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 Tea Party group Hear Us Now has rescinded their endorsement of Maes.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.

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.

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.

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 - )

In the wake of GOP gubernatorial candidate Dan Maes’ spending spree, I decided to take a look at how the frontrunners for that office are spending their money. Though it’s still somewhat early, the guv candidates will begin their burn rate soon. Obviously, voter contact and media should encompass close to 75% of the budget, campaign staff and fundraising costs are distant second and third.

The Republican candidates for Governor seem to disagree on the issue of transparency, specifically on itemization of fees in the public and private sector, according to the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel. 

Dan Maes told the Sentinel "businesses shouldn’t itemize the things they include in their bills. Nor, he said, should public utilities.  Itemizing raises the ire of their customers."

Maes went on to say “If I itemize it separately, it’s an annoyance,” he added. "People say, 'Why am I paying this additional fee?' They’re aware of it, they’re informed of it, and it concerns them. If they roll it into the cost, nobody sees the extra cost, and they’re less likely to express an opinion one way or the other about it."

Scott McInnis on the other hand disagrees.  "Itemization brings accountability. So, the suggestion that [Maes] makes, I can’t imagine there would be one ratepayer in the state of Colorado, not one, who would agree with Mr. Maes’ position," McInnis said. "As governor, transparency has become more and more of an issue because there’s a general lack of trust. He’s wrong on this issue. He’s absolutely wrong."

Transparency in government is a huge issue among voters, especially in the Republican primary.  It is shocking that Maes would stake out this position.  This certainly gives McInnis some ammunition leading up to the August 10th primary. 

The biggest news from today's GOP Assembly was the failure of the McInnis campaign to capture top line on the primary ballot. While McInnis will still be heavily favored going into the August primary, the strong Maes showing combined with Joe Gschwendtner petitioning onto the ballot could cause headaches and a chaotic three-way race.

The second biggest piece of news was the fact that J.J. Ament not only secured top line but held rival Ali Hasan off of the ballot by a comfortable margin. Ament goes on to face Walker Stapleton in the August primary.

In noteworthy, but unsurprising, news Ken Buck won a vast majority of the votes and held all minor candidates off of the ballot. There had been speculation beforehand that delegates supporting Jane Norton or Tom Wiens would try to blunt Buck's victory by casting their vote for Cleve Tidwell or Steve Barton instead of Buck, but Buck's 77% victory indicates this probably did not happen.

Results

Ken Buck: 77%
Cleve Tidwell: 15%

Dan Maes: 49.35%
Scott McInnis: 48.89%

J.J. Ament: 79%
Ali Hasan: 19%

( - promoted by Rocky Mountain Right - )

Today, The Denver Post editorialized that GOP governor candidates Scott McInnis and Dan Maes should release their tax returns. From my reading, its defense of this position is everyone else has done it and it shows “how candidates make and manage their own money.”

 ( - promoted by Rocky Mountain Right - )

 Gary Harmon of the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel reports that Dan Maes is planning to force Scott McInnis to petition onto the primary ballot:

Maes said he hopes to gain 71 percent support from delegates to the GOP’s state convention this spring, forcing McInnis to make a “hard choice” whether to petition onto the ballot and force a primary election or withdraw.

Maes, 49, said he’ll rely on his business background to persuade voters he has the executive experience needed in the governor’s mansion, and he’ll avoid a destructive primary fight by stressing his strengths and conservative beliefs.

This is a lofty goal to be sure. The question that remains is that if Dan Maes finds himself falling short of gaining ballot access, as Marc Holtzman did in 2006, will he be willing to step aside in order to "avoid a destructive primary fight"? This sort of thing cuts both ways.

Rasmussen Reports has the first public polling on the post-Ritter gubernatorial race and Scott McInnis leads both Ken Salazar and John Hickenlooper:

Scott McInnis: 45%
John Hickenlooper: 42%

Scott McInnis: 47%
Ken Salazar: 41%

Former gubernatorial candidate Josh Penry is apparently ruling out joining the Scott McInnis for Governor ticket as a Lt. Governor nominee. Gary Harmon of the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel reports:

State Sen. Josh Penry, R-Grand Junction, said he isn’t interested in joining the ticket of his onetime rival, Scott McInnis, as the candidate for lieutenant governor.

“If I were hell-bent on being on the ticket, I’d still be in the race,” Penry said last week when asked about reports that he might be interested in the lieutenant governor slot.

Penry, however, didn’t tip his hand on a question that has five Republicans watching closely — his decision whether to run for a second term in the state Senate.

Under state law, a candidate for governor does not have to name a running mate until after the August primary - as Bob Beauprez did with Janet Rowland in 2006. Nonetheless; speculation surrounding several potential McInnis running mates has been heating up in recent weeks, notably state Rep. Amy Stephens of El Paso County.

The Democratic Lt. Governor slot may also be up in the air this year, as a desire on the part of incumbent Lt. Gov. Barbara O'Brien to pursue other career options was reportedly the catalyst for the Ritter/Bennet-Romanoff slapfight that Democrats are now embroiled in.

The latest poll from Rasmussen Reports shows Bill Ritter trailing Scott McInnis by 8-points.

A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in the state shows former GOP Congressman Scott McInnis ahead of Ritter 48% to 40%. Four percent (4%) like some other candidate, and seven percent (7%) are undecided.

A Maes-Ritter matchup was not polled.

Full text of Penry statement follows:

Dear Friends,

This morning in a small park in Grand Junction I endorsed Scott McInnis to be the next Governor of the State of Colorado.

Experience and new energy are now on the same team, and that's good news for our state, our party, and the cause of conservative reform and good government that Colorado desperately needs.

It's bad news for Bill Ritter and a Democratic legislature that has rubber stamped his big tax, big fee, no drill economic agenda. The Democratic monopoly in Denver has helped usher in the worst economy in 60 years. Soon, it will be their turn to take a number in the unemployment line.

My endorsement of Scott is an enthusiastic one - it comes on the heels of two weeks of talks between Scott and I as well as other leaders in local government, the state legislature, and leading Republican names like Tom Tancredo. Those talks resulted in a common-sense conservative reform agenda that will be unveiled in the coming days - it's a governing vision that will get Colorado's economy moving again, and at long last rally the Colorado Republican Party on the principles and priorities that make us strong. Look for more on that soon.

It also positions Colorado Republicans for a historic comeback in 2010.   

On the morning of election day in 2004, Colorado was Republican Country.

The Grand Old Party in the Centennial State claimed a Governor, two United States Senators, five Members of Congress, a state Treasurer, Secretary of State, and a majority in both the State House of Representatives and the Colorado Senate.

By that evening, everything changed. And over the next five plus years, Republicans witnessed a literal electoral collapse, with Democrats taking the Governor's office, both US Senate Seats, five Congressional Districts, the state House, Senate and the Treasurer's and the Secretary of State's office too.
The reasons for our Party's demise are by now well documented: a well-funded, well-organized and highly-motivated Democratic and liberal machine out-smarted and out-maneuvered a Republican Party that was, for its part, divided, undisciplined, and underfunded.

This week, the long march back begins for Colorado Republicans.  On the heels of runaway election sweeps in New Jersey and Virginia, Colorado Republicans have a once in a generation chance to return our governing philosophy to a leadership position in Colorado - to defeat an incumbent Governor, to re-establish conservative control of both chambers of the Colorado legislature and in other key seats as well.

And my endorsement of Scott McInnis is one part of that. This election is about something more than personalities and personal ambition - it's about reclaiming this State, and demanding common sense and leadership from government.

I left the Governor's race last week to focus our resources and our common purposes on taking back the electoral real estate we've lost - yes, beating Bill Ritter, but also rallying our resources to make sure we elect conservative reformers to Congress the statehouse and courthouses across Colorado.

It's a little different role then we envisioned five months ago, but it's a critical fight for Colorado.  And right after I finish a little turkey and a lot of mashed potatoes with the family, it's a fight that I will wage vigorously.

For his part, Scott is eager to earn your support and vote. Ask him questions and hear him out. My bet is he'll convince you he's the right man to be Governor - like he did me.

Thanks for your time. Best wishes for a happy and safe Thanksgiving.

Most Sincerely,

Josh

The McInnis campaign and other Republican leaders have been working to unify the party in order to take back Colorado from Democrat control.  Mike Rosen writes about this in the Denver Post.

The agenda, modeled on the winning reform recipes of Chris Christie and Bob McDonnell in their New Jersey and Virginia gubernatorial races, gives McInnis something concrete to run on rather than merely running against Ritter. It's sufficiently faithful to traditional conservative principles to please and reassure the Republican base, while specific, practical, and inclusive enough to attract swing-voting independents in the state. You might call it a Contract for Colorado.

Some of the provisions include:

• A commitment to limit taxes and state spending.

• Rescinding the Ritter executive order unionizing state employees.

• Requiring employers to participate in the federal e-verify program for new hires.

• Establishment of a state "rainy day" fund.

• Responsible development of renewable energy and Colorado's abundant oil and natural gas resources as well as nuclear energy.

• Appointing conservative judges to balance the court and reign in judicial activism.

• Expanding school choice through additional charter schools and education vouchers.

• Reversing property tax and auto registration taxes.

Concerns that the platform would repel moderates by taking an extreme position on abortion were unfounded. It simply reinstates Gov. Bill Owens' policy, banning taxpayer funding for abortion agencies like Planned Parenthood and making a general statement of principle defending the sanctity of human life.

This appears to be a winning agenda.  Republicans could have a great year in 2010 if this works out as planned.

Adam Schrager reports at 9News that Josh Penry has been carrying on a number of high-level discussion with Scott McInnis and Tom Tancredo in an effort to defuse a potentially destructive gubernatorial battle.

Within the last few days, Penry has attended two meetings with McInnis and potential challenger Tom Tancredo as well as a meeting with Colorado Republican Party Chairman Dick Wadhams.

"I'm using the good will I accrued by dropping out of the race to be a diplomat," Penry told 9NEWS Monday by telephone. "Every one of these conversations has been positive and leaves me with the impression we have more in common than we don't."
....
"I'm not going to tell Tom what he should or shouldn't do," Penry said. "I did suggest that we should engage Scott on his agenda and told Tom if he feels comfortable in that agenda, we can avoid the cost of a primary." Contacted by e-mail, Tancredo said he "completely agreed with Josh's characterizations of these discussions."

"It is important to know that, at least for me, the purpose of running for office is NOT the simple acquisition of that office," Tancredo wrote. "It is instead to advance a conservative agenda. If it takes raising and spending $3 million in a primary to do it - so be it. If, on the other hand, the goal can be accomplished in less expensive or less grueling ways, count me in. I have been surprised and heartened by the commonality of purpose I have observed to date. We shall see."

The three men met in person last Wednesday and spoke again by phone last night. The McInnis campaign confirmed the meetings with Tancredo, Wadhams and a host of state lawmakers who previously supported Penry and said the candidate would continue to reach out to Republicans throughout Colorado.

The ball is essentially in McInnis' court at this point. If he is successful in placating Josh Penry's major supporters the odds of a Tancredo candidacy greatly decreases. Penry is giving him a prime opportunity to repair some of the damage that was done by the premature leaking of the news that Penry was departing the race.