President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump



CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta



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

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson



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

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd



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

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese



CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen



CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore



CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk



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

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans



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
October 14, 2006 09:53 PM UTC

Action 22 in Colorado Springs

  • by: El Paso Rockefeller Republican

I just got back from the Action 22 forum in Colorado Springs. I am sorry because it turns out Channel 11 ( is running streaming video of all the presenations and debates (don’t know if they will compile to the site).

The amusement of the morning had to be the HD 21 situation. Turns out the Dem, Anna Lord, had responded after the Sept 30 RSVP date but on time enough that they had printed her name tag. (I understand they called her and she responded she would be there about 10 days ago). Bob Gardner, the Republican, had responded before the Sept 30 date. Anyway, the format was a 4 minute presentation if no opponent shows – a short debate with questions is both candidates there.

The moderator invited Lord up to do her 4 minute and she stated that, since she and her opponent were both there, she would be happy to have a debate.

With much huddling, the moderator informs that the debate was declined. Lord gets up and says she is sorry her opponent is unwilling to debate and does a speech. Gardner got up and stated that since he was courteous enough to respond on time and his opponent wasn’t, he saw no reason to debate. Gardener does his speech.

One person over hearing claims Gardner and his campaign manager, Sarah Jack, attempted to argue that since Lord had missed Sept 30 she should not be allowed to speak at all.  A tempest in a teapot but the only real fun of the morning.

Left after the SD presentations so I can only report that they were the pretyy standard. SD 2 and SD 5 had debates but there was little fire there.

They will have SoS, Treasurer and, I believe, CO-05 deabtes too. Possibly even Ritter/Beauprez. Check it out.


17 thoughts on “Action 22 in Colorado Springs

  1. I was at the debate for Ritter today, but didn’t understand the deal between Lord and Gardner.  Did Action 22 not inform Anna about the debate?  Did she actually respond by the deadline of Sept 30th or was she late?  I had an agenda and she was not listed on it.  So, I am puzzled.  If she didn’t respond on time, then she is probably lucky that they let her speak.  In past years they have told people they could not speak if they were late in responding.  Action 22 runs a pretty by the rules kind of debate without any shenanigans.  That’s why serious candidates want to do it.

    Where was John Morse?  I was puzzled about that as well.  Jones showed up–seemed like a perfect time for Morse to have at him.

    Ritter did great though!  What a great speaker; and Fawcett demolished Lamborn again.

    1. i can tell you right now that in a debate contest ritter would not have been scored as a “great”. he maintains the exact same intensity and urgency with every word, which becomes wearing on the listener. while many may disagree with BB, he is a seasoned politician and it shows in his speaking style. BB’s ability to speak in a laid-back manner about “common sense” related much better to the audience, and he spoke forcefully at times.

      ritter keep mentioning massachusetts and california and other liberal states, and at one point even joked about how one shouldnt mention california when campaigning in colorado. i guarantee red flags popped up in the conservative minds present, and ritter could have made his point without mentioning such states by name. but dont worry i wont fault ritter, the blame rests with his coaching staff.

        1. Doesn’t California have something like the 6th biggest economy in the world? Would that be a bad thing? And I am sure that Doug Bruce would approve because the people have to vote on just about everything. And Massachusetts, one of the foremost intellectual proving grounds in the world. Yes, that would be terrible if we were like those states. God forbid we were influential on a national scale.

          1. You can’t be serious?
            California is also in debt up to its eyeballs. It is a sinking ship. People have been leaving there in droves. Inflated housing prices, overcrowding, etc.
            The only thing that I have heard good about it is the weather.
            But what I dislike most about California is that it is a mecca of liberal ideals. Nannyism to the extreme.
            Colorado used to be the great rustic frontier.
            Now we are a land filled with politically correct yuppies. Many from California.
            I want to barf every time I see people riding bicycles with their little funny pointed helmets and spandex cutsey pie outfits. $100.00 says this came from California too.

            Massachusetts is the home of the girlfriend killer Kennedy. Therefore since they love him so much to keep him eternally in power, I have no use for that state either.

            Other than that, how’s it going dude?

            1. regardless, my main point stands: repeatedly mentioning those states while trying to run as a moderate democrat is not beneficial. instead, just say you “a plan that has been succesful in other states”, then state the plan.

              and if you want to look at the failures of california, look no further than their funding of need-based aid for college students. but i dont think anyone here (myself included) wants to get into the mistakes california has made, because colorado can keep us plenty busy.

    2. they had spoken to Action 22 and Action 22 admited it was their mistake that Anna was not on the agenda. Her nametag was on hand and printed at the stand. She had been in contact with Action 22 in time to be on the agenda. THE CAMPAIGN’S  statement is that the moderator offered Anna the opportunity to push the issue but she did not feel it was worth making a major case out of it – she offered to debate, if Bob didn’t want to, he could back out and he did. That is what was related to me by the campaign.

      1. El Paso Rockefeller,

        I am very concerned.  I know from your ealier postings that you are Anna’s husband.  But, you said you “called the campaign” to find out what happened at Action 22.  I hope you and Anna haven’t separated.  That would be really sad–not to mention a disastrous thing to happen in the middle of a campaign.  I can’t think that you would have let the Action 22 deadline get by if you were helping Anna.  So, I am very concerned–she needs your help.

        We Honest, Rockefleer R’s need to stick together for Anna’s race.  So, if there is trouble, let us know how we can help.  I know that campaigns can take a toll, particularly when you have a vicious opponent like Anna’s. I’m beginning to think he engineered the Action 22 thing somehow to try and discredit Anna and embarrass her–didn’t work though.

          1. You and Honest R both need to get a grip.  Your reporting on your wife’s campaign has been anything but dispassionate–one would not suggest that it could be or even ought to be.  But, to suggest otherwise is either self deluded or dishonest.  Neither you nor Honest R are being honest with any of us.  Both of you are RINOs, among other things–both of you need to change your party.

  2. the intensity picked up later on, with the fawcett-lamborn and beauprez-ritter debates. they became a tad bit lengthy but the candidates kept up the intensity throughout. lamborn stumbled some but fawcett also made mistakes (IMO, opening with the line “it is a good day for newspapers” and then saying how everyone thinks he has a chance wasted time and basically served as nothing more than an ego-boost for himself rather than discussing the issues).

    oh, and i liked the schwartz-entz debate:
    Schwartz:”you voted for this”
    Entz:”no i didn’t, heres the proof”
    Schwartz:”but yes you did, heres the proof”

    so entz voted for or against something, but there is proof for either argument…gotta love politics! i missed seeing curtis imrie…was he there and was it funny? kudos to action 22 for compiling such a complete forum of candidates.

  3. Curtis Imrie was there but his opponent (the incumbent) was not.  Hard to imagine where in HD60 the opponent could have been better spending his time. . .

    Imrie played about 20 to 30 seconds of a tape of his opponent speaking, since his opponent did not attend.  The downside: The audience really couldn’t understand what his opponent was saying on the tape, other than mentioning Rush Limbaugh.

    The CD5 and Governor debates were very good.  Fawcett is head and shoulders above Lamborn — in every way.  And Bill Ritter once again dominated his opponent with a depth of knowledge of state issues that BB does not have.  It was knowledge/plans/strategy vs. Republican sound bytes.

  4. i found it interesting when fawcett said “ive been out to ted hastert’s church” (assume he meant haggard). that, or there is a new church pastored by a hybrid of ted haggard and dennis hastert.

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

36 readers online now


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