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%
January 31, 2008 08:25 PM UTC
43 Comments
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D…
If the Chairman of one of our Representatives Committee assignments gives money to help unseat a member of his party and his committee, that tells me that Lamborn must not be getting along too well with his chairman.
“…Young, through the PAC [Midnight Sun Political Action Committee] has also benefited from the largess of at least six Indian tribes and other clients of lobbyist Jack Abramoff, to the extent of at least $20,000. Abramoff was recently indicted and pled guilty in one of the largest lobbying scandals in U.S. history.”
http://www.capecodtoday.com/ne…
Congressman Young’s contribution to Rayburn says a lot about Lamborn. The ranking member of his committee is supporting Rayburn. In his eyes, Lamborn is clearly ineffective.
.
but Rayburn does not care as much in matters of right and wrong.
I don’t know if it’s true or not,
but if Young asked Lamborn to go along with some of his crooked deals that have him under investigation.
and Lamborn refused out of a sense of duty and integrity,
I think that reflects well on our Congressman.
Again, I don’t know if that’s what happened.
But if it did,
then Young is the sort of vindictive POS that would contribute to Rayburn, and even to Crank,
if they were so naive as to not know about this guy’s shady dealings.
THE POINT IS DON YOUNG.
this guy is as dirty as Abrahmoff and Stevens and Cunningham, all rolled together.
A pretty nasty and under-handed comment considering your case is based upon a pile of hypotheticals.
Nice source… really accurate and reliable…
.
does that mean you reject the facts ?
surely you heard of his “Bridge to Nowhere ?”
Maybe you haven’t heard about Coconut Road,
but it’s pretty well-known.
is Rolling Stone Magazine an OK source with you ?
They say he’s the 3rd most corrupt in Congress.
If you are defending this crook,
I got nothin’ more to say.
Like Crank, I predict Rayburn’s fundraising will hit a wall after his first quarter in the race.
Because I fear your prediction is not viable. Rayburn has the momentum and has only just begun. Like it or not he is the front runner, and Crank and Lamborn are in trouble!
I’ve heard a lot of terms bandied about in regards to Rayburn, but frontrunner is not one of them.
We’ll see if Rayburn can keep this up. But he still has less money and more debt than Lamborn, so I think he still has a long way to go.
in the fourth quarter. Lamborn has very weak numbers for an incumbent congressman, and a good chunk of his money comes from PACs and other special interests. The majority of Rayburn’s contributions came from individual contributors within the fifth district.
Rayburn is very healthy right now, what happened to Crank?
As I understand it, the Lamborn campaign hasn’t officially started yet. I’m sure it’s a foregone conclusion for all of us that he will run, but he has not assembled a campaign yet.
I anticipate that Lamborn’s numbers will rise as he begins to focus on the campaign.
The real loser in all of this is Jeff Crank. His numbers are very weak, and indicate a very sick campaign. Perhaps it is time for him to move on.
Rayburn’s strong showing clearly indicates that he is the candidate who will provide a real challenge for Doug Lamborn.
Quarter to Quarter, Rayburn still beat Crank. Rayburn raised 15K more in his Q1 then Crank.
What happened to Rayburn’s HUGE debt from the last cycle? It looks like he is pumping even more of his own money into the race
Rayburn leads the fundraising effort, I think that says enough.
Who is not that impressed with anything he has heard from any of them, I have to say this makes him a very credible contender.
Rayburn would outraise the other two.
Someone’s first quarter should be their best. It’s good that Rayburn raised a lot in his first quarter, if not he’d be in trouble. But the real test is going to be Q2. That’s what’s going to prove people right or wrong.
But Rayburn isn’t the front runner. Lamborn is
We could see this coming from a mile away. But folks here should be careful to try to spin this too much.
Here are some more thoughts. First, while this is the first quarter Rayburn reported, it is not his first quarter of fundraising. He has been angling for this for over a year now. That means that he has been making phone calls to line up the money even though he could not accept it until after announcing his candidacy. Furthermore, unlike Jeff Crank, Rayburn does not have a job so he has essentially been full time campaigning for about a year.
Of further note, in the last election, Rayburn posted total fundraising numbers of around 120K if my memory serves me right (I think he spent about that amount of his own money as well). In fundraising, repeat contributors are the low hanging fruit. So as of now, it looks like Rayburn’s first year efforts yielded only about 75% of what his last campaign produced.
The one number none of us can actually know is the 527 contribution. Thanks to our soon-to-be presidential nominee, 527s may be the most important factor in this race. In the last election, both Crank and Lamborn had in the hundreds of thousands of dollars via 527s. Rayburn had none. If he does not have any 527s, he can out-raise both the other guys and will still fall way behind in advertising.
Finally, I agree that Lamborn is clearly the front runner at this point. The way it is shaping up is that Crank will be top name on the ballot and the clear choice of the party insiders, Lamborn will be the incumbent, and Rayburn will be the Ross Perot giving us an imbecile who fewer than 50% of people would vote for in a two way race.
preaching the usual message of mediocrity. Lamborn should be the front-runner, he is the incumbent after all.
Your support of Crank over Rayburn however intrigues me… Just a few weeks ago, the tone of every CD-5 Lamborn thread was vehemently opposed to Crank at all cost, and now you Lamborn folks are switching focus to Rayburn.
Good strategy on your part, but highly telling. Apparently Rayburn is now perceived as the real threat. As he should be. He is a great leader and the community is beginning to realize this and respond.
To call him an imbecile as you have, is also telling of your muddy nature. Call all of the names you like, spin away, and good luck to you. Rayburn can take the flak.
I didn’t call Bentley Rayburn an imbecile. He has an outstanding record with the military and has served our country well. Furthermore, I think he is a very bright and decent person. I just don’t think he is right for this job at this time, and I wish his ego was not pushing him to do what he is doing.
I stand by my statement, Rayburn will be responsible for the election of an imbecile.
This diary is about Rayburn isn’t it? But sure, I do think Rayburn will come in second, and Crank third
How many stars did you get in the military?
I misundertsood your comment
The only disagreement I have with Rayburn is his persistence to take this to a 3 man race. For someone as obviously intelligent as he is, he must know that this will almost certainly result in Lamborn winning again. Therefore, the only reason I see him being willing to take that risk is because he is planning to move out of the district when he loses. He will never pay the consequences of his actions, but we will. This leads me to the conclusion that his campaign is not based on the good of CD5, but rather on the outside chance that a “Johnny come lately” to Colorado will win against all odds.
and he wasn’t endorsed by Hefley
and he didn’t buy a house from you in El Paso County
and you demand to see his tax returns
etc
How wise of you to use my argument. You must have been paying attention a few months ago when I told you almost the exact same thing about Jeff Crank.
Of course you ,GOPpundit and CD-5Line tried to spin it, say I was all wet, and convince me Jeff Crank was a fund razin dynamo.
But seeing my own words in your post proves I was “Dead On”. (Dig Dig)
So Thank You.
trying to spin the Crank numbers. A few other people did, but I never thought we would learn all that much from the first one or two quarters of fundraising. In this race, money will mean very little relative to the prospect of a three man race. Rayburn can raise a million dollars and I still don’t see him winning the election. Crank has a better chance in a three way, but in all reality, Rayburn running virtually guarantees a Lamborn victory.
In fairness, GOPPUNDIT and CD-5Line were even more disagreeable than you were.
————————————
CRANK’S $77K was a 9 month report
Don’t be fooled into thinking Crank has a vast supply of financial supporters. He has been hard at work lining up his $77K ever since he lost the 06 primary. So one could say his $77K was a 9 month report, not a 6 week report.
Once he announced, he pulled the trigger and deposited his checks. Watch the next quarterly reporting as I suspect his well is drying up quickly.
I personally know of people who previously supported Crank in the 06 primary who are now supporting Doug. One person told me he responded to Crank’s fundraising letter by telling him, “No, you are only challenging Lamborn due to personal ambition and pride. I will be supporting Doug Lamborn.”
My prediction is that Jeff Crank will get FEWER votes in the primary than he got last time.
You heard it here first.
NEWSMAN
——————————————
CORRECTED NUMBERS for comparison
CORRECTED NUMBERS for comparison based on the true length of time Jeff Crank has been lining up donations.
Lamborn’s average per week = $7,000.00
Crank’s average per week = $2,500.00
“The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so.- Ronald Reagan
by: NEWSMAN @ Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 20:58:19 PM MDT
——————————————–
This is fun, I have some more true comparisons
Corrected numbers for threats made on constituents per year:
Lamborn’s average per year: at least 1.
Crank’s average per year: 0
Corrected numbers on kids who have committed crimes:
Lamborn’s average: 100%
Crank’s average: 0%
Corrected numbers of major PAC donors/supporters who have received FEC fines for campaign violations including coordination:
Lamborn’s average: 100%
Crank’s average: 0%
Number of donations held beyond the legal length of time before returning:
Lamborn’s number: 2 donations
Crank’s number: 0 donations
I dont know about the rest of you, but it looks to me like Crank has a lot of catching up to do if he wants to be competitive with Lamborn.
by: robert @ Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 21:47:14 PM MDT
—————————————
.”.THERE HE GOES AGAIN…”
Spin.. spin..spin.
The subject of this diary is ” Lamborn’s numbers… not as strong as they need to be.”
I point out that you CRANKy Republicans are using fuzzy math to support your hopeful but self deluded conclusion that Mr. Jeff is a fundraizen dynaMo that will our raise poor Doug Lamborn by twice as much per week. And what is your response.
..”Spin Spin, lets do it again, Dogfighten, Kid Raizen, Pacs and his kin..”.
So let’s stop the sparing and talk like two Conservative Friends. Truth is Jeff Crank did a decent, even above average job of Fund Raising for a non-incumbent candidate. He will be a serious challenger.
Lamborn did only about average for a freshman incumbent in a safe Republican seat.
The rest of this page is wishful thinking.
NEWSMAN
by: NEWSMAN @ Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 23:26:01 PM MDT
——————————————–
that was just poking fun (and deep down inside, you have to admit that it was kind of funny). There was no spin there. Nowhere did I ever state that Crank had impressive fundraising numbers. I thought they were average, not good, not bad. I think Rayburn is in the same category. For an incumbent, Lamborn’s numbers are downright pathetic. I don’t think anyone would argue with me on any of those points.
This being said, Lamborn’s people must be ecstatic to hear that it will be a three man race in August. That is way more important than fundraising. I have always said that Lamborn will get 40% in August no matter how many candidates there are. If there are only two, he loses. If there are three, the other two split the remaining 60% making it very hard for anyone but Lamborn to win.
you did call it.
You are One smart Dude too. Good call.
Like he loaned himself another 50K which means he and Crank actually raised the same amount? Is that right? If so… that’s a WEAK 4Q
Rayburn raised $90K from the fourth quarter alone. He loaned himself 50K on top of that. The fact is that Rayburn raised more than Crank and Lamborn in the last quarter.
You can try to spin that however you like, but the numbers don’t lie.
And yes I agree with you, Crank had an extremely weak 4Q, and should probably drop out.
…with that last point, considering that Rayburn has almost twice as much cash on hand (after debts/loans) than Crank. What does that say?
The word I was/am getting back from friends was/is asking me to compare Lamborn to Rayburn, not Crank.
I am more concerned about a 2 way race between Lamborn/Rayburn, than Lamborn/Crank.
I am confident Lamborn wins the latter, closer on the former.
The current Lamborn/Crank/Rayburn probably favors Lamborn too.
Jeff Crank has LOST supporters from 2006 to Lamborn, and I suspect to Rayburn also.
No matter how it shakes out, my bet is still with Doug Lamborn.
No No No, stay right where you’re at Jeff. We need you for our summer ad campaign.
My favorite speculation of the week is: Jeff make big bucks from his new tech company, drops out and endorses Doug Lamborn.
Yeah I told him to call me back when he woke up.
Crank will NEVER endorse Lamborn – too much bad blood.
I do not know how anyone can think that Lamborn is the front runner. With very few exceptions, almost every Republican I’ve talked to (and I’ve talked to A LOT) in the 5th Congressional District is embarrassed to have him as their Congressman.
Crank will bow out and Rayburn will win the primary with 65-70% of the vote.
I try to be honest and not take all this so seriously that I lose sight of the facts, or my perspective.
As you have probably discovered, there are a few shall we say “enthusiastic” Crank supporters here that never let themselves be confused with facts, cause their mind is made up.
I know Doug Lamborn personally, he is an honorable guy. But frankly if he lost to Rayburn, I would be disappointed, but I could hold my head up and vote for Rayburn.
Now Crank would be harder. And his supporters are inadvertently his worst enemy in many cases. I know and actually have had good conversations with Jeff Crank. I just don’t think he is the best man for the job. He’s a slick deal maker, a former lobbyist, and I can see why some of the wheeler dealers that can’t relate to laid back Lamborn would love Crank. But that is what I like about Lamborn.
He is a man of integrity. He is effective for our community, but uses a different style to get things done. He is well liked and respected in the Congressional Republican leadership. He has earned my trust and my respect.