U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Janak Joshi
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Michael Bennet
(D) Phil Weiser
60%↑
50%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) Jena Griswold
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) David Seligman
50%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Danielson
(D) A. Gonzalez
(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*
(D) Milat Kiros
90%
10%
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) Jessica Killin
70%
30%
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%
December 23, 2009 06:44 PM UTC
38 Comments
Quietly. The Wellington slip isn’t really material to this, it just looks dumb, but saying Gail Norton seems like a big enough deal to stop and loudly correct.
When your #3 on the top 5 endangered senator list these yearnings begin to develop in your loins as you realize the principles that got you to the party are all warped.
What Bennet doesn’t get is people think he’s an out of state, east coast political climbing elitist. That’s hard to change.
That’s not the way I would’ve ordered it and those aren’t the main reasons I would’ve picked. I am flattered that you think I get to write these lists.
Grammatical error aside, Bennet didn’t get to “get” anything here. I guess what you mean, correct me if I’m wrong (I can’t pretend to understand you), is that the good people at Hardball don’t understand that Bennet is “an out of state, east coast political climbing elitist.”
You confuse me.
So would monkeys at a keyboard.
Freaking public school English again….
When you’re #3 on the top 5 endangered senator list [MSNBC promoted list] these yearnings [conservative principles] begin to develop in your loins as you realize the principles that got you to the party are all warped.
What Team Bennet doesn’t get is that people think he’s an out of state, east coast political climbing elitist. That’s hard to change.
n/t
That was mean. Monkeys are great.
Libertad, nice re-write, but it still doesn’t actually make sense in this thread.
People that get to know him think quite differently.
He’s actually very modest. The Speaker may well receive a boost from the caacus, though. I would not count him out as yet.
Norton is either swinging way right, or always has been to the right of GWB. I find it disturbing.
I’m surprised that violence hasn’t broken out at the eventsthat tea baggers attend. They come armed and in a mood to use their weapons.
The vigilante border guards have committed violence in the last year. It’s nothing compared to the US demand for illegal narcotics driven violence raging at the border. It crosses over to the US side.
a recent cable television documentary focussed on the danger to the Mexican press (some seek political asylum), and extortion based kidnappings which in Pheonix are not uncommon. Since 2005, the Mexican government has emplyed the military for police duty in at least 5 states. this has lead to a resurgence of PRI in elections. PAN has been the pro business party and the last rpesidential election was mroe contestd than Bush/Gore.
The reach of the cartels carries social consequences for every US urban population including Denver. Shootings and the sound of gunfire are not rare in the inner city.
This, in my mind, is the key difference betwen Sen.bennet and Speaker Romanoff. Sen. Bennet gets the immigration issue. The Speaker seems diconnected to the issue as his reason for not backing tuition equality has demonstrated.
Many liberal suburbanites don’t get it, either. It’s ironic, as a large part of the
demand for powder cocaine comes from those households.
Its good to hear you’re an insider at Club Bennet, maybe you can answer this question.
If Bennet feels the Reidcare bill is such a corrupt and misguided cluster, why does he continue to vote for it?
What’s your upside for Bennet committing you to finance the Cornhusker Kickback?
Or just the excerpts over at Free Republic?
Personally, I want to get this piece of shit to a conference committee where it can be fixed.
You want it killed so that the insurance companies can keep bleeding people until they die.
So why do you want people to die?
Note to Libby–don’t try to play the framing game with me. You’re not smart enough to win.
Primarily to insure that costs are contained for mandated coverages.
He does feel that the non-profits permitted to take part in the insurance exchange will put pressure on the for profit companies to compete.
The Nebraska deal he had nothing to do with.
It will be interesting to see if the conference committee can get a bill that both houses will support.
I know the Speaker ,too.
I like him personally and have felt bad about going after some of his supporters.
I told him that I wouldn’t atack him, and guess that I’ve broken that promise as I expected his campaign to be run clean.
They’ve gone after me, and more importantly spread false information about the Senator since the Speaker announced.
I’ve kept most my powder dry. I need to get better at not letting myself get drawwn into arguments for arguments sake.
I can get you a copy of the managers’ “idiots guide.” to the bill.
You can send a request to r_springfield@msn.com if you want.
The “idiots guuide” for what comes out of the conference obviusly won’t be available until January.
I’m going to need details. You’re no longer entitled to the benefit of the doubt.
Where’s Romanoff’s dirt?
1.They’ve spread that Sen Bennet didn’t support the public option until Romanoff entered. That’s a lie.
2. Wade Norris, insider if there ever was one, tried to suggest that the Senator was soft of clean energy. He’s not. I clearly refuted that with Susan Daggett.
3. Denver Dems “unplanned” fundraiser at the same time, place and date as the normal district meeting.
4. The attempt to smear Sen Bennet for his Wall St contributions, which totals less than 10% of his funds raised, and were raised before the Speaker ever announced.
and by impplication that it influences his decisions. This was magnified by the effort to suggest that the Speaker can’t be bought with PAC money. Well, I don’t think either of them can be bought. The Speaker has taken
PAC money over his political career.
6. If the Speaker cannot control the people in his inner circle, then that’s not leadership.
5. The smearing of John Wren.
I have other examples of people that are very close to him, but this is enough.
If you think that I’ve used the stuff that the Republicans will use then you are wrong.
Your calling me a liar, when you don’t even acknowledge who you are is taken as consider the source.
If you haven’t lied, then I have a pretty good idea of who you are, and once again, consider the source.
Which is how I know you can’t be trusted. You called me a liar, I proved you wrong. Apologize.
As for running a dirty campaign, I see inconvenient points made that you don’t like. If you can link Romanoff directly to any of your claims, please do it. If you’re really insisting that all candidates should be held accountable for what their supporters randomly do, then Bennet has to be held to the same standards.
So, what does Bennet believe? That having made millions automatically makes you a good elected official, that Udall can’t or won’t read bills, and that it’s OK to slander people. There’s more, but this is enough.
You really do a helluva job for your guy. I’m sure he appreciates it.
While there may be a lot of things that are not on the up-and-up with Romanoff’s supporters–especially people in the Denver Democratic Party–there’s nothing coming from Romanoff’s campaign directly that has been anything but positive. Everything that Romanoff has hit Bennet on indirectly has been fair game as far as I’m concerned.
I think it would be a huge mistake for Bennet supporters to start down the same path as some of the Romanoff supporters have taken.
As far as I’m concerned, both campaigns have done a great job trying to keep the race about the issues. I wish I could say the same for the bloggers and activists.
Facts. Logic. Reason. Is there NOTHING to which you won’t stoop! You’re a disgrace to the blogosmear!
And may I say, merry christmas and a happy new year to you and your family.
I also think both campaigns have been very professional and positive. If anything, more so than they should be – because both do need to bring up the distinctions between them.
The supporters of both candidates would do well to follow the example of both campaigns.
He’ll just go on making sense. Then where will we be? Back to reading Steve Harvey, that’s where!
Ray, quit trying to help Senator Bennet. It’s a boon to his opponents.
Charlie Cook only gets cred in DC because people in DC have no fucking clue what’s going on in the rest of the country, and for some strange reason they’ve glommed on to him as somebody who does.
I think he got himself into that position because he was doing political handicapping before the internet, before the data was easily available to everybody. That, and he’s done a very good job of marketing his “intelligence” all throughout the Hill information structure.
Again.
He got Colorado mostly right in a 2008 piece.
http://www.nationaljournal.com…
And yet the lesson of all this apparent D success seems not to have been learned by all the D’s. At least not in my community.
I remember reading it when it came out.
Demographics, my friends, is master to us all.
including MOTR
our Governor Owens while they ran a picture of New York’s new D Rep, Bill Owens. Not that they really care much about getting it right when they’re talking about us bumpkins in the fly-over states.
I’ve kept my the vast majority of my powder dry.
Dispelling falsehoods has been the major task.
I can say that John Wren has been a friend of mine longer than the Speaker has been living in Denver.
This is the last post that I’ll put up here as I am trying to not get drawn into arguments for arguments sake.
…so, it’s probably best that you rest now
All you have to do is read the Statesman’s article on him.
Officers of Hd5 are part of the Speaker’s inner circle. Others in the community in his inner circle have put out flat lies about Sen Bennet so much so that I had to point a recent congressional candidate to the data that refutes some of it.
It’ not been a clean campaign.
If you’d like a less public explanation then I’d be happy to oblige.
…and your comment in this thread is still from left field. Maybe ask Santa for clarity of expression.
I didn’t ask John to CC me. He did so to have someone that isn’t afraid to say that emperors wear no clothes be a part of it.
I won’t publish them as a courtesy to Pat Waak.
If you think that the article did not smear him, then you need to develop some social skills. He is not a troublemaker and it’s plain as day that infractions occurred.
He’s a man that cares about democracy which is more than I cam say for many of the Romaoff backers. Hd5 officials basically are saying to Romanoff backers come on in. To Bennet backers it’s sorry no meeting tonight. There’s the door.
This is what I posted last night:
Colorado Senate Race makes Hardball?
Here is the link:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30…
Charlie Cook on Hardball, tonight, said Bennet is one of the top five most endangered Senators. Why? Cook said that the governnor appointed him and party regulars wanted him to appoint the mayor of Denver, Wellington. Then, Cook said, “Bennet will have a tough opponent in Gail Norton.”
by: dwyer @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 18:51:37 PM MST
I read what you posted.
I also saw the original on Hardball and thought, “what has this guy been smoking?”
that Scoyt McGinnis has a good shot at beating Bill Romer.
Although I thought he was thinking about Chris Romer.
god am I desperate for attention or what…