CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese



President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump



CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*


CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*


CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks




CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg




CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank



CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*


CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen



CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi




State Senate Majority See Full Big Line





State House Majority See Full Big Line





Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
June 05, 2011 10:09 PM UTC

Thoughts on the Hancock "June surprise"

  • by: JeffcoBlue

I’ve been reading the comments in response to the Hancock Denver Players story, as first reported by Complete Colorado and Westword, then on this blog Friday. The authors of Colorado Pols are big boys/girls, and can take care of themselves. I’ll be watching for their response. I would just like to point out that over at Westword, where this story was posted before Colorado Pols:…

I don’t see any of you attacking Westword, there or here. Why all this condemnation for the Guvs, but none for the for profit media outlet who PUBLISHED THE STORY FIRST?

When I see everyone rushing to attack a blog while staying silent about the mainstream media outlet they quoted for the story, my first thought is that Hancock supporters are working the refs they think they can work over. And I’m sorry, that changes my view of your collective indignation.

As for the story itself, I don’t know that I would have quoted Complete Colorado, but Westword is another matter. I don’t have a dog in the Denver Mayor’s race, but smear campaigns still become newsworthy and that’s never going to change. If the Guvs had reported it as confirmed fact, that would be a problem, but they didn’t. They posted what Westword had written about Complete Colorado’s story, and called it a “big if.” I’ve seen it said that this story was shopped to everybody with no takers and that’s why it’s so late. I’d like to know if this is true?

Reagrdless, I personally think this story was not misrepresented by Pols or Westword, and they’re both entitled to their posts. If you don’t like the subject matter, or disagree, you should say that. But if your criticism is 100% for the Guvs and 0% for the media outlet who published the story first, something’s not right about that. Indeed, something is troll like and suspicious about that.


25 thoughts on “Thoughts on the Hancock “June surprise”

    1. They’re looking at the story analytically instead of filling the thread with inane how-dare-yous. That’s what I usually expect from commenters at Pols, but not this time I guess.

  1. I am one of the people highly critical of Pols.

    I feel the exact same about Westword.  For some reason, perhaps naivete on my part, I actually thought of ColoradoPols as more of reputable source for this kind of stuff than Westword.

    For the record, I am not a troll or shill for Hancock.  I don’t live in Denver.  I haven’t contributed to Hancock, I’ve never spoken to him, and I certainly don’t work or volunteer for or with him or anyone associated with his campaign, or Romer’s or any other mayoral candidate for that matter.

    1. Curious that you find a printed paper who actually claims the mantle of journalism more “reputable” than a blog that doesn’t. I could argue both sides in this debate, but Westword has certainly been around longer.

      And sorry, but saying “Westword too” after being called out doesn’t excuse the total failure to criticize them while lambasting Colorado Pols. Yours or others. It just doesn’t make sense.

      Unless it’s part of an agenda…

      1. As I posted below, (where this was posted) receives many times the traffic of Colorado Pols.

        But please, please continue beating up the blog. Smaller things are so much easier to beat up than bigger things, after all!

        1. or assuming people are guilty without reliable evidence and a jury trial. I also believe spreading unfounded rumours that could damage someone’s life and/or family is a pretty unethical thing to do. I’m terrible, I know.

          I just fought hard for an anti-prostitution/human trafficking bill. Show me real evidence and I will stop defending the accused.

  2. There aren’t a whole lot of places out here who carry Westword. When I go to Chipotle, I pick one up. Other than that, it’s only mainstream newspapers.

    Jeffco, what is this “Guvs”. Is that an acronym of an abbreviation? It is not obvious to me what it means (perhaps there are others, too). Thanks for clarifying.

  3. But I expect this kind of bullshit from them. Less so from COPols, though that has grown to be a much lower threshold during this race. Nice concern trolling!

  4. Because regular posters on this site found it extremely distasteful that this site would post “evidence” that originated on a bullshit blog like Complete Colorado and only commented about it here, and did not create accounts on Westword–a website where most of us probably very rarely go, let alone post comments–that means we’re all trolls?

    Is it Wednesday yet?

    1. Westword uses Disqus. Your already have one. You Facebook, Google, and Twitter accounts all qualify.

      Remember when the Romanoff shills did exactly what you are doing? Don’t talk shit about them again, ok?

      Westword: Alexa US traffic rank: 3,938

      CO Pols: Alexa US traffic rank: 169,178

      I respect you, RSB, but your pissy and logically faulty response is unconvincing. You are beating up a blog while ignoring the media outlet with many times the traffic that originally posted what you object to.

      Which is bullshit, and if I’m not mistaken YOU have called out Romies for this exact fallacy. Guess it’s different when it’s your candidate under fire, huh?

        1. To answer your question, no, not really. Westword has more of Evan Dreyer but Pols quotes it. Pols asks a couple of questions about the timing, and what the foreseeable consequences might be if it were true, but

          If this story is true — and that’s a big “if”

          Is hardly a statement that asserts fact. I see nothing here that should upset you this badly, except that you support Hancock and you don’t like this story.

          Given what I’ve said about the original source and higher profile of that source, why shouldn’t I conclude that you’re simply attacking Pols because you don’t like this story about your preferred candidate and view this blog as a softer target than Westword?

          Ralphie said it in the other thread: you guys are shooting the messenger, and it’s crap. It is no different from the Romanoff shills who attacked this blog on a daily basis. And no sarcasm, I really thought that you would know better RSB.

    2. You would be screaming that it deserved front page coverage. All anyone is saying here is that there is enough to bring it up, but no where near enough to make an accusation.

      And I don’t know near enough to have a favorite in this race.

  5. Well said. Needed saying.

    But I also agree with redstateblues, please let Wednesday come quickly. Too many friends being unmade over a municipal election, even in the biggest city in the state. I truly hope that Romer vs. Hancock does not create as much unnecessary bad blood as Bennet vs. Romanoff.

    Because IMHO, neither of these ass-clowns are worth it.

    1. If anyone needed proof that we live in the “Age of Mediocrity,” this Denver mayoral election should serve as conclusive proof.  😉

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments

Posts about

Donald Trump

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo

Posts about

Colorado House

Posts about

Colorado Senate

41 readers online now


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