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 18, 2010 12:01 AM UTC
61 Comments
“…if you study hard and eat all your vegetables, someday you may grow up to be able to debate the douchebag strategist for a candidate for the United States Senate.”
No- that’s an overstatement.
LMAO though.
Did you ask Trippi why Romanoff apparently said last night that he would have voted against the Senate health care bill (and single-handedly stopped the bill) because he didn’t like the deals offered to Nelson and Landrieu?
I didn’t think so.
Glad you had them on, glad you like Senator Bennet’s letter.
But Senator Bennet came out for the public option in June.
ANd he said he’d support reconciliation to get healthcare- with public option – passed at least as early as early September.
I.e., we didn’t need a primary for him to “get it” on either of these kitchen table issues.
If Romanoff-Trippi would just find one policy difference around which to build a message that Romanoff would be a better Senator, then we’d have something.
As it is, on policy difference- crickets
It is messy cleaning up my blown-up head every time the Romanoff campaign lies about the date Bennet came out for the public option.
I’m running out of Sham-wows and Mr. Clean.
Romanoff sent out an absolutely ridiculous e-mail blasting Bennet for sending United States Congressman Jared Polis to debate him (at what was not supposed to have been a debate but an informational forum) and yet Bennet was gracious enough to debate a member of Romanoff’s staff.
Romanoff can’t pretend to be nice and then turn around and act like a dick and expect the conclusion to be that he’s nice.
They both appeared on Sirota’s show, about an hour and a half apart, and Sirota asked Bennet to respond to what Trippi had said — that’s not exactly a debate, as gracious as it might have been.
But you’re right, the way Romanoff’s campaign, and BTC, have played what happened at that event shows a real lack of class.
The title “Bennet Vs. Trippi” would seem to indicate they were on at the same time.
Imagine Mohammed Ali vs. Joe Frazier if Ali had been there an hour and a half after Frazier.
and Someplace About an Hour and a Half From Manila
The one where AR whines about Senator Bennet not coming to the BTC
roast forumdebate.http://www.andrewromanoff.com/…
I just read it–and it just reiterates why his campaign continues to turn off undecideds. His strident tone, his pissyness–Andrew, whoever is writing your stuff these days makes you sound like a complete asshole.
and sly.
His campaign is going to run against the President- but get all Obama-ey with the quotes and the language?
His campaign is going to protest the President, quoting Obama out of context?
I love the- Hey Obama refused PAC money, that must be a good thing. Yeah, Obama had more than enough to run the greatest presidential election campaign the country has ever seen. And the candidate. And the moment. Romanoff has he wouldda killed the Senate healthcare bill and hiring Cadell. Somehow it seems like a different equation.
— er, well, that would be 2008 Obama after Hillary conceded. He’s running against 2009 and 2010 Obama.
When some Bennet volunteer made a caucus canvassing call to my house maybe 2 months ago (are you going to caucus, whom are you supporting, etc), I said I was undecided. But in the past several weeks I’ve become strongly pro-Bennet because of Romanoff’s (A) bitchy tone, and (B) pandering statements (like “I’d vote no unless there’s a public option” — BS, you’re not more of a lefty purist than Bernie Sanders and Tom Harkin).
sure qualified as pissy, and petty. Not impressive.
This is senatorial? Yeah, I know it’s “campaign.” Maybe I’m stodgy, but I like to see a little gravitas in someone who’s auditioning to be my U.S. senator.
It’s tough to debate, shadow, delayed or otherwise, when you agree with the other guy on every significant point. That’s why AR’s campaign lit is pretty much issue free. Take away the “one vote” plaint and the attacks on Bennet for taking the money AR would have to take if Dems were stupid enough to let him win the primary because nobody can run a Senatorial campaign in a small state without it and what have got? Apparently not even charm.
It’s prissyness. Grow a pair, Andrew.
Romanoff was upset that Bennet sent Polis last week, then when he has the opportunity to go up against Bennet, sends Trippi. Yes they were one after the other, but it was still the pair invited to Sirota’s show today.
With that said, this is politics as usual – complain about anything you have a bit of a hook for and see what resonates. (Speaks well of Bennet that he didn’t do the same though.)
Sen Bennet sent Rep. Polis because the event was scheduled on a day that the sponsor was told Sen. Bennet was booked. The sponsor could have negotiated for a day he wasn’t. They chose not to do so.
How many emails are we going to get with the same whine?
“Romanoff Supporters Mad Obama Is Coming To Denver” Channel-4 Denver CO
http://cbs4denver.com/campaign…
These Colorado Democratic leaders are trying to counter those Millions
and the pressure of Obama breaking the rules to come here to raise more Millions for Bennet, who already has seven times as much money as Romanoff,
But Romanoff polls so much better.
when you bold everything. That way we know what’s important!
By the way, that’s one of the news reports you said didn’t exist, by a TV reporter whose name you didn’t get right. That darn mainstream media! Drives me cra-a-a-a-azy!
I think so.
Q1: Who does he believe in the Colorado Senate since has been bought by PAC money?
Q2: Does he support AIPAC?
My belief?
Q1: He’s made up a mythical figure.
Q2: If he says no, then he loses over half the Jewish vote.
I doubt that he will have the guts to answer these questions.
Perhaps I should put a poll as to who he will
recklessly accuse of corruption.
How much money Romanoff was paying him?
It’s easy to condemn money in politics. It’s harder to be credible condemning it when it’s going in your own pocket.
I still think that primaries have the potential to hurt parties. Voyageur’s diary today brought up a couple good examples in Tom Strickland getting the Millionaire Lawyer-Lobbyist tag from his Democratic US Senate opponent, and Bob Beauprez getting tagged Both Ways Bob by Marc Holtzman in the GOP primary. Both are recent examples of how primaries can be harmful.
That being said, I think that as long as the primary sticks to the issues, which I believe it has so far, then it can have the positive effect of putting the media spotlight on the Democrats. That is a very good thing, especially with two such qualified and likable candidates as Romanoff and Bennet.
As MADCO said above, and as I’ve pointed out many, many times (and probably will continue to do so) Bennet was there before the primary. The only thing that the primary has done is put more focus–not more pressure–on Bennet’s positions.
I’ve always said that if the primary stays clean, and there’s a good debate on the issues (like we had last night) then it can prove to be beneficial.
to become a better campaigner quicker, there’s no denying. So can we thank Andrew Romanoff and get on with the main event?
Bennet needs more practice.
This doesn’t end until it’s a gusher.
That AR is making Bennet out to be an evil corporate crony which will inevitably make Dems complacent and uninspired leading up to Nov.
RSB- this isn’t sticking to the issues. He has blatantly set forth a false premise.
If he’s going to be the nominee in November, he’s going to have to deal with much worse attacks than that from Jane Norton or whoever.
All I’m saying is that the primary isn’t going away. Better to try to reinforce the good than dwell on the bad.
While the whole PAC money = evil is a total canard by Romanoff, it’s still based on policy. He’s trying to talk about campaign finance reform, and he’s using it is as one of the only ways he can differentiate himself from Bennet to voters.
If this is the worst thing that comes from this primary, then we’re all going to look back on this and wonder what the fuss was all about. Whether or not it is depends solely on the Romanoff campaign.
Hope this is the worst of it, however, based on what’s happened over the past couple of weeks I think things are really going to heat up and AR is going to be left with no other choice than to go negative.
As opposed to what exactly?
Huh? Romanoff’s whole campaign so far has been nothing but negative. Bennet was appointed and is bought and paid for has been the entire message all along. Adding an anti-Obama, throw the incumbent bums out message while Dems hold the WH and both houses of congress is not just negative, it’s stupid beyond belief. After all, the best way for the middle to heed that message in the general would be to vote for a non-incumbent Republican, not for AR. And Trippy’s best days do seem to be behind him, don’t they?
That’s really not fair, BlueCat, though the campaign does attack Bennet on the points you say (Romanoff is, after all, the challenger). But Romanoff spends the bulk of his time talking about what he accomplished as speaker and what he wants to see the Senate do. He’s got a lot to say that doesn’t focus on corporate cash and corruption, though that is his main point.
where he spoke (was there to hear someone else)) but get e-mails and see lit and they are all pretty much negative and issue free. Even his talk of his legislative experience and accomplishment is geared toward implying Bennet lacks leadership skills. That’s getting to be a tougher sell these days, too. Maybe why more of my fence sitting friends are off the fence on the Bennet side every day.
Most of which are heavily spun, and much more negative than AR is in person.
Whose name are they being sent out over?
n/t
He made it up because he wasn’t getting any PAC money. With the new Supreme Court ruling he’s asking the Dems to go to combat againt a heavily armed army with tanks with nothing but switch blades.
No. More cowbell.
the more cowbell sketch. It cracks me up every time!
Just for you, BC:
http://s165.photobucket.com/al…
You’re the best!
But it was the most complete one I could find.
It’s only February. There’s still plenty of time for total destruction.
Made Barack vs. Hillary look like a round of golf.
Ed (who I would lay down my life for) would not have won this year even against someone as feckless as Little Ricky if he had to contend with a primary that ugly. And that primary, like this one, was between two people whom I knew well, liked, and respected.
There was never any party unity after that primary–there wasn’t time. There’s 90 days between the primary and the election. Ed won without throngs of Peggy’s staff and volunteers burying the hatchet and making lovey-dovey to band together and kick Republican ass. It was just that good of a year.
This isn’t.
This year is unlike any other since 1994. Primaries are fine when the political climate is ripe. We’re officially in desperation mode
well, the first one, anyway. Talk about unburied hatchets. Of course, the 5th is that favorable of a district. The whole state isn’t, not this year.
But listen, i was being a bit sarcastic above. I don’t expect Andrew to walk away. it’ll be curious to see in six weeks if he’s raising much money, but he’s got enough to maintain a campaign through caucuses, where he’ll do well, and on to the state assembly.
Nuclear in proporation. Ugly, ugly, ugly.
But that was probably the nastiest election I’ve seen in a long while. Although O’Donnell was pretty nasty, but it backfired. He sent out a mailing that warned voters that a sexually violent predator had moved in next door thanks to Ed Perlmutter.
After their phones lit up from panicked citizens, the cops endorsed Ed. And I don’t think they’d endorsed a Democrat in decades.
No doubt, but that wasn’t a primary. Who cares if the Musgrave and Paccione crowd reunited after the election? I don’t!
His dissembling staff and advisers that he supposedly doesn’t VET are lying more and more everyday.
Mr. Romanoff becomes the Democrats Marilyn Musgrave with every lie his campaign puts out.
He needs to answer the AIPAC question.
If not for AIPAC support through the years, Israel may well have had more wars, and perhaps lost them.
But it would have to be before the summer or the turnout would be about 5 people.
What do you think of primaries?
(Kidding.)