U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

(D) Michael Bennet

(D) Phil Weiser

60%↑

50%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Jena Griswold

(D) David Seligman

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez

(D) J. Danielson

(R) Sheri Davis
50%

40%

30%
State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(D) Jeff Bridges

(R) Kevin Grantham

40%

40%

30%

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) Trisha Calvarese

(D) Eileen Laubacher

90%

20%

20%

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

45%↓

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
May 07, 2011 09:08 PM UTC

And So It Begins...

  • 2 Comments
  • by: MtSherman

I woke up this morning to the return salvo from the Hancock campaign. Last night around 5pm Chris Romer’s campaign sent two emails accusing Hancock of being soft on the Democratic shibboleth of Women’s choice. Before I even got the official email “from” Chris Romer I was forwarded it by Jeniffer Jacobson with the Romer campaign. That seemed a little uncoordinated. Also the link to article about what Hancock reportedly said did not actually work, it just redirected to the “Michael Hancock, where do you stand?” page on the Romer website encouraging us to write to Hancock. No actual information there.

The Hancock campaign fired back at about 9am with the breathless and mock surprised “Romer goes Negative!” that is the privilege of the first person to be attacked and endorsements by pro choice women and linking to Hancock getting a 100% rating from Planned Parenthood. Of a little interest to me was that my name was used by the Romer campaign in the form of “First Name,” where the salutation on the Hancock email was just “Dear Friend-“. Clearly the Romer campaign has either mort sophisticated software for emailing people or else Hancock’s campaign was pressed for time in jumping on this.

Clearly the gloves are off. Full text of the dueling announcements follows.

*Name*,

Michael Hancock, who refuses to say whether he’s pro-choice, also says it’s not an issue for Denver voters, and is unaware of the Mayor’s responsibilities on reproductive health care.

On Thursday, in response to a reporter’s question on the importance of women voters and choice in the Mayoral race, Hancock stated, “I think there comes a time as politicians we overreach and we talk about things we really don’t have an impact on. I’d rather talk about those issues that families told me they care about when I met with Highland Mommies, they didn’t talk about choice.”

According to Melanie Fitzroy, who lives in the Highlands neighborhood and is a member of the Highlands Mommies, “Just because we didn’t talk about choice doesn’t mean it’s not important.”

Join me in asking Chris’ opponent where he stands on this critical issue.

One of the reasons I endorsed Chris Romer is because he walks the walk on choice. I’m really troubled that Michael Hancock doesn’t appreciate the significant role the mayor plays when it comes to choice.

The Mayor’s responsibilities include:

   * Appointments to the Denver Health and Hospital Authority Board of Directors, which sets policy for the most significant health system in Denver providing reproductive health care.

   * Title X federal block grants administered by Denver’s Department of Health and Human Services which provides thousands of low-income Denver women reproductive health care services.

   * Enforcement of provider/patient protection laws by the Denver Police Department and the City Attorney’s Office.

   * Direct control of the enforcement of numerous laws protecting providers and patients in reproductive health, such as the 1994 Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrance (FACE) Act, making property destruction, obstruction, and other means of intimidation outside of health centers carry civil and criminal penalties.

   * Implementing critical state and federal laws on choice issues in Denver such as HB 10-1021, requiring that all plans on the individual insurance market cover prenatal care and contraception, and prohibits pregnancy from being considered a pre-existing condition, going into effect January 1, 2011.

   * Implementing state and federal funding and grants on reproductive issues.

Click here to ask Chris’ opponent where he stands on choice.

We deserve better.

Sincerely,

Theresa Spahn

Former Mayoral Candidate

Romer for Mayor

www.RomerForMayor.com

Dear Friend –

Less than 72 hours into the run-off election, Michael’s opponent, Chris Romer, went negative yesterday. And worse yet, Chris got his facts completely wrong on where Michael stands on a woman’s right to choose. Michael is strongly pro-choice – and he just earned a 100 percent rating from Planned Parenthood.

Help Michael defend himself and fight back against Chris’ desperate attacks. Contribute $25, $50 or $100 today!

As pro-choice women, we are proud to support Michael in his campaign for mayor. But he’s going to need our help to overcome the type of deceptive campaign tactics we’re likely to see over the next 30 days.

Can you help Michael? Please consider donating to his campaign today.

Michael has spent the past six months campaigning and developing specific strategies to help lead Denver forward. He recently issued a First 100 Days in Office Plan and has concrete ideas that will turn around failing schools, create good jobs and eliminate the city’s budget deficit.

John Hickenlooper showed all of us that negative campaigning isn’t what Denver wants or needs. We don’t do things like that here.

Help Michael stand against these deceptive attacks so that he can keep running an honest, positive and hopeful campaign. Please contribute $25, $50 or $100 today!

Thank you for supporting Michael for Mayor.

Sincerely,

Colorado State Senator Joyce Foster

Denver Councilwoman-at-Large Carol Boigon

State Board of Education Member Elaine Berman

Denver Public Schools Board Member Theresa Pena

Denver Public Schools Board Member Mary Seawell

Hon. Elbra Wedgeworth

Katina Banks

Adrienne Benavidez

Hannah Boigon

Ajenai “AJ” Clemmons

Abby Davidson

Nikki Floyd

Mary Louise Lee-Hancock

C.L. Harmer

Melody Harris

Anna Jo Haynes

Khadija Haynes

Victoria Haynes

Susan Heinzeroth

Leslie Herod

Fabby Hillyard

Christie Isenberg

Monica Lang

Courtney Law

Erin Mewhinney

Sarah Moss

Kendra Sandoval

Sonja Semion

Skye Stuart

Comments

2 thoughts on “And So It Begins…

  1. Asking a candidate to clarify their position on issues as important as choice and woman’s health is totally warranted – especially when that candidate has just dismissed the issues as unimportant and irrelevant.

    As the Romer camp pointed out, the mayor HAS control over a host of issues that are directly related to choice and woman’s health — a very important issue that Michael was hesitant to comment on.

    Furthermore, we all know the Mayor of Denver influences issues and policies to which he has NO direct control. It’s why both Michael and Chris advocated so strongly for school reform – and why I supported neither.

    When Michael berated James on the radio over his legitimate criticisms of the Far North East turnaround plan was that dirty campaigning, mudslinging? Ya’ll recall the mayor has NO direct control over the school system, and still Michael used his positions on reform as a wedge. What’s the difference between school reform and choice (other than the fact that the Mayor actually has some real power over choice)?

    The Hancock campaign knows their candidate screwed-up, and misspoke – he should never have dismissed such an important issue. Unfortunately for them it’s one where their candidate has little track record, and so their only response is to call Chris Romer a liar.  

    1. Personally I am just amused by how both candidates do such an inept job of feigning outrage. “We’re outraged, just outraged!” “We’re outraged that you’re saying you’re outraged!” It is like watching The McLaughlin Group shout at each other in slow motion.

      “Outrage!”

      And I did not use the word “mudslinging”. I was merely noting that the expect turn towards the negative had occurred as sure as the spring snow melt. I would have been surprised had it not occurred no matter who made the run off. Hancock will stress Romer being a banker and Romer will shout “council pay raise” right back.

      Personally I cannot get worked up about any of it since I do not like either of them. I am going to enjoy the show and vote for the one I dislike less.

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

124 readers online now

Newsletter

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

Colorado Pols