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
November 09, 2007 12:47 AM UTC

Jeff Crank's November 5 Kick-off Event and Rossputin's Letter to Gazette regarding its coverage

  • by: CD-5 Line


Here is an excerpt from the above blog:

To the Editor:

Even small errors in reporting can be relevant, especially when they have larger implications. That’s why I was so annoyed by Kim Nguyen’s saying that there were “60 to 75 supporters” at Jeff Crank’s kickoff event. Beyond the 15 or so people on stage with Jeff, there were over 200 others in the room (including me).

Certainly this kind of innacurate reporting by Nguyen would aid Doug Lamborn, which is regrettable.  Was it intentional, was it incompetence, or, merely that she may have ditched most of the event, having come early and left early or having come late, when the crowd was dispersing?  I don’t know the answers, but, am glad to see that Rossputin has made the effort to underscore the enthusiastic support and the large crowd at Jeff Crank’s kick-off event that Nguyen failed to report for reasons known only to her.


15 thoughts on “Jeff Crank’s November 5 Kick-off Event and Rossputin’s Letter to Gazette regarding its coverage

  1. I was there too.  For “60-75” people to be even remotely accurate would have meant that the so-called reporter stuck his head in the door 20 minutes before the dang thing started, got some free food an left.  I got there pretty much on time (around 6-traffic was surprisingly clear on I-25) and I counted 150 some-odd people.

    Anyway, I thought it was a good event.  I was surprised to see so many of Doug Lamborn’s former collegues there.  You’d think that if Lamborn was such a great public servant that his fellow state Senators wouldn’t be getting on stage and calling for “credible leadership”

    BTW-where were you during the speech?  I wonder if we bumped into each other.  I was standing in the back corner furtherest away from the doors with my wife.  Blue suit, rust-orange tie, glasses, tall guy with the short wife…  Anyway, if you see me at an event for Jeff, feel free to say hi!

    1. One of my friends was there and told me it was a large gathering.  I saw the Gazette’s reporting the next day and couldn’t believe what I was reading.  I called a couple others who were there and who figured the Gazette’s reporter has an agenda or simply ducked out early and reported so blandly in her article because she didn’t stay the whole time.  If the latter is the case, the Gazette’s staff should take her aside for a come to Jesus meeting on ethics in reporting.  It’s like when reporters fake interviews.  If she faked her attandance, it’s the same.  Don’t know we’ll ever know the truth of what she did and why.  But, for accuracy in reporting, she gets an F-.

      1. .
        and 120 in the audience,
        it can look like there are only 50 listening to the 30 speechifying. 
        Maybe half the crowd was in the restroom. 
        That could happen, when the crowd’s that small to begin with.

        If there were 1,500 there,
        and she said 50-75,
        that’s a significant error. 

        But you got nothin’ here.

        Maybe see if you can get a little more mileage out of the franked mail,
        or the fact that you think Lamborn is ugly,
        or that his mother wears Army boots. 

        1. after being surprised by the number reported in the Gazette.  I had it from a couple people there that the number was between 150-200 at any given time, but probably more than that total because of the length of the event.  I concur with the other people here that that is a big issue.  When you are off by 3-4 times, it is either gross incompetence or gross pandering.

          Given the Gazette’s history (they never picked up the Bartha story until after it had been reported nationally for over a week), I am inclined to believe it is blatant pandering by Lamborn supporters at the Gazette.

          1. The Club for Growth is Libertarin, not Republican.  Doug Lamborn is not so much Republican as he is Libertarian.  The Gazette has coddled Lamborn, in my view, in light of their mutual Libertarian sentiments.  The failure of the Gazette to report on the Barthas until it was dragged kicking and screaming into the fray had its counterpart in 2006 when the national Christian Coalition of Colorado publicly and loudly apologized to Jeff Crank for the actions of Hotaling and Chuck Gosnell, doing business as the Colorado chapter of the Christian Coalition.  While local radio and TV stations covered that, do you realize that the Gazette never published one article on this very big piece of news?  That apology from the national chapter right there would have evidenced to the considerable readership in the 5th CD of the Gazette the scrurrilous falsity of Hotaling’s and Gosnell’s actions.  To this day, there are uninformed people who would believe that Crank is a member of the radical homosexual agenda.  It would have been right for the Gazette to publish the repudiation by the national Chapter of its actions by Hotaling and Gosnell, and the apology to Crank.  I don’t expect much different from the Gazette in 2008.  They’ll give Lamborn a bye when he doesn’t deserve it.

            1.   Other than certain economic issues and gun control, Lamborn is for greater government involvement in the personal lives of people, whether it be government selected and mandated prayer in public schools, reproductive choice decisions, the war on drugs, or marriage between two consenting adults who happen to be of the same gender. 
                A true libertarian would be pro-choice, pro-marriage equality, pro-separation of church and state, and pro-decriminalization of drug possession.
                Even on economic issues, he’s no real libertarian, whether it’s his voting for runaway budget deficits, pork projects, and my personal favorite, his obscene misuse of the franking privilege.

              1. We all know that Lamborn doesn’t know what he is… he isn’t smart enough to know.  He just pulls a leaver and votes.  That is his entire platform.  He does not think about issues, he does not advocate for issues, he does not debate issues, he just votes the way CFG and his handlers tell him to. 

                Dont blame Doug Lamborn, he’s just a guy trying to find the bathroom in Washington so he can vote for or against something that he does not really understand anyway.

        2. Or the Gazette’s twin?  She more than halved the attendance at the event, whereas, you weren’t there (and some wonder whether she was), and you’ve taken Rossputin’s count of 15 on stage, and doubled it to 30–all in the effort to make anyone who has a chance of defeating Lamborn look bad.  I realize your agenda on the 5th CD, and you’ve made it clear, but, in all honesty, I now see why you left or were kicked out of the Republican party, and why you must be a similar pariah in the Democrat party–a man with no political home who wants to belong but never will.  It is not hard, then, to understand why, if I recall your saying so before as being the one that Doug Lamborn told to “shut-up” in the 2006 debates.  As badly as that worked out for Lamborn on You-Tube, I think he was right after all, at least in your case! 🙂

        3. Colorado Statesman came out and reported more then 200, and amazingly put some spin on the speech… what was said and what wasn’t – zingers – between the lines. The zingers are everything in the news, but apparently what Crank for the most part didn’t say… but led up to. The article is more definitive than the other coverage, I think.

  2. I was at both Rayburn’s kick-off event (playing Hail to the Chief WAS a bit over the top) and at Crank’s the other evening. A couple of notes…

    Rayburn sounded like a fighter pilot show-off General giving a briefing to a couple of Sergeant Majors… he was condescending and talked down to his audience. And the Gazette definitely over-reported the number of people there. I counted something like 65 or 70 people who were not family or campaign workers.

    On the other hand, Jeff Crank had a solid 150-160 non family, non campaign type people at his event. And his speech was solid… a little rusty maybe, but this is a business guy and an effective operative, not a slick know-it-all politician and I actually like that about him.

    I also noticed a significant number of people at Jeff Crank’s kick-off who I didn’t know/recognize. That’s a big deal… when non insiders show up to a political kick-off rally in support of someone running against an incumbent of the same party it speak volumes about the mood of the populace.

    1. Did Rayburn have any political insiders there?  He has said that he was encouraged to run by local party and community leaders, but I cant think of any (aside from Rivera) who support him.

        1. I would guess he is more anti-Lamborn than anything else.  Not a real strong showing for Rayburn in terms of local elected folks.  It will be interesting to see how many, if any, endorsements he gets.  So much for the huge encouragement to run by local political leaders (as he purported in one of his campaign emails).

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

59 readers online now


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