U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Michael Bennet
(D) Phil Weiser
60%↑
50%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Jena Griswold
(D) David Seligman
40%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez
(D) J. Danielson
(R) Sheri Davis
50%
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(D) Jeff Bridges
(R) Kevin Grantham
40%
40%
30%
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*
(R) H. Scheppelman
(D) Alex Kelloff
70%
30%
10%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Trisha Calvarese
(D) Eileen Laubacher
90%
20%
20%
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) Manny Rutinel
(D) Shannon Bird
45%↓
30%
30%
30%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
November 19, 2009 04:39 PM UTC
59 Comments
Only change is the 2nd to last verse, “living in a broke land”
Sounded a lot more profound on weed, too. Like a lot of the lyrics of the day.
My mom used to tell me that these guys had it all figured out. I rarely am able to follow lyrics from the late 60’s, early 70’s.
I guess Mom’s got some explaining to do.
way too seriously
We just didn’t follow through.
We were long on patting ourselves on the back for self-righteous posturing and pontificating. In love with musings that were often more trite than profound without the assistance of recreational substances. With notable exceptions, short on heavy lifting and, as you say, follow through. And I was speaking mainly of the era’s faux revolutionary artists and how we lionized them. Just as a for instance, Mick Jagger prancing around singing about being a street fighting man? All the way to the bank? Pretty ridiculous in retrospect.
by making us work 2 Wednesdays in one week?
A reverse furlough?
In the past 28 days Andrew Romanoff has raised $26,000 on ActBlue. Not sure if he is raising significant sums elsewhere. We do know that last quarter 70% of what he raised came from ActBlue.
It seems whatever Speaker Romanoff is selling not too many people are buying.
..of your interest in this issue, Regis Univ., by which I don’t mean “curious minds want to know.” Otherwise your comment seems a tad random, at best, and I for one don’t believe in random coincidences.
If you had a curious mind, you’d be all over the question: Who is frequenting DC townhouses to contribute to Bennet, and in exchange for what?
maybe Ferrugia and the FBI could stake out the townhouses to find out.
“For Sale. U.S. Senator. Open House….”
Feeble arguments provide their own refutation.
we’re not worthy.
…but at least you’re not…*sniff*…“rural”.
Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Oklahoma, and any number of other states with outsized influence, especially in the U.S. Senate and, where possible, in the House.
What was that famous rural musical, something about the “Surrey with the Chimp on Top?” Since evolution didn’t happen (Hick’s Theory refutes Darwin), that must mean humans haven’t evolved from apes after all, and folks who believe that may have a point, based on the evidence all around them. Bozo’s in the House, Kong in the Senate….
Meantime, Who Bought Bennet? And why?
are they even allowed to stare in the direction of Denver ?
We may have to pick a different restaurant.
Or I’ll take a bath in the pond and leave my shotgun and bible in the carriage.
OK, that was HI McDonough, but it’s a good quote. I’m open for a different restaurant, maybe outside the metro area.
If I make a change this late into the game though, JO will have to reauthorize my travel papers with the party : )
Just don’t tell JO that the unwashed are in the big city that night.
…especially in the context of DC fund-raisers in townhouses owned by lobbyist-law firms and lent to both Republicans and Democrats in the same week. Those are the superficial facts; unexplained is what is expected to be the quo pro quid?
Meantime, one of the symptoms of Curmudgeonly Geezerhood is the ability to fart from both ends. You can look it up.
When your candidate can’t generate enough interest to receive actual campaign contributions, that’s a good thing?
So Obama shouldn’t have accepted all of the cash from the unions during the election?
my snippy-o-meter is malfunctioning…
OK better now
Your uncovering of the scandalous underbelly of our national political system is unprecedented. In the future will we have to reference “before JO” and “after JO” ?
Bennet is for sale.
(Accepted by virtue of not being denied.) We’ll see how that plays in Dot’s Diner or wherever. I recommend the Freedom Fries, btw. Grease is fresh every 24 hours, and plenty of it!
What is more to the point, of course, is the old line about What’s the Matter with Kansas” (book by Thomas Frank). Like it or not, (a) Big Money is in Cities; and (b) Big Money sees government, in particular senators and representatives, as people to be bought. How strange it is to see self-proclaimed Rural Sophisticates defending this practice!
(a) Big Money is in Cities; and (b) Big Money sees government, in particular senators and representatives, as people to be bought.
You have an amazing grasp of the blatantly obvious JO, even if you have to have Thomas Frank tell you so…
To say the practice is widespread and obvious is not to defend it. Just a tip for ya. Bennets for sale – they’re all for sale and have been for centuries, but I trust your new discovery is going to put an end to all that once and for all.
by inviting everyone in the state to their house for dinner. Oh wait. They’d really have to raise a lot of money to do that.
and do a little scouting all by her lonesome and then write a chart topping diary all about it.
From the last reporting period, nearly 1/3 of Bennet’s contributions have come from individual donations on Act Blue. Just a hair under 1 million.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pol…
To imply that Romanoff’s inability to raise nearly enough to compete with Bennet–even if you just look at individual contributions off of Act Blue–is some spin worthy of Libertad.
Actually, you two have a lot in common. You both tend to think that putting things in bold make them more true. WHY, JUST LOOK AT HOW RIGHT I AM!.
I just won this debate.
You are freaking hilarious. SO glad you’re here.
🙂
I’m now in two different signatures simultaneously? And just for some run-of-the-mill Republican-bashing, not even anything particularly brilliant.
What? It’s a REAL QUOTE!
Still just three. OK, now it’s four.
What is this blog, a place for people who quote themselves?
Why none other than Jane Norton!
Step right up! Git yur votes right here! Just $2,500 apiece. Glad you could come… Have any trouble finding it? No? Well, that’s good. Is he a Democrat? Why do you ask? I’m not sure, let me ask.
Mikey? Oh, Mikey….
OK, boys, it’s nappy-nap time. I know you’re all lovey-dovey, but it’s time to put away your crayons… Wait! Did you spill mayonnaise on your pants? That’s okay, we understand. Just wipe it off before it gets all over the futon.
Hissy fits aren’t any more valid than bolding and italicizing everything.
underlining
maybe if she were just a touch more condescending and self righteous she would rally a lot more people to her cause.
…is that Romanoff desperately wants these donations but most people won’t give him any. Unless I missed his big announcement wherein he pleged to reject certain donations and/or returned a bunch of them.
dang it to heck
If the facts are inaccurate in my postings than say so with proof. Bottom line is that Andrew Romanoff is not raising very much money. Both the Senator and former Speaker are raising money from special interests and their lobbyists. Bennet is just doing a better job of it.
you don’t have any actual proof for the original statement. Unless you have a new report on total fundraising, you can’t say every other fucking day that Romanoff isn’t raising much money. You already admitted that you don’t know what’s coming from other sources.
Yep, buying through ActBlue. Great. Thanks for the update. I look forward to having this discussion again tomorrow.
I am sure that Romanoff is raking in the dollars. Even though he raised 70% last quarter on ActBlue I am sure that he is raising tens of thousands of dollars per day via sources other than ActBlue.
Even taking lobbyist and special interest money Romanoff is not raising very much money.
You said that in your original post. If you want to point and laugh at the end of the quarter, go for it. You can’t make assumptions and then claim fact.
I do appreciate you dropping the question marks. Really.
1. By your lights, this is about raising money nine months before the primary vote; from whom matters not. By my lights, it makes a difference who’s paying for the two campaigns, and why. You yourself used the phrase “selling.” What is Bennet “selling” that contributors are snapping up?
2. You would have it that a large number of contributions from small donors is a negative. I would have it that a large number of contributions from small donors is a positive, whereas being beholden to interests with daytime jobs on K Street is a big negative. We’ll revisit the history of the Obama campaign on this topic some other time.
3. Has Thanksgiving break at Rockin’ Regis started already? What exactly is your tie to Regis University? Does the University endorse your opinions? Are you part of their marketing department? Is your “handle” meant to imply that the school endorses Bennet?
4. Is it just a coincidence that, with nothing else to do, you decide to post on this subject…again, and absent any new developments? OR, might you have some other interest in doing so?
IF you have an affiliation with the Bennet campaign, which was my inquiry in the first place, you should say so. If you don’t have any affiliation with that campaign, you should also say so–which I notice that you haven’t said, at least not in this thread. Spare me the trouble of reviewing your previous contributions to see what we can see. Thanks.
and I mean everything too. Full details – past acquaintances, your dentist, home addresses over the past 10 years, cell #, blood type, etc.
There’s nothing that gets up JO’s dander like lack of full disclousure on an ANONYMOUS BLOG.
wait a minute! Are you suggesting it’s possible that JO is not JO’s real name? That JO might actually be Romanoff in drag? Or Bennet in drag?
Andrew Romanoff and Michael Bennet both gladly accept contributions from lobbyists and special interests.
Michael Bennet does so more successfully.
Andrew Romanoff says he is relying on grass roots donations. That is a good thing.
Last quarter Romanoff raised 70% of his cash from ActBlue which is a PayPal for Democrats. So far he is raising less than $1000 per day from PayPal. Is he raising large dollars elsewhere? Or is he selling something no one is buying?
Andrew could attack Bennet for raising money from special interests. Except for one itsy bitsy detail. Andrew gladly accepts donations from those sources. Bennet has also received donations from more individuals than Romanoff. I do not recall saying that a large number of contributions from small donors is a negative. I do say having a spokesperson who posts incoherent comments is a negative.
If any of the comments I make are inaccurate please correct them
nothing funny about any of that.
1. By ignoring the question: “Are you connected to the Bennet campaign,” given that virtually every of your posts since you signed on in late September has been on one subject and one subject only, you have effectively replied in the affirmative.
I gather there’s no particular rule or policy on this blog regarding campaign operatives, however junior, from making posts without disclosing their affiliation with the campaign. Fine. That doesn’t mean it isn’t evident. It raises the question of why the campaign chooses this undercover route…ashamed of the posts? We don’t know.
2. IF, as you claim over and over and over, in repeated comments on the same subject, Bennet is being financed by Big Buck Contributors, that in and of itself raises the question: IN EXCHANGE FOR WHAT? If he is their Chosen Boy, the one they are eager to reannoit/reappoint, for what reason? There’s nothing new or unique about candidates from either party selling their souls, and their votes, to the established wealthy elite. Saunter over to the Treasury Department for a closer look-see. BUT, this pattern is part of a much larger phenomenon (concentration of wealth, stagnant incomes for the middle class, exportation of manufacturing jobs for the benefit of the tiny ownership class) that adds up to a major financial and governmental crisis in the United States. Bennet’s fund raising is proof, if any more were needed, that he is part of that pattern.
For some, it’s a problem that needs tackling. For some, the Bush Era was merely the apogee of a disastrous flight path years in the making, with Republicans and Democrats alike holding out their hands. “Yes We Can” was one manifestation of the popular discontent and desire to change the dominant slogan from “Money Talks” to “We the People.” For others, such as Rockin’ Regis, for those attending a fund-raiser in DC at a lobbyist’s borrowed townhouse, it was, and continues to be, a trend that should be continued, defended, and praised–all in the name of, in the pay of, the elite that has benefited financially at the cost of undermining the American experiment in “all men are created equal.”
Lookee here.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo…
PS. How do I do a hyperlink on this site?
since any URL will automatically convert to a clickable hyperlink, but if you want it to look fancier, you type the following:
{a href=”http://coloradopols.com”}fancier{/a}
except with { } replaced by < >.
How is it going with you?