez)
Beauprez has a press release hosted on his website claiming Ritter wants to have it “both ways” on immigration. Has anyone told them over there the golden rule of PR? Never Never Never even if your life depends on it Never Never Never repeat the charge! Does he want to lose?
dudley is a kook. like caldara and andrews–two other kooks who are also willing to do anything and everything they can to see their names in print, hear their voices on radio, and see their mugs on tv–he consistently sets his causes back by failing to think before he acts. (think dildos on hooks and saddam hussein, among other priceless pronouncements.) he can’t even get his facts straight before he sends out a mailing. case in point: dudley’s attacks on matt smith claim matt is running for the senate district 6 seat; matt is running for the senate district 7 seat. (ironically, if dudley wanted to help protect the second amendment, he would focus on defeating isgar, the democrat who holds the senate district 6 seat.) another example: a picture of matt and salazar celebrating the defeat of referendum a equals matt endorsing salazar. if one were to use “dudley deduction,” he or she could just as easily say that picture shows salazar endorsing matt. dudley, they ran against each other for congress, which means they didn’t endorse each other, they opposed each other. do you need a high-powered shot of brains to get that through your head.
Under current Colorado law, homeowner damages can be tripled only up to $250,000 – any amount above the $250,000 is actual damages, said Steve Durham, a political consultant and the owner of Colorado Winning Edge Inc. As an example of what happens if there are no limits on litigation, Durham cited a lawsuit that was filed in Denver in 2002, prior to HB 1161.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4190/is_20040910/ai_n10045051
Colorado Winning Edge has as its address 1301 Pennsylvania Ave, Denver CO.
Gee, with Durham attacking Rivera, is it save to assume that the Crank Camp is behind this plot? After all, durham is a long-time Hefley fan. Just goes to show that when it comes to the HBA, they’ll flip you like a cheap pancake everytime.
What Durham and Shuck say, every puppet follows. But Lionel was such a good son to the HBA over the years. Both they and the Chamber pushed for most of the tax increases. Now there’s one for the ages!!!
Guess people for fogot to mention how the CHAMBER and HBA pushed for those tax increases each and every time. If durham was so opposed to TAX Increases, why didn’t Winning Edge come out againt them? Smells more like politics than philosophy to me.
Remeber folks, Steve Durham was one of the original members of the Colorado Crazies Club.
SPECIAL SESSION DAY 2:
As for 2nd reading passing of bills:
Romanoff consulted with the GOP before proceeding. They apparently agreed which bills were non-controversial and handled those while waiting for the GOP to get back. They were already 15 minutes late at this point and it was getting later and later …
When the GOP did get back for the controversial ones, they kept trying amendment after amendment that did not fit under the bill titles. That was very time consuming also. HB1073 and SB1 are both still alive as of 11:55 pm on Friday. These are competing measures which do essentially the same things as far as handling immigration, except one does it now (HB1073) and the other refers it to the ballot as a statute referendum (SB1). The basics are: no state services (with that well defined) for undocumented folks; stiffer penalties for employers who hire undocumented folks; stiffer penalties for anyone with fake documentation.
Requiring additional ID/citizen checking to vote now seems to be dead (YEAH!) and a bill deaing with limiting the amount of time the Colorado Supreme Court can sit on ballot issue challenges is still up in the air. The Senate passed one version, but the House turned it into something very different. The House sponsor (McCluskey) ended up wanting to kill it himself after the changes were made, but he was persuaded to hold off a day until he had a chance to consult with the Senate sponsor (Viega) since was her bill to begin with.
There was a late night meeting in the Governor’s office to try to merge HB1073 and SB1 but that did not seem to go anywhere. I expect more haggling went on at a local bar after I went home.
I’ll try to give a Saturday update after the session tomorrow. I REALLY hope that one ends sooner. I didn’t home til 10:00 tonight!
Oh! and a bill recognizing common law marriages only between people over 18 is on it’s way from the House to the Senate.
Right on Corrections. I for one am glad that Matt Smith is trying to remove those dangerous guns from our streets. Guns kill people and Matt seems to understand that.
Unfortunately people like Dudley don’t seem to understand this.
Hey Corrections – when you find yourself believing that you are the only one who isn’t a kook. Guess what? You probably are the kook.
Nice try though. Take your meds and go back to bed.
Dan, are you a bonehead? Somehow you’re excited that we’re not requiring proof of citizenship to vote? Do you work for the Chicoms or the Mexican government, or what?
And, middle of the road, Steve Durham is the embodiment of evil. He’s a QUOTE “REPUBLICAN” ENDQUOTE operative who screws the real republicans for the squishy ones. Only if he wants to spend money beating on Rivera, let him have at it!
Hey corrections. I don’t recall seeing Matt Smith on the ballot against Salazar? Did your ballot show Matt Smith running against Salazar? My ballot showed Walcher vs Salazar.
Come to think of it – I don’t recall Smith endorsing Walcher in that race… Hmmmm.
Some people have short memories. Maybe you need to correct yourself.
Thanks for the update Dan.
Its not being boneheaded. Its being pratical. How on earth would we ever fairly implement such a requirement? If people have to drag their passports, or their birth certificates (and marriage certificates if they got married and changed their name), plus a valid ID, to the polls everytime they vote, how often do you really think they are going to vote?
What about poeple who do not have any of these things and can’t afford to get them. It was $20 for my birth certificate last time I got a copy. $45 for my son’s (he was born in Germany). And speaking of my son, if the poll worker cannot read any German or Latin they have no way of knowing my son is a US citizen from his birth certificate because it is written entirely in German and Latin.
Providing proof of citizenship is way, way WAY too much of a burden to simply vote. In a society where voter turnout is abysmal to begin with, do we really want public policy which will further discourage voters?
Funny – Dan is right. The requirement for an ID to vote is an excessive reaction to the immigration issue. To register you show your citizenship IDs so making it happen at the polling place is redundant. Additionally, in the bills there is no solution of how people voting via absentee ballots would prove they are citizens. Finally, illegals in this country don’t vote. NO county clerk has said this is a problem.
Dan – keep up the good work. I didn’t make it home until late as well. Blech.
Leave it to the party which wants less government to require you to have your papers in order before exercising your constitutional right. Sounds like the good old days in the country formerly known as the Democratic Republic of Germany……
Good updates, Dan. Thanks.
TOM:
ARE YOU THE SAME TOM THAT WALCHER SLEPT WITH ON THOSE TRIPS IN COLLEGE?