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%
February 02, 2016 10:48 AM UTC
18 Comments
Is it too late to organize a Stop Gilmore movement?
Yes. There are plenty already…although it may still be possible to contain Gilmore.
Aside from last week's kiddie table debate, has Gilmore actually been doing anything that needs stopping?
He raised under $200,000 last quarter. That would make most US Senate candidates run for the exits, and some US Representative candidates as well. But if he doesn't use it, it's enough to keep his name in the race. Who knows, everyone else could drop out and then Rubio, Cruz, and Trump could all wind up with dead girl / live boy scandals. Not sure if even that would be enough to promote Gilmore into the running, but a man can hope…
FWIW, O'Malley's 0.57% of the delegates are more than enough to tip the scales once they're freed at a higher level convention. Since he didn't make the 15% threshold in any one county, and definitely not at the state level, I believe his supporters will have to go elsewhere. Same with the few Uncommitted delegates.
And we don't know if his supporters made a difference in any particular precinct, because the Democratic caucuses only report State Delegate Equivalents to the media, and those are determined after any re-allocation occurs due to missing the 15% threshold.
O'Malley has no delegates. Zero. Zilch. None
This was the best possible outcome for Dems.
The Democratic nomination is wide open and will generate tons of interest, media coverage and passion.
The Republican nomination has the most extreme and Narcissistic candidates on top and they are eating their own.
Actually, it works the same as Colorado's Dem caucuses as far as I can tell.
The totals on the official caucus web page are real delegates out of individual caucus precincts. He has 0.57% of the total delegates. That will translate into Zero once they go to higher level conventions, though – and those delegates will move to either Hillary or Sanders before Iowa selects its national delegation.
I got a different read over at dailyKos. The .57% share is at the state level and he had to get enough votes (15%) to send delegates to the state convention from each county just like we do so the question is were there any counties where he pulled 15% or more. I don't think he did so he has no delegates going to the state convention.
I think we're reading the same thing. He got delegates from the precincts (that's the 0.57% the official caucus site reports, which are State Delegate Equivalents), but he won't get delegates from the county level, so none will reach state and none will be counted nationally. Or they pass county unlike us, and they'll be buried directly at the state level. Either way, Clinton picks up 23 statewide delegates, and Sanders picks up 21.
Using a Colorado example: If one of our precincts supported O'Malley with 100% of its delegates, they'd send delegates to the county level even if no other precinct sent a single delegate. Then we have county convention, and at that point the 15% once again comes in to play: no delegates for O'Malley, and his delegates at the county convention have to pick which way they go for the state convention.
Cruz will probably come in third in the New Hampshire primary next week, but then he's got South Carolina and some of the other Bible Belt states to help him get back on top. Trump may have a problem with Cruz.
Rubio can probably expect a second place finish in New Hampshire, which should mark him as THE "establishment" candidate. Unfortunately for him, he's stuck in third place overall with few votes to pick up from the other establishment has-beens. Trump and Cruz are dominating, and the fourth and fifth place finishers are also anti-establishment types whose supporters will jump to one of the two right-wing nut cases rather than supporting Rubio.
The bright spot in all of this (as a Democrat): absent a melt down of some sort, this is going to the GOP Convention as a contested race. Two super-egos plus someone the establishment doesn't hate. Anyone including Jim Gilmore (or Sarah Palin) could end up as the candidate if it comes down to that…
BELIEVE IN AMERICA! BELIEVE IN SECOND ACTS!
It's Willard M. Romney to the rescue! Can a member of the LDS church emerge from a smoke-filled room at a political convention as the consensus candidate?
Excuse me, but Hillary actually won Iowa 58.8% (59%) to Sanders 41.2% (41%).
My math? Hillary won 30 delegates to Sanders 21 delegates. It is all about the delegates, people. Ask President Barack Obama.
Adding in super-delegates? That's not representative of the caucus results.
Right. That's the party establishment who are given extra pull. I think the difference just from caucus results was one or two. And that's one of the reasons why HRC will get the nomination.
After everyone quits happy dancing over Bernie winning New Hampshire it will be on to a whole bunch of places where HRC will have a big advantage, more like her advantage in the national polls, and she can count heavily on super delegates.
Also primary voters are a vey different breed than caucus goers and there a lot more primary states. Caucus goers are highly motivated base voters, more liberal on the Dem side and more conservative on the R side, than typical registered Rs and Ds. Team HRC made sure there would be no Obama this time around. Heck, there were hardly any other real candidates from early on period. Just Bernie and he wasn't supposed to be. He gave them a jolt but he won't take her down.
But is his surging popularity going to force Mrs. Clinton more to the left in the same way that Cruz is forcing Rubio more to the right? Senator Sanders might not win the nomination but will he achieve an ideological win by showing Mrs. Clinton that speaking unapologetically about income inequity and other liberal issues motivates a lot of folks or will he become a bitter conspiracy loser and his supporters stay home if he isn't the nominee? Sanders might not win the nomination but he holds the keys to whether a unified party participates in the general election. Stakes couldn't be higher.
I completely agree that Sanders has already had a very significant and I think beneficial influence in forcing HRC out of her center right comfort zone and into positions more in line with today's grass roots Dems and the demos any Dem needs to turn out in order to win. And yes, if he loses the nomination, which I believe he will, I certainly hope that he will get behind HRC and urge his supporters to do so. I believe that he will because the differences between what he wants and what HRC wants are nothing compared to differences between either of their goals and the horrendous 21st century GOP agenda and I don't see him as a self righteous asshole in the Nader mold.
Mrs. Clinton eked out a majority so she got 23 of the possible 44 selected delegates and picked up 6 super delegates for a count of 29 to 21. As far as percentages go, you must be getting them from Fox News to try and discredit the popularity of Sanders. President Sanders probably is as scary to the tin-foil hat crowd as having a skinny black guy serve for eight long years.
In actual delegates, it was Cruz 8, Trump 7, Rubio 7. Get real.