DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Jena Griswold
(D) Brian Mason
60%↑
30%↑
20%↓
(D) Brianna Titone
(R) Kevin Grantham
(D) Jerry DiTullio
60%↑
30%
20%↓
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(D) Somebody
80%
40%
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Somebody
90%
10%
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Somebody
80%
20%
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Manny Rutinel
(D) Yadira Caraveo
45%↓
40%↑
30%
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Jena Griswold
(D) Brian Mason
60%↑
30%↑
20%↓
(D) Brianna Titone
(R) Kevin Grantham
(D) Jerry DiTullio
60%↑
30%
20%↓
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(D) Somebody
80%
40%
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Somebody
90%
10%
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Somebody
80%
20%
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Manny Rutinel
(D) Yadira Caraveo
45%↓
40%↑
30%
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
August 20, 2010 12:11 AM UTC
58 Comments
What’s ironic, is that Colorado Right to Life is actually against any vote to ban partial birth abortion. Though likely for different reasons than Tambor’s.
Something like: ‘Any vote to ban only certain abortions gives moral justification to the others.’
He asked a few folks prior to Tambor. Think about it, she isn’t a good choice, but when there isn’t anyone else that is willing to jump on the Titanic (as you have put it) then why not her? I’m sure she was thinking…what do I have to lose?
This was a losing ticket prior to the RHINO Tambor, and it is an even more pronounced losing ticket after Tambor.
Tancredo says he’s raised $100k and needs $250k.
Do you think that Maes’ has just enraged enough social issues Republicans to ensure that Tancredo will get another $200k to $300k?
Jason’s been complaining that the mainstream media aren’t covering the social issues positions of Ken Buck and other candidates.
I think we’ll see some coverage soon.
OK, now that the hysterical right wing fringe is weighing in on Tambor, it is little wonder why they have lost total credibility on anything and everything. And they wonder why a lot of registered Republicans are voting for Democrats and why the party is losing registration.
It is very possible that Colorado will buck the national winds that are blowing against the Democrats and keep them in the majority.
The way Republicans have acted, and the candidates we have put forth, who could blame Colorado voters for “bucking” the trend? Disgraceful!
I have a feeling this was the result of the little heart to heart he had with Maes. I don’t think it will have the effect he intended.
He told Maes to do this and it was the worst thing he could have done. Wadhams loses again. Isn’t it wonderful?
I don’t think Wadhams would have advised Maes to pick a pro-choice or moderately anti-abortion running mate.
I’ve heard him speak. He’s as much of a social issues Republican as John Andrews, et al, I think.
And neither did John Andrews. So another couple of sell-outs to the radical fringe. Panty-waist Republicans. You get what you deserve. Now gag on it boys.
I first encountered Wadhams and his late wife back in the mid ’90s. He seemed like a social conservative then, but memories can fool you.
As for Andrews, was he ever a social issues liberal?
What difference does it make at this point? Their party has already proclaimed the candidate’s lameness and lack of qualifications in actively trying to get rid of him as late as, literally, the other day. How much worse could it get for them?
in Nov ’05 for the Dems. We’re stuck with a clown going up against a formidable opponent.
So precedence has been set for a Maes win. (Though our window is much shorter and closing fast!)
Five years later, I’m not exactly sure which side came out ahead…
Beauprez? Bahahahahah!
2005 was when I returned to Colorado, and the only election I remember was C & D. No reason for Dems to feel bad about that.
Beauprez chased out Republicans and Dems alike. He had a clear field. Ritter was the nominee by default after half a dozen more likely Dems declined to face Beauprez.
I can’t imagine Hick doing a commercial standing next to a horse’s ass.
Actually, I can imagine Hick doing a commercial standing next to a horse’s ass, but he would make it hilarious and endearing.
The wonderfully “clear field” open to Beauprez was actually littered with a wealthy land mine named Marc Holtzman, who helpfully coined the Both Ways Bob label that the Dems used to great fame and fortune.
I mean it was clear of anyone else who had a chance of winning the primary or the general. Holtzman didn’t have a chance of winning either (short of a plagiarism scandal).
But you are correct about him being a “wealthy landmine” for Beauprez.
“Too many people look only at the surface facts (what the media tells you) and make
impulsive decisions.”
Yeah. Stick with reliable sources, like strangers who hand you folders on the UN and its sneaky attempt to engineer a Schwinn Revolution.
I got rid of him once and don’t want him back. Instead, ask me. I was President of the NARAL board at the time of the partial birth abortion vote. When it reached the floor of the house it received only 25 votes and 40 against. Our floor leader was then Rep. Bill Kaufman from Loveland. That was when Republicans had huge majorities in the House. At any rate, it was one of the best things I have ever seen to make the anti-choicers heads explode. We settled on a plan of non-confrontation. The Republicans got up and railed, called all the supporters baby-killers, spewed their lies about abortion. What did we do? We we talked everyone on on our side, that’s forty state legistlators with big egos, who agreed to “stand mute.” You could see the heads exploding. When the nuts were done talking, Bill Kaufman got up and said the following: We move to refer this bill back to the Judiciary Committee because of concerns about its Constitutionality. Tambor Williams and a whole slew of other Republican heros voted to refer the bill back. Of course, it was killed in Judiciary Committee on a 10 to 3 vote, with a majority of Republicans supporting killing the bill.
Tambor Williams knew what was going to happen. I talked to her myself. We worked hard with her. Should she try to deny it now, well, there are lots of witnesses and the records of the House will reflect it as well.
Sorry for the right-wing nuts who thought Dan Maes was going to be their puppet who would never stray from their outrageous agenda and demands. But, Dan Maes picked a moderate ticket balancer for his Lt. Gov. Not that it will help him in the long run.
Only that she’s pro-choice – she’s “pro-life, with the exceptions that we’ve all come to respect” – life of the mother, rape and incest. She didn’t deny her work on the partial birth abortion bill back in ’99 – she was very clear on Tuesday that she voted to send it back to committee because she believed it was unconstitutional. If she’s flip-flopping on whether she’s pro-choice or pro-life – well, that’s another matter.
By the way, not to toot my own horn too much, but the Colorado Statesman will have a story tomorrow on another position she took while a legislator that will likely make a lot of Republicans’ heads spin like a top.
We know she’s an awful RINO with no conservative principles and no spine. We also know she won’t have any real power when she becomes Lt. Gov. If that’s what it takes for Dan to unify the party, we’re fine with it.
If you knew she voted for a bill granting instate tuition status to illegal immigrants? (HB 1183, 2003 session). She called it good for her community.
the more I like her.
I think Williams’ pick will make Maes a more attractive candidate for everyone BUT Republicans, despite the fact that the light guv has no role in policy-setting.
Tambor Williams took money and help from Colorado Republicans for Choice. I’m guessing if you look at voter guides, she might also have received the endorsement of NARAL. As I have said before, I have no problem with people who change positions. I understand why the panty-waist Republicans do it if they are interested in running for office as a Republican. They have to swallow their integrity and knuckle under to the anti-choice zealots. I hope Tambor can look herself in the mirror in the morning about this one. What I do have a problem with is running away from one’s record and trying to minimize it. By the way, her problem with the wording was that it didn’t include exceptions for life and health of the mother. Sorry Tambor, but that doesn’t put you into the anti-choice camp at all.
It seems to me that Dan Maes doesn’t understand the legislative process at all (big surprise there). People vote on one procedural thing knowing that it means the death of the bill and intending that it be the death of the bill all the time. Tambor knew what the plan was and she knew it would be defeated by a wide margin in the Judiciary Committee.
I give you the same advice I gave Scott McInnis when he tried to run away from his past. Don’t. The people of Colorado will accept a change of heart. Don’t try to sell them that you weren’t doing what you were doing. They don’t like that.
Please panty-waist Republicans who have changed their position on abortion since the 1990’s. Don’t make shit up. I was there, I was a Republican, you trusted me, I have a long memory. You should leave the party as I did. If you don’t, don’t expect me to give you a break by letting you tell little fibs. Remember, I’m not a Repbulican anymore. I don’t care if the party goes down in flames. The only way to get the party back to its real conservative roots is to crush it. How am I doing?
And you seem to be helping it implode. Anything to derail Maes.
Her name rhymes with TABOR.
True story.
“Help a poor man build a pretty dream . . .
give me pennies, I’ll take anything . . .”
I don’t think anyone says “hep cat” to Republicans better than Robert Goulet IMHO.
WTF is wrong with you people? Use your fucking brains!
God Bless,
Dan Maes
I think Dan Maes handled this whole thing very well. Can’t say as much for the others involved. It’s sad when the political neophyte is the only one with any sense.
“[Dan Maes] is the only one with any sense.” Are you going to vote for Buck AND Maes now?
But unlike you I can acknowledge when someone I oppose does something right.
What if the people you oppose do more things right than those you support?
My primary allegiance is to what’s best for the country. I think Bennet & Hick will do a much better job.
ps – I vote a straight Republican ticket for the Boulder County positions.
All of your postings on CO Pols are satire.
This must be true. The only other option is that you are the stupidest graduate student I’ve ever had the misfortune to know.
Then they should change the process and take the selection of a candidate (and his choice for Lite Guv) out of the hands of the people.
Then they can try and sell us their faux-populist rhetoric.
Good luck with that.
there is a problem with the process. The little talk there is about changing the nominee still includes following the existing rules.
Rather, one time in a thousand there truly is a “silver bullet” that completely takes down a candidate. Both “top” and “most” Republicans were behind McInnis until the plagiarism scandal. Now we’re left with Maes and paying the price for putting all our collective eggs in one basket.
If everyone was for McInnis why did Maes keep winning every step of the way?
until they weren’t.
It’s difficult to back someone who revealed himself to be the type of person McInnis revealed himself to be.
also won the state assembly, before McInnis was revealed to be a plagiarist.
Edit that to be “Everyone higher-up in the GOP was for McInnis . . . ”
I’m curious as to HOW Maes was able to win the state assembly–were rank and file Republicans just that turned off by McInnis?
Plenty of examples of folks winning the assembly and getting beat (badly or otherwise) in the primary election.
Colorado is better off if it has a vibrant 2 party system. The competition means better candidates and the cross aisle effort on legislation means better bills. So Repubs, please take the following as constructive criticism from an opponent who wants you guys to stay competitive.
Are you totally nuts? Do you want to be nothing more than a small group of angry old geezers everyone ignores? Your drive for ideological purity will, by definition continue to reduce the size of your party.
And like the French Revolution where most of the leaders sending people to the guillotine ended up on it themselves, this is a spiral where you are always striving for more purity and in so doing, constantly driving more people away.
Dan Maes did a very smart thing – he balanced the ticket philosophically. That’s a giant message to the party that he wants to represent all Republicans. And it’s a giant message to independents that he wants to represent them – which includes representing their viewpoints.
Voters may be unhappy that we Dems are not doing a better job (and they should be). But that doesn’t mean they want to turn Colorado into Somalia. If you want philosophical purity – start a church.
… which corollary of Godwin’s Law is this?
grassroots activism. As far as ideological purity, it didn’t hurt Obama now did it? In times when things aren’t going well, people want principles and solid ideas to solve problems, not shaky compromises.
I think Dan might just be able to pull it off. Keep the activists at least somewhat energized and pull in moderates and independents too.
Frankly, it’s more likely that Tambor Williams was merely the best choice of the small few who would even consider being on a ticket with Maes. We doubt this was a big strategic move by Maes.
What would this party do the Nelson Rockefeller?
Ed Brooke?
transparency is good