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

50%↑

15%

10%↓

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(R) Dave Williams

55%↑

45%↓

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%↑

40%↑

20%↓

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
July 17, 2006 04:55 PM UTC

Monday Open Thread

  • 58 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

Blog here if your keys don’t melt.

Comments

58 thoughts on “Monday Open Thread

  1. Anyone know when all the CD-5 fundraising numbers will be available? I think they will be a close indicator of how this race will go.

  2. Anyone got a listing of the largest developers with property near the RMNP? Bet you’ll find a significant match with contributors to her campaign.

    Imagine: Six Flags Continental Divide! Bet it’s on the drawing boards right now.

  3. Hold the presses….Ed Perlmutter, the candidate for the 7th CD, whose self proclaimed “demonstarbly” ahead in the race paid for a poll in early May according to his latest FEC filing.

    But wait a second…where are those results?  Did Ed not want that story to fold into the story coming straight from The Hill showing him not able to beat Rick O’Donnell, yet Peggy Lamm can, taken only days before his poll was paid for?

    Now, before the blogging community rips my head off, people have all been yelling “Where’s the numbers, where’s the numbers, EZMak, why are you so mean?”…and such, realize that Ed Perlmutter, has done a poll (from his second pollster nonetheless), realized that his numbers are so bad that he can’t realease anything about the poll (i.e. name rec., positives, Lamm’s negatives) because none of it is in his favor.  Why do I make this assumption?  Because, Ed would take anything to fight all the other 4 polls showing him far, far behind.

    So again, Ed Perlmutter, I ask what are your polling numbers?  No, nothing, no response…then admit going into the last three weeks of the campaign, Peggy Lamm is the frontrunner for the Democratic Party.

    1. Contrary to the uninformed, candidates don’t poll for the sole purpose of creating media buzz (well some do, Lamm did, her Ridder Braden poll was designed to ‘show’ her leading so she could use it publically).

      Candidates poll to give them information for internal planning purpose, not just to proclaim a horse race.

      Your assumption about any information from a Perlmutter poll is faulty.

      Not releasing information is not a basis for assuming the poll has bad news.

      I know for a fact that Bill Ritter did a poll earlier this spring that showed him up by 10 points over Both Ways Bob.

      He refused to release the poll.  Even after repeated media inquiries to see the poll he refused. 

      Not releasing a poll doesn’t mean anything.

      Your post is just another example of grabbing at straws.

      1. Ed Perlmutter has always, always proclaimed that he is the frontrunner in the race.  In press releases and newsletters, Perlmutter says he is the candidate to beat, while activists, the press and donors have said “Let’s see some numbers”.  On this blog, and in many other places, people state that any poll coming out of the Lamm camp are fabricated or obsolete.

        Bill Ritter may not realese internal polls only because many other public polls already show him up, and up pretty big.  I’d bet anything that if public polls showing him behind “Both Ways”, he would realase an internal poll showing him 10 points up.

        Releasing polls boosts fundraising.  You show your donors that you are leading, or have a chance to win, and fundraising increases.  Donors want to give money to winners, and any bit of good news would have helped Ed.

        “In front or behind, so what” is a statement people who are losing make.

        1. Since Perlmutter continues to significantly out raise Lamm, not sure your argument:

          “Donors want to give money to winners, and any bit of good news would have helped Ed.”

          holds water.

          Not releasing a poll hasn’t done a thing to diminsh Ed’s fundraising.

          On the other hand, all of Lamm’s touting of polls, hasn’t positioned her to outraise Perlmutter.

          Hmmmm….

          1. How much does it cost to make up a double digit lead?

            Signifigantly outraised huh?  Only 53K.  Ask any fundraiser.  The last quarter of a campaign to stay on track, you double whatever you have raised to date.  When you are trying to sell a lawyer/lobbyist to a district that elects Democratic women to the legislature, you’re gonna need a much bigger war chest than Ed’s.  Especially with Peggy’s name recognition.  Ed, do the math.  You’re going to come up short.

                1. The traditional Democratic activist support groups are with Ed.

                  Organized Labor
                  CEA
                  Environmentalists
                  Gays and Lesbians

                  If as you say, donors and activists want to see a poll before showing their support, why are the activists and the donors with Ed?

                  It continues to be the question you cannot answer.

                  Elections are won with money and ground troops.

                  Ed has both.

                  Peggy can’t match with donations or ground troops.

  4. So, like, I was watching TV last night and I was so psyched to see the Wheat Ridge Farmers’ cheerleaders uniforms on some kind of ad for some dude named Perlmutter! I mean, it looked like he was running for some office or something. Like, anyway, I’m a good Christian and all, and I don’t think this Perlmutter guy or whoever should be using our Farmers’ uniforms for his campaign or whatever.  So I saw the ad again and I said “No Way!” and my friend Kim said, “Way”.  What can I do about this?

  5. Roger D already squared it up for all the grown-ups, but just to repeat – releasing a poll, no matter the numbers, is not always a strategically advantageous move.  EZMak’s entire argument is predicated on that single assumption.  He/She doesn’t seem to understand that if their underlying assumption isn’t true in all cases, then their arguement is flimsy at best, but I think others will likely get the gist. 

    So far as the fundraising – Ed has a 2-1 cash on hand advantage at the moment.  Everybody feel free to look up some campaign statistics before we start hearing about how “money doesn’t really matter all that much . . . ” from certain people.  If it doesn’t matter folks, why raise it?  The arguement runs along the same lines as those around here that feel endorsements don’t matter, party support doesn’t matter, actually living in the district doesn’t matter, etc.

    Right now the Perlmutter campaign is in full-scale media mode, advertising Ed’s record and message.  They’re not worried about the internet and more ‘phantom poll’ rumors.  Ultimately all that business will have very little bearing on the outcome of the election – it’s just more clawing from the Lamm campaign.  To their credit, they were successful at generating some momentum out of the ether with rumor mongering, and largely on the blogs ar that, but I don’t see it as being successful move twice.

    We’re getting close to the actual event here, and people aren’t interested in hearing the Lamm camp scream about ‘secret polls’ anymore, although I’d say some are finding the tenacious and desperate tone to be amusing.  The only poll that will turn any heads at the moment would be an independent survey amongst likely Democratic primary voters. 

    Regardless of whether or not we see that, Ed is picking up even more steam at the moment with strong media coverage and a clear message, plenty of money, the support of the Democratic Party as well as every labor endorsement in the contest, and a very strong personal base in the JeffCo area.  Frankly, that’s a lot more to stake your chances on than more ‘secret poll’ rumors, but as long as you all are happy with that, I’ll be happy for you.

    And the cheerleader thing, c’mon.  Ripping on cheerleading and traditional advertising is like, so easy.  For every person that holds such a rarified cultural position as to judge Ed’s kids for their choice of activities and interests, there are many more that don’t  bother or *ghasp* even identify.  Sounds like more sour grapes to me.  Should we start discussing Peggy pandering with her oh-so-human struggles with the french horn and her wonderfully populist appreciation of Alan Jackson?

    1. Your comments are right on.

      Also, those who have been pooh-poohing Perlmutter’s stem-cell ad will likely have a lot of egg on their face.

      The free media coverage so far has been positive and helpful.

      The vote in the US Senate will continue to focus attention on the issue and by extension attention on Ed’s support for the issue.

      When Bush vetoes, another coup for Ed with Dem voters.

      So while Lamm is trying to garner support by telling everyone that the reason to support her is a poll that says she has a double digit lead (and not really a ‘lead’ but name identification), Perlmutter is talking about an issue that resonates with Dem voters.

      He is taking the high road – actually running on an issue, and that will make the difference.

    2. I think the problem, Ruby, is that a public school’s logo (on the cheerleader uniforms) is appearing in a political ad.

      When professional football players appear in ads they’re always wearing uniforms slightly off from their team or else it looks like the team endorses the product.

      Same thing here…is a public high school really okay with looking like it’s endorsing a political candidate?

      1. I’d be curiosu to see if there were any rules regarding this, but I sort of doubt it.

        I think the commercial is pretty clear in it’s empashis that Ed is an involved dad, and I’d guess the cheerleading uniforms already in posession of his daughter and her friends were a better option than renting a full set.  He is proud to have sent all three of his kids to public schools in the same place he grew up, so who knows.

        Public high schools don’t have the capacity to endorse anybody, a fact of which I think most are aware, so it seems a bit far-fetched to me that Ed would be attempting to insinuate the idea.

    3. The argument that polling does not matter is not based in political fact.  Polling matters as much as money because it costs money to make up a deficit exposed by a poll.  The correlation between cost and building name ID are quite easy to track.  Perlmutter has a name ID deficit of about 40 points according to all the polls.  That name ID deficit will more than eat up his far less than 2 to 1, more like 1.4 to 1 once you subtract all the expenses Perlmutter incurred in June but pushed to July 1,  cash advantage.  Perlmutter does not have enough money to make up the name ID deficit, let alone build his positives and bring up Lamm’s negatives.  This is especially true when Perlmutter runs ads on issues that he built no record on as a state senator and in fact voted against as a state senator. The stem cell ad will be viewed in Colorado poli sci classes for some time as an example of political opportunism build with no foundation in fact.

      1. Your claim that Ed “fact voted against [stem cell research]as a state senator” has been debunked and shown to be false. If you are being intellectually honest in your barbs you will stop saying that, or present new evidence of this claim. If, however, you continue to repeat something that has been proven false then we can all just know that you are parroting talking points with no consideration for the facts.

      2. I’m afraid that I fail to see how you’re suggesting anything different than usual here – you believe that Lamm’s better name-rec polling is the only and full indicator of who carries the most electoral strength.  Many others believe that it’s a fairly shallow indicator of how many voters are prepared to head out to the polls for her.  Some would suggest it’s really just an indicator of how many randomly sampled folks in the district recognize the names Lamm and Perlmutter, because that, in fact, is exactly what it is. Myself and others have explained ad nauseum why we believe that the name-rec business isn’t very troubling for Perlmutter, some just choose to ignore it.

        I do know that Peggy had to withdraw from the caucus process, which she most certainly was competing in for many months, because she predicted that she couldn’t collect the fairly low margins of delegate support to secure a place on the ballot.  That is not a sign of strong support within the district, despite this supposedly fantastic polling strength.  I also know from just cursory glances at the FEC reports that Peggy collects vastly fewer cash donations from individuals from within the district, also a pretty troubling sign.  She’s shaken up her staff multiple times, and the primary message of her campaign thus far has been “Ed Perlmutter is corporate, vote for me instead.”  Making yourself an alternative to a negative, rather than the promotion of a candidate’s qualities and record, are the tactics of somebody trying to displace a frontrunner.

        In the end, it still comes down to the Lamm crowd insisting that the name-rec advantage is the only factor in this election.  As I keep saying, you’re more than welcome to believe that’s the case, but I personally think it’s pretty silly.

        And the stem cell stuff – that has been explained and disproven multiple times on the blogs and yet we’re still hearing this tremendously ill-concieved spin.  The legislation was unethical and broke all precident for medical research standards, and nearly all other Democrats shot it down along with Ed.  Musgrave’s name was attached to the bill, and some have latched onto this fact in the hope of associating Perlmutter with her, the the two hardly agree on the issue. 

        Frankly I’d love to see you stand in front of Ed Perlmutter and tell him he doesn’t or hasn’t supported stem cell research based on that vote.  The fact that I know you’ve had this spelled out for you clear as day several times, yet it keeps cropping up in the posts, makes it hard for me see much credibility in your posts.

        1. Ruby,

          What about the low name rec of Ed Perlmutter?  That is going to cost some money as EZMak states.  Also (again like EZ says), Ed’s high negatives along with Peggy’s high positives will cost much more money.  I just don’t think Ed has enough money to reverse these overwhelming #’s.

          Why:

          Missing from Perlmutter FEC report,  TV ad production, mail production, general election funds, June payroll….. the list is quite long and amounts to enough money to put Ed out of the running.

          1. Though I wouldn’t refer to it as a 100% indicator, even the good folks at CoPols seem to disagree with you.

            How much would you estimate Ed’s expenses will be in comparison to Peggy’s?  Are you saying she’s not planning on buying as much media time as possible because she feels secure in her electoral strength?  If the pro-Lamm position around here carries water, then Peggy will be holding back on advertising spending because she doesn’t need it?  I find that a little hard to swallow.  Another fact to consider – we’re only about three weeks out.  Ed’s team has likely already budgeted or spent what they plan to on mass media. 

            So far as “Ed’s high negatives along with Peggy’s high positives,” that’s most definately a matter of opinion.  Some would say Peggy has some pretty brutal negatives, and Ed has a massive list of positives.  Additionally, a lot of the supposed negatives tossed at Ed (he’s anti-public schools, he’s a big oil guy, he’s anti-stem cell) are pretty easily disproved with even a cursory glance at his record. 

            The commercials are already on the airwaves (and they’re good), the mail has been moving along for weeks, and I can promise you that Ed and his large group of volunteers are spending a hell of a lot of time out knocking on doors, and they will be until the day of the election.  To compare, just last week I saw flyers around the CU campus advertising for low-paying jobs for the Lamm campaign – she’s having to pay to get people out pounding the pavement and stuffing envelopes for her.  Just to remind, that’s not good.

            I suppose it is refreshing to see the line changed from “money doesn’t matter in elections” to “Ed doesn’t have enough,” (which interestingly, has never even been suggested before today in my recollection).  The bottom line is, the Lamm supporters believe Ed doesn’t have enough based on . . . wait for it – the name-rec polling, again.

            I’ll just repeat this once more because I suppose it’s not coming across clearly. As I understand it, the name-rec polling is done amongst a random sampling of people in the district, not likely Democratic primary voters.  Now, we all know Peggy has a famous last name, that of her ex-husband, Dick Lamm’s brother.  It’s not much of a suprise to anybody that a good number of people are responsive to the name Lamm in telephone polling.  Some people, myself included, are saying that this is really a very poor indicator of how the candidates sit with the relatively limited number of people (as opposed to the entire district’s population, from which the polling data was conducted) that are going to be voting in this primary.  Peggy and Merlino aren’t stupid, they’re very aware of this fact and I think it reflects in everything their campaign has done to date.

            So, I suppose that I basically discout the argument that Ed doesn’t have the money to ‘close the gap,’ because I don’t believe the gap is there in the first place.  Hope that’s clear.

    1. Unfortunately I also don’t want to just leave the Lamm folks alone to spread blatant falsehoods about Ed, so rebuttal is often necessary. The big poll is coming and those of us in the Perlmutter camp are spending a lot more time working on influencing that poll than blogging.

      1. about these polls, but let’s not call them falshoods, or phantoms.  Simply look at any candidates reports and you can find the payment and the day.  Maybe not on Herb’s but everybody else has them.

    2. As for the “the only poll that matter is on August 8th “ line, heard that many times from loosing campaigns.  Has anyone ever heard that from a winning campaign? Perlmutter will loose by 15% and barely beat Herb.

      1. I’m not even in CD-7 – I live “above all that” as it were, in the mountains of blue CD-2.  And what I have seen of this campaign has been disgusting from both sides, both officially and at the blogger/activist level.

        Pardon me for wanting it phoned in, but at this point I’d be happy to see Herb pull it out on primary day, just because he and his followers have been the least obnoxious.  Here we are watching two candidates with lackluster fundraising efforts tearing at each other with trumped-up and hyped-up issues while the bought-and-paid-for Republican is sitting on a warchest of $800k+.

        1. I hear you, Phoenix, but I found Herb’s, er, campaign staff bloggers to be irritating too. You know, they’re the ones posting “Hey, Herb really has the Iraq war position nailed. He’s gonna win!” in various forms. I find it annoying because I think it’s dishonest to post campaign stuff like you’re just Joe Blow voter, not some volunteer trying to influence the debate here. That’s just me, though.

  6. We could talk about something really important.

    For instance, I donno, how about Iran?

    The Neocon Propaganda arsenal is LOCKED and LOADED.

    Like the rhetoric escalating on widening the war in the middle-east.  And the escalating propaganda from the Uber Emperor that Iran is supplying Hezbolah with advanced weaponry.

    DГ©jГ  Vu- Part II

    Kinda reminds me of looking in Iraq for those WMD.
    But, the rightwing newsies tried to float that the missile used in the attack on the INS Spear was “Iranian-made.”

    But wait!  NOT! The missile was “Chinese-made,” as reported on CNN.

    In my interviews, I was repeatedly told that the next strategic target was Iran. “Everyone is saying, ‘You can’t be serious about targeting Iran. Look at Iraq,’ ” the former intelligence official told me. “But they say, ‘We’ve got some lessons learned—not militarily, but how we did it politically. We’re not going to rely on agency pissants.’ No loose ends, and that’s why the C.I.A. is out of there.”

    – Seymour Hersh

    Do you remeber the Article in the New Yorker magazine by prize-winning investigative reporter Seymour Hersh, which maintained that Washington has been infiltrating Special Operations Forces (SOFs) into Iran from Iraq and Pakistan precisely to seek out Tehran’s secret nuclear facilities and other weapons targets in preparation for possible combined air and ground strikes?

    I do.   Read it again HERE 

    1. I thought this website was called ColoradoPols – as in Colorado Politics.

      Though I’m sure that some share your interest in conspiracy theories and such, there are a lot better blogs for delving into anti-Republican policy paranoia topics.

      1. in the military.  Maybe a few of us Coloradans care about being dragged into WWIII.
        Maybe a few of us will be voting for Congressional Representatives here in Colorado, who we will send to Washington to represent us on shaping American Foreign Policy.
        Sorry you cannot connect the dots.

        1. Since our current administration has no foreign affairs policy, and the rubber stamp Congress sticks it’s head in the sand when any confrontation occurs. 

          1. I’m still not exactly sure who is Ed Perlmutter.  But at least his latest mail peice got it right for once, “only one democrat has what it takes to beat the republicans”, too bad it isn’t him. 

        2. But, disqualifying discussion of state political races because you’re more concerned about Iran is a bit off the curb for a blog like this. 

          I personally think that WWIII is a pretty alarmist prediction, and I suppose that type of rhetoric gets under my skin a bit.  If you’re interested in the candidate’s foreign policy stances, I’d say give them a call or at least visit the websites.

            1. It does matter.  We should demand our politicians take strong stances against this administration that fails to act at such critical times.  It’s despicable that they would sit idly by while the conflict in the middle east erupted.  An ounce of diplomacy on our part could have prevented all out war from occuring.  Way to go George and Condi!  Maybe George should stop chewing on rolls and get to work…

            2. And I disagree with his positions, as well as the Bush administration’s.

              But, since the onset of the current Iraq war, I feel that many Americans shape their foreign policy purely in terms of opposition to whatever Bush does.  Statecraft and direction of the world’s most powerful hegemonic nation is a cumbersome and problematic process no matter who is calling the shots, and there will always be international tensions and grievous policy errors made by a fallable human system.  Getting rid of the neocon agenda is a step in the right direction, but railing against the GOP and suggesting what we all already know to be true (peace is the most preferrable state of affairs), is not a foreign policy.  There are plenty of smart, informed, and genuinely good people in government, and plenty of them are Republicans.

    1. I got an e-mail about this group earlier, looks like they blasted a number of activists. I wonder who is behind liberalextremist.com. Certainly not Trailhead, they would screw it up and be ineffective.

      Being tied in with Howard Dean, John Kerry, and Che Guevara admiring illegals certainly isn’t going to help Angie much in the 4th.

  7. just found this on the web…

    looks like Angie is taking money from supporters of Hamas:

    “A 10-minute reserach session on opensecrets.org reveals that one Jesse Aweida and others associated with his American Task Force on Palestine are pumping money into the campaigns of several Democrats hoping to take up or maintain residence in Washington this Fall.

    Thus far in the run-up to the 2006 election, Aweida has contributed $5,500 to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and individual Democratic candidates, including McKinney (GA), Mark Udall (CO), Bill Winter (CO) and Angela Paccione (CO).

    Aweida and the ATFP, while operating under the guise of respectable Arab-Americans simply concerned for the well-being of all involved in the Middle East conflict, are in fact apologists for Palestinian Arab terrorism, and have lobbied on behalf of the killers of Israeli men, women and children in the past.

    Most open in his pro-terrorist views has been Aweida’s partner, ATFP co-founder and President Ziad Asali.”

    http://www.zionist.com/2006/07/17/us-terror-lobby-trying-to-buy-democrats#more-116

    Why is Angie’s special interest Islamic Terrorists?  That can’t be good for Colorado or America.

    1. I can assure you that Jesse Aweida is not supporting Hamas.  These accusations are absurd.  I’m sure his contributions completely balance out the contributions from the Jewish community.

    2. Just stumbled across it, did ya? Hmmm…where you been all day? I’ve been waiting and waiting for MM’s people to spin her fundraising and oh, lookie here, a diversion. What a surprise.

      But just to take a stab at the truth, from the ATFP website:

      “The American Task Force on Palestine (ATFP) is a non-partisan organization dedicated to bringing about lasting peace and stability in the Middle East by establishing the state of Palestine alongside Israel.”

      Note to Captain America–Hamas does not advocate “alongside Israel” because they do not recognize Israel’s right to exist as a state.

      But hey, nice try. And I LOVE the videos…the ominous music, (kind of like Scary Movie soundtrack), the frightening closeup of the Cesaer Chavez banner (oh my God, the Communists are coming, the Communists are coming).

      Get back to me when you want to discuss why a two-term incumbent raised 60 grand less than her challenger. Get back to me when you want to discuss MM’s votes against disabled vets, education, prescription drugs for grandma, millions of dollars of incentives to big oil and gas while the rest of us are paying $3.00+ at the pump, votes that have created the largest deficit this country has ever seen, you know…issues not bullshit.

      Guess I’ll just have to wait until the Paccione/Musgrave debate to get some answers. Oh, whoops, that’s right. Musgrave won’t agree to one. Hmmm…

    3. Who let the Daniel Pipes crowd in?

      Here’s a ringing endorsement of Hamas from the ATFP president, Asali:

      What is happening is an attempt to subordinate the Palestinian cause and national movement to a broader Islamist regional program and the states exploiting this.

      And is this the same Aweida  that gave $500 to Pete Coors and $250 to Bob Schaffer?

      Is it that he has the wrong last name?

      1. http://www.americantaskforce.org/ATFP_brochure.pdf

        This group is advocating for a peaceful co-existence with Israel. “Full acceptance of Israel by all Arab states…” and “Two sovereign states Israel and Palestine living side by side in peace and security…”

        Captain, you need to brush up on your knowledge of the Middle East and the extremist groups you are linking innocent people to before you end up on the wrong end of a libel suit.

  8. No offense, but Zionist.com is not some crazy group that is advocating for Marilyn Musgrave. 
    I dont remember even seeing MM’s name in the story, though I suppose I could have missed it.  Why is it that you think that they are connected to Musgrave?
    On the contrary it seems that they are just offended by anyone who would take money from this Palestinian group.

    1. Call it a wild guess. Who would have an interest in printing this rubbish other than a Musgrave supporter? This group isn’t some right-wing extremist group and they are not associated with Hamas.

      And BTW, how’d you manage to get the link open? Doesn’t seem to work for me.

  9. Ed Perlmutter feels that Peggy Lamm will drop in popularity when people find out that she is not Dottie Lamm. Similarly Jennifer Mello saw a big drop in her popularity when voters realized that it is not Nugget
    “Melo” Anthony seeking the office

    1. and Chris Romer will lost popularity when people discover he isn’t his father? (although, on a side note, it is interesting to see the color, design and logo, if I’m not mistaken, on Romer’s signs are just like his fathers when he ran – can you say sliding into office on name recognition?)

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

69 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!