CO-04 (Special Election)
See Full Big Line
(R) Greg Lopez
(R) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Biden*
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%↓
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
90%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
90%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
(R) Ron Hanks
40%
30%
20%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(R) Deborah Flora
(R) J. Sonnenberg
30%↑
15%↑
10%↓
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Dave Williams
(R) Jeff Crank
50%↓
50%↑
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
90%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) Brittany Pettersen
85%↑
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
(R) Janak Joshi
60%↑
35%↓
30%↑
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
February 27, 2014 05:46 AM UTC
41 Comments
Question for the day – Will Udall be able to hit Gardner on women's & gay's rights? Or will Gardner come out of the gate claiming to be a moderate on those issues? He's got Hill in the race but Gardner has a history of waffling in the primary and still winning it.
He would be the first. Gardner is the master of the indirect, glancing blow. Nothing hits him head on, and almost nothing sticks. Of course, he's only ever had to run in safe races.
Did Stephens really fall for this baloney and quit too? I can't find confirmation.
yes, see the Gazette opinion piece.
Gardner is going to claim to be a moderate on all issues, just like Udall claims to be a moderate on all issues. Moderate is all about the voter, not about the candidate.
I think Udall will immediately nationalize the race, minimize the disparity of resources and make this a toss-up from a leans dem to likely dem, which is where most "experts" had it pegged.
sorry, Gardner will nationalize the race…
Nationalizing the race could potentially work to the Udall's advantage by making it harder for Gardner to run as a moderate, especially if there is a lot of out of state money pushing for idiotic issues like personhood.
However, a nationalized race could also be a liability for Udall. The Democrats and affialiated groups aren't going to just sit there while out of state money pours in for their opponents–the Democrats will respond in kind and depending on what they focus on it could be harder for Udall to paint himself as a moderate.
Yes, David. And it will work as it did with Buck. Winning the highest profile statewide races, Senate and Guv, is a far different thing than winning a safe or strongly leaning CD or one of the statewide offices most don't know or care much about. Can't tell you how many indies I've known to vote R for SOS or Treasurer or AG just to "balance" their ballot because they voted D for Senate and Guv and hate the idea of voting a straight ticket. Doesn't seem independent enough. But for the two biggies, Udall has what it takes to keep his seat. Gardner doesn't have what it takes to knock him out. He's too clearly no moderate.
Colorado these days really does demand moderates for Senate and Guv. Dems have been running nothing but moderates for those positions for a long time now and in fact, both here and nationwide, the overwhelming majority of Dems are centrist/moderate. Centrist/moderate Rs, on the other hand, don't exist at that level here (they barely exist at all) so Dems should continue to have those positions pretty much sewn up for the foreseeable future. Unfortunately the low info indie minded will probably continue to look at the ballot and say, guess I should vote for some Rs too and that hurts Dems in the other statewide races.
I'm really conflicted about all this . . .
. . . not sure if I'm elated that I will no longer have Gardner as my "representative" . . .
. . . or completely depressed at the likely prospect if having Buck ??!!??
As a long time CD6er, iIl your pain. But CD6 is different now. How about moving here?
That's "I feel". Lately my computer has occasionally erased parts of text, sometimes much bigger chunks than this, when I do things like backspace to correct a wrong letter or something. My husband had a whole section of a long e-mail go poof.
Blue Cat wrote:
I would be careful not to descend into hubris, thinking that Democrats have it compeltely locked up for good. Nonetheless, I would generally agree with your assessment.
Colorado, to a certain extent, mirrors the demographic shifts that have been taking place in the country. The Democratic Party is indeed been far more competitive across demongraphics (including both urban and rural settings). The Colorado Democrats are not going to win the Focus on the Family crowd anytime soon, but they have done a remarkably good job of being competitive in more than just Denver or Boulder.
By contrast, it remains to be seen whether Cory Gardner can do the same for the Republican Party. If he can win the nomination without having to drift too far to the right, and stay on a moderate, general election message, he could conceivably take down Udall.
First, what's this about drifting far right? He is far right. Second, I did qualify with words like "should" and "pretty much".
Lord knows, outside of completely safe districts… stuff happens.
The current state of the Republican Party nominating process seems to conist of the limbo. Instead of "how low can you go" it's how far to the right can you go? I'm hesistant to say they can go any farther to the right.
They may have bumped up against the limit recently in Arizona.
In the mad Teabagger era, "right" and "low" have become synoymous.
How about "Right on the 'down-low'?"
May Chokwe Lumumba rest in peace. More here on the man.
Embarassed that I hadn't heard of him. The first link was an especially good read.
Don't want to be accused of outing so I'll just say congrats to one of our posters who will know what it's about.
Big win at COGCC?
Nope but I won't respond to any more guessing.
Yep, I noticed too as I follow that particular activity as well. Congrats to our fellow poster.
Larry Saboto's take on the 2014 Senate races:
http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/
It does not include the latest switcheroo in Colorado
Caplis's take is that if Gardner does not win in 2014, he will be set to beat Bennet in 2016.
Bennet will be a lot easier to beat. The only people who love him are the top people at Wall St firms. So lots of money to campaign with, but not much in the way of charged up people on the ground.
Oh yeah. Bennet didn't feed your ego with an interview.
Actually he was nice enough to sit down twice for an interview. But good job trying to avoid the issue.
Not trying to avoid it at all. I like Senator Bennet, And I'm not even a billionaire banker.
Sigh… truth is they're all pretty friendly with the top fraction of a percenters. Singling Bennet out as particularly Wall Street friendly is just silly. He's no more so than Obama or most of his fellow Dem Senators.
That's not saying much to David.
Another subject for open thread. The protecting bigots from law suits bill has been vetoed in Arizona. Guess the business wing of the GOTP can still pull rank once in a while when push comes to shove. At least with Governors.
Since the show me your papers law still stands and passage of this new hate bill in both houses shows where the majority of Arizona stands, I'd still recommend staying away, though. The fiery climate for so much of the year isn't the only thing that makes this state a hell hole.
Dick Waddams was on Caplis….glowed about Gardner getting in the race….but nix on Beauprez as candidate for governnor.
Waddams said the governor's race needs a new, fresh face……Waddams and Tancredo got into an on-air fight in 2010…..real radio, got to love it.
As for being a candidate for governor, Beauprez had his chance against Ritter in 2006 and didn't do so well, to say the least. I'm not sure the state GOP would like to to take a chance on having another series of photo-ops like the now- famous one with the horse.
Have to agree with Phoenix Mayor.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/27/phoenix-mayor-anti-gay-bill-sb-1062_n_4866238.html?utm_hp_ref=politics
Fascinating article in Time about the team that fixed Healthcare.gov.
http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2166770-1,00.html
Wow – that's a really good read. It's too bad that the other 99% of the time the government never hires people of that caliber for IT projects.
I especially agreed with the conclusion of the article saying that the government contractors are basically optimized for winning contracts — not so good at delivering on their promises.
A friend of mine has worked for government contractors for decades, and the horror stories he tells would make your hair stand on end.
Early in my career I worked at one, but decided to bail after less than a year because I could see it was 90% mgmt overhead and 10% productive work.
Exactly. But message to David–if you want to win the job, you have to bid the job. No excuses if you don't bid.
If a group of apolitical novices can beat back the gunzos in the Castle Rock red stronghold of redder Douglas County, then there's some hope for common sense in the rest of this State:
http://www.crgov.com/CivicAlerts/#733_SingleEntryView
Well this is inconvenient news for GOTP trolls. Deficits have fallen to pre-crisis level. And once again, as usual, it's happened with a Dem in the WH and after a disastrous R administration that totally and with lightening speed squandered the surplus of a previous D administration. So what's this about the GOTP being the party of fiscal responsibility now? Just think how much better the recovery would have been without all that GOTP obstruction and Dem cowardice.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/28/business/economy/federal-deficit-falls-to-smallest-level-since-2008.html?_r=0
Jimmy Sengenerger interviews Scott Gessler and Lynn Bartels. dwyer, this ones for you…rightie radio in gooey glory. I haven't listened to it yet. Found it linked on Elliott Fladen's FB. Thanks, Elliott. Any insights?