President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Kamala Harris
(R) Donald Trump
80%↑
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) V. Archuleta
98%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Marshall Dawson
95%
5%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd
(D) Adam Frisch
50%
50%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(D) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank
(D) River Gassen
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) John Fabbricatore
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen
(R) Sergei Matveyuk
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
52%↑
48%↓
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
October 12, 2006 06:14 AM UTC
5 Comments
but I definately think he will be better for us than a DA from a second rate city with a half ass record.
I voted for BB as did my wife. We also voted for Lamborn down here.
My hopes is that even though I voted my conscience, I sincerely hope doing so pisses off many on this lefty site.
Of course you voted that way. Anybody on this site who thought you would vote otherwise is as delirious as Lamborn.
I just saw the Ritter ad blasting BB last night, and it blows him away.
How anyone who thinks for himself can support a partyline social issues radical is beyond me, and a lot of other voters this year.
Your misery is just beginning. Pour soul.
Do you mean the ad about proposed tax increases? The ad about those tax proposals could be effective, I guess, but it’s sad that everything that the campaign says has to be 30 seconds long.
There are very good reasons why all those tax proposals of Beauprez’s are horrible ideas, but that advertisement doesn’t (and can’t) accurately represent any of them. As it is, the ad will be easy to refute; all Beauprez has to do is point out that he intends his proposals to be revenue-neutral. Practically no one will ever find out that they really wouldn’t be revenue-neutral, or that they would subsidize SUV ownership at the expense of condemning anyone who can’t even afford a car to greater economic hardship, or any of the other reasons that Americans ought to be outraged that Beauprez would associate his name with such stupidity.
Alas, that’s the way life works. Nevertheless, this is the first Ritter spot that I’m not happy with. It just feels dishonest.
gas and groceries wouldn’t be get the tax under Bob’s idea. Not sure how SUV’s fit in, except they would attract more taxes than a cheaper car. Nice try though.