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*
(R) V. Archuleta
98%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Marshall Dawson
95%
5%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
50%
50%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(D) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank
(D) River Gassen
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) John Fabbricatore
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen
(R) Sergei Matveyuk
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
70%
30%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
January 18, 2011 11:42 PM UTC
55 Comments
The fact that the liberal propagandists at Colorado Pols want you gone means you are doing something right!
He’s winning elections for Democrats. Way to go, Dick Wad!
Who says we want him gone? He’s a gold mine for Dems. I’d vote for him if I could.
Campaigning???
Which Republican lunch?
Reservations only as I understand it.
We’ve said two things repeatedly when it comes to Wadhams:
1. Democrats should be rooting for Wadhams to return because he has done such a poor job for Republicans in the last four years.
2. We can’t see why Republicans would re-elect Wadhams, given his track record.
We’re not advocating for or against Wadhams by making these fairly obvious points.
We hate Wadhams because he’s a huge threat. Right? RIGHT?!?!?? Liburls are scared! Anyone but WADHAMS!! NOOOOoooooOOOOOoooo!
am petrified.
.
Now I have to come up with a new name ?
I sure don’t want folks here confusing us.
.
The majority on this site don’t like Wadhams. How is that an indictment of his performance as a state chair? You realize you’re on opposite sides, don’t you? It’s not like most of you spent time talking about or writing letters to the editor about how kick-ass previous GOP chairmen were.
The facts are, the Colorado GOP had a bad record during historically bad downturns in the political cycle and had a good record during good turns in the cycle. Alert the press!
Of course, you know that. So let’s look at other data points. During Wadhams’ first term, the Colorado GOP broke state records and was top 5 nationally in gross voter contact (not pro-rated).
That brings us to the most recent cycle. The Party has much more influence over down ballot races than the major statewides. By that measurement, Wadhams did great. It was McInnis who scuttled the party and led us to a mixed result. He was vetted just like Udall was vetted (and more so): by a lot of years of public service. Maes was simply the predictable outcome of a very unpredictable event. Throwing in Tancredo only made it more exactly like ‘The Perfect Storm.’
There was no precedent and no playbook to consult. The majority of Colorado Republicans aren’t going to fire a great chair for that. He’s going to be fine. I wouldn’t be surprised if he got Tancredo’s endorsement, though I’m not sure if he needs it either.
But please, continue to argue that Wadhams “is the most divisive chair in memory” who has incurred the wrath of the party – but that he also “has this sewn up through backroom deals.” Both make you look banal at best. And the fact you say them at the same time just makes you look silly.
“Top 5 nationally in gross voter contact”.
That’s great, but here’s the problem: Republicans aren’t winning elections in Colorado. You can pull out whatever statistic you want, but the only one that really matters is the outcome of elections.
The Denver Broncos had the #7 passing offense in the NFL in 2010, but nobody cares because they only won 4 games.
You really think that Wadhams was responsible for the national environment in ’08? You think that if Karl Rove, Lee Atwater raised from the dead, or anyone else was going to regain state majorities or win statewides for the GOP that year? As for ’10, see above and elsewhere.
Please accept this as permission to delete this thread and pretend like it never happened.
Unlike the NFL, politics is predictably cyclical. The national environment and the top of the ticket have more to do with election outcomes than anything else. The state party is more like the NFL front office – not the people on the field.
the two top prizes in CO were not won by your party under the leadership of DW.
As I said, the record speaks for itself, which is why I too applaud Dick’s brave and heroic efforts and wish him success in his endeavor to retain that leadership.
You should vote for him.
then it must also have mattered in 2010. Right?
True or false: Wadhams should have vetted McInnis better than he did.
True or false: Wadhams shouldn’t have “cleared the field” for McInnis, leaving only a stubborn outsider to win the nomination when the unvetted plagiarism scandal broke.
True or false: Wadhams abandoned Maes when he was honor-bound to support him.
True or false: If this was a GOP wave year, which is the heart of your comment, at the very least Buck should have defeated a vulnerable appointee.
False.
False dilemma. He didnt clear the field and in fact personally supported Penry.
False.
True.
if not Wadhams, we’d love to have you, 20th. Same reasons.
… that the party has nothing to do with the major candidates who run, even though the pattern has been, since Dick’s return, that all the promising ones drop out of major races early, only to reappear in subsequent major races in which other major candidates suddenly withdraw early. (Example: McInnis was initially going to run for Allard’s senate seat in 2008, only to suddenly drop out early in favor of Schaffer; he reappears for the governor’s post, and suddenly Penry drops out for the less glamorous job of running someone else’s primary campaign).
Maybe Wadhams has little to do with that, but there’s someone definitely playing the heavy and cutting deals for the purpose of avoiding messy primaries. We’ll see if we get a new GOP chair – and actual competitive primaries, though we’ll have to wait for 2014.
Now, denying that Wadhams and the party abandoned Maes when we have smoking gun evidence of that… That’s some nerve you got there, my friend.
Published election results even! Hell yes we abandoned him. A vote for Maes would have been irresponsible!
And since when has the GOP successfully avoided primaries? I recommend you use the Google to check out our gubernatorial race last year. Or the ’06 race. Or ’04 senate. Or many down ballot races last year?
Didn’t you hear? We’re divided between the establishment and the tea party.
You answered “false.” Now you’re saying you lied one response up. Way to build credibility.
Tip for posting: Bottle and/or bong must be put down first.
Anything about that guy. It’s a false premise (look it up).
You guys are really raising the level of debate around here…
You answered “false” but meant “Hell yes.”
Maybe your thesaurus is defective?
Maybe 20th accidentally let slip that the GOP really is an organization that has no honor, but if that’s not what he meant, then he’s just lying about the role of a party chair. Yes, yes, yes, party chairs are supposed to support and promote their nominees. It’s absolute sheer desperation, and he just destroyed his credibility when he said that that’s not the case.
Anyway, 20th – Wadhams is bad for the state GOP and no non-Republican fears him or wants to see him cede the party chairmanship to a competent leader. Case closed.
Published election results even! Hell yes we abandoned him. A vote for Maes would have been irresponsible!
And since when has the GOP successfully avoided primaries? I recommend you use the Google to check out our gubernatorial race last year. Or the ’06 race. Or ’04 senate. Or many down ballot races last year?
Didn’t you hear? We’re divided between the establishment and the tea party.
All the news to the contrary can be disregarded because 20th Maine, the ultimate republican, has said so. Never mind that the only contested primaries that have happened in any of those years were exactly that – one establishment candidate, one outsider of some sort.
Too bad I’m stubborn and tend to believe what I see more than you.
Say what you want about Scooter’s habit for lifting other people’s work, Dan Maes won the Primary fair and square.
DickWad promptly shit on his head, both in front of and behind the scenes. And speaking of shit, it brought Tanfreakco out of his badger hole and became the terrifying, unelectable face of Colorado Republicans, even though he was running under the (abeit temporary) flag of the ACP.
And that’s just one example. You can say a one-seat margin in the State House is a nice consolation prize (along with a few other state offices) but the fact that the major political prizes in this state went to a Dem (Bennet) and a goofy Dem (Hick) is a FAIL for the Colorado GOP.
Dick didn’t cause the McInnis issues. And he didn’t make Maes so incompetent that he would be a danger to the state had he been elected. It was a no-win situation, on every level. SM & DM ethics were in question. Not Wadhams.’
What, exactly, do you think the GOP Chair does? It’s not Wadhams fault that he’s incompetent, it’s all these others things. Moron.
you’re right about Wadhams getting Tancredo’s endorsement.
That would put the icing on an otherwise near-pearfct comic day here on Pols.
Tancredo wants Ted Harvey…
http://bit.ly/htqHfO
And is fabulous!
Uh… Harvey, the only thing scarier than Wadhams! Waaaaaahhh!!
Republicans picked up how many seats there?
If it weren’t for the 1 seat majority in the House, the last election would have been a abject failure for Republicans.
Picking up SOS & Treasurer and 2 congressional seats. The only major race that can be attributed to gamesmanship is the US Senate. Bennet out-played Buck. That’s why candidate quality, staff, etc still matter. But you can’t blame Wadhams for poor Buck campaign.
This thread assumes that Wadhams, as state chariman, has all but total control of the Republican Party. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Wadhams’ hand was dealt before he ever came back to Colorado from Virginia. Before he returned the Colorado Republican Party was taken over by the far right social conservatives who focused on paranoid views of government and ludicrous public policy positions (e.g. terminating funding for public education – St. Sen. President John Andrews). The far right’s take over of the Republican Party is what cost the party its majorities in the state house and senate and several congressional seats as well as the last U.S. Senate race. All of that was in place before Wadhams returned to Colorado.
Second, based on my persoanl experience running Republican campaigns in Colorado, if a state chairman attempts to railroad a candidate into a nomination by eleminating other candidates they simply don’t have the power to get that done.
Wadhams problem eminates from the build-up that other people gave him when he returned to Colorado. For instance, St. Sen. Nancy Spence said something to the effect that “We went out and got the meanest son-of-a-bitch (Wadhams) to run the party and now we are going to take Colorado back.” Such hyperbole and other such statements were taken as the gospel truth and Wadhams perceptually was clothed with an aura of invincibility but the fact of the matter remained he did not have the influence within the party or the power to dictate who would run or what kind of positions each candidate should take to win.
I’ve known Wadhams for thirty years and he is a gifted political message manager but being chairman did not place him in a position where he could control either the party activists or the nominating process. The expectations surrounding his return after the 2006 election were way out of proportion to reality.
You can’t say that it was great that Republicans won SOS, Treasurer and 2 congressional seats, but that the losses don’t matter.
We’re not giving Wadhams credit OR blame for any of these races individually, but you cannot escape the reality that Republicans have not been very successful while Wadhams was in charge. Would a different Chair have had different results? Who knows? But the facts are the facts.
Here’s another sports analogy for you. Basketball coach Phil Jackson has won 10 or 11 NBA titles, but critics say that he’s not that great of a coach because he always has great players. We won’t get into the long arguments about this, because the basic point is this: When he is the coach, his teams often win.
When Wadhams has been Chair, Republicans have fared poorly. You can break it down however you’d like, but at the end of the day, the results speak for themselves.
Wadhams doesn’t get to choose the players or set the strategy. State chairmen or chairwomen, at least in Colorado and unlike Phil Jackson, have little or no control over the players (e.g party activists and candidates)or the message. Wadhams has made mistakes as chairman but there is far more blame being attributed to him than he deserves.
Wadhams is more like David Stern.
Then the state chair is of little import. But in practice Wadhams generally has had major influence. Not absolute control, but major influence.
I think Pols is right on this, a competent state chair could have mitigated a lot of the damage. Wadhams more often than not made things worse.
In fact, I made the point that the environment is more influential than a party chair There are things I could give DW credit for. He was a great spokesperson, ran a great assembly process and is great (relatively speaking) in raising money and spending it prudently.
I have simply made the point that he isn’t to blame for the things for which you are trying to assign blame. The higher the race on the ballot, the less influence state party has. If campaign finance laws were different here in Colorado, the party could spend a lot of money to help a candidate. But thanks to Am. 27 and McCain- Feingold, that power now belongs more to more secretive outside groups.
but in theory, 2010 was such a wave year that based on the environment Reps should have won everything!
And while you say
…it appears that the higher the race, the more involved Wadhams was. I don’t recall any rumors about behind-the-scenes positioning for any of the down-ballot races. Contrast that with Penry-McInnis and Norton-Buck. In fact, given the criminal records of several Republican candidates, I’d say that the party really doesn’t give a hoot about down-ballot races.
And while the down-ballot races clearly went with the wave, I bet you’d trade them all for the Governorship.
I’d Luuurrve her to be the R nominee.
Get it?
I for one am not the least bit embarrassed at the thought that Colorado Republicans might re-elect their biggest embarrassment.
As they say, your mileage might vary.
You are still trying to figure out who Wadhams kicked out of something somewhere. Youre a mess …
Otherwise, even I can appreciate your shots at Maes. Though we’re not likely to ‘re-elect’ him!
I never said a word about Maes.
And what’s this about my friends and family? What the fuck do they have to do with my response to you?
Stick to the subject at hand, 20Me. Don’t change the subject just because you’re losing the argument.
to win elections for his party in the state.
The only reason that Dick lost so many important elections for the GOP is because the Democrats won!
Or something.
The question is, will committee members just vote for him because they know him, or will they consider alternatives?
Colorado needs the Dick, but George “dirty word” Allen is going to run for senate against Webb and he needs a big name, and very expensive, campaign manager. Which to wish for.
Wait a minute. Dickie has enough experience he can be the big head of the Republican Party of Colorado at the same time he is feeding his ham sandwich to George “very dirty name” Allen in his senate run.
Conundrum resolved.
Dick Wadhams was a Penry man from the get go until Penry pulled the rug on a number of his old friends (including ones here in Mesa County) without advance notice.
Wadhams will seek another term in CO.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…
If the GOP re-elects him…AGAIN. Then I think it’s time for a third party or a major restructoring of the party…where the Chairman has no power and the money goes to the counties or something. ANYTHING is better than a 2012 term when Republicans have to take Colorado especially if it’s a close election.
I’m supporting John Wagner. Time for leadership. Hey the Tidwell campaign was terrible, but he at least won the guy 17% at the Assembly when others have spent much more (Holtzman) and still come up short, especially when the candidate wasn’t really bent on the idea of trying to hard and thinking it would come to him.