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%
February 26, 2014 04:19 PM UTC
45 Comments
At least that foot in Buck's mouth won't be wearing a "high heel"!
As for Cory, what's one more lie/con job in a lifetime filled with them? He'll do his best to weasel around and out of it somehow.
"Switching deck chairs on the Titanic"….the phrase keeps coming to mind, but it was never a winning strategy.
Why the suggestion that Buck and Gardner having converstions about I am thinking of entering the race, if you do I may run for the seat that you walk away from, as being something that needs to be hidden?
Most of the Republican candidates for Senate would be happy if a Republican wins. Leave open the possibility that they do not plan on hiding the conversations, because there is nothing to hide.
Buck has said before he would endores any of the other Republican candidates who won and if it would be helpful to their winning he would endore Mark Udall.
Democratic "backroom deals" bad, Republican "backroom deals" good. Roger that.
Nothing to see here folks, move along…move along…
What?! It's a lie by omission to everyone who was considering atteding the R caucus to choose a Senate nominee.
It makes the campaign to day 100% bs.
It's a bs move – and aif you were not so blinded by partisan loyalty you'd agree.
The average voter thinks (and would be correct) that all decisions for people to run for Congress are "backroom" to some extent. Rarely (with the exception of a few like Ed Perlmutter), do they actually see their neighbor making it to Congress. That's why so many sheeple loved Sarah Palin at first. No one in their right mind would have chosen her in DC.
When it comes down to voters, Cory Gardner's record of being anti-woman will be his demise. Watch.
Agree.
"Buck has said before he would endores any of the other Republican candidates who won and if it would be helpful to their winning he would endore Mark Udall."
Huh?
that's a bit of self-deprecating humor on Buck's part, Indy, not a serious offer.
Buck is such a weak candidate that CD-4 just might be winnable for a good D. Any suggestions?
CD-4 has a PVI R+11. Buck may be a weak candidate state wide, but not in a solid R district that includes his base in Weld County, the loonies that wanted to seceed in NW Colorado and DougCO. A Democrat winning here is a pipe dream.
Can't waste money and manpower on pipe dreams when the Senate race just went from likely D hold to leaning D-hold/toss-up
Maybe Romanoff will move there?
He seems to be the Dem roaming opportunist candidate.
Yeah, moving to a neighboring city sure is the calling card of a roaming opportunist. Could you at least try to be a little clever with your chortling?
Romanoff is loved statewide. He is the hometown hero all over the metro area. I think you're jealous, Mr. Carnegie.
Romanoff is loved statewide? Really? No, Romanoff is TOLERATED statewide. Even among many of his "supporters."
I'd say, in general, he is widely loved by most of the caucus going base and now pretty happily tolerated by most of us who were really pissed off at him over his unfortunate hissy fit last time as a viable alternative to the execrable Coffman. And as a DLC style true centrist, rather than the fantasy progressive champion his people tried to pawn him off as last time, he really is a good fit for the new pretty evenly mixed CD6. Let's hope his camp has the sense to drop most of the phony stuff they were pushing when the only way forward for him was to primary pretty much equally centrist Bennet on the left.
"Happily tolerated" I think is a far more accurate statement than "beloved statewide."
But he is widely loved by much of the dedicated Dem base. It really tore apart the active Dems in my HD. A battle royal ensued between those who (with justification) believed he was screwed out of the appointment in the first place in favor of a guy who was perceived as being the Obama camp fave, Romanoff having been a big HRC supporter, and those who felt that Bennet, as the appointed incumben,t had the electability/funding advantage (not to mention, yeah he was the Obama favorite) and their wasn't a dime's worth of difference between the two of them on policy. People stopped talking to each other over it.
But everyone I'm still in touch with in my HD who, like me, was on the Bennet side considers that water under the bridge now. As for the die hard Romanoff supporters, well they're obviously thrilled.
There still may be some cold shoulders coming from that side when we all meet at Romanoff events. So many of them really hated Bennet in a way we never hated Romanoff. Some of them may never forgive.
"Water under the bridge" and "widely loved" are two different things. I guess I'm in the "water under the bridge" camp.
I'm in the water under the bridge camp but also quite liked Romanoff prior to his emotional revenge melt down and am ready to quite like him again.
Your flop sweat is showing.
Michael Bowman
Hope Michael Bowman will seriously consider the race.
I'm running. I've been quietly building a grass-roots organization for almost a year. I'm filed with the FEC. I can defeat Ken Buck! Check me out http://www.vicmeyers.org.
How much money have you raised and how much cash on hand?
I don't see the big money Dems going into a District that voted for Romney 59-40 this cycle.
Got the answer, Raised $5K, spent $4K, $1K cash on hand.
Good luck.
Vic Meyers is the Only candidate for the job…visit his website: http://www.vicmeyers.org, Facebook: Vic Meyers for Congress, Twitter: Vic4CO4 & VICMEYERS4CO4
I notice Mr. Meyers has no statement in his "important issues" file on the subject of energy development. Is he trying to avoid the issue entirely or just a position his fellow Democrats won't like?
Gotta agree V. Not sure who, but someone should jump in and make the RCCC play hard for that seat now that it has a weak candidate to "buck" around with.
You haven' seen?
Vic Meyers is the Only candidate for the job…visit his website: http://www.vicmeyers.org, Facebook: Vic Meyers for Congress, Twitter: Vic4CO4 & VICMEYERS4CO4 –
Not happening. No money.
http://www.fec.gov/fecviewer/CommitteeDetailCurrentSummary.do?tabIndex=1&candidateCommitteeId=H4CO04074&electionYr=2014
Strategery . . .
Had to log in to say that I would almost be willing to move to the flatlands to do everything I had to to get Michael Boman elected. I hope that you consider it sir. I will work extra hard to earn money to max out if you run.
Vic Meyers said,
Cory Gardner wasn't representing the people of the 4th CD and won't be missed.
Vic Meyers entered this race because the people of the 4th CD were not being represented in Washington. We need a representative that cares about the issues affecting the citizens of Colorado and not one who is only interested in promoting a political party. That's why today's news doesn't change anything for the Vic Meyers for Congress campaign.
When told of today's news Vic said, "I'm not running against Cory Gardner or Ken Buck or anybody else. I'm running for the people, all of the people regardless of party, in the 4th Congressional District. This morning I was running on Protecting Social Security, Passing Immigration Reform, Infrastructure Investment, and Honoring our Veterans with deeds instead of rhetoric. Tonight, I'm running on the same things, because these are the things that are important to the people of this district."
OK, we get it.
And I'm pretty sure Michael Bowman isn't thinking about running so we probably should all face reality.
Seriously now. Anybody know something out there? Who's name is being bandied about by the big dog Ds to run against Buck?
I haven't heard boo, BC, but then I'm not on anyone's speed dial in that sphere. I didn't make any public announcement about this, but I left the party in early January. After a lot of contemplation it was something I had to do.
The decision was based primarly around one issue: the farmers and ranchers across Colorado (in particular southeastern Colorado) who have been ensnared (and many of them facing bankruptcy) over the long-running battles over conservation easements. Struggling farmers and ranchers, who, playing by the rules, were thrown under the bus by "Denver".
I could write a diary on this (and I probably will when I get some time) – but let's just say this: 1) this entire situation could have been resolved with an Executive Order by this Adminstration instructin the Colorado Dept of Revenue to treat the transactions in the same manner as the IRS. 2) this Administration has shown zero intersest in resolving said problem. 3) the monied interests (the tax credit purchasers and the Denver lawyers) have all gotten their fees and inured to the benefits of the program – the farmers and ranchers are left holding the bag. 4) I have made a handful of attempts to reach out to the state party to discuss ways in which we could have made ourselves more relevant in rural Colorado. For the most part there didn't appear to be all that interested. I get it. It's called "arithmetic". But it's as much of a folly for Denver-centric leaders to dismiss the rural vote as it is for the residents of Dumphuckistan to think there's is relevant. It's nothing but false choices by both sides. Neither of us are independent. We're interdependent. And I'm not giving Republicans any pats on the back here, either. Brophy, as the senate representative of the district, has been as useless as teats on a boar hog on this issue. Ditto for Gardner.
All that said, I'm don't anticipate (nor seek) any interaction with either party. For the time being I'm parked back in the party I was a member of for 32 years – but there is "no room in the Inn" for Teddy Roosevelt Republicans in that world either. For the time being I'll focus on things that can make a difference that don't require the sign-off of either party.
Please come back. But I understand. If the Denver-centric Colorado Dems don't understand what a great asset you represent for them then they don't deserve you. Even if not as a candidate but just as someone with a name and rep and knowledge of the problems rural Colorado faces. Sure arithmetic says the votes are concentrated in Denver/Boulder and 'burbs but why just cede the rural votes? In potentially close statewide elections why not make a real effort? The Salazar brothers were great rural Colorado assets in their day. Won us two very important seats in a very important election when things weren't going so well for us elsewhere. Sorry to hear you're no longer on our team though I know you won't be supporting any idiotologues.
Michael, I'm very disappointed to hear that. The Democratic Party needs folks like you, precisely for the perspective, drive and knowledge you bring.
I hope you one day come back when the time is right. But I know you will continue to do valuable service for your community and the state at large. It's just that if you had a larger megaphone, like serving as the CD-4 Rep, you'd be the boar hog, and not the teats 🙂
Thanks, Davie 🙂 I'll still be working on all of the same things – and promise not to be a wallflower! I mentioned in a previous post that I am going to be very involved in the local control ballot iniative that we want to get on the ballot this fall. It's unfortunate that we have to spend our time on these battles when we have so many other things that need our attention as well – but that's the hand we've been dealt.
Hey MB–I'm with them, where-ever you land you are a great asset to our state. Hope we get to work together (like on local control) IRL.
Colorado does need your brand of leadership – whenever and however you are ready to take on that role.
That's probably smart – focus on issues affecting people's lives, transcending party labels. We could all improve public discourse by being issues-focused, instead of promoting the puppet show that is partisan politics.
Vic Meyers.
The Dems wrote this district off when the did reapportionment after the 2010 census.
A 10+ deficit is a rather steep hill to climb.