President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Kamala Harris
(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%
October 14, 2006 07:38 PM UTC
19 Comments
How do YOU know which “Bob” I’m talking about?!
OK, OK, I’ll concede that one.
But what’s so “gross?” It’s just an alternative lifestyle, like marrying a sheep or teaching an elk to tippy-toe around a natural gas well. Maybe it’s the idea of seeing Bob Beauprez’s bony veterbrae quivering atop his arched back at the receiving end of headboard-grabbing sodomy.
Actually, that is kind of gross.
And since I have already (obviously) watched the debate, let me just say that Fawcett absolutely creamed Lameborn. It was sick.
http://images.google…
Mineral extraction and wildlife do not have to be mutually exclusive. Caribou in Alaska actually spend a lot of time around the pipeline.
You’re serious, aren’t you dude?
Damn, they must pay you well. Good show.
I’ve already seen the entire debate. We absolutely need to scream this one from the rooftops. Post the link to it anywhere and everywhere, send it to as many CD-5 voters as you know… http://www.youtube.c…
Anyone that watches this can clearly tell that Fawcett has the intelligent answers and that Lamborn is a tool.
Doug Lamborn is a great American…
http://www.careerbui…
How did Lamborn become a Senator in this State, who voted for this talking monkey?
This is the BEST candidate CD-5 could field? He almost had me feeling sorry for him before the debate was over.
Jay Fawcett is the best candidate in this race. Unless you got a couple mil coming in inheritance taxes, you better go with the guy who’s got some real solutions.
I should have said best “R” in the district. From the outside looking in, I can’t believe even a Dobsonite would consider sending this guy to Congress.
Lamborn has proven he’s good enough to get nearly 13,000 votes out of about 340,000 registered voters. That’s good enough when voters don’t think primaries are important. Only about 56,000 out of about 340,000 registered voters voted in the primaries.
It’s doubtful Lamborn could beat Crank or Rivera in a general election with a bigger turnout, or even Rayburn or Anderson for that matter.
If the average person is willing to accept whatever their party gives them to vote for with no questions asked, then all it takes to get that coveted letter next to your name is that your backers are motivated than the opponents backers. (Although in this case, it doesn’t hurt that opposing votes were spread out among several candidates instead of having to beat just one.)
KRCC, public radio in Colorado Springs, was rebroadcasting the Canon City debate this afternoon (same as the video above). There is a huge contrast between the two candidates – Lamborn just comes across as a lightweight (which doesn’t even touch on the allegations of sleaziness).
The Action 22-sponsored debate in Colorado Springs today simply reaffirmed who is the heavy-hitter in this race. Fawcett has a terrific military background for this district which has multiple military facilities. He is clearly more knowledgeable about federal issues, and just plain thinks better on his feet than Lamborn.
FAWCETT AUDIO EXCERPT FROM ACTION 22 DEBATE:
http://www.gazette.c…
LAMBORN AUDIO EXCERPT FROM ACTION 22 DEBATE:
http://www.gazette.c…
LAMBORN APES ABOUT HIS FLUSHING SUCCESS IN DEBATES:
http://www.careerbui…
I attended the debate yesterday. If Jay Fawcett wants to win, all he has to do is debate Doug Lamborn as much as possible.
Fawcett was very polished and well-spoken and had an amazingly strong grasp of the issues and a detailed answer to every one of them. I don’t know if he’s really that smart or his handlers have just been extensively prepping him for these kinds of debates, but his performance was very impressive.
Lamborn on the other hand needs to avoid debating at all costs, if he performs as badly as he has in the last two debates. You just started feeling sorry for the guy as he stumbled and stuttered or simply had no response to Fawcett’s continual attack. (Some of Fawcett’s supporters were holding placards outside with a picture of Lamborn and the caption “YOU SHUT UP!” It made me laugh.)
I think Fawcett’s most powerful message is that, even if you don’t agree with him, he promises to listen to his constituants. I really don’t think that’s true with Lamborn. Yes, Lamborn may vote the way you want on a couple of issues in Congress, but will he listen to you if you stop by his office? Will he do his best to represent you and champion your problems in the federal government? I’ve heard from some groups that he has been very helpful to them in Denver. But with the number of forums and events he’s been invited to but missing lately, I’m beginning to wonder if he’ll do the same in Washington (maybe for a couple of big interest groups that can guarantee him blocks of votes or big checks, but for the average guy with a grievance against government?).
The recent poll showing the two candidates neck and neck should scare every Republican in America into actually paying attention to who’s running in a primary, even in supposedly “safe” districts. Because the way it’s looking now, the CD5 has apparently picked the absolute best possible opponant for Jay Fawcett.
http://www.gazette.c…
That’s the link to the Gazette’s article. See the “comments” link at the bottom of the page. You can see the Mr. Handy 2001, blah, jon crowd misrepresenting things such as Lamborn having drubbed Fawcett, and so on. The good credit I can give Lamborn after these two debates is to say that he’s not stupid. He’s possessed by a retarded ghost.
Same garbage that Hoteling was pushing in the primary. I think he would be smarter to spin it that it is somehow miraculous that Lamborn is competitive despite poor debating skills. That would at least hold some water.
I picked up from the Gazette article, linked in the post, above, the following that suggests Lamborn is quitting at two before he gets any further behind:
“Though the two campaigns have been discussing more debates, nothing has been settled.
‘Can we get a date? We’re ready to go,’ said Fawcett’s campaign manager, lingering outside a group of reporters talking to Lamborn.
‘Good for you,’ Lamborn said to her.”
Sheez. Looks to me like Lamborn is “cutting and running.” It was insane for Hotaling to let Lamborn debate Fawcett even once so I understand Lamborn’s cowardly retreat, but I was hoping Laimbrain would go for another try or two.
…. but Lamborn’s comment is lame. He needs to shut up (heh, heh).
It’s frustrating. It’s not the idea of our Congressman having conservative values that bothers me so much, even if Lamborn’s too far to the right for me. It’s that he has nothing going for him at all other than conservative social values.
He’s not a quick thinker, nor a deep thinker. At times he’s not even a very clear thinker. A little like a mud puddle.
So far, he’s been a parody of the big boys in Washington, right down to trying his own amateurish version of Swift Boating in the primaries.
Maybe Grouch Marx’s old line is best, “He may look like an idiot and talk like an idiot but don’t let that fool you. He really is an idiot.”