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
(R) Jeff Hurd
(D) Adam Frisch
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
52%↑
48%↓
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
October 05, 2007 04:31 PM UTC
18 Comments
Loading ...
If he had changed his residency to Washington, then maybe there would be an issue. I just dont see any prosecutor going after someone for not paying taxes and not registering to vote in a place that was clearly not their home… which is what makes this a big political problem.
Colorado was clearly not Rayburn’s intentional home. He basically vacationed here as a kid, but that makes him no more a Colorado resident than the hundreds of thousands of tourists who enjoy vacationing here every year.
It is fair game for Rayburn to be attacked for moving here just to run. He clearly is not from Colorado and just wants to stay in the district long enough to “get hired” to move to DC. That is probably where he wants to live full time anyway.
This could be the issue that forces Rayburn either out of the race, or into permanent insignificance in Colorado politics. Had he taken his time and supported Crank in this race, he might have been fully supported as the candidate to run against Salazar in 2010. Crank probably would have supported him in exchange for Rayburn not running which would give Rayburn a shot at Tancredo and Hefley supporting him as well. This would have made him a solid candidate, but being a two time loser will forever relegate him to the same level of insignificance as Will Perkins and Paul Prentice, his main supporters.
How insistent does he want to be that Missouri was NOT his home and that Colorado WAS those 30 years?
I’m with you. He vacationed here. He had an uncle with a ministry from here. His wife may be from here. But, I’ve got family all over the U.S., aunts, uncles, cousins, nephews, nieces–you name it. If their accomplishments and states of residency and that I happen to love one or two of those states very much, is all it takes to cloak myself as being from one of their states so as to run for office in their states, I would be doing so strictly for my own ego, my own gain, what was in it for me.
Contrary to Rayburn’s slogan that “It’s all for America” that he is running, it is truly, truly, truly, “All about Bentley Rayburn.” He is to be commended for his military service, but, he is to be socorned, shamed, and humiliated for what he has tried to foist off on the people of Colorado, and the 5th CD in particular. He should go home. To Missouri. Where he came from.
What if one of the other better candidates had won the election? Go with Crank or Bremer, the other two candidates who were clearly conservative Christians. I tend to think that Rayburn would have primaried either one of them. Rayburn had to have known all along that he would lose the election (or he is a lot dumber than his education and career success indicates). So the only logical reason to run was to improve name ID in the district. Given that tanked his military career and sank about $100,000 of his own money into improving his name ID, he must have planned all along to run again.
I think Rayburn might actually do a good job as our Congressman. It would be hard to do worse than what we have right now. But this race is not about giving CD5 the best representation to Rayburn. It is now and has always been about promoting the ego of Bentley Rayburn. He is hurting the chances of Crank winning the race and he has little to no legit chance of beating Lamborn.
His plan was to win Hefley’s old seat, and run for U.S. Senate in 2008, if Allard honored his term limits pledge, or 2010 against Salazar. A Congressman’s seat is not what he wants at all, in other words. It is merely a stepping stone.
What is so interesting is that Rayburn is going to end up more reviled than Doug Lamborn–and I didn’t think that was possible!
lying, self serving Republican.
But, it’s a generalization that does not apply to all Republicans or Democrats, for that matter.
I read another article in today’s Gazette about Rayburn saying he was the one that was going to unite the party, and heal its divisions. That is such a fraud! Here this man is, just off the plane from Missouri, who played the spoiler in 2006, splitting the vote, giving us Doug Lamborn and all the division that comes from that, and now, he’s going to be the “great uniter”? His narcissism knows now bounds.
I hope he keeps digging his grave that Colorado was his home state and does it so forcefully trying to defeat the handle he’s earned as a carpetbagger that the Colorado Department of Revenue actually believes his lie he was coming home–and goes after him for back taxes. It would truly serve him right.
I thought he left Missouri to attend the USAFA 30 years ago,
and his last assignment was at Maxwell AFB, Alabama ?
🙂
The one and only state where Rayburn would NOT have been carpetbagging would have been if he’d gone home to his real home, in Missouri, from where he figuratively got off the plane with his carpetbags in hand, mucking up the 5th CD in 2006 and mucking it up again in 2008.
What Rayburn does not understand is that the EPC GOP was divided before the primary. The last primary just amplified it because Lamborn’s handlers decided to be so sleazy.
I have always believed that there is a rift in the party. The Lamborn supporters believe that it is between true conservatives and the Rinos. In fact, it is between the normal people and the angry people. Doug Lamborn represents the Doug Bruce angry folks who hate everything and everyone associated with normal society. This is about 5% of the registered Republicans, but they all show up to vote giving them about 25% (what Lamborn got in the last election). These folks represent the conservative MoveOn, Code Pink, and George Soros. The rest of the GOP in El Paso are people like you and me. Very conservative, but also functional in society and realistic about life. We believe in having the best candidate who is most likely to get things done and dont care as much about whether a candidate is 99% “right” versus 100% “right” on every issue. We chose our candidates based on character and capability, not the level of extremism they can demonstrate.
This is the rift that is in the El Paso GOP today. Bentley Rayburn can not fix it because he does not know it because he is not from here. I believe that unity will happen when we (the normal functional folks) take back CD5 and Doug Bruce’s seat and relegate the angry part of the GOP into oblivion. It’s not about who is the most conservative, it’s about who is going to represent the district and not make a fool out of CD5.
while you fudge the percentages, you have the core truth exactly right.
Many posters seemed to think this was all about Doug, and didn’t see the bigger problems in the party.
I’ve had a lot of fun jerking their chain, because they were missing an understanding of the fundamental schism.
Now you’ve spoiled my fun, possibly.
I think you are purposely baiting someone on this board by falsely blaming everything on Doug Bruce. Let’s see who responds.
He (Doug B) arrived in CD-05 some time after the schism formed; he has exploited it to his benefit; but even if he moved back to LA tomorrow, the split would not heal.
I was told more than 20 years ago (I moved here, like Bent Rayburn, with the military) a short history of the conflict.
I couldn’t believe it at first; it all seemed so petty.
But the factions all sincerely believed that they alone were the true party core, and all other factions were pretenders (oops – I revealed there are more than 2 factions.)
Periodically, leaders have emerged to unite and rise above the divisions.
But faster than you can say “school vouchers,” for example, the unity was gone.
In 2006, the contenders who had lived here a long time (Anderson, for the best example) tried to rise above the factions, and apparently didn’t play by the rules that had taken shape.
Crank’s campaign appeared to be ignorant of the divisions, but if Hefley was actively helping (I don’t know if he was,) he was perhaps the one person who knew and exploited those divisions to the most effect.
Lamborn’s campaign was imbued with tribal loyalty.
And, as you say, poor little Bent had not a clue. The folks who got him to run were key inciters of the division, but didn’t want to bother Bent’s pretty little head with the dark side of local politics.
After a couple years in the Democratic Party, I can assure you that their party leaders are well-schooled in these divisions.
In 2006, Democrats worried about Anderson or Rivera turning a new page and making the old antagonists irrelevant.
We really thought that Jay had an outside chance, if the internecine combat could be exacerbated. And we did try to do that.
Unfortunately, one tribe apparently decided to be a good sport and come back in two years. Otherwise, CD-05 could have been represented by an extreme progressive. For 2 years.
I am not sure on the numbers, but I do know that the rift is out there. What % do you think are in the fringe group?
Here are a couple more thoughts on the current/past situation. Having read your posts, it sounds like you think that Duncan Bremer could have brought the party together. I supported him and agree with you on that. I liked John Anderson very much as a person, but he was more of a libertarian and really is not a mainstream guy for CD5 Republicans. Lionel Rivera was never a real candidate as a Republican because he never courted the base vote. On top of that, no one seems to respect the guy even though everyone knows him (unlike Anderson and Bremer who were well respected even by their opponents).
Back to my earlier point. Bremer probably was best positioned to unite the party if elected. Unfortunately, his campaign never got enough traction and he was horribly outspent in the last few weeks. But that is now the past.
Despite being ultra conservative, I always try to be a political realist (for instance, I will vote for Rudy G. against Clinton and not a third party even though I am staunchly pro-life). So the reality of today and the CD5 race is that the next congressman will either be Crank or Lamborn. They represent the two sides of the party here today and both have deep roots in the party. Rayburn is going to get blown out of the water at the Assembly as both Crank and Lamborn will work the party structure. It is possible that Rayburn out-raises both of them, but his lack of local party politics will be his downfall. My hope is that Crank pounds Lamborn and Rayburn so hard at the Assembly that we dont have a competitive race after that (there will be a race, but it could be incredibly lopsided if Lamborn and Rayburn have to petition onto the ballot).
If Crank is elected, the fringe “angry” folks may decide to leave for a libertarian political sect. This is not bad since (a). most of them are pretty much libertarians anyway, and (b). they are such a small group of people that the EP GOP will not miss them. That might bring some unity to the area.
I was not trying to bait anyone with regard to Doug Bruce. I really dont like the guy. You have read enough of my posts to know that personal character is big to me, above partisan politics. Bruce is so lacking in personal character that it’s disgusting. He was part of the Lamborn slander machine and he should not be in public office.
I am probably harsher on conservatives who are lacking in character than liberals. Why expect the Clintons to act ethically? They have no apparent moral foundation and worship political power so I expect their ethics to reflect this. When someone like Lamborn or Bruce pulls the same stunt, I find it grossly offensive.
I sincerely believe Jeff Crank is the best candidate; however, that could confuse the issue. Many of us, like me, resent what Chuck Gosnell, Wayne Williams, Doug Bruce, Doug Lamborn, the Hotalings, and others were willing to do in 2006 to get Lamborn elected. It really is about their character. It’s more important that Doug Lamborn be removed from office than it is that Jeff Crank be the one who does it–and that a message be sent to the Gosnells and Williams, etc., in the party who proved they would bend and distort the truth, apparently on the principle that the end justifies the means. Like you, I was grossly offended by all their actions and there are others like us. A lot.
I grew to respect Crank a lot during the last election. He really could have gotten nasty, but it says a lot about his character that he didnt. He demonstrated that he was more concerned with maintaining his integrity and character than winning the election.
Through the last election, I felt that Crank was tainted by being Hefley’s guy. But because of how he ran his campaign, he clearly demonstrated that he can stand on his own two feet and does not need Helfey to bolster him. I think he would make an outstanding congressman and I hope he pounds Lamborn into the ground this election. If he does that, all the folks you mentioned will become figures of the past and insignificant in local politics.
and take down your posts.
You make too much sense.
If Republicans read this stuff,
they could pull together and work as a unified party.
That would be bad for the rest of us.
Wish me lock.
/
“Vote against the Doug Nearest You”
-Haners
Good one!