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 13, 2010 10:03 PM UTC
55 Comments
Make as much of this as you can. I know you don’t get too many chances nowadays. 🙂
I think it’s possible that Toda’s departure was for a position he wanted more. Of course it’s possible that he didn’t like the direction or progress of the campaign, but I think it’s a bit conclusory to say that Toda’s leaving is necessarily bad news.
That said, it is of course possible–perhaps he saw the quarterly fundraising numbers and decided to jump ship.
what does that say about the pasture you’re in?
Not so green?
they needed a change.
it just seems a bit conclusory to me to say Toda’s leaving is as negative as the original post implies (at least that is how it comes across to me).
I am still waiting to hear why AR is running–to date, I’ve not heard a compelling reason.
Four spokespeople in eight months — that’s a lot.
Four spokespeople in eight months does strike me as a lot, although I think a slightly closer look at why is in order. While I mean no offense, it seems to me that Joelle left to have twins (crediting Roguestaffer’s suggestion), that Mr. Schroyer was replaced for being out of his league, and thus there have been two successors–Toda and now Teicher.
Of course, even the best reading of the events suggests that AR doesn’t exactly know how to pick the best person for the job for the long haul. Alternatively, he simply couldn’t afford the type of talent he needs, which also calls into question why he’s running and why he thinks he can win.
I believe Joelle left the campaign because she was ready to have twins, not because of any creative differences.
I’ll make it bigger:
roguestaffer believes Joelle left the campaign because she was ready to have twins, not because of any creative differences.
Clearly, the story should have said Teicher was a PRINCIPAL at the consulting firm. It is well established that political consulting firms don’t have PRINCIPLES.
I’m with you: I hate it when people make that mistake. The Colorado Statesman should know better.
We do! Apologies for the mistakes in our initial post, we were dealing with a sudden power outage and got distracted. And thanks for pointing out the typos, they’ve been corrected. There’s also an update with an explanation, of sorts, from Dean Toda about why he left the campaign.
The Colorado Statesman
And the update is??
Looked like the exact same article to me.
and was due to several disagreements. He didn’t leave for another job.
Wow. His comment sort of kills the meme that the AR campaign is floating here, doesn’t it?
Since you brought up the subject, you really ought to consider changing your underwear more often. Dead governors are presumed to give off a certain musty smell, but the neighbors are starting to complain…
😉
And Pols, you say “there’s no way to spin this” but your entire write-up is spin. I’d suggest that Pols should try to be less transparent, but it really doesn’t matter.
We said there is no way to spin this positively. There is no way that you can say four spokespeople in eight months is a good thing.
Cause I don’t get the dead guvs joke. I wish I did because I enjoy a good laugh.
I wish I could ROTFLMAO too. 🙁
Not dense, just not someone who followed the site years ago. The original site owners went by the nickname “The Dead Guvs,” and posted under the names of the three Colorado governors who held office in a single day near the turn of the last century.
That was before my time. Sheesers. Been following (not writing) for years and had no clue on that one.
Thanks for clearing that up!
You brought up the concept of spin in the initial write-up. I’m not attempting to spin anything.
Move along folks, no spin here. . .
Colorado Pols has never missed a chance to spin negatively anything Romanoff…
8 months late and a few million dollars short.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…
Romanoff is approaching Admiral Stockdale status. Hang ’em up, buddy.
Yes this probably does portend some issues with the romanoff campaign – but as I asked in an earlier thread, how much does a senate candidate need to raise to be healthy as a rule of thumb? – and somebody mentioned it would take about two million.
Having said that, I am cuious about how much COH he has.
So for me the changing of staff is still inside baseball (it is important) but only we care. I still think there is plenty of support out there for both candidates.
At least this shows that the Romanoff folks know they have not yet adequately answered those questions and need to come up with answers better than I should have been appointed in the first place and who needs big money to win when you have more core love than the other Dem, though he has enough for a respectable showing and has all the money?
Of course Romanoff supporters will point to the County Assemblies and say that Bennet didn’t win a better position even after all those TV ads. Therefore money is over-rated. But caucus goers are the people who pay attention and aren’t so dependent on TV ads to clue them in on candidates.
The money and ads will matter much more in the primary and then even more in the general. You can be sure Romanoff knows this if his caucus supporters don’t. Yep, a better why and how certainly should be the order of the day.
On the off chance they win the primary, they’ll then need some good spin for the inevitable turn-around they’ll have to execute on funding purity. Who will they hire for that?
Ran the day after the caucus.
which I was including in the caucus process and I’m already hearing Romanoff supporters bragging about how all that money he spent didn’t improve his position at the assemblies which are attended by the delegates elected at caucus. But those are high information, core, attention paying Dems, not likely to be swayed by a few weeks of ads.
In fact, I’d guess some were more likely to be willing to listen to Romanoff camp spin about the big money vs the grass roots because of those ads. Wait until the primaries to see what money will do with people, many of whom are barely aware of the State legislature and Andrew Romanoff.
Where did Trevor Kincade, Bennet’s new spokesman come from? He seemed to pop up on the scene last weekend. Also, isn’t Bennet on like his 4th Chief of Staff now?
Come on pols — this is pretty weak sauce, even for you guys.
Are you attacking him for hiring a pregnant woman to help him get his campaign started? Because as was pointed out above she was his first spokesman.
The Romanoff campaign is clearly building their A team — dropping some people while continually bringing on more and more talented people.
Come on, Czech, you really find this to be a noble strategy? Hire the first person you find, then fire them when you get someone better. Then…fire that person when you find someone even better. That doesn’t exactly build strong morale or dedication.
Welcome aboard! We’re happy to have you. Please work hard until we find someone better to replace you.
Now, we don’t think this is an actual strategy by Romanoff, but you can’t be switching horses like this every few months. It’s distracting for the campaign, and a waste of time for the manager and the candidate.
Lots of campaigns make staff changes. Some campaigns hire someone low-level to get them started, then bring on a bigger gun later. But this kind of repeat turnover is not at all common.
This is politics — not a HS play tryout. You notice that Andy Kabza got canned after losing the caucus for Bennet? Funny that you didn’t run a story about that. You know the full story there? Bennet’s staff screwed up the caucus, gets fired, but magically gets a job working for the state party…where Bennet’s campaign coordinator’s wife happens to be ED.
You aren’t as smart as you think you are “pols” — if you want to start going after staff, you might want to make sure that you know where the bodies are buried on your side first.
He was a regional caucus director; caucus is over, thus the end of his job.
Back to the subject at hand. Yeah, looks like things are going great in the AR camp.
I guess someone needs to. 1) Kabza was statewide. 2) Even if he wasn’t, let me explain something about campaigns for you. If you do a good job, you advance — their caucus director would move into a role for the primary. If you don’t, you get fired and if they want to keep it quiet they get you hired somewhere else so you don’t bitch about it (see example above). Nice attempt at spin, this it’s pretty clear that the Bennet staff screwed up and now they are trying to clear house.
Also, no response to Bennet jumping Chief of Staffs a bit back?
When you come roaring into a blog with the sole purpose of bashing one candidate while trying to build up another, your credibility becomes a question mark. And there’s just nothing I love more than when someone starts out a conversation by telling me how smart they are.
Yes, Kabza was Caucus Director.You are correct–I have constantly and accidentally said Regional for months.
If you think Bennet’s camp ever thought they were going to win the caucus, then your inside sources are fucking with you big time.
See you in August. Try to keep your eye on the prize. And I look forward to talking with you further when AR’s numbers are posted. You should probably start working on your talking points now.
When we are on our fourth Chief of Staff and have hired and fired a FOX talking head, I’ll be happy to engage you further.
way to come to Pols aid. Funny that they haven’t done it themselves. You are a lot like peacemonger — when confronted with an actual argument and facts you resort to personal attacks on the poster.
I look forward to seeing you in August myself. Romanoff is building a hell of an organization, but we will need the party unified under him to win — no doubt.
you suck at it bigtime. Are you paid staff for AR, by any chance? I’m just a curious girl.
You’re adorable, by the way. A shiny new addition to the AR camp here at Pols (and at Square State, too, I see.)
I’d hate to see Reality Czech bounce!
Pols replied to you up above. They’re pretty capable of taking care of themselves that way. Just because you didn’t like their answer doesn’t negate the fact they already more than ably answered you.
Pols apparently doesn’t like it when you give a little more story than the simple ones they like. My point remains — Bennet fires their caucus director after a terrible showing…no story. Romanoff hires some serious campaign staff with years of experience, and apparently it’s a scandal.
As far as who I am, we all have to love the anonymity of the internet right “middle of the road?” But since you asked nicely, no I’m not a paid blogger for Romanoff. I am amused by the assumption of the Bennet people on here that everyone who got tired of reading the bias crap on here has to be staff.
And Bennet’s campaign coordinator’s wife had nothing to do with hiring him.
You ignored Reality Czech’s question but used the comment to bash Romanoff again. Whatever the validity of a particular point, you have no objectivity and credibility on anything Romanoff/Bennet.
Few do. Even fewer have objectivity.
The new Bennet spokesman didn’t replace anyone, he was an additional hire. The previous spokesman, Craig Hughes, is still running the campaign. Even you can admit there’s a difference between turnover and staffing up.
see above response to pols. Bennet is dumping people…but try to be quiet about it.
but your point about Kincaid wasn’t. There’s always turnover in campaigns, but four press secretaries since mid September is a swiftly revolving door, there’s no way around that.
I don’t disagree that Romanoff has slowly been building a better mousetrap, but to be fair it really is 3. Joelle was around at the beginning to help while he found someone — she was about to start a family and wasn’t planning on sticking around.
Three press secretaries in five months, that’s much better.
I’m neither in the Bennett or Romanoff camp, but either can make their decisions as often as they like. One doesn’t always get what they think they’re getting. It’s called buyers remorse.
If I were either candidate, keeping in mind the short attention span of the average voter, I’d stay as flexible and fluid on these types of issues as necessary.
It’s when it comes to principal and practical problem solving legislation that I would be unwavering.
it wasn’t the campaign that had the remorse over their last hire, but the other way around.
Yes, it’s inside baseball, but the ability of a candidate to stay on message and maintain clean, clear avenues of communication isn’t something to sneeze at. These guys are pros, but there’s always a lag coming up to speed and establishing relationships with media types. It’s not like replacing one direct mail firm with another.
calling environmentlists communists, and union mmber thugs