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%
October 20, 2010 11:30 PM UTC
29 Comments
Hickenlooper has it in the bag. Right?
Next question?
Ever bothered to look at the party numbers on the West Slope?
Do that and then let someone know if you still don’t understand. I know how bad you are with numbers.
Republicans have a huge advantage right now.
Now do you understand why an ad covering a issue close to their hearts would be airing?
I feel like I almost have you on the same, sane page, but also feel like I’m about to be disappointed. I know you’re new to politics, but it’s really simple strategy.
The DSCC should have been running this since Labor Day.
It’s like closing the barn door while there are still some horses. Except you knew the exact time the first horse was going out the front.
It was a good ad.
But 2003 was a long time ago. We’ve had a lot of turnover and growth. Energy workers and rich retirees coming (and in the case of energy workers, some going). Not sure that Referendum A is in the public’s memory banks anymore.
As an aside, by close of polls yesterday, 9.3 percent of active voters had voted already in Mesa County.
What I saw last night was a TV ad put out by League of Conservation Voters. Same theme, same comment.
If you look up the victory fund on TRACER, you’ll find that the League’s political engagement fund has put $70,000 into the Colorado Conservation Victory Fund in the last two months.
This just doesn’t hit in Mesa County, it’ll go across the Western Slope. Water buffaloes have long memories, as do Republicans.
Ref A is still alive and well as the personification of what the Front Range would like to do to the Western Slope.
The ad has plenty of punch. The rich retirees don’t by a longshot outnumber the old-timers, and energy workers who come and go (and vote in their home states of Texas, Louisiana or Wyoming) don’t matter.
It’ll hurt Tanc if the radio buy was done well.
what praytell, is a water buffalo in political context?
I know I should be ashamed that I can’t get a ‘native’ plate, but I am happy to be here now.
in a nutshell:
CO water law is complex – everyone wants more than they have, especially if and when someone else pays for it.
No one wants “their” water going somewhere else.
Add the two together and you get people who are only happy when it’s raining while the sun is shining.
To them, water is not just their top issue, it’s the ONLY issue. Water buffaloes can be farmers and ranchers who deal with water daily; they can be those who serve on water boards, they are people living in places other than the Front Range metroplex. Newer water buffaloes, i.e. those in the conservation community who won’t admit to water buffalo-ism but are anyway, and the older ones clash because the older ones basically never met a dam they didn’t like (unless it is to aid diversions out of their own basin) and the new ones want water in the streams, no matter what. But when push comes to shove, they’re buffaloes.
The species is native to rural areas in the state, although a few can be found in Front Range cities.
They are a political force. Which is why support for Ref A will forever be an albatross for those who supported it.
water rights do seem to be dicey here. I remember a debate the CO State House last session, that was about whether or not rafters and kayakers had a right to the water in CO; for use with non motor watercraft.
I was, sigh, a backer of Ref A along with Gov. Owens. I remember discussing with Ken Salazar that he was arguing A:Ref A wasn’t necessary because everything in it could be done by existing law (he was probably right) and
B: passage of Ref B would mean the end of Western Civilization.
I challenged him on the contradictory nature of his claims — if all the evil that would stem from Ref A could be done under existing law, then weren’t we doomed whatever the outcome?
We both got a good chuckle. But he whipped my butt in the Referendum. And , Yeah, West Slopers still throw that at any R who foolishly backed it.
The valley is not a wealthy place. Whenever the Front Range comes in and tries to grab water, they all have to pony up cash to defeat it. You can bet they remember.
…just ask Greg Walcher.
“Water Grab Walcher?”
I still remember those commercials.
I am glad there is another western sloper on here who remembers those commercials.
Thanks!
I find it odd that a county district attorney either would be, or even could be a “leading supporter” of the water financing initiative in 2003.
While I find it odd, it isn’t impossible.
Thoughts or knowledge on him being a “leading supporter”?
Until then- the ad cites Denver Post 9.30.10
The curse of Ref. A – The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/opin…
n/t
It is a hit but with a cute poem and no ominous music playing in the background. I am so tired of the swishing symbols and low piano cords.