GOB United; GOP Undecided

By Julian Dunraven, J.D., M.P.A.

Honorable Friends:

I learned from yesterday’s front page headline of The Denver Post that my party now stands united behind former Rep. Scott McInnis in the Colorado gubernatorial race. Odd that. I used to think we had primary elections for this sort of thing, but it seems they have fallen out of fashion in Colorado. It is, after all, far more efficient for the Party’s leaders to simply anoint a candidate. I am certain that Mr. Dan Maes would be overjoyed to know that he need not bother with a primary. Afflicted with the woeful ignorance of fashion so typical of Republicans these days, however, he still seems to be campaigning. I am sure someone will point out the faux pas, though.

I also learned that we have a new platform, again courtesy of Atty. McInnis and the GOP leadership, saving the rest of us a great deal of time and consideration. The Post even published a nice ten point summary of it on the front page. In fact, many of my Independent and Democrat friends called to chat about these bullets before I even finished reading the article. Although they are each greatly dissatisfied with Gov. Bill Ritter, and despite the fact that they agree with most of those ten points listed in the article, my honorable friends told me they were going to abstain from voting entirely, or else reluctantly support Mr. Ritter again, due to the fact that two of those bullet points were dedicated, yet again, to social issues. They had hoped the GOP would focus entirely on economic and liberty issues.

Hoping to restore the confidence of my honorable friends in the GOP’s potential, I visited Atty. McInnis’s web page to examine the full text of this new platform. Interestingly, what I found was substantially different from what the Post article reported. The Post reports that this new, “Contract for Colorado” includes promises to appoint conservative judges to state courts, to establish a school voucher program, to restore Former Gov. Owens’s ban on state funding for Planned Parenthood, and to establish a general statement defending the sanctity of human life.

In contrast, the “Platform for Prosperity,” on Atty. McInnis’s web page makes no mention of judges or the judicial system whatsoever. It speaks of school vouchers not at all. While it does indeed promise to revive the Owens era ban on state funding for abortion providers, a general statement defending the sanctity of human life is nowhere to be found.

I do not know whether these discrepancies are the result of poor reporting on the part of the Post, or whether Atty. McInnis and the GOP leadership who authored this plan simply provided the Post with faulty information. However, with such noticeable inconsistencies in the commitments of Atty. McInnis and the Party leadership, I can hardly blame my honorable friends for being distrustful. Indeed, many Republicans remain wary as well. Whatever they may think of any particular issue, they have had few reasons to trust the Party leadership and its mothballed candidates who so often seem far more interested in the politics of pull than in principled policy.

While it may be true that the Good Old Boys (GOB) of the Party leadership have united behind Atty. McInnis, the Grand Old Party (GOP) remains undecided and skeptical. Moreover, as the GOP has never been known for its fashion sense, it may well ignore the new trend against primary elections and continue to consider the candidacy of Mr. Maes. If Atty. McInnis truly wishes to unify the GOP and Independents in support of his candidacy, he should strive to show firm and consistent commitment to principle. That has never been his strong point, but I have always believed people are capable of positive change.

Ryan Frazier At R Block Party

Let Colorado Choose: Blogger Memo To NRSC

Ben DeGrow nails it--and quite succinctly, I might add: memo to National Republican Senatorial Committee--let Colorado Republicans decide.

We don't need the NRSC to determine, Florida-style, who the GOP nomination for US Senate will be in 2010.

Bloggers from around the country are circulating a petition (click for additional signatories):

Dear Senator Cornyn,

We the undersigned believe that the National Republican Senatorial Committee should be committed to serving ALL the members of the Republican Party.

Additionally, the NRSC should be focused on defeating Democrats, not Republicans. Towards that end, we believe it was completely inappropriate for the NRSC to endorse a candidate in the Florida primary race.

Therefore, we request that both you and the NRSC alter your position on the Florida Senate race, maintain neutrality, and promise to spend no money directly or indirectly in that race.

Sincerely yours,

El Presidente
Colorado
Slapstick Politics
People's Press Collective
Rocky Mountain Alliance 2.0

The Colorado GOP welcomes a frank, honest, and open debate between the three announced candidates--Ryan Frazier, Ken Buck, and Cleve Tidwell.

And next August, Colorado Republicans will decide who they wish to see battle Sen. Michael Bennet in the general election. Not party insiders, national operatives, or yes, the NRSC.

**My position on this petition includes only my personal blog, and extends to my affiliations elsewhere insofar as I participate in those collaborations, and is not meant as the position of either PPC or RMA 2.0.

Colorado 2010 US Senate Race: Ryan Frazier An "Untraditional" Candidate

The local media (InDenver Times) has picked up on the increasing profile of Ryan Frazier in an update on the looming GOP primary for the opportunity to unseat the appointed Michael Bennet:

Republican Aurora City Councilman Ryan Frazier said Wednesday he is “seriously considering” running for U.S. Senate in 2010, though he acknowledged his toughest fight may come from the more conservative wing of his own party.

Frazier stopped short of saying he will definitely run. But the 31-year-old Navy veteran has been making the rounds, meeting with potential supporters and attending county party gatherings. At a dinner in Douglas County – one of the state’s most conservative areas – Frazier got about 60 percent of the vote in a straw poll, besting more conservative Republicans such as radio host and attorney Dan Caplis, former Congressman Bob Beauprez and Weld County District Attorney Ken Buck.
. . .
A native of North Carolina who has lived in Colorado for 12 years, Frazier describes himself as “not a typical Republican” and “very independent.” He knows his stance on certain issues, such as benefits for same-sex partners, may rankle the far right. But he believes he is better positioned to win statewide, much as Democrats have dominated recent elections with more centrist candidates such as former Sen. Ken Salazar.

“It’s going to be a real question for the Republican Party: ‘Are they ready for someone like me?’ ” Frazier said. “It shouldn’t be a question of surviving a primary. It should be, ‘Are you ready to win? Or do you want to continue down the road of a string of losses?’”

That's up to the Colorado GOP--establishment vs. activists, and the mythical "base" of social conservatives vs. center-right, fiscally conservative voters statewide. The GOP primary, depending on who actually jumps in, should give us a clearer picture of where the party insiders stand, as well as where the rank-and-file Republicans are leaning. Expect more libertarian-minded folks and those "unaffiliateds" to take a good look at Frazier's "live-and-let-live," limited government, and economically-minded positions over other potential GOP competitors.

That won't stop the criticism, however:

Most recently, Frazier was one of the driving forces behind the “right-to-work” initiative known as Amendment 47. Voters rejected the measure, which would have banned agreements that require workers to pay union dues if they fall under a collective bargaining contract.

But Frazier also supported benefits for same-sex partners of city of Aurora employees. And in 2006, he joined with Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper – a Democrat – to publicly endorse Referendum I, which would have given domestic-partner benefits to same-sex couples statewide.

Frazier said he’s been told by many people – inside and outside his own party – that his support for those measures will be “the arrow on my back” in a primary battle.

“They will come at me hard on that,” he said.

Based on the somewhat coordinated comments seen so far, they sure will.

But Frazier's initial strength lies in being outside the traditional party structure that ultimately alleviates any associated baggage from a recently weak Colorado GOP, and is more concerned with moving forward than looking back a decade:

“These are untraditional times that call for untraditional people to step forward,” he said.

Frazier said his top issues would be the same issues he believes are most important to voters: the economy, energy, education, defense and government reform.

Frazier also said he isn’t dissuaded by Bennet’s stellar fundraising in the most recent quarter, in which the former Denver Public Schools chief and businessman raked in nearly $1.4 million.

It’s a good start, Frazier said, but added that whichever Republican takes Bennet on, “the money will come.” And he said he has had Democrats and unaffiliated voters encourage him to run.

Regardless of the candidate, the GOP will push hard for this Senate seat--the question of degree of broader support will ultimately depend on what kind of candidate the GOP settles upon, both for Senate and for Governor.

Real grassroots support will play an extremely large role in this primary--although there will be the temptation to coordinate astroturfing campaigns in order to "demonstrate" real support among GOP voters, however far-fetched.

Incidentally (via RockyMountainRight), at the most recent Denver County GOP First Thursday Breakfast (April 2), Frazier and State Sen. Josh Penry won informal straw polls for Senate and Governor, respectively. Penry spoke at the breakfast, and Frazier is scheduled for the May meeting. While the results are unscientific and very, very early, it looks more and more likely that many Republicans are at least prepared to take a look at younger, next-generation, not-as-established candidates. Much will depend, as indicated earlier, on who eventually runs and who can create the necessary ground game for primary victory. Fundraising and messaging will be important as each candidate seeks to establish his own "base" within the party.

If the party truly wants to create a 64-county, all district, renew-the-bench strategy to reinvigorate GOP voters, increase registration, and re-connect with unaffiliateds, then it will need a fresh vision for the state. Relying on late '90s electoral messaging, final-weekend get-out-the-vote campaigning, and retread candidates will not be the way to electoral victory in the critical 2010 election. With redistricting looming and five state-wide offices up for grabs, the top of the ticket--the U.S. Senate and Governor--should be viewed as the vehicles for electoral coat-tails. Mediocre and uninspiring candidates will be shunned by activists, won't attract much national attention or fundraising, and will depress voter turnout if they can't engage on a meaningful level, especially on economic issues. Elections have consequences, and Colorado can't afford a repeat of the 2004, 2006, and 2008 elections.

Colorado 2010 US Senate Race Update: Ryan Frazier's Ascent Part II

A new direction for the GOP?--Ryan Frazier speaks at the March 1 Gadsden Society "Rally for Freedom"

Yesterday, SP noted that Ryan Frazier had won the straw poll at the Douglas County Lincoln Day dinner.

What we didn't know was how big.

Then we received the numbers--this was more than a plurality--it was a clear majority of attendees:

171 votes cast in straw poll....

Frazier 102 = 59.6%
Caplis 34 = 19.9%
Beauprez 22 = 12.9%
Tidwell 4 = 2.3%
Buck 9 = 5.3%

Given that the average Lincoln Day dinner is populated by GOP faithful, including operatives and activists, and not fly-by-night grassroots supporters organized by the candidate him/herself**, and also given that Douglas County isn't exactly RINO territory, this informal poll says quite a bit. Frazier has the clear ability to draw broad-based support in a fairly conservative county that will be one of the keys to any GOP victories in the state. There are many counties that will play a part in the five state wide elections in 2010 (US Senate, Governor, Attorney General, Secretary of State, Treasurer), but how Douglas County goes, so goes . . .

Initial impressions for this race have yet to be firmly cemented, but GOP voters like what they see in Frazier--one among the next generation of GOP leadership. As mentioned yesterday the hard part will come in spreading that visibility and familiarity state wide, establishing solid policy chops, and raising the campaign dollars necessary to win.

Frazier's speech from Saturday's Lincoln Day dinner:





Previous Frazier-blogging.

**an earlier version alluded to Ron Paul's supporters, not to reflect on RP himself or his message, just the tactics of some supporters who occasionally "gamed" online or straw polls

Colorado 2010 US Senate Race Update: Ryan Frazier's Ascent

**Update--Buzz from Douglas County Lincoln Day dinner indicates that Frazier won the night's straw poll--exact numbers to follow this evening.

From Chris Cillizza's "The Fix" at the Washington Post:

9. Colorado (D): Appointed Sen. Michael Bennet has made a solid debut so far although his wishy-washiness on the Employee Free Choice Act has turned him into something of public punching bag on the right and the left. Bennet, a virtual unknown before he was named to replace Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, is clearly vulnerable in 2010. But, there doesn't appear to be a serious primary challenge in the offing (does former state House Speaker Andrew Romanoff really want to risk his "rising star" status on a race against a sitting senator?) and the Republican field has been slow to take shape. The most likely GOP candidate seems to be former Rep. Bob Beauprez but his disastrous 2006 run for governor raises questions about his political strength. Some within the GOP are excited about the possible candidacy of Ryan Frazier, a 31-year old African American member of the Aurora City Council. (Previous ranking: 10)

The seat could quickly become a real toss-up as Frazier's visibility within the party increases. GOP grassroots activists, many of whom supported Leondray Gholston's successful vice chair candidacy at the state level (Gholston served as Frazier's reelection campaign manager), have identified Frazier as a strong contender for the GOP's 2010 U.S. Senate nomination. They believe that Frazier carries none of the negatives of the other potential candidates whose names have been bandied about for the seat, and argue that he has a greater potential for reestablishing and mobilizing a "big tent" for conservatives/GOP/libertarians in the state. His main task will be in establishing brand awareness across Colorado in the coming months, along with building a sufficient campaign war chest to tackle a contested primary and Sen. Bennet in 2010.

SP has been tracking Frazier's potential candidacy for months.

2009 County GOP Elections In Colorado Reveal Lingering Tensions Within Party

Recent county elections for GOP leadership--in **Denver, El Paso (h/t The Colorado Index), Douglas, and Larimer County--have revealed that in many ways, the Republicans continue to look both forward to 2010 AND back to the last few election cycles, simultaneously positing the conflicting strategies of the "big tent" approach (Denver) and ideological purity (El Paso). These counties represent four of the top nine counties (along with Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder, and Jefferson, Weld) by population, and the rifts still in existence will continue to place a drag on the party's prospects as a whole.

It is clear from a couple of the posts above, along with insider information from those attending other county elections (Douglas County in particular), that there is still a drive to enforce an ideological litmus test on those running for party positions of power. Not an explicit standard to be sure, but intimations on the sidelines that working together to effect electoral victory will take more than simply jumping on the party bandwagon, and that in certain counties, particular positions on a variety of issues will be frowned upon by other party activists. How this will play out in contested primaries and the general election in 2010 remains to be seen, but it appears that the tensions between so-called "social" and "fiscal" conservatives will continue to exist.

Note to folks of all stripes in the GOP--the 2008 election cycle is over, as are the heated 2004 Senate and 2006 gubernatorial primaries. 2010, aside from the ever-present foundational fundraising and recruitment challenges, will see five high-profile state-wide elections--Attorney General, Secretary of State, Treasurer, U.S. Senate, and Governor. As the Denver County GOP election revealed (short bios of those elected), the focus should be on turnout, and maximizing that turnout in Democrat dominated counties especially. "Turning out the base" has run its course in the Colorado GOP, and as Denver GOP Treasurer Kelly Maher indicated, the party needs to "maximize" its presence everywhere. Reinvigorating Republican voters who have been ignored recently or who have chosen to sit on their hands for any of a variety of reasons will be a top priority. This maximization strategy will obviously extend to returning independent voters (a bloc that has exploded in registration since 2004) to the GOP and particularly those that lean to the center-right, who have either stopped voting for Republican candidates or have actually moved into the Democrats' column over the last decade. And with a probable continuation of the raft of Amendments that have become a biannual ballot challenge, conservatives need to work together on those issues that are not overtly partisan. Transparency is not a Republican or conservative issue, but a good government and accountability issue. Better aggregate turnout percentages are key, and continuing to abandon areas in Denver or elsewhere will not make the task any easier.

None of this will be possible, however, if the party reverts to infighting rather than looking to the base principles of free markets, individual liberty and responsibility, and limited government, and creating policy initiatives instead of becoming a "party of no." Even if the candidates themselves try to remain above the fray, rivalries among the party activists and operatives will slow the party's exit from the wilderness. We know that the key domestic issues will focus on the economy and job creation, and fighting the awful stimulus and pork packages and other Democrat-inspired legislation will continue to be hot-button topics nationally, and some of the same bread-and-butter legislation and rhetoric will be a priority here in Colorado. GOP primaries should be focused on these factors, and not on candidates trying to out-Reagan one another, or devolving into an exercise of "more-conservative-than-thou" mudslinging. The Democrats should provide enough electoral fodder on these issues to last several cycles, and will give the Republicans their clearest path to victory.

Republicans can and should continue the conversation about overall campaign strategies and highly targeted tactics in particular areas. Republicans and their donors also need to figure out how to make use of social networking and new media and better integrate the tools into their campaigns, but even potentially look to leapfrog the left (as success may breed stagnation for Democrats, and failure can only provide opportunity for Republicans). Success in 2010 will necessitate a concerted effort of allied individuals committed to the common principles outlined above. Candidates and elected officials are certainly fair game and should not be above scrutiny; however, applying preemptive preclusionary tactics to fellow party activists smacks of ideological narcissism and a failure to draw better conclusions from the electoral results of the last few years. Let's focus on the 95% common ground we share, and agree to disagree on the other 5%.

**EP was selected as precinct committeeperson and chair of Senate District 34 in Denver at the Denver County GOP election.

GOP 2010: News From The Grapevine And Why Republicans Should Borrow A Page From The Democrats' Playbook

Face The State has a new report on the "rumor mill" making the rounds within the GOP for the upcoming 2010 midterm election.

The speculation is not unsubstantiated beyond FTS, as SP has heard good things about Aurora City Councilman Ryan Frazier beyond insider comments, with Frazer responding to FTS that "It’s fair to say that right now I’m considering where I can have the greatest impact going forward"--and SP is looking to candidates in the Frazier mold to step up and begin to refill the tattered GOP bench.

Why is this important? The GOP can't win in 2010 (just as the GOP didn't win in 2006 or 2008) by using the same candidates, political operatives, and electoral strategies that worked from 1980 to 2004 any more than the Denver Broncos were able to use the same coaches, players, and playbook from their back-to-back Super Bowl victories in the late 1990s. Just ask Mike Shanahan or Pat Bowlen.

The idea that the normal cursus honorum or "paying your dues" processes that produced the "Contract with America" class of GOP politicians is still viable will only doom a newer generation of conservatives and GOP-leaning libertarians (roughly those 25-45) to wait through potentially more disastrous election cycles in the near future, and forsaking long-term goals to rebuild the party locally and nationally by wanting to avoid stepping on the toes of those who believe that this is "their time." Incumbents of any age and viable candidates of all backgrounds should be given the opportunity to throw their hat into the ring, especially if the GOP wishes to mount anything approaching Howard Dean's 50 state strategy and fellow blogger Joshua Sharf's call to run in every district in Colorado.

Quick-fix celebrity recruits aside (the often-rumored John Elway, for example), every race should have a viable candidate, even in difficult areas where incumbency or voter registrations numbers are a disadvantage. GOP primaries should not necessarily be avoided, and multiple competing candidates at the bench level should see a wide variety of opportunities given the Democrat Party advantage in governorships, state legislatures, and Congress. There is no reason why the GOP shouldn't be anything but a national party and not simply a regional party of "get-out-the-base" voters, volunteers, and fundraisers. We haven't conceded anything on the core principles of the "big tent"--free markets, smaller government, and individual rights/liberty--so why concede districts just because they are held by Democrats?

The 2010 election in Colorado will feature several state-wide races--Governor, a US Senate seat, Attorney General, Secretary of State, and State Treasurer. Voting in the aggregate matters, especially at the state level in midterm elections, and turning out GOP and GOP-leaning center-right and independent voters will be the key to victory. Renewed interest in local races in typically uncompetitive districts currently held by Democrats will play a huge role in reengaging those voters set adrift by strategies that look to maximize votes in supportive areas while ignoring others in the hopes that the GOP brand will be enough to get folks to vote. President Barack Obama's campaign presciently and effectively--obviously, he is the President--eschewed such a course. Even without him on the ballot in 2010, much of the party infrastructure and institutional knowledge will still be in place, and the Democrats are no doubt hoping that this built-in advantage will discourage any GOP efforts at revamping campaigns off-line or on-line. To do so would be to ignore (forgive the gratuitous Star Wars reference) Admiral Ackbar's admonition--"It's a trap!"

It is still too early in 2009 to endorse those candidates who have formally filed, those who have been mentioned or have shown an interest, and those whose candidacy is merely speculation. But it is not too early to begin reengaging the dispirited GOP rank-and-file, to propose bold new visions for the party, to toss out discredited strategies, to effectively communicate our principles, to avoid becoming a party of "NO!" by offering alternative solutions instead of whining about the other side of the aisle, or to turn into debased imitators of the most vitriolic smear-merchants in the Democrat Party.

Opportunities to perform a true house-cleaning and not simply rearrange deck chairs on the Titanic don't come very often. GOP elites, fundraisers, powerbrokers, political operatives and especially the bench itself is going to be put on notice (as if it hasn't already been in the two most recent electoral abbatoirs)--lead, follow, or get out of the way.

August 12 Primary--Don't Forget To Vote

You'd think that with all the attention on the DNC, we forgot about actually voting.

The primary is tomorrow, August 12. Here is a link to the voting locations for Denver (search by address), including other voter information, such as where to drop off mail-in ballots (it's too late to actually mail them in).

For more ballot information in other counties, the Rocky has an extensive roundup.

The only candidate we have endorsed to this point or will endorse before tomorrow's primary is Joshua Sharf for HD 6. Our previous coverage of his campaign and earlier endorsement can be found here, as well as the analysis of his opponent, Rima Sinclair. As if there needed to be any more reason to vote for Sharf, try this recent article that outlines Rima's belief that the "Zionists" control the Western media. The bottom line--Sharf is a principled conservative, whose positions are within the mainstream of the GOP. Rima's political positions are ambiguous, her campaign has been one where the "victim card" has been overplayed, and the contest itself isn't so much about winning the HD 6 seat (which will be a tall task for any GOP candidate), but in not allowing stealth candidates with little in the way of a paper trail on positions and quite disturbing beliefs about key allies to go unchallenged in a primary.

Some have argued in comments elsewhere that this GOP primary is about "proving who is more conservative" or pitting a "neocon" against a "terrorist sympathizer." Sharf and Sinclair have different views, and those views should be aired out before the voters, and neither party benefits by having uncontested candidates at the primary stage, especially at the state and local level. Just as Sharf and Sinclair's rival Democrats slug it out in their own three-way race, political competition is a sign of a healthy and robust republic. Given that Sharf and Sinclair are so different in outlook can only prove that at least on the GOP side, there is no lockstep party conformity.

We look forward to supporting the GOP candidates in the general election, and have enjoyed watching as interested observers these past few months as candidates walked precincts, made calls, bought ads, and made their case to voters.

Bring on Nov. 4!

GOP Primary Battle In CO House District 6 In The MSM Spotlight

"Israeli soldiers now are known to be just bombing and killing babies"--Rima Barakat Sinclair, July 2006, in an interview on CBS4

It only took three weeks, but the Rocky Mountain News has finally picked up on the story of Rima Barakat Sinclair, a stealth GOP candidate in state House District 6, who has expressed anti-Israeli views in the past:

A Middle Eastern native running for a state House seat faces a challenge from a blogger who called her "a terror apologist and an avowed enemy of Israel with no credible conservative credentials."

Republican Rima Barakat Sinclair said she has been unfairly labeled because she is a Muslim of Palestinian descent.

"I absolutely deny that," she said, of claims she supports terrorism. "What is behind that? Where is the proof? This is nothing but mudslinging."

Her campaign finance manager, who is Jewish, also dismissed the criticism, but some Republicans are leery.
. . .
Her candidacy so alarmed Republican blogger Joshua Sharf, an orthodox Jew, that he now is collecting signatures to try to get on the ballot to run against her in the August primary.

Leery, indeed.

Jeremy Pelzer at PolitickerCO has the lowdown on Colorado HD-6 Congressional Candidate Mike Coffman's refund of Sinclair's donation to his campaign:

Coffman manager Dustin Zvonek said the campaign will return Sinclair's donation, made in December 2007, after learning of statements Sinclair has made to the media in the past criticizing Israel.
. . .
Zvonek said the Coffman campaign mailed her a $500 refund check within the past few days, explaining, "There were some statements that she made in the past regarding Israel and Palestine and Hamas, and when we learned of her statements we decided that that was something that our campaign did not want to be associated with."

For a more detailed account of Sinclair's views, including a video interview with CBS4 from July, 2006, click here, where you can find this gem--"Israeli soldiers now are known to be just bombing and killing babies."

And if you are so inclined, you can find out how to help Joshua get onto the primary ballot here. His petition campaign has forced the MSM to investigate the story, something that may have been avoided had Sinclair advanced unchallenged as the GOP's candidate to succeed House Speaker Andrew Romanoff (he is term-limited).

Super Tuesday Postmortem: Colorado Caucus Results

Update (1:30 pm)--Note to Sen. McCain-telling conservatives to "calm down" is no way to build bridges with GOPers like those in Colorado ready to bolt from the party or simply sit on their hands

Update (1:00 pm)--Eye-rolling "Dems are nonpartisan, Republicans are conservative" caucus analysis of the day:

"Obama's that creative-society, nonpartisan, new-advocate-for-change Democrat that we like here," said Denver pollster Floyd Ciruli, pointing to former Colorado Sen. Gary Hart, Sen. Ken Salazar and Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper.

Mitt Romney's win over John McCain, on the other hand, showed that Republicans were backing conservative, core-party values over more moderate views.

Update (12:00 pm)--Ben DeGrow links to the "trust but verify" scenarios that will offer McCain perhaps his only chance at mending fences with conservatives; more observations of "barely organized chaos" from Roger Fraley; Dem blogger Wash Park Prophet sees Democrat enthusiasm as providing coattails for Mark Udall and other Dem candidates this fall

Update (7:00 am)--voter turnout percentage, based on voter registration for each party and the closed caucus rules-13.6% of Democrats caucused vs. 6.4% of Republicans

Update (3:30 am)--record turnout in Colorado-8x for Democrats (120,000 in 2008 vs. 15,000 in 2004) and 65,000 Republicans

Initial thoughts--despite his Super Tuesday success, here are the image problems in a nutshell John McCain will face in the coming months in his quest to court conservatives in the GOP base (via the awesome Michael Ramirez):

Super Tuesday Predictions And Blog Roundup: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John McCain, Mitt Romney

Around the blogosphere:

Michelle Malkin has an extensive, excellent roundup.

The Anchoress is keeping her vote private, and has a roundup as well.

Election Projection is doing, well, projections for both parties, as well as another roundup.

Real Clear Politics has a clear chart of the GOP delegate count and extensive columns, polls, and coverage of Super Tuesday.

Jay is serving up some links at Stop the ACLU.

Hot Air predictions.

Gateway Pundit is covering today's events at his blog and at Pajamas Media.

Previous coverage:

Super Tuesday Colorado Caucus Results

Super Tuesday Predictions And Blog Roundup: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John McCain, Mitt Romney

Colorado Caucus Open Thread; Update: Endorsing Mitt Romney

Colorado Caucus: Unaffiliated Vote Growing

Colorado Caucus: Colorado Conservative Bloggers Pick GOP Favorites For Super Tuesday

Colorado Caucus: Record Turnout Expected

Colorado Caucus: Denver Post, Rocky Mountain News Issue Caucus Policies For Journalists

Colorado Caucus: Hillary Clinton, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul Answer Your Questions

Mitt Romney Visits Colorado In Advance Of Super Tuesday

Super Tuesday Colorado Caucus Party Registration Numbers

Colorado Buried In Avalanche Of Political Visits: Obama, Hillary, Romney, And Even Bush

Colorado Caucus Gains Importance; **Update: Super Tuesday

Colorado Caucus Open Thread; Update: Endorsing Mitt Romney

Comments, predictions, links, and anything else caucus related--here's an open thread.

Ben DeGrow has a Super Tuesday post, and can't wait for some primary season resolution.

David Harsanyi sums up my sentiments succinctly:

Why do so many conservatives detest — and yes, "detest" is the most accurate word — John McCain?

Why are radio talk show hosts like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham and Hugh Hewitt abandoning their customary stance on Republican unity by endorsing or supporting Mitt Romney?

Why would the right-wing queen of provocation, Ann Coulter, claim that she would rather campaign for Hillary Clinton than the longtime Republican senator from Arizona?

Why, many talking heads marvel, are conservatives ambushing their only real shot at a general election victory in November?

Well, just maybe, to conservatives, the principle is worth more than the victory.

This explanation squares with my own motto, the one that appears at the top of this blog:

"Supporting party above principle does a disservice to both"

Before registering as a Republican for the 2004 primary election, I had been an "unaffiliated" voter--though certainly not in the "independent" or "moderate" or flip-flopping fence-sitter mode. I was a conservative--fiscally, socially, in foreign policy and in temperament. None of these positions were in the absolutist, ideologue sense--a healthy blend of small-l libertarianism influenced all of my positions, creating the need to balance my views on personal morality and public policy. As these were not always coterminous, a certain tension existed--not one that drew me toward the mushy middle, but one that made it difficult to pigeonhole me ideologically. I'm sure many of you have had the same feelings.

Generally, the problems of this country could not and should not be solved primarily or even substantially by the government. Nanny-state totalitarians masquerading as government do-gooders and demagogues spouting economic populism while excoriating the "evil" business sector--these were the main adversaries, and sometimes even found a home in the GOP. This says nothing of the anti-American, pro-socialist moonbats on the left, or the tinfoil-hat wearing, black helicopter spying, conspiracy theorists.

Government, however, does have a role (and this is why I'm not a big-L Libertarian) in playing the third-party arbiter, law enforcement, and foreign policy roles. One of the failures in this area has been the inability and lack of will regarding enforcing immigration laws. Any regular reader here knows my position on illegal immigration.

McCain-Feingold and McCain-Kennedy violate both of these positions. I'm supposed to "take one for the party" and simply prostrate myself before the failure-turned-juggernaut John McCain campaign? His "bipartisanship" and "maverick" designations generally mean kicking any principled conservative position to the curb, all the while scolding those who dare to disagree.

None of these problems with McCain's policy positions denigrates his service in our military. A casual glance at this blog will disabuse anyone of the notion that I have nothing but respect for McCain on this aspect, and would certainly find him a strong defender of this nation in the foreign policy arena. But one's military service does not mean a default vote for a candidate, much as one's gender or race should not bring an automatic vote either.

Mike Huckabee presents a similar problem. His social conservatism is admirable, but tends toward the evangelical (I'm Catholic, there is some disconnect there). Huck's main shortcomings, in my view, stem from his willingness to view the government as the source of the correctives for any issue that comes before him. A strong dose of economic populism also does much to dissuade.

Ron Paul. Good on domestic policy, atrocious on foreign policy. While he himself may not be a nut, some of his followers are, and tend to be disaffected cranks and conspiracy moonbats. That he has not distanced himself or his campaign from their antics or their contributions doesn't speak well to him as a candidate.

Mitt Romney isn't perfect. He has been accused of "flip-flopping" on any number of core issues that conservatives find important. But at this point, and given the candidate pool that the GOP has been left with, Romney is the only candidate whose professed positions come closer to my own, without the accompanying ideological (Huckabee) or historical (McCain) baggage. We know how McCain would treat conservatives, and I'd rather not be roadkill for "maverick" John McCain.

That being said, I can't see myself pulling the lever for a Democrat or any third party option come November should McCain earn the nomination. An extremely reluctant vote for a Republican will (hopefully) help ensure that either Democrat--and the variance between positions is quite clear to all those who have been paying attention--will not be successful. It will also increase the likelihood that potential Supreme Court nominees--to my mind the most important spoils of victory as evidenced by the 2004 results--will remain at best strict constructionists and at worst, moderates. A Democrat victory will only bring moonbattery and leftist "living document" disaster to the highest court in the land.

However, my enthusiasm remains undaunted for state and local GOP candidates, especially for former Representative Bob Schaffer in Colorado's Senate race. We must not forget down-ticket ramifications and remain on the sidelines by sitting on our hands and refusing to vote. Just because we don't like the candidate--no candidate is perfect or even ideal--doesn't mean we should eschew our responsibility--our right--to vote. Don't like McCain? Great! Now get out there and pour your time and money into the other races at the state and local level, and work to prevent a Democrat-dominated Congressional delegation and Colorado legislature move no further to the left. We need to begin chipping away at their advantages now, and begin identifying prospects for challenging them in 2010. Disdain for McCain is no excuse for failing to support the GOP and conservative principles elsewhere.

Final point. The primary season is the time to air differences, argue positions, and strengthen resolve. Any criticism of McCain now will remain even if he ends up the GOP nominee. But I'd rather work to sway McCain back to conservatism (forcing the death of the McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill) than have to fight a Democrat President and likely House and Senate tooth-and-nail to stop the country from going into a tailspin.

Soapbox/endorsement off.

Colorado Caucus: Unaffiliated Vote Growing

A few days ago I posted on the numbers of people who belong to the Republican and Democrat parties, and noted the large increase in the number of unaffiliated voters in Colorado, both newly registered voters who have yet to declare affiliations, and previously affiliated voters who have disenrolled due to enchantment with their party (or both, for that matter):



There are 2,890,852 voters in Colorado as of January 25, 2008:

1,011,152 Republicans--35.0%
880,761 Democrats--30.5%
998,939 Unaffiliated--34.6%

Yesterday, Colorado Public Radio featured some "unaffiliated" voters eager to gain some insight into their reasoning for remaining unaffiliated, or for leaving their current party (part 1). CPR then spoke to Colorado Republican Chairman Dick Wadhams and Democrat political consultant Mike Stratton on the challenges of campaigning for unaffiliated votes (part 2) in a state that has always featured a rather large "unaffiliated" bloc and that has also elected both Republicans and Democrats--in other words, a consistently "purple" state.

Given current trends, it is entirely conceivable that unaffiliated voters could outnumber members of both parties this year, especially if a great number of Republicans are disappointed in the eventual GOP Presidential nominee, and if current interest in the 2008 election encourages even more new voters who similarly disavow a partisan affiliation.

Colorado Caucus: Colorado Conservative Bloggers Pick GOP Favorites For Super Tuesday

Poring over my fellow Colorado conservatives' blogs these past few weeks, I pulled together a rough list of their picks for the GOP nomination in no particular order (if you would like to add your endorsement to this list, leave a comment and link below):

The Daily Blogster--"Go Mitt!"

Clay Calhoun--"If the GWOT is the #1 issue, and I believe it is, then McCain is who I want leading the charge"

The New Conservative--Huckabee or McCain, anyone but that sleazy Romney

Best Destiny--"I will be enthusiastically caucusing for Mitt Romney on Tuesday night"

Ben DeGrow--Mitt for President

ThinkingRight--"Mitt Romney is the only clear conservative candidate"

The Drum and Cannon--"It is time for conservative Republicans to bury our differences and let our voices be heard, loud and clear. It is time to come together and support Mitt Romney for President of the United States"

Rossputin--"If John McCain is the GOP nominee, I'll vote Libertarian"

ClearCommentary--"There's much about McCain we don't like, but if he's our fate, let's sharpen him to a razor's edge and prepare for November"

The Colorado Index--(no official endorsement) "The conservatives who are always in search of the perfect conservative candidate with the threat that they will sit on their hands if he doesn't materialize have handed us Ken Salazar and Bill Ritter"

FWIW, here's how the SP GOP poll turned out:

Colorado Caucus Gains Importance; **Update: Super Tuesday

**Updated and bumped to the top through Super Tuesday--scroll for caucus info**

<---Please take a moment to vote in SP's GOP poll, located to the left in the sidebar. Democrat caucus info/Republican caucus info

9NEWS has a short primer on caucus procedures for Democrats and Republicans

---

With the Super Duper Tsunami Tuesday Caucus/Primary Electionpalooza (or whatever the MSM is calling it) only 26 days away (thanks Ben for the reminder!), Colorado's relatively obscure caucus should garner not only record turnout with both parties lacking a clear frontrunner, but also increased attention from the candidates:

Colorado is bracing for possible record turnouts in the Feb. 5 presidential caucuses, as state voters get swept up in the country's election fever.

Massive turnouts at the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary indicate that voters want to play a pivotal role in the country's most open presidential seat in more than 50 years. And Colorado voters — on both sides of the aisle — are no different.
. . .
GOP and Democratic Party officials say they are expecting much higher participation at the caucuses than they have had in years. State GOP head Dick Wadhams said the intensity of the race was certain to bring out new attendees.

State Democrats have told their county precincts "to prepare for record turnout," said spokesman Matt Sugar, who noted that his party is involved in numerous caucus trainings.
. . .
Unlike Iowa and New Hampshire, Colorado does not have so-called open caucuses. Only those who registered as a Democrat or Republican by the first week in December can attend the caucuses. Unaffiliateds — the state's second-largest registered group — cannot show up and vote.

The state currently boasts just over 1 million Republicans, 994,575 unaffiliateds and 875,650 Democrats. Unaffiliateds have increased by about 50,000 since March, while Democrats went up about 25,000 and Republicans 12,000.

Colorado is one of more than 20 states taking part in what's known as Super Tuesday. The front-loaded nomination schedule has accelerated the process, which may potentially result in both parties producing a nominee by dawn on Feb. 6.

The country would then have a two-candidate race for nine months — a historical first.

Having a closed caucus will prevent unaffiliateds from skewing either party's selection--giving a clearer picture of what rank-and-file Colorado Democrats and Republicans view as their ideal candidate, while leaving pollsters and bloggers to speculate on just how the 2nd largest voting bloc in Colorado will break come November.

Ben DeGrow has a good roundup of Colorado caucus information, including Jefferson and Douglas County GOP caucus gathering information and links. More from Colorado GOP Chairman Dick Wadhams.

Denver County GOP caucuses are arranged geographically, centered in the 9 State House districts that comprise the county:

District 1 - Kennedy High School
District 2 - Colorado Automobile Dealers Association offices
District 3 - Harvard Gulch Recreation Center, 550 East Iliff (Logan & Iliff)
District 4 - Lake Middle School
District 5 - Tivoli Auditorium, Auraria Campus
District 6 - Location 1: Windsor Gardens, 595 S. Clinton Street (Clinton & Alameda)
Location 2: Central Christian Church, 3690 Cherry Creek Drive South (Garfield & Cherry Creek Drive South)
District 7 - location TBD
District 8 - Park Hill Methodist Church, 5209 Montview Boulevard
District 9 - Hamilton Middle School, 8600 Dartmouth

DemNotes captures the excitement felt on the other side. Not every Democrat, however, knows which lever they will pull in the upcoming election:

Cory Madden, a student at the University of Denver, said part of his class is engaged in a youth voting project to get people involved in the presidential race.

He hasn't registered yet but plans to as a Democrat. However, he doesn't know which Democrat will get his vote.

"[Dude--ed.] I'm just not getting a huge political vibe yet," said Madden, 19, who is originally from Ohio.

Slapstick Politics January Colorado GOP Poll Results

FWIW a few days ago in honor of the New Hampshire primary I posted a couple of online polls--here were the very unscientific but fun results--interpret them as you see fit:





Thankfully the Ronulans/Paulbots didn't stack the deck.

If there are a similar number of GOP candidates still left on Super Duper Caucuspalooza in a couple weeks, I'll run the polls again.

I've actually thought about doing a marketing-like survey on Colorado--like the ones for my MBA classes--drilling deeper than the usual Rasmussen/SurveyUSA/Zogby polls that like to do crosstabs and ask pretty simple questions. One can discern more from a question, rated on a 1-7 Likert scale, of intensity of feeling for a candidate than a simple, "who would you vote for" type question. Any thoughts?

NH Polls

While New Hampshire has a primary, SP has a Colorado poll--

Election '08--Colorado's Bloggers Analyze Iowa, Critique The Debates, And Back Their Favorite GOP Candidates

For the first week of 2008, the conservative blogosphere in Colorado has issued prognostications, offered analysis, and revealed who they think the frontrunners are (or should be). A few have even endorsed their primary candidate, or more importantly, detailed who they won't be voting for should that candidate receive the GOP nomination.

Michael at Best Destiny insightfully details more ground that ALL of the GOP candidates should be steadfast in not ceding to the Democrats this election cycle.

Mr. Bob at the Daily Blogster explains his (well-reasoned, IMO) to back Mitt Romney, and also his distaste for the over-the-top antics of radio personality Hugh Hewitt.

Jim at ThinkingRight also believes that Romney is the best of the leading candidates, and has analysis as well.

Meanwhile, Ben DeGrow remains a FredHead for as long as he sticks in the race.

Clay Calhoun, after an extended blog hiatus, offers his rundown of the marathon two-party debate Saturday evening--he likes Fred and Huck, can't stand Romney or Giuliani, and thinks McCain will get the GOP nod.

Phil Mella at ClearCommentary takes Barack Obama's foreign policy philosophy to task--would we be safe (from external threats/attacks) with Obama in the White House?

Iowa Caucus Roundup

**Update (via Drudge)

Obama 37.36; Edwards 29.97; Clinton 29.45
Huckabee 34; Romney 25; Thompson 14; McCain 13%; Paul 10%

Initial thoughts--nice finish for Fred Thompson

Michelle Malkin has a roundup, liveblogging

---

This post will be updated and amended as the results from the Iowa Caucus--the official start to this year's Presidential battle--come in this evening.

First, a comprehensive PJM roundup on all things Iowa.

Ben DeGrow has been following Fred Thompson's campaign, and did a little bit of results blognostication himself.

Michael at Best Destiny has a few thoughts as well.

Of course, 2008 will not only just be about electing a new commander-in-chief. Colorado's GOP has set its sights on reclaiming both houses of Colorado's legislature, by laying the groundwork for in this election and the mid-term 2010 election, targeting the Democrat-held Senate seat and the governor's mansion. Political cycles are no longer confined to the election year itself or even the normal two-year pattern (off year elections notwithstanding). The campaign for '08 began as soon as John Kerry conceded in November 2004. Republicans, having learned that their vaunted GOTV campaigns can not rescue hapless candidates in a poor political climate, must set to work building, or in some cases, re-building the grassroots elements of the party, and move away from the intraparty bickering and recriminations that have come to define recent primary campaigns, on both a local and national level. This will be put to the clearest test this year in the Presidential campaign, but will also have ramifications for GOP candidates on all levels. A permanent fracture would leave the GOP in permanent minority status, giving Democrats the keys to our government--and our future--not by losing the battle of ideas, but simply by default.

Wash Park Prophet has a post on the "irrational" voters--often those self-proclaimed "unaffiliateds" or "independents"--which might explain the rise of Ron Paul.