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%
April 03, 2010 09:54 PM UTC
71 Comments
Just got word that Sen. Bennet’s message was also received by delegates in Kit Carson where at assembly Romanoff picked up 20% and Bennet dropped 10%
http://coloradopols.com/showCo…
So Bennet is wrong to petition because it isn’t necessary ?
or
He’s right to petition because the delegates are all breaking Romanoff?
8 diaries – 7 bashing Bennet. I copy and paste from a poll.
Where’s your diary about why you support Romanoff?
Romanoff shot up from almost nowhere — he gains 16 points and bennet drops 7.
By the way — a 56% win is a “cream” to you now? Funny that you view the caucuses so differently.
You have to understand here in Bennet’s Wonderland – losing is winning until you announce you never planned to win at all but then when you aschew winning then your opponent getting 43% was you creaming them unless that was you who got 43 and then it was a win you see…. Welcome to math as it’s done after jumping down the hole my friend
Try eschew in place of aschew.
But as a Bennet delegate, I agree the spin on the delegate shift is getting a little over the top. By next weekend, we’ll know if the petition drive is even needed.
We are both blessed and cursed to have two excellent candidates for only one position.
I can only cringe at the nightmare of allowing this seat to fall into the hands of the right-wing crackpots offered up by the GOP.
While we differ on how best to prevent that nightmare from happening, we all can agree that after the primary, it’s all our jobs to keep the seat in Democratic hands.
At the Mesa precinct caucuses, the tally was Bennet-65% Romanoff-35%
Yesterday at the assembly, it was Bennet 54% to 44% percent for Romanoff w/2% uncommitted.
I am pretty sure of my numbers, but stand to be corrected.
I was there. The AR people were very happy with the results. The Bennet people were very quiet. Bennet is very popular in Mesa County, but AR is gaining some ground. Both gentlemen gave excellent speechs and there was NO rancor, which was particularly important to me.
SOS Bernie Buescher, Mayor Hickenlooper, and a number of other speakers (including me) made a point of speaking to the generally accepted desire to keep it clean and positive.
I mean, really. We have a chance to vote FOR someone, instead of AGAINST someone. And we don’t have to hold our noses to pull the lever.
All the delegates are seeing Bennet doesn’t care about them and are switching to Romanoff!
Whatever MADCO, the only real statistic is total turnout vs delegates at assembly. That’s what the campaign emails said, anyway.
This diary is so good it almost fits the narrative I’m paid to reinforce.
for the candidate you purport to represent.
Are you really saying you are paid by the Bennet campaign? You probably should be.
He is circulating the petition. This looks so bad for Sen. Bennet. When does the DNC, DSCC and the Administration cut and run?
well that’s for sure. If Bennet is the nominee we can all start swallowing the phrase “Senator Norton” or “Senator Buck”
Pffffffffffffffhhhhhh?
What’s on yours? Besides blind faith in our appointee of course.
You asked “When does the DNC, DSCC and the Administration…” abandon Colorado. I said November, meaning that this is an important seat, Democrats everywhere know that, it’s in play and we face a tough election year holding it, and Democratic leadership are not going to give up until the day after election day.
You go on to ask “the polling is on my side
What’s on yours?” And I’d say the confidence – shaken and now just a little hopeful – that all Colorado D’s can unite behind whichever candidate is the nominee, that the energy and experience of the party activists will be the leadership and influence to help that unity happen, and that we can focus on swinging enough U’s to out nominee that we can hold the seat.
If, instead, we focus on beating the crap out of each other and venting our frustration with each other- we’re not going to have unity. We’re not going to persuade near enough U’s. And we will lose the seat.
If you are a D and want the seat to stay D and Bennet is the nominee but we end up with Senator __ (R) – that will be as much your responsibility as any other D more interested in settling scores and arguing with other D’s as anyone’s.
When in doubt, listen to my grandmother: when you haven;t got anything nice to say, don’t say anything.
Nailed it.
Funny MADCO how you quote something, end quotes and then misinterpret the conclusion. I never read “abandon Colorado”. I read “cut and run” and it is obvious to an even casual observer such as myself that he meant drop this foolish support for Bennet and leave Colorado Dems to decide our candidate and THEN jump in to support Romanoff in November.
Why is it that the Bennet supporters on this site seem be the ones attacking every statement of support for Romanoff, twisting every utterance as though it were a stab to the heart of Bennet?
Someone on this site asked why we support Romanoff and I told him or her. I asked why they supported Bennet and the silence was deafening.
Just because he was a big cash cow for Obama in ’08 doesn’t mean that we need to slander a truly committed public servant like Andrew Romanoff now to get Bennet nominated/elected simply because he is sitting in the seat now. Other then that, I don’t see that Bennet has any special qualifications for the job.
Or just trolling old threads to get the last word?
I have posted previously why I support Bennet and I will again. You are clearly figuring out how to use the search function, just go back a little further in time.
I also have not slandered Speaker Romanoff.
About the closest I’ve come is to express skepticism about some elements of his campaign. But that’s hardly slanderous.
You, on the other hand, are clearly no “casual observer.”
I was pushing back on otoole because he/she posts to pick fights and bash on people. It’s not helpful- we have approx 12 weeks to when primary ballots go in the mail. If we can avoid beating on each other during that time- and instead campaign against the R’s – we will be much better off 4 weeks after when we have our D nominee.
I want the seat to stay D and the D nominee will have my support, whichever it is.
I expect that it will be Bennet and the DSCC will continue supporting him. I expect if it is Romanoff the DSCC will support him, whether he wants it or not, because their main priority is that the seat stay D.
Never used it.
But I do read the posts here as much as I have time for and what I do notice is that Bennet supporters seem to drag Romanoff supporters through the mud here at ColoradoPols.
I’ve seen a lot of ad hominem attacks when Romanoff’s supporters challenge the assumptions that lead people to support Bennet (I may try searching for your answer to that question MADCO…).
I have many friends who support Bennet. I gently tease them for doing so as they tease me back. We also try to persuade each other of our candidate’s merits (ex: Romanoff’s years of public service experience, legislative experience, tireless dedication to the people of Colorado, selfless giving to larger causes and goals than his own personal self-aggrandizement, etc).
But whenever facts are used to support his case (polling data, caucus results, assembly results) I read a lot of vitriol from Bennet supporters about how naive we must be, or how stupid we are to support such a long shot. And the biggest reason, the only significant reason I can discern is because of the money.
I think the attacks seem to come more from Bennets side on here than from Romanoff’s. But I don’t have time to read each and every post. I don’t live on ColoradoPols as some seem to (Steve), so maybe I haven’t seen all the trashing Otoole has done. But I have seen all the trashing Otoole receives as personal attacks for any and all of his or her postings.
he’s just trolling, and clearly uses the search function as soon as he logs on to pursue his petty vendettas. Another damaged psyche free-ranging in the bloggosphere.
I just love to stir you up every time I see your name. It is a new hobby of mine, because you’re so full of shit. And watching you spin is a lot of fun.
I neither troll nor search. I just read and respond to what interests me. And if an asshole like yourself wants to attack me personally for my posts as you have done Steve, then you deserve what you get.
The only person launching personal attacks is you. What you really meant is, “if someone embarasses me by making stronger arguments than me, thus publicly humiliating me by showing me to be less intelligent than I want to believe, and want others to believe, that I am, then instead of relying on the strength of my arguments (which I am admitting by my behavior aren’t up to the task), I will simply hound them with endless ad hominem attacks (that being the only weapon I have available), all the while bizarrely claiming that it is they who are launching the ad hominem attacks against me.”
Most of us are here to discuss politics like adults, with a bit of fun and humor laced into the conversation. You keep admitting that your purpose is to be an obnoxious troll, and then denying it in the same breath. You’re obviously unbalanced, insecure, and desperate to inflate a damaged ego. Your chosen methods are counterproductive (and illegal), in several ways.
Who and what you are and what I am is irrelevant; that’s what ad hominem means. Get a life (yes, yes, you told me you have one. Obviously, not so much).
Your “new hobby” is the opposite of “just reading and responding to what interests you.” The inconsistency between your claim to be above trolling, and your simultaneous insistence that you will continue to troll, is apparent to everyone but you.
you went on the personal attack once you realized your weak arguments had no standing at all. But that is what i’ve come ot expect from you Steve.
but you’ve published that you are doing so intentionally. You will end up publicly humiliated, off-line and by your real name, if you continue. It’s your call.
That is an awfully threatening comment for someone to make when they are a candidate for office. Or I am behind the times?
I have no personal preference in this tiff, I just thought I might point that out.
enjoy the same legal protections as everyone else.
Why don’t you two exchange email addresses, and then you can harangue each other back and forth in private? Or write letters to each other. Or send carrier pigeons. Or skywriting. Whatever — just leave the rest of us out of it.
Do you know how many people that read this site are interested in your little spat? We’ll give you a hint: It’s less than three.
Next time you decide to suggest to a poster to trade emails and take it off-line, make the suggestion to the one who 1) initiated all of the offending interactions, 2) proclaimed his intent to continue to initiate them (as a “new hobby” to harass the other poster), and 3) didn’t supply his contact information (mine comes with every post), to be used for the purposes you suggested, or any other, at will.
If you’re going to enforce common decency on this blog, then, by all means, enforce it. If you’re going to leave it to those on the wrong end of assertive and persistent indecency to enforce it themselves, then don’t rebuke them in the moment that they have effectively done so.
I missed a lot while I was away. That’s quite the bomb Steve. Threatening me with public humiliation? Amazing!
I guess I would say if you have a criminal case to prosecute, call the police. It will be interesting to hear their perspective.
If you think you have a civil case to pursue, I guess there is no one stopping you from filing it.
You may want to consult with an attorney before taking any drastic action though Steve. And I mean a real attorney, not some quickie Google search of legal terms which seem to satisfy you.
I would also suggest you take a quick look in the mirror at yourself for the myriad aggressive and offensive things you have posted against myself and others on this site. Calling me a “douche” and constantly insulting my intelligence and calling someone else a “perennial turd in the punchbowl” as a few examples are not things that would make you seem like the innocent bystander here Steve.
Also as a public person, you actually do not have the same protections as I as a private citizen do. You may want to look into that a little more Steve.
You post on a public blog web-site, thereby opening yourself up to the responses to your posts you may receive.
Finally, I have never contacted you outside the auspices of ColoradoPols. I neither know where you live, what your phone number is whether you are married or single, straight or gay, or much else about you. I merely respond to your posting on this web-site, which seems well within the bounds of what this site exists for. Sorry you don’t like that Steve.
Your move next Steve. What are you gonna do now?
On so many levels, and in so many ways. But, like I said, it’s your call.
BTW, I never called anyone a “perennial turd in the punchbowl.” I won’t debate it with you; it’s just a fact.
And I’ll be voting for Senator Bennet.
I’ll be voting for Bennet in Denver next week, as will my friend at her assembly in Arapahoe County.
Maybe we’ll all meet up at State 😉
I’ll be at the Arapahoe County assembly, and I will be doing my best to convince people to vote for Bennet.
I thought you were undecided. Having you as an advocate will be a big plus for Bennet.
I can’t wait until the campaign is able to turn to the real policy differences between the Dems and the nonsense being pushed by all the GOP contenders.
A few years back (at least 15) I was going to nursing school at Lamar Community College. Whenever there was a major test, the scores got posted outside the classroom door as soon as they were available and everyone queued up to see them. Most people just wanted to know if they passed. But for me and two other people, we wanted to see how the top three ranked. You would have thought we had money on the line, considering how strongly we felt about a 1 or 2 point difference in the total test grade.
Know what? It had absolutely no effect on our real lives, then or now.
Our county chair told me the total number of delegates to state last week. I don’t remember it exactly, but I think it was around 4400. The number of active Dem voters statewide is over 800,000.
There is no question that those who go the extra mile to work for their party are worthy of admiration and respect. But the “test results” on Assembly Day, no matter how pleasing or disappointing, are just a snapshot of one day.
The real test day will come in November. Will the Dems pass?
.
I think the GOP field is pretty weak. I don’t even remember who my party (ACP) is running. But any one of these would beat the incumbent.
The Dems have a funny problem in this Primary:
do they get crosswise with the Chicago political machine by backing the favorite son; or
do they support a lackey of the White House, knowing that Colorado voters will never elect someone to their Senate seat who will be expected to put the President’s interests and priorities ahead of those of the state ?
I don’t see the percentage in that.
Anybody will beat the incumbent in November, if he’s on the ticket. Anybody who says they will represent Colorado interests.
Despite Obama’s enduring popularity, folks do not want to sacrifice their seat in the Senate in homage. Especially not now, not when the other Colorado Senate seat appears to be taken by someone who’s just not that into voters.
.
The difference between conceptualizations of reality, and reality itself.
Your narrative may have some cache, but it is divorced from reality in a variety of ways. Repeating it is something people who want to change that fact, for whatever reasons, tend to do.
I’m not going to debunk it. I’m just going to slap on a warning label: “Reader Beware. Apply knowledge and thought liberally to this product.”
claim all this hidden knowledge of “variety of ways” and then don’t back it up. Slander a poster and a post without much to go on.
The meaningless attack by the obsessed virtual stalker, again days after all others have abandoned the thread, responding, ineffectively at this point, for the sole purpose of harassing and annoying someone who once bruised his fragile little ego. Gee, how will I endure your scathing (and rather astoundingly clueless) remarks?
I had the time to devote to the site that you obviously do Steve, but I have a very full life working full time, rasing my family, volunterring in my community. I just don’t have all the time to make such clever links to posts where you think you’ve gotten the better of me and where you insult me viciously and in uncalled for ways and for which you have yet to apologize because you are a pompous ass and so full of shit that you think you have a right to do so to anyone you desire. i see you do i tto a lot of people on here Steve. You’re very brave behind your keyboard.
Only one of us posts under his real name. Who’s hiding behind a keyboard?
And only one of us seeks out the other’s posts as soon as he logs on, in order to continuing throwing his little tantrum.
Getting the best of you is like humiliating a toddler trying to bully an adult, and provides just as little satisfaction.
Get over yourself, you self-important pompous ass!
It’s more that I can’t read anything on here without running into your bloviations. Is there ever a diary you DON’T comment on?
But I sure do get your goat every time I poke you. I hand you the shovel, and you just can’t help yourself. You have to keep digging!
Gnats are annoying to. It’s no cause for pride, and a low height to aspire to.
You don’t seek me out? If one clicks on your name and checks your posts, well over half of your posts are troll-secretions in response to old posts of mine which had been made in reply to other people. I, on the other hand, have never replied to any post of yours, after my first and last one well over a month ago, that wasn’t a response to one of those troll secretions.
You can’t rewrite reality when it’s documented and available for review with a couple of mouse clicks. We all get that you dislike me. Fine. Now let’s act like rational people who dislike each other and have no other connection, and just ignore each other. That’s what I’d like to do. That’s what reasonable, non-emotionally-disturbed people do. If you’re not some pathetic obsessive virtual stalker, then why can’t you do it as well?
and I would think anyone would react as I have to your offensive comments Steve. Except you’re so full of yourself you can’t see that.
And feel free to react in any way you think fit. And I’ll do the same. It makes me feel good to get under your skin and bother you so, just like an annoying gnat.
and what corresponds to reality are amazingly dissimilar things, which is why you are oblivious to their dissimilarity.
Oddly enough, unbalanced nut-cases always think that, and are always wrong, not only about how “anyone” would react to the imagined slight, but also about the nature and existence of the imagined slight in the first place.
You are quite the little specimen, aren’t you?
“Oddly enough, unbalanced nut-cases always think that, and are always wrong”
You beat me to it! 🙂
Maybe we can capture that in verse? You know, “I’m rubber, you’re glue…”? Toddlers will no doubt be impressed.
The troll spewing endless vitriolic insults complaining about having once been mildly insulted. The stalker complaining that the person he’s stalking is guilty of, you know, being there while he’s stalking them. The petty grudge-bearer who refuses to let bygones be bygones being the one who claims to be on the moral high ground. The whack job insisting that the object of his crazy obsession is crazy. The coward hiding behind anonymity calling the object of his vitriol, who does not hide behind anonymity, a coward. The one in the hole claiming the other is digging. Uh huh.
Like I said, you are quite the little specimen.
such rancor. I’m surprised Steve. I thought you were above all that. You sure do say such pretty things.
jpsansci always needs to have both the first and last word in his Troll attacks, there’s no point in responding to him again. Of course, I’ve never claimed to be “above” anything. I argue positions, identify values worth promoting or striving for, respond to personal attacks (sometimes sharply), and always offer and accept offers to let bygones be bygones (no matter how enduring or vitriolic the other poster’s attacks have been). There’s obviously no way to affect the behaviors of anonymous parasites who place themselves beyond the reach of reason and goodwill. Such is life.
I have decided to make a point of responding to your substantive posts with dispassionate critiques rather than simply ignoring you. I’ll leave the desperate recourse to endless barrages of unbalanced vitriol to you.
Here’s how I see it. Romanoff is a good candidate, BUT he has made an almost unfixable error in making his main differentiating issue to be not taking special interest money. Not taking it means giving a huge advantage to the Rs. Changing his mind later opens him up to the accusation of flip-flopping and hypocrisy at best.
As you say, the worst Rs running against Bennet could say is that he has Obama’s support and approval. Is that going to hurt him as the economy improves and Obama keeps batting them out of the ballpark? Not so much.
And is why anyone who cares about free and fair elections should be actively supporting campaign finance reform at all levels.
At least Andrew (and Ken Gordon, another favorite whipping boy of the ConservaDems on this site) put his money where his mouth is in refusing this tainted money.
is not reform. It does not promote or lead to reform. It can be praised by those who find it to be an expression of a principled position, or criticized by those who find it to be a strategic choice compelled by necessity. But it should not be confused with an attempt to initiate reform.
it must be so…
Let’s play a little game. Let’s imagine that Michael and Andrew both have horrible finance directors who would mismanage their money badly enough that they both announced bankruptcy tomorrow.
Michael, loses campaign staff from Indiana, Iowa and the like. Those poor kids, (who are very nice and I would hate to see lose their jobs) will have to go on home. Michael then cannot afford the shiny mail pieces that are sent to Obama caucus goers homes, with big pictures of the president on the cover. He can’t afford to make silly TV adds. He can’t afford to pay phone bankers to call and tell his delegates about going to caucus (probably because ge couldn’t afford the data system either.) Thank goodness he still has you.
Andrew wouldn’t really lose anything. Considering that the majority of people who could even be considered “staff” are actually volunteers who are working for him because they believe in him. Volunteers who do what they do because of their belief, not for the paycheck that comes from it, are far more valuable in the long run. Andrew would have the true activists who have been doing this and “spreading the word” for decades speaking for him to their neighbors. The people who have always paid attention will know when their caucus is, and go, for him. Not for the POTUS.
Basically, if Michael didn’t have his money, where would he be?
And I am sure I will get some long meandering and downtroddren response from you about how many people really believe in Michael and how you fantastically believe that Michael inspires people like Barack did in 2008.
Just because he pats you on the head and makes you feel special, it doesn’t equal the numerous years of dedication that Andrew has shown the people on his staff and on his delegate list. Those are people of true passion, and passion is never something to be underestimated.
Andrew has been dedicated to his out-of-state campaign manager, his out-of-state pollster, his out-of-state top strategist and his out-of-state direct mail guru for years? Now that’s planning ahead!
Andrew has the advantage with party insiders (the kinds who go to caucus and assemblies) because this is his fifth election. Bennet is still relatively unknown. No one is arguing that point.
In the U.S. Senate.
Huh?
And who says we are all above name calling?
calling something what it is, even if it’s not flattering to the object being named. In fact, I’ve always been a staunch advocate of personal responsibility, which depends on people holding one another accountable for their misbehaviors. You can’t very well hold people accountable for misbehaviors that you are “above” naming, now can you?
I also believe in forgiveness, and reconciliation. I am on good terms with anyone who wants to be on good terms with me. That’s as accommodating as it gets.