U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Phil Weiser
(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) George Stern
(D) A. Gonzalez
(R) Sheri Davis
40%
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%
April 25, 2006 08:00 AM UTC
54 Comments
Inside Tip mentioned a Perlmutter retreat in yesterday’s open thread, but from what I know it was last week, not this week, and it was not just about polling. Alan Salazar was out sick (get well soon, Alan!), but in attendance were the infamous Celinda Lake, Perlmutter’s media consultants Carl Stuble and David Eichenbaum, his mail consultant Karen Patel, his finance director Amy Sanchez, and some others.
The retreat didn’t go very well. The consultants agreed that Perlmutter needs to raise his name ID in the district and go on the attack against Lamm, but does not have enough money to do both. Also, the AFL-CIO poll conducted last year, the Lamm poll, Lake’s oversample, and Lake’s new poll (which is why Ed didn’t raise his cash on hand by very much last quarter) all say that Ed is behind by double digits even with likely Democratic primary voters.
Just letting you know what I heard!
OT, but listening to Shrub live now on CNN…
Why is it he always sounds like a blithering idiot, like some junior high school student who didn’t do his homework?
Sample: “Demand for oil is high. We need to increase supply. That’s supply and demand. When you increase supply, price goes down.”
Embarassing, shameful idiot leader of the free world.
That matches pretty much with what I heard, Kim. Ed’s whole team took part: Welchert & Britz, Patel’s Mack Crownse Group, et al. Not pretty for Ed. Needs to raise ID and go negative, but can’t buy enough in the Denver media market to do both. They’re going to try to do some of it with mail, but we all know that mail by itself doesn’t usually get the job done unless there’s some TV or radio behind it.
Bums-man, good call. At least he’s investigating the price gouging! Our own attorney general Suthers won’t do it because the guy is more out of touch than Bush!
It is pretty clear that this is a Holtzman front website. I guess with Laura editing your content you have accidently missed all of the articles that the Post and the Rocky have been writing about the little fella petitioning on the ballot and raising money outside the state. ColoradoPols you are really showing your true colors now. I guess the money you are getting from Holtzman makes it easier to manipulate the truth.
Throw the Bums out!:
If I were you I wouldn’t avertize Bush as a “Embarassing, shameful idiot leader”. After all, he beat John Kerry in 2004 and was elected by the majority.
Ok, I’m not in the district so I haven’t paid much attention to Perlmutter vs Lamm. However…
Does Perlmutter have a compelling reason why he should be the candidate? If not, then there’s not much he can do. If so, sell that.
RE: “Sample: Demand for oil is high. We need to increase supply. That’s supply and demand. When you increase supply, price goes down.” from TtBo:
Does your comment imply that you agree that we should drill in ANWR? How about Colorado and Utah? New sites in the Gulf?
The Middle East is producing at full capacity, but the greatly increased demand from countries like China and India are competing with that of the U.S. and Europe. Yet the enviromentalists (=Dems) prevent opening new sources here.
David,
I can’t speak to Perlmutter’s reasons for running, but he has a much bigger problem. Even if he did run several great positive TV spots it wouldn’t put him ahead of Lamm. Perlmutter’s behind by double digits and needs to bump his positive name ID and attack Lamm at the same time. The problem with that is money. He just doesn’t have enough to do both.
Reality, meet Mencken:
“As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.”
I’m sorry, but we re-elected a lemon. We should have sent him packing after the first four-year failure, but we didn’t – we were too scared, we were misled, and we “liked” Bush. Now, Bush is consistently polling in the low to mid 30s; a majority see him as dishonest and not doing the right things on just about every issue under the Sun.
Wrong analysis, Kim. Peggy, if she is ahead, leads because of name recognition (lots of people still think she is Dottie Lamm) among Republicans and Independents who can’t vote in the Democratic primary. Perlmutter is far and away the favorite of the Democratic activists, which is why he blew Lamm totally out of the water at the caucuses and forced her to the expensive petition route. Ed’s job now is to identify those Democrats who will vote for them and make sure they get to the polls. That’s not so much a matter of money as organization. And that’s where his union support is critical. Figure labor volunteers, experts at this stuff, to man phone banks for him, identifying supporters and turning them out. Television spends lots of money reaching Republicans in Douglas County who can’t vote in 7th CD democratic primaries. Primaries are a job for old fashioned political organization and, in the Democratic Party, the unions are the trump card in that category. Score: 23 unions have endorsed Ed. Zero, nada, zilch, have endorsed Peggy. It’s my screen name, but why don’t you Do The Math?
DoTheMath: I got two words for ya: Mike Miles. Party activists does not a primary win you.
Uncle Jordan Perlmutter will fund a 527 committee in excess of $2 million if Ed Perlmutter needs it.
Ed has $500,000 in the bank today. Ed has all the money he needs
I wonder who was polled in CD 7–all likely voters? Registered D’s? Likely D voters? Or, likely D primary voters?
With all the talent advising Ed, the decision to do name ID or Lamm negatives should be simple as long as they agree. Is that the problem? He’s getting different advice from advisors?
DoTheMath-
In 2002, 20,000 Dems voted in the CD7 primary. Do you really think these 20,000 are as well informed as the few hundred activists in the district? No. People have their own lives and, I’m sorry to tell you, are not paying attention 24/7 to politics, but rather their own life. Do you think it’s out of the question that a good number of these folks will go to the polls and vote for someone because their name looks familiar? No this won’t help Peggy win, but will be a big reason why she will. The other reason is the answer to this question…who would you rather vote for, a former school teacher or a bankruptcy attorney?
Good try, Lamm shills, still beating the dead horse of your so-called secret polls. Tell me, shills, exactly which unions were backing Mike Miles? Anyone? Anyone?
Oh, you mean the labor team backed Salazar and they whipped Miles? Yes, they did. So Lamm, with no Labor support, almost no record in public office, not much money and spending most of what she has to buy her way on to the ballot because she bombed at the caucuses, is going to defeat Perlmutter because?
Buehler? Anyone? Anyone?
Well, Sam you ain’t, look at it this way. You’re a Democrat who cares enough to vote in a party primary. The choice is between somebody who doesn’t live in the district, endorsed Bill Owens for governor and who once was married to Dick Lamm’s brother Tom. Oh, and served a very unmemorable two years in the House.
Or a lifelong resident of the district who served eight years in the Senate, including two as president pro tem, and helped shape the Democratic takeover of the Senate. And who endorsed the Democratic candidate for governor against the Republican backed by Lamm.
So, you’re a Democrat and you’re going to vote for?
Anyone? Anyone?
Well, at least we know the Perlmutter staff still reads Coloradopols. I was worried that they were working on issues and positions instead of writing responses on this blog, but it’s good to see they’re back on here as usual.
While GW isn’t the most adept at speaking on various topics. The boneheaded statement for today came from Mcmahon with the DNC. He said the fault of our energy woes was due to the Republicans controlling the House and Senate for the past ten years and that none of thir bills have even been able to get to the floor for debate.
He then said, “having the Republicans determine Energy Policy is much like having the Chickens oversee the Hen House.” Isn’t it supposed to be Wolf overseeing the Hen House?
Maybe he was right? Only he meant the Democrats. AQfterall, they are partly to blame for this nonsense (Anwar, EPA, Environmentalists, etc.). The Dems energy policy reminds of the French Battle Flag – solid white. Cany you say surrender to the Environmentalists and $5.00 a gallon for gas? McMahon was on Fox News.
Shills-
Good luck cramming all that junk into a message, communicating it to the people with limited resources in the bank and making up a DOUBLE digit lead. The longer Ed’s camp takes to publish a poll, the worst his fundraising will be, while Peggy will be ever increasing her funds, her already strong name recognition, and her contact with primary and general voters, not party activists (God bless em’)
Good boy, Sam, now get back to interviewing those kids hired from Craig’s list and teaching them how to collect signatures. That’s what peggy pays you for, after all.
Wacher,
From what I’ve heard, the latest Lake poll (not the “oversample” poll that we learned about a while back) showed Perlmutter behind by double digits with likely Democratic primary voters.
The problem is not that Perlmutter’s advisers disagree on whether to go negative or to push name ID. Perlmutter’s problem is that all of his advisers agree that he needs to do both, but only has enough money to do one or the other.
DoTheMath is right that this means Perlmutter will have to emphasize field work, but field only gets you, at most, 3-5% of the vote. This is not enough to make up the double digit gap even with aggressive TV advertising.
Again, just from what I’ve heard, Perlmutter’s consultants are very worried.
Haha good one Shills, but I promise I have a much better job than that my friend. Your response also proves that you know Ed and his camp are in trouble, and instead of campaigning, you attack. Maybe that’s why nobody knows Ed’s name.
Why is it he always sounds like a blithering idiot, like some junior high school student who didn’t do his homework?
That “Gentelman’s C” at Hahvahd is coming back to bite him…..and us.
Don’t worry, they won’t release the results of this poll, either.
Well if the posts here are any guide (and they probably aren’t a good one), there is no compelling reason to vote for Lamm over Perlmutter or vice versa.
If the two candidates are similiar, then I guess name ID and drag down the other are your only options – but I doubt that will do the job.
No reason to vote for someone remains no reason to vote for someone.
OFFICIAL NOTICE THAT SINCE SOME ASS IS POSTING AS SAM I AM (I WOULD NEVER USE THE WUSSY TERM, “A FAIR SHAKE”), I WILL BE POSTING UNDER A NEW NAME.
So should be now call you “Sam you was?”
Check the Lamm video at http://www.peggylammforcongress.com/ for more than a few good reasons to support Peggy.
And how cool is that? Having a video up on your website that isn’t one of your ads? Great use of the Internet, Peggy!
Some clod is posting under my name too, and making me look like some dimwit Lamm shill.
Tell us one more time, Kim, about how you’re not a Lamm shill or anything, you just feel compelled to post 84 times a day about this terrible unresolvable problem Ed has that only proves Peggy is strong, she is invincible, she is WOMAN!
If Democratic operatives run this site, Sam I Am, why would they help Beauprez? Holtzman, the Wicked Wuss of the West, is the dream candidate for the dems, an unqualified, uncharismatic, far right windbag who would be an easy punching bag for Bill Ritter. Every Democrat I know is rooting for Holtzman.
I apologize to the real Sam I Am for falling for the fake Sam I Am post. The above sentiments are correct — Holtzman is the Wicked Wuss of the West, for sure _ but the real Sam I Am didn’t make the wuss post.
Alva, what’s the chance of bringing back typekey to tell the real posters from the frauds?
Type Key was buggy and didn’t really work, but we are looking for better alternatives. If anyone has suggestions on software, please pass them along.
Just thought I’d mention that I have all this really neat inside information about the Perlmutter campaign and it proves, really PROVES, Ed can’t win, even though he’s got twice as much money as my candidate…err, as Peggy, and a zillion times more endorsements. But his own consultants say Ed is dead meat, and naturally they rushed to share this information with me, a Lamm volunteer…err… a concerned citizen. But really,Peggy has a lock and we have just tons of polls to prove it, of course, we can’t release them, but Ed, you’re history.
Damnit, you Craig’s List people, I ordered PEPPERONI pizza and you brought me ANCHOVY! Sigh, you get what you pay for, I guess. Anyway, just thought I share my inside information for the 100th time today.
Give it to me, Kim. I love anchovies!
I have not received a Peggy smearing letter from Purlmutter camp for months.
Yea, send some more. That will change my mind.
When I first started receiving those, (months ago)I made my mind up to check both camps out, listened to them debate, asked both of them questions, and decided on Peggy. I mean if all he and his team have going for him is his ability to hit Owens, address, Owens, Address, (yawn, yawn) its going to be a long primary season here in CD 7!
Personally, being a great mud slinger is not one of my top qualities candidate or representitive. Plenty in office already.
Whoops,
I mean mudslinging is not a quality at the top of my list of desirable attributes in a candidate or representitive.
Agreed bluegreen. Mudslinging is an undesirable trait in a candidate. Unfortunately, it appears to be a staple of the current political landscape.
A link to blogging-software comparisons: http://www.asymptomatic.net/blogbreakdown.htm
Wow, looks like some guy went crazy pretending to be everyone on this site. Sam I Am, I feel your pain.
To whoever posted under my name,
You are a real jerk. If you don’t want the information, don’t read it. I do not work or volunteer for Peggy Lamm. If I did, do you think anyone on Perlmutter’s campaign would talk to me? I’m just telling you what I heard and you can believe me or not, it’s up to you.
The level of the Perlmuter/Lamm debate on this site is officially in the gutter . . .
I have to say, it’s mostly instigated by the Lamm people, and though it’s fairly distasteful, I’ll describe them as shills. These people constantly post under different names and traffic almost exclusively in rumors and the “I heard this and I heard that” variety of statements, generally with no proof to back anything up.
This is called a whisper campaign, and if any impartial observers (I don’t think there are many reading these threads anymore) don’t realize that’s what’s going on, just look back through the blog archives. These people consistently make things up, then disappear when challenged to provide facts or evidence. Every few days a new crew shows up, attempting to trumpet some new fabricated item or development. It’s all just misdirection and distraction to try and keep Peggy’s name-rec high and institute doubt that Perlmutter is still on top (which all observable evidence clearly indicates).
Once again, for appearently no reason, several Lamm supporters have “heard” secret, inside information from Ed’s top-level management. Of course, like the last several times they heard some of these secrets, it’s all bad news for Perlmutter. I’d be really suprised if anybody is really buying all this hogwash. At the very least, perhaps Perlmutter should fire all his consultants and staffers, since they seem to report every development and strategic decision made by his campaign directly to the Peggy supporters on ColoradoPols, and seemingly nobody else.
I can’t help but point out that all this elaborate online misdirection and whisper campaigning, as well as the escalation of the bizarre and aggressive pro-Lamm posting seems to have begun after Merlino’s arrival.
I have no idea as to whether or not he’s responsible for fueling this activity, but I do know that a month ago the pro-Lamm posters primarily just made statements approximating “Peggy is great! She is a great candidate! Perlmutter is so done for!” Now, they run through endless (and occassionally sophisticated) lies, attempting to get rumor traction, and constantly change their names in order to avoid any solid association with their previous dishonesty.
Don’t buy the rhetoric, this is just another misguided atempt at insinuating the idea that Perlmutter has serious problems, which anybody with even a menial understanding of the race understands is not the case. If Peggy is truly doing so splendidly, would her interns/volunteers/staffers really need to spend this much time online spinning these fantasies to a limited audience? Make no mistake, Peggy is on attack through every outlet available. They’re trying to come from behind, and this sort of aggressive negativity is the most effective way to eek out some progress.
It should be obvious, but I did not write the above post about Anchovy pizza, though I do love anchovies.
As for this rumor business, Coloradopols is a site that deals in rumors. Personally, I spend my time here because I like politics and it’s fun to be in a position where I can contribute something every now and then. If that means I have to share this site with so-called shills from the campaigns, it’s worth it to me.
A “menial understanding of the race?” Stop trying to belittle me with your big words – I don’t read good, but I count real good, and the polls speak for themselves.
As Kim (love ya, girl) mentioned in the top post, the AFL-CIO poll last year put Ed behind by double digits. Peggy’s poll by the well-respected Ridder-Braden firm put Ed behind by double digits. Lake’s ovesample poll put Ed behind by double digits. And let’s not forget Lake’s new poll that also put Ed behind by double digits. (I personally don’t have any inside information about this last one, but it’s crazy that they wouldn’t already have a poll!)
The results of the first two polls are fact, jack, and if Eddy thinks they’re inaccurate then all he’s got to do is release the results of the oversample poll (which Lake already admitted she has) and his new poll! Problem solved.
And if my latest post as “double digit” didn’t fool anybody, then I’ll come back as yet another name. I’m abandoning Way to Liberal for now because nobody believed me when I predicted, actually, guaranteed, PErlmutter would drop out last week. But I’m undaunted and will keep spinning and shilling until somebody, anybody, believes me.
“The results of the first two polls are fact, jack”
This has been covered extensively elsewhere, but one last time for kicks.
Somebody from Peggy’s own team, posting on this site as ‘Henry,’ stated that the Ridder-Braden poll was a
name-recognition push-poll of female voters, and I believe largely conducted outside of JeffCo. He said that it “served its purpose at the time,’ and explained that it was damage control for all the horrible news the Lamm campaign was generating. Not to mention that the poll was essentially a laughing stock, even on the blogs. Or that Peggy has since fired Ridder-Braden (it seems junk polls weren’t the solution to her lack of traction in the district).
The ‘oversample,’was, I believe, a portion of the AFL-CIO poll, which it’s at least nice to see the shills now recognize exists. Painstakingly demonstrating to them over and over that Ed didn’t commission the poll sunk in, it just took two weeks.
Why don’t we take another look at the Lake memo, that was written in response to the Peggy shills on this site:
“It has been brought to our attention that findings from our recent statewide survey have been misinterpreted and misused as a barometer on the current primary involving former State Senate President Pro Tem Ed Perlmutter and former State Representative Peggy Lamm.”
Got it? Findings misrepresented and misused. Why and how?
“First, the information being reported revolves around an oversample of 75 registered voters in the 7th Congressional District. The margin of error on a sample of that size is 11.4 percentage points. Secondly, the question at issue was asked of all survey respondents – not just Democratic primary voters. Finally, and most importantly, the survey sample (the voters we spoke with) was specifically designed to include registered voters who DO NOT vote in off-year elections . . .”
Loud and clear – people not likely to vote and not just Dem voters – meaning, if the reported numbers are correct, then it was simply a name recognition/confusion (e.g. Dottie Lamm) glitch. Peggy was saavy to hang onto that last name, at least until people start asking about Dick Lamm and immigration . . .
“the most logical conclusion is that the survey tells us nothing about the Democratic primary between Perlmutter and Lamm.”
I’m inclined to take a professional pollster’s word over some anonymous blogger’s on this one.
“And let’s not forget Lake’s new poll that also put Ed behind by double digits. (I personally don’t have any inside information about this last one, but it’s crazy that they wouldn’t already have a poll!)”
So let’s be clear – you don’t actually know of any new poll, you just think it’s crazy that there wouldn’t be one. Unfortunately that’s a pretty poor burden of proof so far as most people are concerned. How you assume this new poll (of which you admit not knowing whether or not it has been conducted) somehow places Lamm in a double-digit lead is beyond me. Actually it’s not – you’re shilling for Lamm and just making things up.
“the polls speak for themselves.”
It’s more accurate to say that you speak for the polls.
Ridder-Braden Poll: Admittedly and clearly a name-rec PR tool that doesn’t really say anything about Peggy’s support in the district, nor taken seriously by any politically astute followers of the election.
Lake Poll: Not really conducted about the election, and described by the pollster, in response the activities of Lamm shills, as a completely inaccurate indicator of CD7’s candidate support.
Poll That Lamm Shills Think Must Exist and Suppose Shows Peggy With A Huge Lead: This one speaks for itself.
Can we put this poll garbage to bed at last? Shouldn’t you all be out collecting signatures? Should be easy, what with Lamm’s overwhelming support in the district. Makes me wonder why she dodged the caucus process in the first place. She only needed 10%, should have been pretty darn easy if all those polls are legit . . .
Curses, foiled again!
Didn’t mean to touch a nerve there, Anonymous. But let’s clear up a few of your misconceptions, shall we? First, the oversample poll and the AFL-CIO poll are two different polls. One was done early last year and the other was done early this year. Both show a double-digit gap.
Second, the oversample poll was described as having an 11.2% margin of error, but it also showed Ed behind by way more than 11.2%.
Third, Ridder-Braden was fired? I thought they just moved from General Consultants to Polling Consultants.
Third, I’m not the one that brought up the new poll and I don’t know if it exists or not. Not my burden to prove.
Indisputable Facts: Three separate polls, the AFL-CIO poll, Perlmutter’s oversample poll, and Lamm’s poll, all put Ed behind Peggy by double digits.
“First, the oversample poll and the AFL-CIO poll are two different polls.”
I believe you are wrong – the ‘oversample’ was part of the AFL-CIO poll. There is nothing in the Lake memo to suggest there is more than one poll, and in fact there isn’t. The oversample that her memo addresses is the only thing that regards Perlmutter and Lamm. It was part of the AFL-CIO project.
“Second, the oversample poll was described as having an 11.2% margin of error, but it also showed Ed behind by way more than 11.2%.”
Once again, Lake herself stated that it was horribly useless as an indicator of candidate support in the 7th, regardless of margin of error. You fail to address this. As I said before, I’ll take the pollster’s word over some blog poster.
“Ridder-Braden was fired? I thought they just moved from General Consultants to Polling Consultants.”
I thought they were dismissed entirely. Either way, they have been replaced as her general management. I never suggested they were fired because of the poll; to the contrary I’m sure Peggy’s camp was quite pleased with it at the time, though it did little in the long run.
“I’m not the one that brought up the new poll and I don’t know if it exists or not. Not my burden to prove”
It doesn’t make it any more likely that it exists just because you don’t take responsibility for it. Indisputable Fact: The “third poll” is a rumor circulated by pro-Lamm people on the blogs and doesn’t really exist.
It’s always your burden to prove your own statements, although you were kind enough to admit that you don’t know whether it actually exists or not (for the moment I’ll ignore that you refer to it as an “indisputable fact in your last post . . . seems indisputable facts and things you don’t actually know can share the same definition in your posts).
“Indisputable Facts: Three separate polls, the AFL-CIO poll, Perlmutter’s oversample poll, and Lamm’s poll, all put Ed behind Peggy by double digits.”
Very disputable facts. Two polls, one dismissed by the pollster as a completely inaccurate appraisal of candidate support, and the other an addmitted PR tool that was the joke of the week when it was released.
RubyBlue,
AFL-CIO ran a poll last year. It was not the minimum wage poll that was run this year and oversampled in the 7th. It was a different poll. It put Ed behind by double digits.
And as long as you’re taking the word of pollsters over bloggers, the only proof you have that the Lamm poll was what you call “an admitted PR tool” is that some blogger said so, and in my opinion this blogger probably works for the Perlmutter campaign.
Can we agree on this:
There have been at least three polls, not couting the latest poll which may or may not have been done recently by Celinda Lake, that put Ed Perlmutter behind Peggy Lamm by double digits. The first poll was done by the AFL-CIO last year and had Ed behind by double digits. Things could have changed over the course of a year, but our second poll done by Ridder-Braden had the same results showing Ed behind by double digits. Ridder-Braden has stood by their poll and its results despite claims by an anonomous poster who said that it was nothing but a PR tool. This anonomous poster did not have any actual proof that they worked for Peggy Lamm and may very well actually work for Ed Perlmutter. The third and final poll that I personally know about, the oversample poll, was done by Ed’s polling firm and it looks very very very bad for Ed. The firm subsequently dismissed the poll as innacurate, despite having intentionally and at some cost oversampled in the 7th CD specifically to gauge Ed’s support in the district.
Can we at least agree on that???
We can agree that you’re a shill, double digit/space cowboy.
A SHILL!! How dare you! If that’s all you’ve got then you’re dead in the water. And I ain’t no cowboy.