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%
December 04, 2011 07:05 PM UTC
24 Comments
Look, unfortunately it is not about who got in the race first, but who can win.
Dems faced this with Mike Miles. Great guy, in it for a year, couldn’t get the big dollars. Ultimately, Ken Salazar had the money team and the votes.
I’m not convinced that it matters who wins the seat. The Democrats haven’t exactly protected my business, my family or the American way of life. So, I’m not real motivated to give or raise a dime unless my number one need is a major part of their campaign.
Congress & the President will continue to make sure that there is absolute protection for…
Wall St, the 1%, and the multi-national corporations. Don’t you worry, regardless of who is elected, that will come first.
Now on the issues that are not of primary importance to those that own the ones we elect, then the difference between the Democratic and Republican candidates do matter – a lot.
He’s no Mike Miles, and is a harder worker and smarter campaigner than Andrew Romanoff.
It is highly doubtful that Andrew would do anything but replicate the campaign model he ran with in 2010: incoherent message, staff chaos, increasingly lame cult of personality, confused and paralyzed decision-making, and irritating and angry surrogates going around talking trash.
Been there. Done that. Failed that time too.
Dan, were you not a party officer with the HD-9 Democrats (Miklosi’s current seat in Denver)? It might be prudent to point out where your leanings spawn from.
But I am more concerned about winning the seat and Joe has done the necessary prep work for a successful campaign.
In terms of disclosure, I actually supported Miklosi’s primary opponent when he took HD9.
Got the staff. Got the endorsements. Got the website. Got the policy down. Got the connections.
Now all he needs is cash. See the huge “Contribute” button? http://www.joemiklosi.com/inde…
If Andrew had entered this race at a point where he could have had a real potential to take the seat, I would ahve been behind him 100% as I always have been.
But, that time has come and gone. ANY primary on the Dem side will dimish our potential for success here.
There are times and places for primaries, but in a district where the GOP has a numerical advantage, albeit small, AND the incumbency, a primary would be disasterous.
If Romanoff raises twice as much as Miklosi’s haul in three weeks that it took 6 months for Joe to raise, then he’d be foolish to stick around.
If Romanoff had his way, he’d probably stay out of it. He’s not mulling a run because of his ego, he’s doing it because there are plenty of Dems, both at a state and national level, who don’t think Miklosi can beat Coffman.
Giving up the Rotary circuit for the ol’ familiar campaign glare would be an act of altruism.
to let Andrew know how he feels. Not everyone knows what titles Dan holds within the party, so I thought it might be sorta kinda maybe somewhat disingenuous for him not to, ya know, mention the fact that he’s the Chair of the HD that Joe Miklosi currently represents.
considering he wrote a GBCW diary back in October where he bid us all in the blogging world a fond adieu.
I guess that didn’t quite take.
Same thing with Danny the red hair and laughing boy. Why go after him for it?
what’s the difference?
You obviously don’t know me very well.
I would be the first to tell you I generally don’t pull the line for anyone else. The current leadership of the Denver Dems would be the second.
Staying out of political discussions is very difficult for me. As much as I am trying to, I cannot keep quiet when the national party figures try to interceed with local elections. It has been my experience the national folks are generally clueless about anything that happens between the Potomac and the San Andreas Fault. So when they try to insinuate themselves in Colorado’s process, i find nearly impossible not to speak up.
My role as HD9 has no bearing. I was not there when Joe was first elected (in fact, I supported Paul Rosenthal in that primary) and my role in as Chair actually removes me from voting in the upcoming assembly to nominate candidates to be Joe’s replacement.
I have distanced myself greatly from the party (to focus on other parts of my life) so the only positions I have left are ones I was elected to some time ago and have an obligation to complete the terms I was elected to. My term as PCP terminates in March and as Chair in Feb. 2013. All over positions I held have since expired.
Now that I have stated my position, I’ll (try to) go back to quitely lurking.
Andrew Romanoff was originally elected from HD-9 before the last reapportionment. Who gives a shit?
It’s all the same, small pool activists and party officials that both of these guys spring from and count on for core support. A particular party title doesn’t connote anything or detract from the fact that if former hard core Romanoff supporters like Dan Willis are not buying AR2.0–then it’s not a stretch to think a CD-6 primary challenge is going to fracture the former hardcore supporters.
Was Dan the chair of HD-9 when Romanoff was first elected? No? Who’s throwing out red herrings?
When someone like the current chair of the house district of the person running for a seat is posting something discouraging someone else from getting in that race, it’s usually frowned upon to not disclose such a connection. Dan’s position makes him different from a regular “hard core Romanoff supporter”. In fact, I can’t seem to find very many hard core Romanoff supporters who weren’t already in bed with Miklosi’s campaign making these kind of overarching statements about Andrew getting in the race.
At any rate, it’s not about there being some sort of fungible pool of activists, it’s not about the race in particular, it’s about disclosing meaningful connections when writing blog posts. At least Nancy Cronk is up front about her shilling. Can’t say the same for Dan.
Re: Shilling.
As far as I know, Romanoff has not said he wants to run for any of these offices you people are bandying about. So everyone needs to stop criticizing him for whatever “bad timing” y’all imagine he’s displaying for not announcing any intention to run for any of these offices he’s not running for.
and Shelia Canfield Jones still needs a job.
I’m sorry I posted that above. I shouldn’t have named her personally. I was wrong to do it.
Is the possibility of having to choose between Miklosi and Romanoff.
Is there anyone else that could jump in instead? Sheesh.