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%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
June 27, 2009 11:09 PM UTC

McInnis Tries To Pile On

  • 13 Comments
  • by: MesaModerate

( – promoted by Colorado Pols)

In the latest of his embarassing e-mails to people he assumes are supporting him, Congressman McInnis tries to pretend that he’s been fighting Bill Ritter for the past two years over his oil and gas rules.  

Really, Scott?  Where exactly have you been?  Cashing checks from EnCana isn’t the same as being in the trenches fighting onerous regulation.  Worse yet, when he had an opportunity to confront the chief architect of the rules (Kathleen Curry) he eloquently noted: “this is your fight, not mine.”

http://www.gjsentinel.com/hp/c…

Just when people think a campaign couldn’t get off to a worse start, Scott steps up to show how it’s possible to waffle on one of the biggest campaign issues of 2010.  First it’s not his fight, next he’s concerned.  

From the desk of Scott McInnis  

June 27, 2009

Good morning,

I thought you would be very interested in the article linked here from the Denver Business Journal.  It says loud and clear what a lot of us have been concerned about for some time: demonizing an industry that provides quality jobs and tax revenue in communities throughout our state has real, lasting consequences.

Article link: http://denver.bizjournals.com/…

The study by the respected Fraser Institute shows that Colorado ranks dead last for where energy company executives want to invest money and create jobs.

You’ll note, too, that when Gov. Ritter took office in 2007,  Colorado was at the top of the list for executives.  Now, in just two years, we’ve fallen to rock bottom.  

You don’t need an economics degree to know what the effects will be when energy businesses reject Colorado for other states.  Fewer jobs.  Lower tax revenues which hurt our public schools and other local priorities.  A much steeper climb out of tough economic times.  

This important study shows clearly that Colorado’s self-inflicted economic wound is not going to heal any time soon.   Only a return to a balanced approach focused on jobs and solid environmental protection will do that.  

Please take a minute to read this study and pass it along to others who will want to see the decline in Colorado’s economic development standing.  

Have a great weekend,

Scott

 

Comments

13 thoughts on “McInnis Tries To Pile On

        1. You can pull that off – barely – for a house district. But statewide there just isn’t enough hours in the day.

          The other thing is the web/blogosphere will be second only to paid TV in ’10. And I think a lot of candidates confuse using certain technology with being effective in that medium.

          With that said, it doesn’t upset me much that the GOP mostly sucks at this while on the Dem side we range from ok to excellent.

          1. What’s your example of the Ritter campaign using the Web, blogosphere or social networking “ok to excellent”ly? So far they seem as inept and scrambling as McInnis.

            On the other hand, Frazier and Penry seem to have grasped the medium pretty well so far.

            1. However, I look at the total effect and that includes a lot of people who support the Democratic party but are not a member of any campaign. Look back at Udall vs Schaffer – a lot of the stuff on the web that helped Udall was from people who had no connection to the campaign.

              This is one of the ways Ritter is hurt by his actions. People who normally would step up to help his campaign on the web – don’t.

              1. the quality and determination Republicans are bringing to the Web this time around, or you’re just not plugged into the networks where Republicans and GOP candidates are very active. There’s some geeky newcomer awkwardness, but it’s not true the GOP “mostly sucks at this.”

                Also, Ritter is hardly MIA — his sock puppets are out embarrassing the campaign, he’s got a dead Twitter account and sends out the occasional e-mail, some of which get passed around with derisive comments.

                Basing your assessment on the last campaign would be a mistake.

  1. about the Fraser study is the anonymity of the respondents. Corporate executives who shade the truth in order to make a politcal score are putting themselves at risk with their share holders. Anonymity shields them from the fiduciary responsibility and allows them to respond with the politically expedient comment. How dumb do they think we are.?

  2. At least McInnis is engaging discussion on an issue.  Let’s talk about Ritter and that he hasn’t updated his website in three years.  Talk about lame.

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

84 readers online now

Newsletter

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