President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

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

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

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

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

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

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) J. Sonnenberg

(R) Ted Harvey

20%↑

15%↑

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

(R) Doug Bruce

20%

20%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

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

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

40%↑

20%↑

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
March 17, 2008 12:13 AM UTC

Boulder County Convention - what it means

  • 29 Comments
  • by: DavidThi808

Update: I have the various results I am aware of here. Anyone who knows additional numbers, please email me.

Ok, we had the convention, what does it all mean? This is what I see as the major items, after sleeping on it.

First off, the Boulder Democratic party is incredibly well run. I can’t say enough how impressed I am with how smoothly the whole thing ran. Major kudos to Deb Gardner and her entire crew. You did the impossible and made it look easy. (Deb Gardner for governor in 2014?)

Here is what I think is the biggest data point from yesterday – well over 90% of the attendees are not party activists. Everyone was talking about how 95% had never attended a county convention before but Claire Levy was in that group and I think we have to count her as an activist. The important data point is that most of these people probably could not have named the 3 amigos. They were there to vote for Obama or Clinton and the rest was other stuff they were also asked to do.

Which means, having the party base on your side was good for maybe 5% of the vote. In fact, not everyone there will bother to vote in the August primary. But I think it is reasonable to say that the results are a good indicator of how a primary vote would play out if it was held today. So let’s drop the “candidate X had an insider advantage” because that wasn’t worth much.

SD-18

Ok, this was easily the biggest surprise of the day. Rollie had the backing of most of the activists. And Cindy had recently been busy shooting herself in the foot. So everyone thought the questions was "would Cindy hit 30%?" And Cindy won with 53%. This totally changes the race.

I think the speeches of each candidate had a gigantic effect here. First off Rollie’s way of carrying himself reinforces his age negatively – and that has an impact. Rollie also gave a very deliberate speech where he listed the issues we face, but did not sell us that he has the skills and the ideas to address them. He may very well have all that, but he has to convince and sell it.

Cindy got up there and had energy and drive and threw out the one-liners that gave the crowd the red meat it wanted to hear. Personally I tend to be driven away by that as I worry it means the candidate is all sizzle and no steak. But the crowd ate it up (or at least 53% did).

I think for Rollie to win he’s going to have to shift gears big time and come across as energetic, impassioned, and dive into why he has the skills to address the issues we face, and do so in a way that gets across in quick sound-bites.

I think for Cindy to win she needs to push for as many live debates as possible and just keep improving her presentation. I wish it didn’t work this way but if you can sell the sizzle well, it’s very effective. And she can sell it.

Oh, and so far I am under-impressed with both. Hopefully the campaign will give one a chance to show they will be a strong effective contributor in the legislature.

CD-2

Will Shafroth is toast. He’s a nice guy, I think he would make a good rep, and he has 0 traction. Anyone who supported Will, plus any who just couldn’t decide, added up to 4% of the vote. It’s not there. And the thing is, Will’s resume does not stack up to Joan’s or Jared’s and voters do want to have a track record as past effort is a good indicator of future effort. (I’d love to see Will switch to SD-18, he would rock in that race and a couple of terms in the state house would give him a great list of accomplishments to point to.)

And again, lets go back to this was not the party activists. Will was given a slot to speak before the CD-2 vote. He presented his case with an equal shot to Joan & Jared, to a group that is reasonably representative of the voters in the upcoming primary, and it didn’t resonate.

Jared’s got a tough road ahead of him. 40% among party activists would have been a great accomplishment. Across all the counties (Adams & Boulder being the big dogs) I think Jared is at a hair under 40%. Figure if Will stays in it will be Joan at 55% and if Will drops out Joan at 60% and this means Jared is in serious trouble.

On the flip side, this is no worse than where John McCain and Barack Obama were 5 months before the presidential primaries started (and Huckabee was an asterisk). Jared has 5 months to change the dynamics and a week is a lifetime in politics.

What Jared needs to do is to find something that resonates big-time with the electorate. And based on how Jared approaches the race (and life), he will keep trying. So I think he’s a bit down now, but definitely not out and still has a decent chance.

Joan is rocking. I really enjoy watching a professional who performs their job brilliantly regardless of what that job is. Joan is a joy to watch in action. What Joan needs to do to win is continue executing perfectly (or close to it).

I support Jared but I find all three candidates (and their staffs) to be very impressive.

Mark Udall

Be afraid, be very afraid. We had Mark’s wife presenting for Mark. We had Ken Salazar (has he ever been seen without his cowboy hat?) talking about Mark. We had several others discussing the Senate race. And the single reason they gave for electing Mark is to flip a Senate vote from Republican to Democratic.

Now this is a very strong reason as there are numerous times in the Senate right now that critical measures fail by 1 vote. And every Dem will vote for Mark come November.

But this does not lead to a charged up base. This does not lead to volunteers. This does not lead to donations. And this does not give the unaffiliated, the voters that decide the election, a good reason to vote for Mark. Moderates prefer a divided government and so many could easily balance their vote for Obama/Clinton with one for Schaffer.

If Mark continues down this road I worry that he will lose most of the moderates and be left with mostly those who will vote for the Democratic candidate regardless of who it is. That is a losing proposition in Colorado.

To win Mark needs to start actively campaigning on why people should be charged up to vote for him. To get the base energized and to get the middle sold. And he needs to get his ass in gear yesterday.

Obama

I saw no ground game there for Obama. On the flip side the Clinton campaign was there in force – big time. The Clinton campaign sent Wellington Webb in person (and boy is he good). I even had one person handing out some Obama flier tell me that they had it in the bag.

This is not won yet. I worry, not just for the primary, but for the general election too. Whichever candidate wins, they need to fight for the general nomination down to the last second and for every single vote. As an Obama delegate, worrisome…

Once we have a nominee…

There’s a lot of people worrying about what happens once we have a nominee, be it Obama or Clinton. Every time someone spoke to this issue and how we had to line up and support the winner, the place erupted in cheers. I don’t think we need to worry on this count. (One suggestion, regardless of who wins, put Wellington Webb up on the stage to speak to this issue – immediately.)

How to get Elected as a Delegate 101

I got a comment earlier saying they hoped I voted for all 87 slots. Are you kidding? I knew maybe 5 people on the ballot. I voted for myself, Claire Levy and Suze Ageton (both quality politicians), and a college freshman who is a friend of one of my daughters (and will be a good delegate).

But I realized that most others there were in the same predicament – they knew a couple of people and that was it. So I went around and traded votes. I said I was blogging and would appreciate their vote. And without exception people said they would vote for me if I would vote for them. And I happily did so.

So I voted for about 30 people knowing absolutely nothing about what kind of delegate they would be in exchange for their vote for me. Vote trading pure and simple. (In fact my daughter’s friend did the same – "Dave, vote for me and I’ll vote for you.") My guess is that will put me near the top in votes.

So we all condemn politicians for the horse trading inherent in getting legislation moved forward. But when it came time for me to get sent to the state convention, I did the same thing, pure & simple.

Also posted at Liberal and Loving It

Comments

29 thoughts on “Boulder County Convention – what it means

  1. Great post, that was very infomative.  Your posts have caused me to take more interest in what goes on up there in that liberal heavan of yours!  🙂

    In your opinion, do you think that the Colorado Obama campaign thinks that they’ve wrapped it up here so they didn’t show up?

    1. The Obama campaign doesn’t seem to be as aggressive in its campaigning as is the Clinton campaign, but I also don’t think they’ve dried up and blown away.  Attendance at all of the Dem conventions has been outstanding.

      In contrast, the Clinton campaign has been very dominant, trying to pick up delegates to close the gap.  This seems to be working a bit in Colorado, but they’re losing ground in California and Iowa, so overall it isn’t getting them anything.

    2. do you think that the Colorado Obama campaign thinks that they’ve wrapped it up here so they didn’t show up?

      That definitely seemed to be the case. The Clinton team did their best to own the day and the Obama side was by and large the individual delegates.

      We were supposed to have Gary Hart speaking and he cancelled. I don’t know why but that is indicitive of how it was treated. And it looks like HRC gained 1% over the cacaus results reported last month.

      1. Good luck with that!  🙂

        Hey, how much of Brandon Shaffer’s senate district is in Boulder?  Romney’s Colorado Political director is running against Shaffer, but I don’t know a lot of people who can keep tabs on that…

  2. Mr. Boulder gets beat by 20 points in his home base.  

    But, even more ironic. Mr. Political Reform cannot fill out his FEC form properly and is in the top ten nationally for non compliance. Many of the names without occupations were known to the campaign. Were they just lazy or were they trying to hide the occupations of some of his donors?

    Has Jared Polis actually filed an FEC complaint against Shafroth? Or, does his campaign think that a press release is the same as a formal complaint?

    Than, Will Shafroth accuses Polis of exactly the same thing that Shafroth was doing; not listing occupations. Was he fearful that some of his  big developer donors might tarnish his enviromental credentials?

    Has Shafroth actually filed a complaint or does he too think a press release is the same as a formal complaint?

    Ironic indeed.

    1. As to Jared Polis filling out his FEC form correctly – no one, not even Will Shafroth claimed he filled it out incorrectly. They merely claimed that he didn’t try very hard to track down the occupation of donors. As all the law requires is an effort is made, that’s not a violation – it’s merely fodder for bad press.

      1. Jared Polis has always said that Boulder County would be his firewall. Jared planned on a big win in Boulder to offset losses elsewhere.

        Oops!

        I love your logic. Jared did not fill out the forms incorrectly. Jared merely failed to supply the required information. Does that not mean he filled out the forms incorrectly.

        Let us stick with the irony. Who in their right mind (Shafroth) would accuse another of doing exactly what he was doing. Is it possible that Mr. Ethics and Mr. Environment were intentionally hiding the occupations of some of their donors for political reasons. Did Shafroth want to hide that major developers were supporting him and so listed them as “community volunteer”.

        Or, was it merely two campaigns unable to fill out simple forms correctly and too lazy to use a phone book and google to check out their occupations?

          1. Mary Kobey is listed as a real estate developer on the Udall forms but as a community volunteer on Shafroths.

            Shafroth complains that Polis did not properly list occupations for donors when his campaign had failed to do the same thing.

            I wonder if they have actually filed complaints with the FEC? They both probably think that a press release is the same as a complaint. If anyone has a copy of the actual complaints to the FEC they might want to post them.

            They want to be in Congress and they cannot even fill out simple forms correctly.

            1. Her husband is a developer. She isn’t. Check out the REST of the FEC reports which list her as a volunteer. It sure is ironic complain about checking other’s FEC reports without doing so yourself. She is listed as a community volunteer with Salazar and Strickland. Udall must have made a mistake filling out his form.

              1. Hillary Clinton lists Mary Kobey as a Developer, John Kerry listed her as a landscape architect. Glad to see she is a good Democrat.

                Irony has been overused. It is downright funny that an experienced campaign team would accuse another campaign of the very wrongs they themselves were doing. Will Shafroth seems to be such a serious guy. He must truly enjoy being laughed at over this.

                Has anyone actually seen their complaints or did these jokesters complain by press release only.  

  3. How do you justify the notion that Will Shafroth is “toast” when he wasn’t even running in the caucus. In fact, Will has been telling his supporters to choose their second choice if they are attending an assembly. How in the world could someone who hasn’t spent a dollar on the process and told his supporters to support someone else be “toast” by coming up with 4% of the vote?

    1. I was told by numerous delegates that will was asking people to go undecided if they were at all unsure of who they favored. He also spoke with JP and JFG and it was made very clear that his reason for speaking was for people to vote other. There was even a vote on if he should be allowed to speak before the vote and it was approved based on the fact that uncommitted was a ballot choice.

      It’s been reported here on ColoradoPols (which granted could be inaccurate) that the same thing held in other counties, that the Shafroth supporters went uncommitted.

      1. You are wrong. Even if you weren’t it wouldn’t matter. It is the most ridiculous thing you have said yet that the results of a candidate that spent no time trying to get delegates and no money on the process has anything to do with viability in August. Seriously. This is the most crazy spin yet coming out of the Polis camp. Will didn’t go through the caucus process. For you guys to make it seem like his lack of success in a process he didn’t participate in means anything is Orwellian in how backwards it is.

      2. Will was not running for any spot on the assembly ticket in Gilpin; he didn’t try, and he got no votes.  He was gracious and asked only that folks consider signing his signature petition if they were interested.

  4. not being on the ballot.  Now if you want to argue that Joan Fitzgerald’s commanding lead is bad news for both Jared and Will I could buy that argument but Will got 4% more than expected at the Assembly.

    1. If the uncommitteds go to Fitz-Gerald in large numbers than Polis is perilously close to 30%. Was it the plan all along to spend all this time and  money to get under 40%? Mike Miles spent a whole lot less and got a lot more votes four years ago.  

      1. Adams County has some rule where 99 of their delegates go uncomitted. Apparently they felt the primary rules in this state were not complicated enough already.

        As to how they vote – got me…

      2. If all the uncommitteds went to F-G, Jared would be about 25 delegates above threshold (technically where he is right now). It would only take 25 people to see, between now and May, what a total fraud Jared is to keep him off the ballot

  5. My next door neighbor was an alternate and was the first in line on Saturday, so he got seated as a delegate.  He said either the vote, or the numbers of delegates (or whatever, I confess I don’t know how it works) for Obama was about 800 and 200 for Clinton.

    Is this correct ?  Just curious.  BTW Wellington Webb does kick ass and Clintons are lucky to have him.

    Also, great post.  Thanks for the info.

  6. Your comment on Shafroth being toast because of his convention showing is absurdly misleading.  Of course Pols and all the diarists here have their own slants, takes and opinions, but I think you should consider it an obligation of blogging on the Pols frontpage to at least base your takes on facts and reality, not ignorance of the process.  

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

144 readers online now

Newsletter

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