President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Kamala Harris
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) V. Archuleta
98%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Marshall Dawson
95%
5%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
50%
50%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(D) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank
(D) River Gassen
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) John Fabbricatore
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen
(R) Sergei Matveyuk
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
70%↑
30%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
June 16, 2007 04:05 PM UTC
37 Comments
If that charge has any legs at all it’s going to hard for Udall to look mainstream.
Chris Cillizza is a fairly right wing Republican (he’s always swooning over Mitt Romney). If he is rating this race as THE seat most like to switch party afiliation in Colorado, a decidedly Red State, then he has little confidence in Schaffer closing the deal with moderate Republican and unaffiliated voters.
The other indication that Bob is in trouble was the flurry of activity earlier this week in the short-lived Draft Penry movement.
Ramey Johnson, are you behind all of this?
is a show of Shaffer’s strength that the draft Penry movement only lasted a week. If Shaffer was really weak why didn’t Penry jump?
until the “vocal group of moderate Republicans” come forward, I think we have to assume the “draft penry movement” was a strategy penry and a his consultants dreamed up to rebrand him as a moderate.
Because they are all smart enough to know that this seat is going Democratic. And none had any interest in a brusing primary to then be the one Udall gets to beat up and trounce.
Same reason Gingrich is taying out of the Rep race for President. He knows Hillary will win so why go through that.
National experts expect it to be the #1 tossup in the country. Josh isn’t getting in because he understands it’s Schaffers time, McInnis is not getting in because in light of polling #’s it was shown Bob would be the better candidate and Allard felt he had served his time and is moving on to the next phase of his life. None of the 3 decided not to run because of fear of Udall.
…Udall wouldn’t be one of ’em. Milquetoast Mark is one of the weakest possible Democratic candidates. If you really want to win John Salazar will get you there.
This is simply a case of the Democrats overreaching–they’ve interpreted recent electoral success with real ideological change. That’s a losing assumption and their choice of Udall shows it.
If it weren’t for the tragic lameness of the GOP in Washington Schaffer would be unquestionnably favored in this race. The fact that the national GOP is full of so many losers is your saving grace–it will save you from utter embarassment, but it won’t win you this race.
Milquetoast Mark, huh? Better than latte Mark or Mochiatta (?) Mark, I guess. Kind of. Though shouldn’t it be Milk-toast?
Is COPols the new testing ground for anti-candidate memes or something?
Yes, this a testing ground for new, childish candidate names.
No, Milquetoast is the correct spelling.
Ah, I see from Google that Casper Milquetoast was a a cartoon character from 1924. I was thinking it was milk-toast, a dish my mom used to make for me when I was sick. I am thinking Milquetoast might be a bit to obscure to catch on, though it is better than mochiata.
I also don’t think BOB for Big Oil Bob is going anywhere.
Trite nicknames are cheesy, and in my opinion, show an intellectually, and creatively, bankrupt individual or group. Im tired of them.
The senate seat probably won’t be decided by the war. I think that the most Rs will have abandoned the war. They will use the Petraeus report to give them political cover.
That’s why BS has answered the question he poses on his web site:
“We have lost elections because Republicans have not effectively communicated to the American people why our sons and daughters are being asked to fight and win a war that many Democrats in Congress and their friends in the press would prefer America lose.” BS website
Why are our sons and daughters (or husbands and wives, or mom’s and dad’s, or in my case brother and aunt) being ask to fight and die in someone else’s civil war, Bob?
I don’t think he’s answered because by the fall the Rs will have abandoned the war and he doesn’t want to flip flop too much.
I actually think higher ed affordability will determine CO’s race.
we can already see the ads. Big oil Bob (BOB) is in the pocket of oil, profiting from our pain. Ask BOB why he’s supports oils interest against the people’s interest.
Mark Udall is a bolder liberal yada yada yada He’s out of step with colorado values (yeah all the people who have moved here in the last 15 years moved here for the scenic gas rigs, not for Colorado’s outdoor quality of life)
The race is in the Denver suburbs and it will be decided on the question of higher ed affordability. As almost the 1st order of business after it took control of the house, the democratic house cut student loan interest rates in half–every survey shows the public trusts D’s more than R’s on this issue.
BOB has shown no leadership on the cost of higher ed, instead focusing on vouchers and local control (read religious control) of curiculum when he talks about education.
With or without the war, Udall wins–(assuming he runs a credible campaign)
the increasing number of CO outdoorsment who have realized that the Dems aren’t going to take their hunting rifles but the the R’s are not preserving the habitats that are needed for them to hunt and fish. Your laser scope and camo doesn’t do much good if there aren’t any elk.
Three. One to regulate it, another to call a conservative to put the gunrack on, and a third to realize that to realize that you really ought to own gun to put in the gunrack.
In 2005 Udall received a big, fat, ignominous F from the National Rifle Association. Udall bumped his score up to a gun-totin’ D in 2006.
Sportsmen in Colorado are a savvy bunch and certainly will not fall for a gun-snatcher like Milquetoast Mark.
The NRA thought about fighting the house bill to prevent nut jobs from getting guns. They thought better of it.
I’m a liberal, a hunter, and I own guns, lots of them: pistols, rifles and shotguns. I’ve hunted since I was a kid, though I mostly Blackpowder big game today: I prefer the mountains during the Archery/muzzleloader season, they’re a little quieter.
Though I support the arguement that the purpose of the 2nd ammendment is to prevent the government from having a monopoly on the means of coercive force, what’s the point if we give up rights to be secure in our home (privacy, search and seizure) and to not be detained without public trial.
Right now many hunters have come to the conclusion, that republicans may be better at protecting gun rights, but they are doing nothing to protect the places we hunt, or the water quality of the places we fish.
You and my DH could have a nice long conversation about your various firearms and hunting stories. Maybe in other states gun ownership follows party registration, but not in Colorado.
That most Dems want to take away everybody’s guns. In spite of the unfortunate silly picture Kerry presented in shiny new hunting gear, he really has hunted all of his life and no doubt had old beat up hunting gear at home. That and his perfectly legitimate bronze and silver stars. The west, in particular, is full of meat-eating, gun-toting, hunting and fishing Dems. Look at Governor Schweitzer of Montana. The Salazar brothers are fifth generation Colorado ranchers, not a group known for opposing gun ownership. The whole “Dems will take your gun away” thing is bull.
That’s impressive……you shatter the stereotype that some (who shall remain nameless) attempt to draw of liberals as gun control Nazis.
That’s doubly impressive because you can shoot big game unlike the Massachusetts Gerbil Hunter, Mitt Romney, who although he claims to be a life-long hunter, admitted to only having gone only twice and then only taken aim at “small varmints.”
Shot a few occasionally at targets but never owned one.
But I played paintball almost every weekend for several years. That is intense. And there were numerous gun nuts that not only had a hard time believing it, but thought I should not be allowed to play paintball because I’m so liberal.
Just goes to show – we’re all different.
In fact, his page on gun and environmental issues would indicate the exact opposite. Did he leave something out that you know about?
http://markudall.hou…
Or, more likely, another R pulling facts out of the orifice?
“Another one bites the dust,
another one bites the dust,
oh yeah, another one bites the dust.
Who did that song?
Hard to tell if your question was real or had some other meaning but the lyrics surprise a lot of people when they find out it is about gun violence.
Queen
Another One Bites The Dust
Steve walks warily down the street,
with the brim pulled way down low
Ain’t no sound but the sound of his feet,
machine guns ready to go
Are you ready, Are you ready for this
Are you hanging on the edge of your seat
Out of the doorway the bullets rip
To the sound of the beat
Another one bites the dust
And another one gone, and another one gone
Another one bites the dust
Hey, I’m gonna get you too
Another one bites the dust
How do you think I’m going to get along,
without you, when you’re gone
You took me for everything that I had,
and kicked me out on my own
Are you happy, are you satisfied
How long can you stand the heat
Out of the doorway the bullets rip
To the sound of the beat
Chorus
There are plenty of ways you can hurt a man
And bring him to the ground
You can beat him
You can cheat him
You can treat him bad and leave him
When he’s down
But I’m ready, yes I’m ready for you
I’m standing on my own two feet
Out of the doorway the bullets rip
repeating the sound of the beat
My head only had that refrain in it, not the whole song.
Not because of the topic, but the very substance was not at all funny.
You learn quickly that it’s risky business trying to peddle anything remotely funny to liberals.
how’s fox’s 1/2 hour news hour working out? I hear Colbert and Stewart are shaking in their boots.
Man… even Dennis Miller is struggling after he started hanging out with Rush and Bill’o.
Bill’o, Rush and the rest of the GOP water carriers could be considered funny, if they, and others, didn’t believe it serious.
Danny 1, DDHGLQ 0
that Dobby likes to sing.
And in answer to Emma Anne above, where she asks about Pols being a place to test campaign insults, Dobby seems to think so, although I don’t know why he keeps changing it. I guess he wants to be like the guy who coined “Both Ways Bob.”
The list of trial balloon nickname which he has launched for Udall is lengthy, but he can’t seem to stick with just one. Mariacchi Mark (or was that Marischino Mark), Team Tofu, Latte Mark, and of “the Little El Dorado Spg. Engine That Could” is his latest appellation for Udall.
Give it up and maybe Dr. Dobson can write you a script for Ritalin.
Maybe I wasn’t very clear on it. Hey, I’ve laughed plenty of times at Mallard Fillmore and Coyote, especially when it was a creative jab at us libs.
It just wasn’t funny.
I meant, that it wasn’t the politics that made it not funny.
When are you going to realize that anyone smart enough to recognize that you’re a smart person is also smart enough to recognize a bullshit talking point when we see one.
Successful hunting takes two things: guns and animals.
Animals require habitat. Hunters know this. However, political hacks don’t. Your ignorance is showing
I’d be surprized if the affordability of higher education made the top 10 in Colorado. I think the issues that will drive the 2008 elections in Colorado will be:
1. Iraq/Iran (Iraq, aka “the South Korea of the Middle East”)
2. Political Corruption (calling your opponent and his/her party a cooked toad is a time honored tradition)
3. Fiscal Responsibility (federal earmarks, how did the billions from Amendment C and SB 199 actually get spent?)
4. Fuel Prices and Dependence on Foreign Oil ($4.50/gas in the Spring 2008)
5. Health Care/Insurance Costs (Massachussets Plan will be debated in CO in 2008 according to my crystal ball)
6. Water (CO River issues, Front Range v Mountain communities)
7. Transportation (where’s the billions of $ for road maintenance and construction going to come from?)
8. Primary Education (K-12, declining graduation rates, failing CSAP scores)
Immigration was a 2004 election year wedge issue that got out of control and will be dropped like hot rock in 2008 in my view.
1. Iraq unquestionably
2. Fuel prices and foreign oil
3. Healthcare
4. Global warming (why did you not list this)?
5-9. The rest in the order you have
And I think Iraq will be so much more awful by then that it will push most everything off to 2nd level at best.
– dave
Water is going to be a LOT higher. It always is. In particular, this year is a la nina year, so we are expecting drought later this summer. When that happens, water will rise to somewhere in the top 3 (as it should). If we have no water, then the rest does not matter.
Fortunately, after this next drought, I expect the state will get serious and put together a bill with NAMED projects, rather than have a lying gov say “trust me”.
I don’t monitor this too regularly, so sorry for the delayed response.
I did not include Global Warming because I think it’s an issue that’s ironically REALLY important, but there isn’t anything policy-wise we can or are willing do about it.
Roughly 50% of the carbon load is from coal fired power plants and 50% from cars/trucks/transportation. The China and India are building power plants and adding drivers to the road in such numbers that nothing we do will matter to appreciably affect the carbon load even if the US shut off all its power plants and we all traded in our LandRovers for a Prius.
To affect Global Warming, the world will have to reduce its consumption of EVERYTHING, not just the gas we burn in our cars. For example, how many shirts do you have in your closet that you don’t wear? How many pairs of shoes do you or your wife own? Those shirts/shoes consumed resources to make, transport (over an ocean and cross county) and store in your closet. Those resources consumed to make those consumer goods that sit idle in your closet added a lot to the carbon load.
How big is your house? If you’re like most Americans it’s way bigger than the space needed for the occupants and consumed beaucoups resources to build, maintain and operate that also add to the carbon load.
“Use it up. Fix It. Make do without. Stay home. Live in a smaller house. Have fewer (or no) kids.” is the mindset required worldwide to tame Global Warming. That change in mindset ain’t gonna happen here and it ain’t gonna happen in China and India and anywhere people are beginning to become prosperous for the first time.
Global Warming is a “game-ended” issue. I just don’t believe our political process is up to doing anything about it other than talking about it or making token gestures.
Pretty dismal, huh?
It matters what issues drive the “gettable” votes. That’s where higher ed costs matter.
Most voters (about 60%) have hard electoral preferences. To quote my grandfather, veteran of Normady and the 30’s Labor movement, “I’d vote for a dead golden retriever over any republican, as lond as he was a democrat.” This explain’s why Bush is still at about 30% approval. There is another 20% that is strong leaning, one direction or another.
In years where the population is basically happy or united running to your base, GOTV is the optimal strategy.
However in divisive, change years, getting those 20% of moveable voters is the mission. In Colorado those voters are in the denver suburbs, Lets look through those 8 very important issues and see how they impat those swing voters.
1.War. everyone will want out by the fall, R’s will move to neutralize this issue.
2.Corruption. Yawn… except in JeffCO. I know people who voted for 41 an wish they hadn’t.
3.Fiscal Policy. Always an issue. I think Romanoff is going to get something on the ballot which will make it more of an issue.
4.Gas. Maybe. Pocket book issue, hard to hang a campaign on though, because gas prices are hard to predict, even for experts, and even harder to do anything about. Its bad to pick an issue where you can’t deliver anything. (note the congresses “failure” to get us out. Under promise over deliver.
5.Health care. Important issue. Don’t deny its importance one inch, but its on everyones radar.
6.Water. very important issue for Colorado–totally uniportant to most suburban voters.
7. Transportation. Important issue. very important for chamber of commerce types, but not high on the radar of most suburban voters.
8.K-12. They have good schools, the rest of us…they feel bad for us.
The ramp up in tuition rates at the public colleges has been fierce, thats why C won. C won in arapCO, jeffCO,and got 48% in dougCO. On the other hand C only got 40% in the much more democratic leaning adamsCO. because College enrollment rates are higher in arap, jeff, and doug, than in adam.
Other issues are more important, but this will drive the gettable votes.
I have a daughter entering CSU next year and tons of friends who also have kids entering college next year. Yes there’s the typical moaning & groaning. But I don’t hear people laying the costs at the politician’s feet.
For the state legislature it will matter because that’s where most of the money goes. But I don’t think it’s going to be tops even for those races.