U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Joe Neguse

(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) A. Gonzalez

(D) George Stern

(R) Sheri Davis

50%↑

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) Manny Rutinel

(D) Yadira Caraveo

50%

40%↑

30%

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
October 04, 2006 09:00 PM UTC

Perlmutter Up By 11 In Zogby Phone Poll

  • 15 Comments
  • by: ohwilleke

( – promoted by Colorado Pols)

Zogby Interactive, the pollster’s internet polling service, is flawed.  Zogby’s telephone polling is as good as anyone’s. 

The latest Zogby telephone poll in Colorado closely watched open 7th Congressional District race shows Democrat Ed Perlmutter leading Rick O’Donnell by 11 percentage points:

O’Donnell (R) 34
Perlmutter (D) 45

More analysis and details are available at Colorado Confidential.

Comments

15 thoughts on “Perlmutter Up By 11 In Zogby Phone Poll

  1. The double digit lead I mean.  O’Donnell wants to give the Mark Foley to the young and the old.  If he’s not killing Social Security, he’s kicking kids out of high school to go tackle border jumpers.  What a dufus.  It’s time to get a new boyfriend Carrie.

    And if those eighteen year olds at Golden, Green Mountain, Standely Lake, Arvada register to vote and get polled, the gap would be even bigger. 

    1. You spin the issues like he does.  “Kicking kids out of high school”.  Please.  The paper he wrote was an interesting alternative to a pretty weak Senior year of high school.  It’s not perfect, but he never said we should kick them out.  Read the plan, and form a real opinion.  As for Social Security, I can name about a dozen issues I’ve had complete changes of heart over in the last 10 years, and I bet you could too.  You want to define someone by an old op-ed?  Then lets all call Arianna Huffington what she really is: A conservative masquerading as a progressive.  But of course she’s not.  People’s opinions shift.  It happens.  And 11 points is better than the survey USA poll from last week which had him down 11.  And that’s after a bunch of negative ads againt O’Donnell.  So maybe he’s not done yet. 

        1. The one that had BB and Ritter tied, which I think is absurd.  Beauprez is losing, and a poll showing a tie is really, really flawed.  But it was a new kind of technique that Zogby was using.  Obviously, it’s got some problems.  This was a more traditional poll.  I think It’s about right.  I’d bet Ed is up about 11 points.  The 7th is really too evenly divided for anything other than that.

          1. The Ritter/Beauprez Zogby combined a small direct sample with online surveys.  This one is way more legit. 

            Also, there’s no spin on those issues – at one point O’Donnell did advocate the whacky border patrol plan (I believe that he still stands by it), and he most certainly once advocated the abolishment of social security.  He may have had a change of heart, but for people concerned about privatization and such, the fact that he once actively endorsed that kind of action is a major concern.

            1. It’s an interesting idea and the border aspect was an option, not a mandatory “give ’em a gun and put ’em on the border” spin that Ed has tried to use.  The plan isn’t perfect, but I do think O’Donnell has some legitimate points about the merits of national service.  I think it’s an idea that should be debated, not ridiculed.

              As for Social Security, well, I think he’s been pretty honest about what he felt in the past, and what he thinks now.  If he wrote it just 2-5 years ago I would be concerned.  But 11 years is a lifetime, especially if you were writing for a think tank then but have just spent 8 years in the public sector.  Arianna Huffington was once one of the top conservative columnists in the country.  Now she’s a progressive.  I’ve read enough of her to feel she’s sincere.  I get the same impression with O’Donnell.  I feel he’s sincere. 

              1. Bush spake almost the same words about Social Security that ROD did, at about the same time.  Do you really think that, if given the chance, Bush wouldn’t completely dismantle the system, despite his “reformed outlook”?

                Similarly, the service idea might not have been so whacky if it had included women, and if it hadn’t proposed taking kids out of high school where they were “wasting time and money”.

                Rick is a far-right loon.

                1. If O’Donnell had written a series of articles over serveral years calling for the abolishment of Social Security and/or it’s privitization I wouldn’t think he had.  But he wrote one 11 years ago.  Have you changed your mind on any major issues that you felt stongly about that long ago?  I have. 

                  As for the service plan.  The full column addresses problems that young men of 17-18 face that don;t effect young women in the same way.  And I think he makes strong points about how little is actually gained academcially in the final year/semester of high school.  But the idea can easily be applied to both genders, and has merit.  Calling O’Donnell a “Far-right loon” doesn’t help the situation, convince me that you’re thinking rationally about thius issue or add anything to the debate. 

              2. You have a point, and in actuality I wonder if he ever really bought 100% of his own smoke on social security.  As I’ve mentioned before, young conservatives can really make a mark and move through networks of patronage by writing far right material substantiating the opinions that the conservative base is focused around.  Rick was probably smart enough to know that a polar position on social security would get him noticed or approved of by the right kind of people to get his career moving.

                The border service is actually more screwy in my opinion.  Manditory youth conscription for public service isn’t a terrible thing to support, in fact some of those loony left socialist European nations have that sort of plan in effect, I believe.  The problem is, he cuts it along gender lines (make boys into men!), which shows some pretty backwards ideas about social equality and gender roles in the modern world, and he somehow is so out of touch with education that he doesn’t think that the second half of senior high school is necessary.  That’s crazy – admissions are more competative than ever, and one it’s every student’s right to get their full 12 years of public education. Plus, the only thing we could put our nation’s young men to work at is the freakin’ border?  Talk about pandering to the immigration crowd. 

                The border service plan thing basically just sheds insight into the mind of a far-right leaning guy who isn’t really in step with the reality of the world or braoder public opinion.  This country has major issues – yanking male high school seniors out of class to go shuffle around by the Rio Grande and eliminating the social safety net aren’t solutions to any of them.

      1. I think everyone on this site has read the plan.  We all gaped at it for some time.  The plan is for a mandatory period of service for high school boys in place of the second semester of the senior year of high school.  It’s mandatory service; all students (if they happen to be of the wrong gender, anyway) are expected to participate.  Rick was very clear on that; in fact, he stressed it, insisting that no one could buy their way out.  If he had other exceptions in mind, then the wording was certainly misleading.

        Now can you please tell us how this isn’t kicking kids out of high school?  Perhaps you prefer to characterize it as asking nicely, and then strictly enforcing the polite request?

        People on this site are more informed than you seem to think.  You can’t lie to us and expect no one to follow up.

        1. Why O’Donnell supporters get caught in the campaign spin on this.

          During the debate the other night Rick tried to play it off as a harmless public service plan, comparing it to the peace corps and such. 

          Fortunately, Ed had a copy of the thing in his hand, and Rick struggled furiously to try and keep him from reading it.  He knows it sounds bad; he knows why it sounds bad as well.  He also knows most people are going to think it’s weird.

          With stuff like that floating around, Rick isn’t really a viable candidate at the federal level.  Maybe in days of yore he could have kept a lid on  it or just distort things through the papers, but interested people can get the straight story too quickly these days.  If you go wingnut to help forge a career and reputation, expect to pay when you’re trying to appeal to median voters years down the line.

          I feel sorry for him in that he probably regrets the hell out of writing that paper now that he wants a career in an elected office – but not that sorry. 

          1. Unfortunately, Ed wasn’t being entirely honest on the plan, either.  It’s disturbing enough that Rick O’Donnell suggests that high schoolers should go patrol the border.  In all fairness, though, his proposal doesn’t require *that*.

            1. I can’t remember what he lists as his main priorities for the plan – but I seem to remember that it really emphasized border security.  I’m pretty sure it was supposed to be manditory service, but I could be remembering wrong.

              I did notice that Ed was more aggressive than usual, but I like to see that.  He seemed to control the tone of the debate and projected a lot of decisivness on the issues.  Even the moderators seemed to give him an edge in his response times and were reluctant to cut him off – something that O’Donnell was practically in  a hissy fit over by the end.

              I do agree that O’Donnell would have been better than Beauprez.  He at least seems interested in ethics reforms and making some moves towards more bi-partisan efforts in Congress (although there’s a reason the guy’s nickname is ‘Rubberstamp Rick’ – his career so far hasn’t shown him to be much of an independent force so much as a party loyalist).  I don’t know if it’s just lip service or not, but I do know that Beauprez is about the most status-quo GOP solider around. 

          2.   It’s too bad Rick didn’t win the nomination four years ago.  Regardless of whether he or Feeley won, the people in the 7th C.D. would have ended up with a better U.S. Rep than what they eventually got……

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Gabe Evans
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

344 readers online now

Newsletter

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