U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(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%
March 24, 2008 03:10 PM UTC
30 Comments
Which side of the bed did we wake up on today?
From the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03…
This may just give Ron Paul the momentum to become the Republican nominee.
Oh wait, no it won’t. This is only going to anger conservative radio hosts and will only be discussed by bloggers on the internets.
John McCain has the license to do anything and everything, and any and all dirt can be dug up on him, and it’ll be worthless at this stage. He’s bulletproof until the (D) nominee is known.
Then the fun begins.
…vote for the democrat, or vote for the Democrat.
On every one of those occasions, or he’s repented for his sins and was forgiven for his liberal dalliances by his wife and Jerry Falwell
With all the back and forth about who is better positioned to win the general election (Obama has won more states and the total popular vote – Clinton has won bigger states) I was curious as to how those same state wins translated to electoral votes (the only thing that counts in a general election – nationwide popular vote is meaningless as Al Gore can attest and coming close in a state is meaningless as electoral votes in a state are selected on a winner take all basis). Now clearly a Democrat winning a primary in a particular state does not mean that they will win it in the general election, bt I was curious as to how Obama stacked up against Clinton in the electoral vote.
Of all the states voting or caucusing to date (not counting Michigan and Florida)Clinton has won states with a total of 219 electoral votes and Obama has won states with a total of 202 electoral votes.
Michigan and Florida account for 17 and 27 electoral votes respectively.
I think you DO need to count FL and MI, because the resident’s votes will count in November. So, it puts Hillary a fingertip away from the gold ring.
I think this is the type of analysis that “super”delegates often do. The average voter tends to forget about the Electoral College, which is the bottom line here in America.
one of the candidates “won” a number of states that are going GOP, regardless.
If you score the states that neither one is going to win as a ZERO,
you get a result that is a better indicator of the November poll.
Hillary won Texas. Obama won Miss., Wy., Idaho, Utah, Neb., Ga., S.C., Ala. and a couple of other hopeless causes.
We might begin there and then credit each candidate with the votes of states like California, Massachusetts, New York, etc. which will go Democratic in any event.
Then the question becomes, who puts more states in contest?
That is a more complex and somewhat subjective question. Yet it is the real issue. Does anyone think that NY or Mass will go for McCain and not Obama?
Does anyone think that Clinton will win Colorado or New Mexico? That is an interesting question.
For the purposes of figuring out who will win in November, Texas and New York both equal zero.
Most of the big states will go for the Democrat, regardless of the nominee. The large swing states – Florida, Ohio and Michigan come to mind first – are so up in the air right now that polls don’t really do them justice.
Compounding the problem of determining the answer to your question is the fact that some people will not move to “the Democrat” until after the nomination is decided one way or the other. I think both Clinton and Obama are weaker in the polls right now than their final support will be…
But using your analysis, don’t even think about trying to add those electoral votes to HRC’s 219; the Obama people have a hissy fit.
The large states Hillary won would go to Hillary if she is the nominee and not to Obama. When it comes to large heavily blue states like California and New York, they will in all likelihood go to either one in November. Others, like Texas will go to neither.
This is an exercise in apples (primaries) and oranges (general), proving nothing, especially considering that some contests were open, some Dems only, and took place at different times, during different stages of the campaigns, with or without other candidates still in the race and under different circumstances, with or without campaigning or even with or without all candidates appearing on the ballot.
As I stated in my post: winning a state in a primary does not necessarily mean that it would be won in the General.
I am also not positing anything. I just thought it would be interesting to see how each candidate stacked up against one another with regard to electoral votes in the states that each won.
This was done, as I also stated, in the context of each candidate claiming to be the more electable in part due to the states they won. Clinton claims that because she won the big states that she is more likely than Obama to win in the General. Obama claims that because he has won more states (some of those red states) that he is more electable.
Noticed a Saturday Gallup Poll that had Obama regaining a small national lead after briefly losing the lead to Hillary after the Wright video dust-up but before his speech.
Wonder if the video showing Hillary, 16 year old Chelsea in tow, being greeted by children with flowers upon landing in Bosnia on an occasion she had been repeatedly claiming was so fraught with danger there was no greeting ceremony and they had to run to waiting vehicles under sniper fire, will get as much play.
Clinton has been telling this story, claiming she was sent because it was too dangerous for the president to go. I’m wondering what’s worse? The fact that it’s a completely bogus story or the fact that, if it had been true, that would mean Bill Clinton had consented to sending his little girl into such a situation? Not to mention several entertainers, including Sinbad.
At first, Hillary continued to insist on her version. Now, with so many contemporary news accounts, the video and so many of those who were on the trip coming forward with the truth (including Andrea Mitchell), her campaign says she mis-spoke. At least she wasn’t wagging her finger at us while defending her initial version.
That 8 year old could have had a bomb vest, or she could have been a spotter for the snipers in the hills. Thank God Bill didn’t go, he could’ve been killed!
Just kidding. I love this story.
another fine example of how the numbers only count if they favor Clinton. In reality the superdelegates will look at all the numbers including the number of states won, the number of delegates won, the popular vote count, the count that Roger D gave above and a count of the states that the candidates won that they will likely win in the general.
Is which has a better chance against McCain in Ohio & Florida.
What could be interesting is with Obama running (95% likely) I think he’ll continue with his 50 state strategy. And I think he will pay serious attention to 20 or so of them.
This could be amazing. If states like Texas are suddenly competitive then McCain is left playing defense in states that should be his base and he’s lost.
In addition, it means more wins for us Dems for Congress and state seats. It could be a major realignment.
Shafroth complains about Polis. Than Polis says he has filed a complaint against Shafroth. Has anyone actually seen the Polis complaint accusing Shafroth of criminal wrongdoing? Polis should either post the complaint or issue an apology.
I haven’t even looked at this site for a week and you’re STILL whining about this on a blog?!
Have you called the campaign HQ and asked; or does the your mom’s basement not have a phone?
Every life is precious, and they served with honor. 4,000
http://conservativeforchange.b…
tough time to be GOP.
You endorse McCain in one part of your blog,
and in another part you complain that the GOP is no longer “conservative.”
I’ve looked at the Constitution Party’s website (can’t rememberit right off the top of my head,) and it is a lot closer to your beliefs than the GOP.
You are more pragmatist than conservative, it appears to me.
Nothing wrong with that, I suppose.
But that’s different than being a strict conservative.
It is just that John McCain is the better choice between the three that are left. The constitution party does have beliefs that are similar to conservatism and Republicans,so does the libertarian, but third parties in this country do not mussle political will. I wish that they did, that way it would allow for colilition building. But that fact is that Republicans and Democrats are what we got, and I would rather have a Republican than a Democrat.
Colorado Springs is second only to Las Vegas.
From the Gazette
Does this seal the fate for Ritter’s first term? With such a huge shortfall I don’t know how they can advance any major policy intiatives – they’ve already given up on health care. How can they do anything in regards to transportation or education?
I like the gov and I know the state appreciates a return to good governance (as evidenced by his high approval numbers) but it’s frustrating to see so little of actual substance getting done on the really big issues.
More, http://steampoweredopinions.bl…
for looking goofy (and allowing his picture to be taken) in military headgear.
In the latest Colorado Statesman, Aaron Harber has an add touting his interview with David Petraeus. He is pictured as is General Petraeus. Petraeus looks fine and commander-like in his fatigue cap. Harber looks goofy in a helmet that looks like it it too small for his head, and a flak jacket.
During a tele-townhall call hosted by Bentley Rayburn tonight Bentley answered a question about the IRS saying that the IRS rewards bad behavior and he said “borrowing money is a bad behavior.” I would guess that he thinks the home interest deduction is a bad behavior but he wouldn’t understand that since he doesn’t own a home in Colorado.
I don’t have HBO, so I haven’t. Anyone care to review what they’ve seen? The mini-series has been receiving a lot of hype; I’ve even seen ads for it at the post office. And I think Paul Giamatti’s a good actor.
http://www.hbo.com/films/johna…
Pretty good
I haven’t caught the whole thing. I have On Demand, so that’ll be most of my weekend.
May not be 100% accurate, but I think it’s a story that people should see to get a better knowledge of the birth of our country.
I may read the book sometime.