( - promoted by Rocky Mountain Right - )
Tom is a good man. He has backslid a couple of times but, overall, he is a good man. I live in Parker (Tom's former Congressional district) and I am one of the folks that voted for him every time I got the chance.
That said, the campaign has become very nasty with a LOT of backroom dealing and disavowed comments. The RINOs have spent the last several weeks throwing mud at Tom and calling him everything under the sun. He made some statements about not joining a third party that have come back to haunt him. The RINOs and the party-line-over-the-cliff lemmings have really been out for blood.
If I were Tom, I'd be really mad that the party--and PEOPLE--that I took so much abuse supporting and so many bulletts defending would turn so violently on me. Amidst resounding declarations that I was "finished in the Colorado Replublican Party" I might just fly the middle finger and stay in until the bitter end.
I mean, what's he got to lose? Truth be told, the abuse I have taken for defending him from those RINO [not fit for print] has very nearly got me to the point of voting for him to teach the dang RINOs a lesson. They tried to push Norton on us--who McCain recruited, funded and campaigned for, and then tried to play down their mistake with McInnis and take a shot at the Tea Party by pretending to back Maes. Their ultimate goal with Maes, when he self-destructed as anyone with a brain knew he would after meeting him, was to be able to look condescendingly at the Tea Party and 9/12 folks and say, "See, we told you so. Now let us ex spurts handle the politics".
With that all in mind, I have moments of wondering why I should vote for Norton if she is on the ballot.
Lesson: Root out the RINOs from leadership. In this single campaign they were able to take out Maes, then prop him up, talk Tancredo into ruining his chances for a further office by waving the conservative flag at him and telling him it really WAS best for the party, then turning on him and then position their RINO Senate candidate that lost to Ken Buck as the Republican candidate for Governor.
Two words: Shark Tank
....and Wadhams said he thought McInnis was untrustworthy? Look in the mirror, man!
If Dan Maes' angry declarations that he will stay in the race, constant claims that his ethical problems are non-issues, and insistence that we all need to stop focusing on his past and instead on his future plans all seems oddly familiar; that's because we went through all of this very recently. Dan Maes has transformed into a mirror image of Scott McInnis as his campaign was unravelling.
It was exactly one month ago that Dan Maes savaged Scott McInnis in a debate: "You don't have positions. You don't stand for anything. You have no integrity. You have no character." (CBS 4)
Now, Dan Maes has revealed himself through his numerous lies and exaggerrations to be just as lacking in integrity and character as Scott McInnis. Maes' attempts to dismiss the fact that he apparently misrepresented his entire background echoes of McInnis' claims that his plagiarism scandal was a "non-issue."
Sadly, Maes will likely not step aside. He shows all the traits of running a self-centered, ego-driven campaign. Already, he is spinning the hemorrhaging of his support as an assault by insidious "power brokers" and casting himself as some sort of proletariat hero rising up against the oppressors. Make no mistake, Dan Maes has been abandoned by "party insiders" and grassroots alike. Tea Party group Hear Us Now has rescinded their endorsement of Maes. A group of 9.12 groups are set to meet with Maes this week over "concerns" about his campaign. This is the end of the line for Maes even if he refuses to accept it.
( - promoted by Rocky Mountain Right - )
Do you hear that sound, Dan? That's the sound of the people leaving you. Do you remember that scene in the movie Old School when Frank (Will Ferrill) stripped naked and told everyone they were going streaking? Well, Dan, we're at that scene when it's dawned on Frank that he was alone and naked running down the street.
Not to worry, though. The car has pulled up along side you. You can either keep running and suffer the embarrassment or stop the race and head home.
We're proud of you, Dan. You qualified for the race and you were even a contender. Unfortunately, there are a lot of people counting on you but you have no chance of winning. It's time to step aside and get someone in there with fresh legs to carry this home.
Remember, we're counting on you to make the right choice.
( - promoted by Rocky Mountain Right - )
( - promoted by Rocky Mountain Right - )
Winners:
Michael Bennet
He now enters the general election as an elected candidate with a resounding thumping of Romanoff. As a candidate who practically prints money in campaign contributions, he is running the perfect race to win in November. So long as Romanoff’s supporters were not too hurt by the campaign, Bennet should have a consolidated base of Democrats supporting him.
Ken Buck
Buck ran an overall better campaign effort than Jane Norton. Given that he had been written off for dead last year, this was an impressive comeback. However, the vast majority of his success was the 527 part of the effort. With nearly $2M in 527 contributions, Buck’s success was based on the support of a couple millionaires who footed the bill. Now the ante is upped, and those supporters had better be willing to add a zero to the end of those 527 checks or Buck is in big trouble. I would be surprised if the old Republican guard of
John Hickenlooper
He could not have asked for a better setup come November. McInnis would have been a terrible candidate, but he would have known it and might have vacated the race. I don’t see any way in which Maes will give up his position on the ballot. The Republican establishment is not going to embrace Maes, and Maes does not have the ability to win (with or without Tanc in the race). It is virtually impossible to see a scenario in which Hickenlooper is not the next governor of
Walker Stapleton
He ran a wise and well disciplined race. JJ Ament had worked very hard, but Stapleton had a better plan to win and more money to execute that plan. With a wind at the Republican’s back this cycle, Stapleton stands a great chance at becoming the next SoS.
Norton’s El Paso Team
The El Paso Team for Norton did something right as she polled around 9 points higher in the conservative hotbed of
Toss Ups:
Dan Maes
Why is Dan Maes a toss up? Had he lost, I would have put in the winner category. He would have beaten expectations and gone down a legend. I would say the real Dan Maes has many chinks in his armor; but the reality is that he has no armor. He won on an anti-McInnis vote, not a pro-Maes vote. His only path to victory is for Hickenlooper to have a scandal twice the size of McInnis… not very likely. So unless Maes finds a graceful exit from the race with a posh deal from the “establishment”, he will likely be humiliated in November. If this happens, he will be quickly discarded by his now loyal followers and be relegated back to complete insignificance with no future in politics.
Tea Party
It is not clear what if any role the tea party played yesterday. Statewide, some self proclaimed tea party candidates won and some lost. Polling showed Buck’s support came as much from party base as anywhere and Norton did well with new voters. Without a McInnis meltdown, Maes would have been pounded. If you remove the tea party from the equation, I think the election breaks out pretty much the same way.
McInnis’ Key Supporters and Endorsers
Everyone knows they had picked their boy and had to stick with him. Without a viable alternative in the Republican primary, they more or less were stuck with a tough sell. This will probably not come back to hurt anyone from the McInnis campaign as no one could have seen the plagiarism thing coming.
Losers:
Scott McInnis
He is done, and his campaign seems like a big mistake now.
Andrew Romanoff
He sold his house based on information from flawed polls. Whoops. That’s probably one heck of a morning after election hangover.
Right now, it seems that the state party is in chaos. They have a disaster of a race in the governor and no good way out. Their standard bearer for Senate and Governor have key supporters who rabidly hate the GOP and openly rant about it. Even if by some chance the GOP wins the two big races, they will have a continual problem with the supporters of their two candidates. Wadhams may well be in his last term as state party chair over this debacle and how he handled it.
Josh Penry
He must have made some sort of deal to get out of the governor’s race which is looking like a very bad decision this morning. Given his ambition and knack for politics, that must have been a heck of a deal. His affiliation with the Norton campaign has made him some enemies. A year ago Penry was the darling future of the party, today, he has nothing. The silver lining for him is that Penry is probably planning a long game. He may very well have earned the support of the money brokers and be the clear front runner for governor in 2014.
Maes Key Supporters and Endorsers
It’s not a question of if, it’s a question of when. Maes campaign is a house of cards that will collapse. They make mistake after mistake, have a candidate who could pass for a small town mayor but never a governor, and no apparent plan to win the election. What makes matters worse is that no one in the campaign realizes this. If they did, they might be able to mitigate the damage, but this campaign is an accident looking for a place to happen. When it all comes crashing down, folks like Kent Lambert and Dave Schultheis are going to take the blame. As experienced politicians, they will have to answer the question: Shouldn’t you have known better?
One of the largest question marks as we approach the August 10th primary in Colorado is just how many votes will be cast. We can get some idea of the scale of this election by examining the last major contested primary in the state as well as data from states that have previously instituted mail-in ballot elections.
The last major contested statewide primary on the Republican side was the Coors-Schaffer race in 2004. The turnout numbers for this race can be used as a baseline for turnout in a non-mail-in ballot election between well-matched Republican opponents.
333,701 votes were cast in the 2004 Republican Senate primary. In August of 2004, there were 1,074,366 total registered Republicans. Secretary of State records also indicate that in August of 2004, approximately 73% of all registered voters in the state were also active voters. This means that out of around 784,000 active Republican voters in 2004 - 42% cast their ballots.
The latest numbers from the Secretary of State office show that there are 855,667 active registered Republicans. If turnout were to match 2004, we can expect 359,000 votes to be cast. However, this is the first mail-in ballot primary in Colorado and this will impact turnout.
The impact of all mail-in ballots on turnout is disputed among academic sources and tends to vary widely. However, some recent research, as well as trends from states that have put mail-in elections in place, indicates that a jump in turnout for a primary election for the first mail-in ballot election will be approximately five percent over the previous comparable election.
Using this model, it is likely that approximately 377,000 Republican votes will be cast in the 2010 primary. If Democrats experience comparable turnout, which early returns indicate they will, there will be approximately 360,000 votes cast in the Democratic primary.
The mail-in ballot process in place this year should cause the primary turnout to rise above historical primary turnout. However, this will not be the massive increase in turnout that some campaigns are banking on. Instead, all things being equal, mail-in ballots seem to increase voter turnout incrementally each election cycle that they are used.
( - promoted by Hestons Ghost - )
Wow! First it was the attack ads from Colorado Outlook labeling Senate District 6 candidate Dean Boehler as being too “extreme for Colorado”. Now, it appears a Denver-based law firm is trying to influence the primary by sending out slick ads supporting Dean’s opponent, and calling her “conservative to the core”.
Dan Maes sent out a statement today telling Tom Tancredo he isn't going anywhere.
Evergreen, CO, July 23, 2010 - This morning Republican Designee for Governor, Dan Maes, responded to the July 22 ultimatum by ex-congressman Tom Tancredo which stated that Maes or his republican opponent, Scott McInnis, should step down from the race for Governor if they win the primary and are losing in the polls to John Hickenlooper. "This is an arrogant and absurd position for Tom to take but it is certainly his right to do so. I will not step down from this race at anytime, period." Maes declared. "Tom thinks I am unelectable because of some bad press. If he actually has the courage enough to step into the arena I suspect he to will get some bad press." Maes claimed. "I am proud to continue our campaign with the state assembly victory, and polls showing us competing head to head with Mayor Hickenlooper at our back." Maes concluded.
No word yet from the McInnis campaign on whether or not he is backing out if Tom Tancredo gets in.
( - promoted by Hestons Ghost - )
Holy cow. Just when Ken Buck thought that everything was going his way (what with the dirty Washington, D.C. money pouring in to Colorado on his behalf and all), he got a little too comfortable and let this one slip at a recent event:
Yes. He did say that. He did say that the reason Colorado voters should support him is because he "...doesn't wear high heels."
Good luck defending that one, big boy.
Republicans across the state know Scott McInnis and Dan Maes have their shortfalls. There is no question about that. But it seems the Denver Post began its tirade against Republican candidates for Governor once their beloved Denver Mayor jumped in the race.
Take Karen Crummy for example. While asking Scott McInnis and Dan Maes questions about topics reaching back decades ago, she asks John Hickenlooper which sugary snack is his favorite. (Crummy reported Hickenlooper enjoys Snickers.)
Hard hitting, fair and balanced journalism? Hardly. Regardless of who Republicans put up against the Denver Post’s chosen candidate for Governor we can prepare ourselves for more Hickenlooper fluff pieces and more anti-Republican stories.
So while Karen Crummy and the Denver Post writers dig deep to see what ice cream, soda and coffee the Denver Mayor prefers, Republicans should continue promoting their chosen candidate for Governor and stop attacking each other.
An example of the Denver Post’s fair and balanced approach to the Governor’s race can be summed up in this Saturday Night Live clip.
( - promoted by Hestons Ghost - )
This is an exclusive which can be found on the Constitutionalis Today. I encourage everyone to take a gander. He put it out there. I believe by doing so he has nothing to hide. The games and shenanigans going on within our own party are not attractive. We must choose the best candidate from the ones the PEOPLE have already said they wanted. We do not want a hand picked candidate for us. http://www.theconstitutionalisttoday.com/exclusive-dan-maes-tax-records-released/
In 2006 - Bob Beauprez, arguably the worst candidate Colorado Republicans have ever fielded for any office until this point, was crushed by Bill Ritter in a 57-40 landslide. Having Bob Beauprez at the top of the ticket caused a drag effect on the rest of the ticket causing excellent candidates such as Mark Hillman to lose their races by narrow margins and extremely popular candidates such as Mike Coffman and John Suthers to end up in much closer races than they should have been in. Bob Beauprez's unpopularity surely contributed to handing his own 7th Congressional District to Rep. Ed Perlmutter (that district voted for both Ritter and Perlmutter by a wide margin). The carnage in 2006 in the state legislature can also be blamed on the disastrous top-of-the-ticket as local races are more insulated from the national mood.
As the last few years have shown , Bill Ritter is not exactly a skilled politician or a great campaigner. He won in a landslide because of Beauprez's implosion. In 2010, Colorado Republicans have even more damaged candidates than Bob Beauprez in the form of Scott McInnis and Dan Maes. On the other hand, Colorado Democrats are fronting a very skilled politician in the form of John Hickenlooper. In short, this is a recipe for an electoral blowout that will make it nearly impossible for Republicans to win back the Senate seat, the State Treasurer's office, the Secretary of State's office, CD-3, CD-4, CD-7, and countless local races that could be tanked by association.
There is no longer any doubt that Scott McInnis will not be on the ballot in November. McInnis may be able to scape by for the next few weeks and stand as a primary candidate. He might even be able to win the nomination against Dan Maes. However, McInnis does the party and the conservative movement a disservice the longer he remains in. This scandal has advanced to a point where it cannot be argued that it is "just politics" and every day that it rages on it tarnishes all Republicans.
On the other hand, a Maes victory in the primary would not be a legitimate victory. Maes would win not on his own merits but merely by the spectacular implosion of the McInnis campaign. Maes, who by all indications will still be unknown to the majority of the primary voters once ballots are dropped, could win by default. This scenario would leave Republicans with a candidate who has no resources to compete against John Hickenlooper, a tendancy to make 360-degree flips on issues when the situation suits him, and a questionable grasp of how the state operates. Maes is, simply put, woefully out of his depth.
Perhaps more damning to both candidates is the complete lack of confidence that is being shown towards both. Activists do not believe either can win (outside of small dedicated followings). Elected officials are running from them. Partisan organizations want no part of the Governor's race anymore. Colorado Republicans are about to be left with a gubernatorial candidate who has been disowned by their own party.
The only way out of this mess is for both candidates to step aside for the good of the party. Doing anything else will not only mean a certain victory for John Hickenlooper; but a probable victory for Betsy Markey, Ed Perlmutter, John Salazar, Bernie Buescher, Cary Kennedy, and Michael Bennet as well.
While many self-styled populists will rage against the idea of a party "establishment" vacancy committee selecting a nominee, the time to rage against them was when they were sweeping viable conservatives out of the way in favor of a race between Scott McInnis and whatever random people felt like slapping their name on the ballot. This is not an ideal situation by any means, but this is the only choice left.
Former State Treasurer candidate Ali Hasan chimed in on the Examiner's accusations that the Hasan Family Foundation was some how involved in the McInnis plagarism story. Hasan had this to say.
To readers of Rocky Mountain Right -
I wanted to publicly share the comment I left on Ian Cerveny's article, the linked article above at the Examiner.com
"It is likely that the Hasan Family Foundation knew..."
Dearest Ian Cerveny - in running for State Treasurer in 2010, I never asked Scott McInnis for his endorsement, as I was upset with him over his public criticism of Bob Schaffer during the 2008 election, a criticism which cost votes for all Republicans. In turn, there is no vendetta if the endorsement was never requested - and if you think otherwise, I suggest you to produce proof - you will not find it.
Second, while I cannot speak for the Foundation, I am sure that no one on the Foundation Board "knew" of potential plagiarism - if you think otherwise, I suggest you produce proof.
Until then, this article is a complete mischaracterization and should be edited or deleted.
Love and peace -
Muhammad Ali Hasan
ali@hasan2010.com
We appreciate Ali Hasan posting this on Rocky Mountain Right to give his view on the issue at hand.
( - promoted by Hestons Ghost - )
( - promoted by Hestons Ghost - )
Today more accusations fly. More info coming out on Scott McInnis. More on this person and that. I even saw stuff on my county coroner's race. Really all these ploys are to sway the uniformed voters. You aren't involved and you don't know the candidates. You read the slop and believe it. That's on YOU for not being more informed and involved!
Folks! Get our acts together! We are destroying our party by acting like children. Let's get to the real issues. Our nation is threatened so greatly and all many campaigns care about is ruining the opponents name through the mud. Grow up! Many voters are getting sick and tired of the mud slinging. I for one know I am. We must focus or we lose come November. If we lose in November our country loses forever. Focus my friends!
Allegations are flying as to who was the driving force behind the plagiarism story against Scott McInnis. The Denver Examiner reported today that it is possible the Hasan family played a role in this after watching the defeat of their son Ali Hasan by J. J. Ament at the Republican State Assembly.
The Hasan Family Foundation released these plagiarism accusations through the Denver Post earlier this week, forcing McInnis to come clean on his sloppy partial authorship.
Not coincidentally, a member of the Hasan family entered into the 2010 race for state treasurer late last year. Ali Hasan, son of Hasan Family Foundation founders Malik and Seeme Hasan, was favored to finish strong in the assembly, but was instead routed by fellow Republican candidate JJ Ament. McInnis refused to endorse any candidates in that race, despite his close relationship with the Hasan family and the fellowship extended to McInnis by the Foundation in 2005 after he left Congress.
It is likely that the Hasan Family Foundation knew that McInnis was not entirely responsible for the articles published under his name five years ago, and they may have also been aware of the plagiarized content therein. The timing of these accusations smacks of a vendetta … one earned when McInnis failed to repay a favor by endorsing Ali Hasan for state treasurer.
Did the Hasan family really push this information because Scott McInnis refused to endorse Ali Hasan in his campaign for State Treasurer? Stranger things have happened.
( - promoted by Hestons Ghost - )
Many Republicans opened their mail today to find an attack piece against Dean Boehler, Republican candidate for State Senate District 6. The mailer took the form of an over-sized, two-sided, color postcard.
The mailer, sponsored by a group called Colorado Outlook, says that, "Republican Tea Party Candidate Dean Boehler is too conservative for Colorado." (A little research shows that Colorado Outlook was incorporated by several liberal mouthpieces from the Denver area.) It goes on to call Dean, "a dangerous choice for Colorado." Throughout the rhetoric-laced mailer, the authors try to tie Dean Boehler to the Tea Party, as if that's a bad, scary thing.
In this year, of all years, these liberal Denver operatives couldn't be more wrong-headed if they tried. (Which I'm sure they have.) Guess what? The Tea Party is very active in southwestern Colorado! Along with the 9/12 Project and other conservative groups, the Tea Party shares a huge amount of popularity in State Senate District 6. What were they thinking?
Two other odd things about this hit piece against Boehler. First, Dean hasn't been officially endorsed by any Tea Party or 9/12 group. Don't get me wrong. Dean Boehler shares many of the same values as the Tea Party movement, and has spoken in front of many Tea Party and 9/12 Project audiences. In fact, Dean considers it a compliment that Colorado Outlook associates him with the Tea Party! He wears the distinction proudly.
The other question that comes to mind is this... Why would a liberal political organization try to interfere in a Republican primary? That's right. Dean is in a primary race with State Representative Ellen Roberts. Why would Colorado Outlook care which candidate faces off against incumbent Democrat Bruce Whitehead? Good question, huh?
I mean, why not wait to spend their money on the general election after the outcome of the primary is known? "That," as Shakespeare wrote, "is the question."
Apparently, they believe Dean Boehler is too dangerous to allow him to challenge Bruce Whitehead. You see, Dean Boehler IS dangerous. He is dangerous to tax & spend liberals. Dangerous to unfunded federal mandates. Dangerous to groups who seek to curb our Second Amendment rights. Dangerous to federal bureaucracies seeking to infringe on our state's rights. And, perhaps, most dangerous to those who believe more government control is the answer to every social problem.
So, to the Republican voters of State Senate District 6, ask yourselves one question? If the liberals are so afraid of Dean Boehler, shouldn't he be the one you WANT representing you in the Colorado State Senate?
Just thinking out loud.
( - promoted by Hestons Ghost - )
Democrat candidate for Attorney General and Boulder County District Attorney Stan Garnett’s hand must be hurting after banging it on the podium so much lately. In his latest press screed, he says that “states should have the right to decide important states’ rights issues…” and that Suthers “appears to support states’ rights on a selectively partisan basis.” Here, Garnett is referencing a Massachusetts court overturning the Federal Defense of Marriage Act.
As a side note, The Durango Herald interview also quotes Garnett as saying “Boulder is not nearly as liberal as people think. When it comes to education, public safety, quality of life, Boulder’s very conservative.” I though Udall’s victory showed that the Boulder-Liberal label no longer works? Maybe we need a new Boulder-Conservative label. Stan, do you really believe the weed-friendly Boulder-ites have a conservative public safety bent? Put the pipe down!
( - promoted by Hestons Ghost - )
So when the "Colorado Promise" fails to assuage voters' angst regarding (fill in the blank - the disaster in the Gulf, $13 trillion budget deficit, mandated health care, increased taxes, etc.), generalization is the 'go to' tactic.
In his latest fundraising missive and blog entry, Andrew Romanoff suggests that those on the far right speak for the GOP as a whole. While nothing could be further from the truth, it's an interesting move on his part, and I think we can all rest assured that the media will begin lapping this stuff up and regurgitating it to the unwitting public.
The question is, will the public buy it this time around?
First off, using former Congressman Tancredo's speech given at a "Ken Buck for U.S. Senate" rally or the "tweets" of State Senator Dave Schultheis as legitimate representation of what this election is about, much less what the GOP is all about, is just poor form.
(Honestly, Mr. Speaker, where was your indignation when Madam Speaker Pelosi called then-President Bush a "total failure?" Where was the public outrage when House Democrats booed and heckled the president during his 2005 State of the Union Address?)
Second, the public is tired of spending. Period. They're tired of government taking and taking and doing nothing - taking more money, taking away freedom, taking more taxes. They're scared for the future and the future of thier kids. And they ought to be.
At this point, Democrats have controlled Congress and the U.S. Senate for four years. They've controlled the presidency and the majority of governors' mansions for almost two. How long will Democrats point their fingers at Republicans and think the public won't notice the smoke and mirrors?
Can Tancredo and Schultheis get a little nutsy? Sure, but so can Sen. Reid and Rahm Emanuel.
This election is about jobs and the economy. It's about restoring freedom, getting government out of our way and letting Americans do what we do best - finding a way out of this mess. It's about creating opportunity for businesses and employees, not creating new taxes and burdensome regulation. It's going to take a stiff upper lip and a strong stomach to reach in and make cuts - among other departments, it will likely mean cuts to Medicaid (which eats up 30 percent of the state's budget) and cuts to education (which eats up 43 percent of the state's budget).
Does it stink? Yes. But, can we afford to continue down this path of infinite spending looking always to tomorrow to bail us out? No. Is the answer to our problems a tax increase? Probably not during a recession.
We've got real problems Mr. Romanoff. And while you and your friends in the media try and obfuscate and spin, make excuses and point fingers, voters are smarter than you give them credit. That's a Colorado promise you can take to the bank.
We can sort this all out after Nov. 2, but in the meantime, if Romanoff would be kind enough to tell us what his solutions are and limit his name calling and broad (not to mention, disingenuous) generalizations to beating up his Primary opponent, that would be fantastic.
For general inquiries, tips, and blogroll requests; please email: info@rockymountainright.com
