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
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
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
70%↑
30%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
June 09, 2008 10:46 PM UTC
26 Comments
Yes it will get some additional voters there. But it will also remind most moderates of where the Republican base wants to take them and that helps get more Dem votes from the middle.
A lot of “Ritter Republicans” will turn out to vote, take one look at the Egg as Person Amendment, be reminded as to what’s happened to their party, and vote against A-48 and for Obama and Udall rather than enable the Wing Nuts.
The same might be said of Calfornia’s same-sex marriage ruling bringing more R’s to the polls around the nation as well. Sort of tough to measure these things.
Also, ballot initiatives tend to bring people to the polls for one side or the other, not suddenly change their minds when they get there.
The wingnuts have been well trained to show up at the polls. 48 won’t make a difference for them. The RINOs & disaffected republicans are on the fence, not necessarily wanting to go dem, wanting their party back, not sure where the party stands now. Wadhams et. al. are trying to convince the voters that republicans are back in the middle, thus Schaffer’s “no position” on 48. Having 48 on the ballot will remind those that thought maybe the party was moving to the middle that it is not. 48 also makes it difficult for R candidates to not take a stand on this issue. A time tested tactic for the wingnuts.
Is he seriously going to maintain that position through Nov?
Won’t the Steve Curtis and Pat Miller types accuse Schaffer of turning squishy RINO on them and betraying the Cause?
I think it’s impossible to maintain “no comment” for an R right now. The “time tested tactic” is to put the issue (48) in black and white and say (the Curtis/Millers of the party) “you’re with us our against us”.
I don’t know. If you were Schaffer would you rather have half the republicans voting for you or the other half? If you can figure that out give Schaffer a call.
Wish I could tell you what’s going to happen. A lot of republicans do too.
I always thought that Ds had a tougher time because you have so many splinter groups. I now believe it is more difficult to have fewer warring factions.
In summary: I think Schaffer is toast.
To the press and state at large, he can either refuse to comment or sidestep the question by saying it’s a state concern, up to the voters of Colorado, while he’s running for federal office. His backers can let the faithful know he’s behind them 100 percent.
It’s much easier to compel an answer from a legislative or state executive candidate on a state ballot initiative. Even then, there are legitimate questions of scope — a CU regents candidate might rightly beg off answering, saying it’s outside the scope of his or her campaign, which is about higher ed and higher ed alone.
The trick will be to watch everything Schaffer sends his backers to see if he tips his hand to them. And, if possible, make an issue of his refusal to answer questions on 48.
Is going to be really crucial here I think. These amendments are defined before one goes into the booth, rather than being read while in the booth, and I think that those who remain opposed to defining a person at conception, in particular organizations like EMILY’s List, should make a concerted effort to force candidates to speak out against the issue, rather than just running faceless ads opposing A48.
A lack of clear opposition from named candidates was particularly detrimental to Ref I last year, as Ritter and Co., who all supported it, were quite tacit. I hope this is not the case this year.
I’m guessing you mean a “lack of clear support,” rather than “opposition,” in your discussion of Ritter and Co. vis a vis Ref. I in 2006.
Ballot measures work differently than candidates. The default position for most voters is to vote against new laws, which is why ballot measures almost invariably must start with more than 50 percent support. (The support doesn’t have to be explicityly for a ballot measure but can be gauged by general sentiment, like opposition to bear traps.) Colorado is a liberal state when it comes to reproductive rights, with upwards of 60 percent falling pro-choice. Faced with an extreme measure like 48, support shifts even further. The amendment has little chance of passing but has a good chance of rousing hard-core Republicans who might be tempted to sit on their hands with McCain at the top of the ticket. Since this is likely to be a huge turnout year across the spectrum (with a tremendous influx of new voters supporting Obama), that turnout surge is unlikely to affect other races to the extent A-48 backers might hope.
I meant clear support.
And I think your analysis is exactly right. I’ll be interested to see where polling begins on 48. I would venture about 45-55 for/against, which will steadily decrease.
McCain’s pro amnesty stance shows he does not believe in national security and is willing to put his blind ambitions ahead of the best interests of the country.
Many voters know that, and many will refuse to vote vote for McCain because they distrust his decision making and information processing capabilities as shown by his positions on amnesty, campaign reform and torture, among other things.
And worse, he’s sold out to the religious radicals, which makes him even more suspect.
Ok, I’m voting for Obama so I’m happy for you to not vote for McCain for any reason. But his initial take on amnesty was clearly not the best move politically and he knew that.
Agree or disagree with McCains position and reasoning, he took the amnesty approach because he thought it was the best thing to do, not because he thought it was the best political move.
IIRC, Schaffer, speaking through Wadhams (does he communicate any other way?), announced some time back that he had yet to form an opinion on it.
Schaffer has an opinion on anything… Gotta run it by the pollsters first.
Makes the statement for him, thus allowing him to go on without making any firm statements he may have to abandon later when the polls change.
and unity are greater forces than the wedge of 48…
IMHO McCain does not resonate as a Western candidate the same way as Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan, any Udall, or even Bruce Babbitt. He is career military and has been in DC so long I really don’t think of him as a Westerner–to me he seems more a Beltway Republican. He doesn’t incorporate Western into his “look” and his positions on signature Western issues seem more establishment conservative rather than regionally influenced. Most important, he doesn’t seem to have that fierce connection to the land–whether they advocate use or preservation–that marks both Western Repubs and Dems.
you turned a potentially ugly visual into a moment of surreal amusement.
The question is, will he know which end of the horse to stand by?
Yhey seem to be his campaign’s main idea
“In the Navy”
or maybe “Macho Man”
First I get Rick Rolled and then the Village People ? Shoulda stayed in bed today.
Colorado is one of the two most pro-choice states in the union. Remember, we defeated what everyone says is a wildly popular initiative, banning partial birth abortion. (Actually every state that has voted on this ban has defeated it.)
This initiative will just remind pro-choice Republicans and unaffiliates how out-of-touch the Republican Party is now and will affect the swing counties of Jefferson, Arapahoe and the ski resort counties to the extent that McCain won’t be able to carry this state.
As for Schaffer, stick a fork in him already.
Not just in CO, but across the entire nation, Obama would do well to paint McCain as another Bush, as he has been trying very hard to do. If he can crumble the mostly baseless notion that McCain is a ‘maverick’, McCain is toast.
This is particularly true in CO and the West in general, as we have a history of supporting freethinking, albeit generally conservative, libertarian types. McCain simply does not seem to have that aura anymore, but if Obama can destroy whatever remnants of it are left, he could easily win CO, NV, NM, and MT.
As for 48 bringing the radical conservatives out from their hovels to vote en masse, it might, but I think that dog don’t hunt too much anymore. It will not overcome distrust over McCain. Even other amendments meant to do the same thing, like prop 47, the anti-family ‘right to work for less’ amendment, will not scare up that many more Republican votes.