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%
July 15, 2007 07:29 PM UTC
25 Comments
should take notice. Republicans won’t be able to ride the far right to victory in the next election. Some of the votes will need to come from the center.
I can understand Musty and Mark wanting to demonstrate an ability to cross party lines and work with members of the party opposite but this is starting to look downright silly, esp. in the case of some of the things Musgrave is doing.
It makes sense for Mark to reach out to Republicans because Colorado is basically a red state (if you simply look at registration figures…..142,000 Republicans than Democrats), albeit a red state which is voting more and more like a blue state.
But what does Musty think she will get out of this ideological mating dance? Few, if any, Dems will ever cross over and vote for her. Maybe a few independents will see her as less stridently partisan, and consider voting for her?
There must be some really bad blood between Musty and B.S. for her to go to the length to which she’s going to bond w/ Udall.
Democrats will support Musgrave, particularly if Ken Salazar does not come forward and oppose the expansion.
Allard is already delivering his Senate seat to Udall precisely because of his stand that Fort Carson and certain El Paso county’s interests are more important than the rest of the state.
The PC issue has created a strong alliance in both parties across the nation. As long as this fight continues, Musgrave has taken the leadership gaining a lot of support.
With Udall and other Colorado Dems on board, they will also being doing what is right and garnering bi-partisan support as well.
has B.S. adopted Allard’s position on Pinon Canyon? has B.S. adopted ANY position on Pinon Canyon?
if her Dem opponent comes forward and opposes the expansion? Then how does making nice with Udall help her? Seems like Udall gets something out of this but why should it do much for MM one way or the other? No smart opponent is going to support the expansion.
One of her big vulnerabilities last time was the perception she cared more about social conserv issues than helping folks in her district–a reason Eidsness was able to challenge her. PC gives her an opportunity to show she stands up for property rights and local control of lands, also gives her some insulation on environmental conservation. All these things take off some of her hard conservative edge and make her more palatable to traditional (ie non-fundamentalist) Repubs.
She is sitting in a Repub-weighted district. All she has to do is solidify her center of gravity within her Repub majority and center-right moderates to hold her seat.
The Dem congressional majority will actually help her by squelching any radical fundamentalist proposals she might come up with.
Her big challenge will be threading the needle with the Iraq war and immigration–both issues expose a fault within the Repub party, and among her constituents.
I diametrically oppose her on most every issue but she impresses me as a very tough and smart politician who is finding a way to adapt to a new political dynamic. I suspect Ken Salazar has more to worry about from a potential challenge by her than by Imperial Wizard Tancrazy.
Musty aint ready for prime time…..or even a statewide race. I agree that she might just survive in C.D. 4 in ’08 (and in fact, she may improve on her 2.6% winning margin in ’06), but she definitely is unelectable statewide.
I suspect that Tancrazy is similarly unelectable statewide.
but the moves she is making leave her options open over the longer term, depending on how she develops. She is one of the more interesting pols to watch in Colo right now–but like observing a rattlesnake, you don’t want to get too casual about it.
I think that she’ll stay in the house for the duration. I think she’s smart enough to know her limitations. None of the R’s with name recognition are very strong for a statewide race. Until things started falling apart I would have pegged coffman as the strongest statewide GOPer. Now I don’t know who’s got it.
Can’t you just picture Doug Lamborn taking his $29 war chest, and running statewide with it? As for who might be in a position to pick up the pieces, Suthers is probably the most presentable and electable Republican in Colo. today.
I think Romanoff, Joan F-G, or Cary Kennedy would all smoke Suthers, to name 3. But that’s just my uninformed opinion.
I was just wondering who was the strongest GOP. They all seem so weak
Get as many video cameras on her as possible.
… getting elected. Anything else comes way distant to that. They’re successful politicians and both are going in to competitive races – they’ll do what it takes.
You know, I think we’re making a mistake to oppose this Pinon Canyon thing. Why are we thinking about letting politicians who have notoriously bad judgment about all things military make this decision. Yes, there are folks down their who will lose their ranches and homes. Frankly, sometimes that happens, it’s why the government was given the power to condemn, in the US Constitution. What greater public purpose is there than a strong defense? If the generals think we need this base, then I say let them have it. And practically speaking, remember, during the last base closing commission Ft. Carson almost went away. Only Joel Hefley saved it. Does anyone thing that Lamborn has anywhere near that clout? I don’t. Why should the generals at the Pentagon go out of their way to save Ft. Carson next time when they can just move all their operations to Texas where they will have a very friendly population who won’t really mind giving up a big chunk of land for a training center, and oh about 50,000 jobs. If you want to see Colorado Springs go into a depression, just let that happen. Won’t help us out here in the metro area much either. Think about it.
Holy grenade smoke! Running tanks around and shooting jack rabbits? I doubt it. Something I’ve noticed over my many years, is that whatever predictions people/pols/bidnesses/military folks make about jobs, it’s all optimistic bullshit. It NEVER happens. Never.
If you think we should just roll over cuz some generals are stroking their tax funded military Viagra, you would have loved the fifties. If the military wanted it, they pretty much got it. I, for one, am glad those days are past.
I would offer these thoughts. First, are there alternative sites in the US? We have huge tank training grounds in the California deserts and bombing ranges on the coastal islands. Second, why all this emphasis on long range armaments when every military planner is talking door to door action as the wave of the future?
Can I quote you?
All “the jobs” will be in El Paso County, since the troops will be transported to PCMS and back. And what type of jobs will that be? Construction, big time, most of all, and in the beginning.
Someone in the county should really run the numbers. How and who will benefit in the county. What will the state pick up in cost, subsidizing Social Services and the highways?
The Phase 1 expansion of the PCMS will be a negative for the whole region of Southeast Colorado and the state. No one county stands alone without interaction with the others despite what Allard seems to think. It is supply and demand between the businesses of the Front Range and the Southeast.
And…
“why all this emphasis on long range armaments when every military planner is talking door to door action as the wave of the future?”, you are right on target.
It always ends, then the pols and the pavers look for new projects. We need to stop thinking short term. High construction activities in a locale distorts the economy; housing prices skyrocket, as does the price to get work on a house done. Schools get overcrowded and about the time a new school gets built, they all leave.
You think we should cede Southeast Colorado to the US Army because some guy in a uniform at the Pentagon says so?
Any you want to take the word of some politician to block an important project for the defense of our nation?
Come on. If you want to have a policy discussion, fine. Tell me why, on policy grounds, this project isn’t needed, but don’t just call names. That’s exactly what the problem is with politics today.
I stated that the pentagon says we need it. They do. Tell me why we don’t?
I said, there is the chance that if we fight this, the pentagon, thinking Colorado is just too difficult to deal with, at the next base closing round would just close down Ft. Carson and take its 50,000 already existing jobs and go somewhere else. Tell me why, with a weakened presence in Washington that may not happen?
Tell me why, the use of this land isn’t a great public purpose. You can argue about some of the eminent domain uses in the recent past to develop a shopping center, but you can’t argue that a military training facility is an important public purpose and exactly what the founding fathers imagined when they gave the federal government the right to condemn, in the US Constitution.
And finally, tell me why these ranchers have a beef when some of them have at least benefitted from the water projects down there which were constructed on land obtained using eminent domain and when, by the US Constitution, they will receive payment for the fair value of their land.
Tell me. Just don’t call names. Or do you really have a response?
First off, I didn’t call you names, so don’t whine.
Second, why should I develop counter-arguments for someone whose entire case is: “The Pentagon says so”?
Third, here are some arguments: It’s bad for Colorado’s rural economy, it’s bad for the protected habitat, it destroys the generations of ranching heritage in that region and the rural town jobs that rely on it. The Army has been manipulative and untruthful about Pinon Canyon for decades, so they don’t have any credibility. They claim the area resembles Iraq when it doesn’t. The land seizure only makes sense for armored maneuvering, which has nothing to do with the way the Iraq or Afghanistan wars are being fought.
Above all, it is a massive seizure of private property by the government, so don’t toss it off like it’s nothing just because some generals are yapping about national security.
You may not believe in the sincerity of the politicians who are against Pinon Canyon, but I believe in the sincerity of the landowners and local citizens who are against it.
these two need to get a room…