U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Jena Griswold
60%
60%
40%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Alexis King
(D) Brian Mason
40%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez
(D) George Stern
(R) Sheri Davis
50%↑
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(R) Kevin Grantham
(D) Jerry DiTullio
60%
30%
20%
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) Somebody
90%
10%
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) Yadira Caraveo
(D) Joe Salazar
50%
40%
40%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
October 23, 2008 01:28 AM UTC
33 Comments
I read your post over on SquareStates against Amendment 51.
Boo.
Who cares if 20 other groups go for a tax hike. This is what the state gets with TABOR. Let them make the case that funds are needed for their issue and let the voters decide. That is what TABOR is all about. Take the money allocation decisions away from lawmakers and give it back to the people.
Amendment 51 is a reasonable way to help the most vulnerable in our society. When I read your post I thought of the Grinch. What a shame full chintzy argument.
It is possible to fund programs without raising taxes–it’s called spending cuts.
If you want more money for your special interest, then you have to find a place in the budget to make a cut.
I would argue that TABOR is
allkinda about fiscal responsibility.I need to figure out how to write one.
I was doing some research and saw his post and it was one of those WTF moments for me. I agree with him on a lot of the issues but this is one that I think he is wrong about.
I don’t buy the cut spending to increase spending argument. This amendment is about $50 over a year which is chump change for most folks. The Republicans are all lathered up about Amendment 48 but could care less about a developmentally disabled child if it has tax repercussions. One of my best friends has a 24 year old autistic child and it is a beyond difficult for them to take care of him. What is so magical about our current tax rates? We can’t increase taxes because?
I really do have to put up a diary about this. My apologies to all for injecting a different subject into Dave’s diary. Proceed with discussing the bus crash.
A bus crash is more organized, I think.
I haven’t filled out my mail in ballot yet and haven’t made up my mind on this one. I need input and would greatly appreciate hearing your POV on this.
Union, Political, & Corporate Bosses are against them, yet 420,000 Coloradans signed petitions to get them on the ballot.
Just a sample…
p.s. I do not endorse 49, but since they oppose them as a group I needed to be fair to the 49 people.
Thanks. Any advice from you, I just do the opposite and it’s a win/win for all of us.
As we all know 47/54 are headed for trouble. Workers rights will continue to be restricted by Corporate and Union Bosses.
Sole source inside dealing Denver Chamber types will thrive and continue their inside political dealings.
Union Bosses is as outdated as the unsliced loaf of bread.
It’s chump change for you. I promise to invest it wisely in union-brewed beer.
but you blew me off.
Would you consider spending fourteen cents a day to help 12,000 developmentally disabled people get needed care or are you too drunk to help out? Can I summarize your position as: “My life is good but helping families struggling to deal with tragic situations isn’t important to me? I’m not willing to give a dime to help them”.
http://www.endcoloradowaitlist…
YES on 51
when they are getting a huge benefit from the union’s bargaining, but they SHOULD be forced to pay a sales tax that would help a small (albeit deserving) portion of the population?
Your logic is baffling. Stick to a position for once.
Based on your logic (and Ewegen’s slant), shouldn’t the government collect a Chamber of Commerce Association fee for each business license it grants? Maybe they could do the monthly billing for Chamber dues too.
Go back to your thuggery … there is a rally of your forced unionism types standing at City Hall.
YES on 54 and 47!
But I think the responsible answer is no. 51 will pass and it will be interesting to see how many of these we get in ’10.
Especially a regressive sales tax that makes damned near everything I buy cost more.
Damaging. I don’t know how you spin that, if you’re the McCain campaign.
And frankly Chuck Todd is right–the body language between the two is awkward, tense, uncomfortable to watch.
I usually mute them both anyway. The body language really does jump out without sound.
Yeah, his voice makes my head hurt so the less I have to listen to him, the better. 🙂
The wheels have been coming off for about 3-4 weeks. McCain has continued to wither and look confused about what is going on. At times, I honestly expected him to say something like, “Wait – America is supposed to love me. It’s my turn. Why is everyone picking on me?”
The McCain problem is McCain. The guy just has not delivered a product to the American people that make them want to invest in it. I think he lost the election when he pulled the “I’m suspending my campaign” ploy, went back to the Senate and disappeared into the cloakroom. It was a chance to show all of the attributes of leadership he says he possesses – yet he showed us nothing.
one of the main reasons he was such a crappy pilot and stalled out so much was because he hated studying and never spent time with his manuals.
After he made that big fuss about going back to DC to be the hero he was unable to contribute anything to the special meeting he got Bush to call and bring Obama to, and unwilling to even state an opinion. How could he? He admittedly hadn’t read a thing. He has also admitted to not understanding economics.
He may not have liked Romney but he certainly would have inspired more confidence as a running mate in this crisis and could have spoken coherently on economic matters, something neither McCain nor Palin can manage. Any of his other choices would probably have been more confidence inspiring in the face of the financial melt down.
If McCain is looking for someone to blame for Palin or for the incoherent jumble of messages and proposals that come out of his campaign one after another on an almost daily basis, he only needs to look in the mirror. The final decisions are his.
It looks a lot like the failed HRC camapaign which also tried to paint Obama as inexperienced, as some kind of dangerous other, had a lot of infighting and also whined about the unfair press.
…especially in “battleground” states. All in all, a good “poll day” for McCain.
All others have Obama surging. He could peak too soon I suppose.
Sample sizes and skews are common. The AP poll is of “likely voters”. This means people that have voted before and do not have cell phones.
The press wants it close to make money.
That’s bullshit.
Different polling organizations use different methods, and the AP is notoriously conservative (resistant to changing its model for likely voters).
An Obama landslide and rejection of Republicans is just as compelling a story as a neck-and-neck horse race — perhaps more so, as most readers are sick to death of the endless campaign, they want it to be over, or at least for the story to evolve. Interest in the election is at historic highs, it’s not going to wane in the last two weeks.
AP’s poll had 44% evangelicals. If you want to believe there’s anything remotely legitimate about that kind of sample–which, um, gives McCain a 10% advantage among voters under 25–by all means.
It’s a bad poll, whether they did it intentionally or not.
There are a number of problems with it, including the one you point out oversampling evangelicals. It’s a bad poll, that doesn’t mean “the press” wants it “close” to “make money.”
Here’s a link to the story about the flawed poll:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…
It’s also out of line with most other polls.
…but it’s not just the bad sample that raises eyebrows. It’s also the case that they used a ridiculous LV model that takes the numbers from +10 Obama among RVs to +1 Obama among LVs. To get that kind of change, something like 65% of the responses they threw out were for Obama. Then they inexplicably waited a couple of days to release the numbers, coincidentally right when other polls were showing Obama’s numbers ticking back up. Then on top of all of that, their writer wrote it up with a headline saying that the race is tightening, again, while other polls and newer polls were showing the gap widening again.
Not a conspiracy theorist here, but it sure looks odd.
It’s a bad poll.
But the AP wasn’t skewing it, or screwing it up, so papers could “make money.” That was my only point.
First of all, it’s one of a dozen polls with equal weight, any of which can be cited by AP members, though without an accompanying cut-and-paste story. It may have been true 30 years ago that a national AP poll could somehow shape perceptions of a presidential race, but no one believes that anymore.
Second, the AP is fighting for its life, with papers large and small (some quite large) giving notice based on recent changes to the AP’s fee structure and content delivery — there’s simply no margin in providing anything but the best, most accurate product the organization can, because nothing will shed members faster than unreliable news, including polls.
We’ll see which it is — either the AP blew it, went out on a limb with what might turn out to be an inaccurate voter model — or broke from the crowd and went with its best model (doubtful), portending some serious tightening. Journalists and pollsters make mistakes — there’s enough of a spread, from Obama +6 to Obama +14, to demonstrate no one has figured out a universally acceptable model, and the AP’s poll varies by a lesser degree from the low-end Obama leads than those polls do from the high-end leads, so it’s not wildly out there, it’s just out there.
I suggest that you read The Political Economy of Media-enduring issues, emerging dillemas
by Robert W.McChesney
If you think that Fox, or CNN want a landslide you don’t speak the same language that they transmit their coverage in.
MSNBC has shown some bias in my opinion to Obama.
The media made money frightening people into selling their 401k’s the last month.
CNBC and the barely credible Cramer show flat told people to sell everythig at market lows.
I can agree to disagree, but I prefer my news from foreign sources. Stratfor.com and overseas markets in Bloomberg are far more
newsworthy than what passes as journalism in our country.
The polls will move up & down 1 – 2 points daily if there is no true change. What you want to watch for is change in a direction over several days.