U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Joe Neguse

(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) A. Gonzalez

(D) George Stern

(R) Sheri Davis

50%↑

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%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
October 05, 2010 11:28 PM UTC

Karl Rove's "Super PAC" Ad Plays Romanoff's Tune

  • 67 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

From the Colorado Independent’s John Amick:

Two groups conceived by former Bush White House Senior Advisor Karl Rove and former RNC chairman Ed Gillespie have new independent expenditure ads opposing Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) and supporting Florida candidate for U.S. Senate Marco Rubio (R). The ads appear the same day as campaign finance watchdog organizations wrote a letter to the IRS asking them to investigate the 501(c)(4) tax status of one of those groups, American Crossroads Grassroots Policy Strategies (GPS)…

The $770,000 Colorado ad buy hits Sen. Bennet over a pension bond deal that he did as Denver Public Schools superintendent with JP Morgan Chase that had an exploding interest rate like an adjustable-rate mortgage. The story, reported by Gretchen Morgenson of the New York Times, broke the Friday before Bennet’s primary win against Andrew Romanoff. American Crossroads, a 527 group, is running the ad, and has spent $1,793,207 against Bennet.

Of course, local media outlets swiftly debunked this attack when Bennet’s primary opponent Andrew Romanoff fired it off as his last-minute (and unsuccessful) Hail Mary play the weekend before the election–but we knew then that wouldn’t stop Republicans and their allies from pulling it out against Bennet later. If nothing else, there’s more time to refute this story than before–helped by the fact that it’s already been refuted.

On the other hand, $770,000 buys an awful lot of truth-by-repetition…

Tweet
Share

Comments

67 thoughts on “Karl Rove’s “Super PAC” Ad Plays Romanoff’s Tune”

    1. What kind of addictive spending occurs at DPS?

      Have they been funding the education of illegal aliens?

      Did they forget to flip the autopilot “off” while traveling the habitual spending course?  

      2. DPS has been funding the education of actual aliens. Their craft landed the same year “Michael Bennet” showed up in Colorado. Coincidence?  

          1. Lib seems to know an awful lot about the scheme to educate the refugees from Rigel 7. No one was supposed to know Cary Kennedy is the emissary to the alien life forms, but now he’s posted it on a public blog. His own little secret might not be safe once the Commission starts its inquiries.

    1. American Crossroads, founded and backed by Karl Rove,is the largest Republican outside donor. For the month of August it raised 91% of its money from 3 billionaires. – Rachel Maddow

      Quote:  “There’s a small group of billionaires and corporate special interests that are trying to buy their way back into power. They’re spending their fortunes to defeat our folks and elect some of the most right-wing Republicans this country has ever seen.” – Joe Biden

        1. There you go again having some difficulty with numbers. Only one billionaire, beej, the others were mere millionaires. It’s sad when homeschooling does that kind of damage, and to someone who fancies himself a mathematician, no less. Just sad.  

            1. between a million and a billion? Heck, it’s just a rounding error, isn’t it?

              I’m so thankful our state is sponsoring mathematicians of such caliber. From each according to his ability …

          2. He only knows what Wikipedia tells him about Colorado politics as he checks it in the 5 minutes before he posts something he’d never even heard about until reading the post he replies to.

            You can’t home school carpetbagging. You have to learn a skill like that in grad school.

  4. If Andrew Romanoff’s ad had been this good he would be the Democratic nominee for US Senate.

    Senator Bennet’s explanation has not been very good so far.    

  5. Back during the primaries as soon as the Romanoff campaign rolled out this ad I said that we would see it again in the primaries!!

    Sure the ad is a crock of bull and we all know it and sure we all know that the GOP has no respect for the truth and yes, they may have come up with this very ad on their own BUT we didn’t sure didn’t need a Democrat using these sort of lies against a fellow Democrat and simultaneously handing Karl Rove this BS on a silver platter.  And ‘Rovian’ is exactly how I branded this ad when Romanoff came out with it.

    I thought that I had gotten past the anger and frustration that I felt when Andrew’s campaign ran that piece of crap but I guess not.

    Boy sometimes I do so I hate it when I’m right.

    Hopefully, the Bennet campaign can use the fact that these allegations have already been proven false to their advantage.

    1. As sad is this is, the Rove ad is correct.  DPS was trying to shore up a $400 million short fall, and it has cost Denver taxpayers $115 million in interest in fees.  These numbers come from a spreadsheet provided by DPS’ COO, David Suppes.  

      What is sad to me is, if the Democrats of Colorado hadn’t been so cock sure that Bennet was a genius, they might have had a chance at winning this election.

        1. The Dem Senate trust fund just spent about $5 mill trying to knock Buck down.  It looks like it will take this ad and less than a mill to do the trick for the glass jaw appointed one.

      2. You might do well to go back and read the article and the ones from back when Romanoff first ran this nonsense it was proven to be FALSE!!!  Just in case you missed it the first time around, FALSE, NOT ACCURATE, WRONG, UNTRUE!!

        Have ya got the point NOW!?!?!?

        1. IIRC, DPS is already money ahead compared to what they would have paid if they had either (a) done nothing or (b) paid a fixed interest rate.

          You got a problem with that?

  6. Remind me what this ad has to do with Romanoff’s ad that “virtually ever media outlet in the state swiftly debunked”? Nothing? Yeah, because the two are on completely different topics. The ad that was debunked via your link was in regards to Bennet’s involvement with Anschutz. This one is in regards to the DPS investment decision.

    You may want to fix your links.

      2. So let me spell it out to you slowly. Only moments ago, Pols linked the text “swiftly debunked this ad” to this thread: http://coloradopols.com/showDi…

        Problem is, the ad above has nothing to do with Bennet’s involvement with Anschutz, which is what “swiftly debunked” thread focuses on. Apparently, Pols has corrected this error and now links to a Denver Post article.

        Did you get there ok, or do you need me to slow down a bit more?

        Thanks for fixing it, Pols.

        1. and his initials are not AR.  Bennet either wins the race because he has spent the last year and one-half getting to know Colorado and its people, and has organized an outstanding ground game, and has connected to the pain people are feeling from this god-awful recession, and has charted a clear path out of the disaster so that people can keep their homes and can find a job which pays enough to live on.  Or he doesn’t win the race.  Bennet has had so many advantages – money, D.C. connections, the support of the Governor and the President, incumbency.  The outcome of the race is up to him.  If he loses it won’t be because he had a primary opponent.

                1. or risk losing the election. Now I’ve been calling on Bennet to defend his record for months.

                  To point: The Obamacare massacre continues: 3M to drop retiree health plans

                  Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer….

                  Like it or not bloggers, I talked to yet another Dem operative … this one based in Denver. In summary, Bennet’s gone. I however don’t believe Bennet is out of the game.

                    1. Its a natural outcome of 17% functional unemployment and being responsible for passing the legislation that caused it …

            1. The majority of Coloradoans are against what you haters try to portray Ken Buck as! The issue is they see right through typical dem slanders now.

              On the flip side they see what an ugly SF liberal voting record Michael Bennet has. You guys try to decieve, but people are living the misery caused by Bennet and Obama everyday and that my friends is hard to spin, even for the spin masters that the democrats are.  

              You guys are trying to make people hate Ken Buck since your political philosophy depends on it. The only issue is people hate not having a job, a home, or a pension even more. Wake up Bennet supports obama’s failed economic model and in just the two years he has been appointed Coloradoans are paying the price. Ultimately Bennet walked the plank for Obama!  

          3. Is it realistic to label “D.C. Connections, support of the President and incumbency” as advantages in this election cycle? Seems like everything I’ve been hearing says those are disadvantages. Bennet has certainly been attacked over and over by both the left and the right because of them.

            1. Spending ” . . . the last year and one-half getting to know Colorado and its people,” organizing “an outstanding ground game,” and connecting “to the pain people are feeling from this god-awful recession,” charting “a clear path out of the disaster so that people can keep their homes and can find a job which pays enough to live on.”  If he and his campaign decided early on that incumbency and D.C. connections were a disadvantage, why didn’t they craft a campaign focusing on the above?  

              Bennet is one of many candidates who are absolutely failing at understanding the devastating impact the recession has had on millions of people.  Why aren’t candidates connecting on an emotional level?  Why aren’t they showing at least some degree of empathy, and why aren’t they communicating with people about how they’ll help it get better?  People are going to vote based on their own circumstances – absent a candidate doing what I’ve described, they’re likely to follow the candidates who stir up their fear and anger.  

  7. Mikey Bennet didn’t consider the downside when he entered this transaction.  I don’t know if he dragged DPS into it or if the bankers dragged Mikey into it.  Regardless, someone got dragged and DPS taxpayers paid dearly for Mikey’s adventure.  A positive for him is that he surely built some goodwill with Wall Street.

    2. Try this article:

      Denver Public Schools bond deal doesn’t add up to disaster – Denver Business Journal

      Here are some pertinent quotes:

      The $400 million pension fund hole was costing the district 8.5 percent per year…

      At the time, the district could have issued fixed-rate debt at an interest rate of about 7.25 percent, Boasberg said. But the more complex arrangement was expected to result in a rate of about 6 percent, including fees and costs.

      Instead, it paid about 8.6 percent in 2008-09 and 6.1 percent in 2009-10. For the life of the deal so far, the total cost of the financing has been 7.14 percent.

      Right now, the costs are at 6.1 percent … which is right about what we’d expected.

      “To date, we’re about $20 million ahead of what we would have paid under the previous financing.”

      So did you get all that?

      Do nothing: pay 8.5%

      Fixed rate financing: pay 7.25%

      Complex credit swap financing: To date: 7.14% / Present rate: 6.1%

      Savings to date: $20-million

      Remember, just because you don’t understand it doesn’t make it bad.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Gabe Evans
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

113 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!