Word is that Barack Obama's campaign is planning to spend Day 4 of the DNC at Invesco Field instead of the Pepsi Center. This promises to be a logistical nightmare as security and media preparations will have to be extended to two locations instead of one and raises the question of who will foot the bill. Will Obama's campaign pay up or will the city of Denver, already struggling with a hefty debt to pay for the DNC, be forced to cover this as well?

(- promoted by Rocky Mountain Right -)

Natalie Meyer, the former SoS, blasts Coffman for abandoning the office in the Rocky Mountain News:

The secretary of state is the chief elections officer in Colorado and has a lot of latitude and authority to protect the integrity of our democratic process. This includes interpreting and enforcing existing election law.

For example, Coffman recently declared the three Republican candidates in Jefferson County eligible to run for the legislature, despite an uproar among Democrats who claim that they missed a deadline and should not be allowed to run.

Another example is the one former Secretary of State Gigi Dennis made in 2006 when she interpreted election law to demand that "small-donor committees" get permission from their members before automatically deducting from members' paychecks. Democrats and labor unions sued to reverse her decision.

The secretary of state has a lot of discretion on the enforcement side, too. For example, if a candidate raises illegal amounts of money or raises it from illegal sources, there are consequences. The secretary of state can do anything from sending a harsh letter of admonishment to imposing substantial fines.

Finally, recounts. This is probably the most high-profile aspect of a secretary of state's duties. You don't have to look further than George W. Bush's presidential victory in Florida in 2000, Bob Beauprez's victory for Congress in Colorado in 2002 or even Coffman's own victory for secretary of state in 2006. As widely reported, Republicans and Democrats fought tooth and nail arguing for different legal standards in these close counts.

Here's Marxists/Socialists/Communists for Obama, hosted at... BarackObama.com!

This group is for self-proclaimed Marxists/Communists/Socialists for the election of Barack Obama to the Presidency. By no means is he a true Marxist, but under Karl Marx's writings we are to support the party with the best interests of the mobilization of the proletariat. Though the Democratic Socialists of America or the Communist Patty of America may have more Socialististic values, it is pointless to vote for these candidates due to the fact that there is virutally no chance they will be elected on a National level.

The Obama campaign and his online community don't seem troubled at all by this.

Wil Armstrong's campaign is continuing to announce endorsements from Colorado politicians.

Centennial, CO – Today US Senator Wayne Allard formally endorsed Wil Armstrong for congress to succeed retiring Rep. Tom Tancredo.  Allard recently sent out a fundraising letter for Armstrong.

            Allard remarked, “In the many years that my wife Joan and I have known Wil, he has consistently demonstrated his conservative principles as a business leader, as an involved community member, and as a father.

            “We need more leaders in Congress who have hired employees and grown businesses in the real world.  Wil’s business acumen, particularly relating to the current economic woes and financial turbulence, will make an impact in Congress.”

From the Rocky Mountain News:

Are some Colorado voters so spooked by the rising price of oil that they consider anyone associated with the industry disreputable? That's the ad's basic thrust, which Atkinson believes the public is buying.

Schaffer - along with a majority in Congress - voted for tax breaks to foster oil and gas development during a year when the price per barrel of oil had been averaging $23 (as unlikely as that seems today). You can argue that those breaks are no longer justified given petroleum's current price, but offering tax breaks to promote energy is hardly a scandalous idea. In fact, the League of Conservation Voters wants more such breaks for its favorite energy sources.

After he left Congress, Schaffer went to work for a midsized independent oil and gas company (hardly Big Oil) that emphasizes the production of natural gas and pursues drilling opportunities on several continents. This sounds like an honorable profession to us. Those who disagree might want to shut off the utility lines to their house and see how they like relying on fireplaces and wood stoves next winter.

"Colorado deserves cleaner representation in the Senate," the ad concludes. Notice the double meaning of the word "cleaner," clearly deliberate, and thus another implicit smear.

Perhaps what Colorado really deserves is a Senate campaign that involves a serious discussion of energy issues rather than sleazy scapegoating. In pursuit of that goal, however, voters apparently won't get any help from the League of Conservation Voters.

Quinnipiac University in association with The Washington Post have conducted a poll of Colorado on the Senate and presidential races.

Obama (D): 49%
McCain (R): 44%

Udall (D): 48%
Schaffer (R): 38%

Archived polling data for both races is available at the Rocky Mountain Right Poll Tracker.

Long-term trends:

Rocky Mountain Right has obtained more information pertaining to the joint CD5 poll that was to determine whether Bentley Rayburn or Jeff Crank were to continue their campaigns for congress.

Despite the stipulation that polling commence on May 27th, Rayburn's campaign delayed signing the agreement until May 28th as can plainly be seen on the document which has now been made public. Polling started the next day (May 29th) and concluded on May 30th with 395 interviews conducted (some interviews in the May 30th column may have been later). The Rayburn campaign has contended that the CD5 Assembly gave Jeff Crank a "bump" in the polling that would have boosted Crank's numbers. Unfortunately for them, the day-by-day breakdown of the poll shows Jeff Crank's poll numbers unchanged from May 29th to May 30th indicating that no "bump" took place:

In fact, the small number of interviews conducted on May 31 and beyond that the Rayburn campaign is using as the main rationale to back out of the agreement actually favored Rayburn more than the bulk of interviews which were conducted the first two days.

The poll also conducted head-to-head matches against Lamborn which showed that Crank would outperform Rayburn by a whopping 22-points. Rayburn's campaign is instead choosing to ignore these results and point to a questionable internal poll they conducted nearly two months ago showing Rayburn performing marginally better.

The agreement both campaigns signed is now public and the results of the poll are conclusive: Jeff Crank was the victor of the poll and should be the only other candidate in the race alongside Rayburn. If Rayburn's campaign was foolish enough to believe they would have made a stronger showing, then that is their fault alone and not an excuse to back out of a promise to the voters of Colorado. Attempting to delay the start of polling and then distort the results to the public by claiming Crank enjoyed a "bump" is exactly the sort of unethical politics that are the problem in Congress.

Ben DeGrow at Schaffer v. Udall is raising questions about the relationship between Mark Udall's campaign and the environmentalist groups attacking Schaffer.

One has to wonder the extent of shady coordination that is occuring between Udall and these left-wing environmentalist groups this year given his past history. In 1998, The Sierra Club was caught "loaning" staff members to Mark Udall's congressional campaign even as Mark Udall's wife was regional representative for the organization. The Rocky Mountain News reported on October 30, 1998:

A Sierra Club  employee who helped write the group's voters guide later was loaned to the congressional campaign of Democrat Mark Udall  , who was endorsed in the guide.

The Sierra Club bills its guide as nonpartisan but Republicans say that clearly is false if one of its authors is now working for Udall .

A Republican group has asked the Federal Election Commission to investigate whether the Sierra Club and the Udall campaign coordinated efforts on the guide.

``That is illegal,'' said Italia Federici, president of the Coalition of Republican Environmental Advocates.

Sierra Club officials said their staffer was not connected with the Udall campaign until after the guide was produced. He still is on the club 's payroll and amounts to an ``in-kind'' contribution to the Udall campaign that will be reported to the FEC.
...
Udall 's wife, Maggie Fox, is a regional representative for the Sierra Club . She took a leave from the organization, using vacation and time she'd earned, to work on the campaign.

Oddly enough, the Udall for Senate campaign is engaged in the same sort of activities as the Udall for Congress campaign was in 1998. I guess old habits die hard.

(- promoted by Rocky Mountain Right -)

"I've never supported a single tax increase, and won't do so in Congress." That was Doug Lamborn in 2006 as he sought to fill the Congressional seat being vacated by Rep. Joel Hefley.  The problem with that statement is that it is completely false.  From the Colorado Springs Gazette:

Lamborn sought a seat in the Kansas Legislature in 1982, he supported a severance tax, and alcohol, cigarette and motor vehicle taxes. The Lawrence Journal-World quoted him saying, "We're going to need to take a look at slightly raising existing taxes as well as cultivating newer, less established taxes."

Looks like you are a liar Lamborn.  In fact, that's a good name - Liar Lamborn.  Of course he fired back with a written statement - he's too scared to talk to a reporter right now.

"It remains true that I have never voted for, or supported a tax increase in my 13 1/2 years in public office."

Maybe that's true Dougy, but that's not what you said on your campaign materials.  Therefore, you were purposefully lying.  That's wrong and you know it. 

So here's a campaign song for Liar Lamborn.  Enjoy!

Mark Udall and his surrogates are avoiding debating the issues and records of the candidates altogether and are instead pursuing a "guilt by association" campaign against Bob Schaffer. This isn't the first time that Mark Udall has run a campaign like this. In 1998, Udall's campaign ran a hard negative ad campaign against Republican Bob Greenlee falsely implicating him in a series of events he had nothing to do with. This Associated Press brief from October 27, 1998 sums up Mark Udall's unethical tactics:

"Mark Udall and the Sierra Club are playing fast and loose with the truth and with campaign finance laws," Nicholson said in a news release.

Earlier Greenlee said he has written local and state prosecutors seeking a criminal investigation into a television ad for Udall.

The ad deals with allegations raised by a former blackjack dealer and cocktail waitress who claimed they were wrongfully dismissed from their casino jobs following maternity leaves.

The ad cites cases involving The Gilpin Hotel and Casino and says Republican candidate Bob Greenlee was the person responsible.

But in Greenlee's letter to District Attorney Alex Hunter and Colorado Attorney General Gale Norton seeking an investigation, he said he only owns a minority interest in a joint venture partner in the casino.

"The Udall campaign knows Mr. Greenlee had no involvement, whatsoever, in the disputes, yet they are hopelessly contorting reality to create a scenario they know is false," the letter said.

Mark Udall narrowly avoided prosection by escaping on a technicality. As the The Bulletin's Frontrunner reported on February 25, 1999: 'While noting the advertisement implies more, the report (from the Boulder County District Attorney) states the spot 'is on its face accurate in stating only that the casino fired the two women; it did not state Mr. Greenlee did anything.'"'

Republicans need to wake up and realize that Mark Udall's modus operandi against Bob Schaffer is going to be to push out "guilt by association" stories into the press. Udall also came under scrutiny at the time for illegally coordinating with left-wing environmentalist groups, something else that Republican bloggers should be vigilant in looking for this time.

It's no wonder that Mark Udall is declining to debate the issues, he's practicing the literal same old politics of the past.

A DSCC commissioned poll on the Colorado Senate Race confirmed the recent Rasmussen Reports poll on the match-up between Schaffer and Udall. The DSCC places Udall with 9-point lead over Schaffer, but also shows both candidates with lower levels of support overall than the Rasmussen poll making you wish someone would release cross-tabs once in a while.

Garin-Hart-Yang Research

Udall: 46%
Schaffer: 37%

Jeff Crank and Bentley Rayburn recently signed a written agreement to conduct a joint poll of the CD5 primary, whoever was more than 4 points behind would drop out of the race to allow the stronger candidate a one-on-one contest against Doug Lamborn. The raw results of that poll have now been released:

    46% Lamborn
    26% Crank
    15% Rayburn

When weighted according to the formula specified in the written agreement signed by both parties (and viewable at PolitickerCO), Crank's over Rayburn lead increases to 17 points (for those keeping track, that's more than 4).

The Rayburn campaign's main complaints are that because a portion of the poll was conducted after the CD5 assembly and because extra calls were made that the poll is inaccurate and biased towards Crank. This morning's Colorado Statesman pokes holes in that claim:

    Mike Hesse, Rayburn’s campaign manager, objected to the changes in polling dates because voters may have been influenced by Crank’s media “bump” after the 5th Congressional District Assembly on May 29.

    Crank’s “bump,” however, was countered by the May 28 television and newspaper coverage of Rayburn and Lamborn turning in their petitions to get on the primary ballot.

    “It’s an inexperienced candidate who will give that argument of media attention,” said Hill, adding that it had no impact on the polling results. “These protestations are almost an absurdity.”

    “There were businessmen in this community who spent six weeks of their time trying to negotiate this agreement,” recalled Crank, adding that “no one questioned the validity of the poll except for Bentley Rayburn’s campaign.”

The poll is statistically valid, whether Rayburn's people want to admit it or not. There is no possibility of Rayburn winning a two-man race and surely not a three-man race. Finally, there is the small detail that Bentley Rayburn signed a piece of paper saying he would withdraw from the race if he was found to be more than 4 points behind Crank and later changed his mind. Rayburn was even approached by other polling outfits who have offered to conduct pro bono polls to put this issue to rest, Rayburn has indicated this is not an acceptable arrangement.

Had the polling in fact showed that Crank received some sort of massive boost from the CD5 assembly that pulled him outside of the margin-of-error then Rayburn would have been correct to question the results. However, it is now clear that Rayburn's lag in the polls in persistent and that his campaign may have delayed the commencement of polling until the last possible minute in an attempt to start exactly this sort of controversy.

Rocky Mountain Right believes that Bentley Rayburn is a man of his word, and therefore will no longer consider him a candidate for office at this time.

(- promoted by Rocky Mountain Right -)

Wil Armstrong is continuing to rack up endorsements from prominent Colorado politicos, most likely reflecting their dissatisfaction with Mike Coffman's impending abandonment of the SoS office.

(- promoted by Rocky Mountain Right -)

Congressional candidate Jeff Crank launches a television and radio ad called Courage and Conviction. This ad proves that Jeff will literally fight through fire to protect conservative principles. No...seriously. Watch the television ad.

Mark Udall went on the record opposing the exploration of offshore oil resources in 2006. Udall's vote on this is telling and reveals that his opposition to energy exploration is not motivated by concern for Colorado's wilderness but rather by adherence to extremist environmentalist ideology that wants to "teach us a lesson" with higher oil prices. These reserves are located dozens of miles off the shoreline and would have minimal environmental impact. The fact is that drilling for this oil will only help to bring down gas prices and take a step towards weaning us off of foreign oil.

Send Bob Schaffer to the United States Senate to take real steps towards lowering oil prices and taking the burden off of the middle and lower-class. Send Mark Udall to the Senate if you want to drive up living costs at the expense of struggling families to make a point about the environment.

The chicken-suit that seems to turn up every election cycle has made its obligatory appearance this year, this time in El Paso County protesting outside the office of Rep. Doug Lamborn who is refusing to debate either Jeff Crank or Bentley Rayburn despite a previous indication that he would.

You have to feel for the intern who got stuck with that job.

Rasmussen Reports has released new polling in Colorado.

Mark Udall (D): 49%
Bob Schaffer (R): 40%

Barack Obama (D): 43%
John McCain (R): 41%

While Mark Udall has increased his lead in the state, Barack Obama has seen a marked decrease in support since the last Rasmussen poll of the state. Key finding:  half of Colorado residents think Obama is too inexperienced to be President.

View the full polling trends at the Rocky Mountain Right Poll Tracker.

(- promoted by Rocky Mountain Right -)

COLORADO SPRINGS, CO – Colorado State Senator Andy McElhany and Representative Larry Liston today announced their endorsement of Jeff Crank in Colorado’s Fifth Congressional race.

“I am supporting Jeff Crank for Congress because Jeff epitomizes our Colorado values,” said Liston. “As a native Coloradan, Jeff knows and understands the people of our district. Jeff is an honest conservative and has consistently listened to the concerns of the people of this community. I know Jeff will always have his roots in our District and not in Washington,” concluded Liston.

“The elections this year will help to determine if we will take action to change politics,” said Crank. “I’m looking forward to working with Andy and Larry as they work to promote our local community and I’m honored they have the confidence in me to take on this task in the U.S. Congress.”

“Jeff Crank has worked very hard for this community and it shows in the relationships he has here,” said McElhany. “Integrity is an issue in this campaign and Jeff has shown over a lifetime of working in this community that he’s a man of integrity who upholds his word and his commitment.  He will represent us well in Washington and will always be a friend to this community.”

Senator McElhany and Representative Liston join a long list of local elected officials supporting Jeff Crank. The Crank Campaign has previously announced the endorsement of many law enforcement officials from around the district, El Paso County Commissioners Amy Lathen and Dennis Hisey, as well as Vice Mayor Larry Small and Colorado Springs City Council members Darryl Glenn and Tom Gallagher.

The Wil Armstrong campaign in CD-6 has released this video on YouTube of former-Gov. Bill Owens endorsing Armstrong:

This video raises several interesting question. First, is this further evidence of just how irritated the GOP establishment is with Mike Coffman or is it more due to Bill Armstong's influence? Second, has conservative anger at Bill Owens waned enough over the last years that this endorsement will have a positive influence?

The results of the CD-6 primary will be very telling.