CO District 5 primaries
By bubbagump29 Posted in 2006 — Comments (2) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
From the diaries, by Erick . . .
On the eve of the Colorado primaries (though I imagine people are watching Lieberman’s more closely), I want to update all the kind folks here who joined the Club for Growth and myself in donating to Doug Lamborn’s campaign. If you didn’t read that, now would be a good time to so you aren’t confused. At this point, the race is the epitome of a tossup. The only public poll I’ve seen was one back in June from the Rivera camp putting obviously himself is first with Lamborn being his runner up, the heir-designate Crank and others close behind except for General Bentley Rayburn (who?) at 2%. Critics called it a push poll and it could well have been, but that’s what we have. People generally acknowledge Lamborn, Rivera, and Crank as the frontrunners. Rivera has backing from quite a few downtown businesses and is the popular mayor of Colorado Springs, Crank has the Hefley supporters, and Lamborn has the state and National Right to Life movements and the Club for Growth. A lot has changed since June, so ignore the poll. Better indicators are money and yard signs. But first, who is Bentley Rayburn?
I thought there were six candidates when I wrote the relevant diary linked above, but I could only find five. No one had ever heard of the sixth. In fact, it seems he has hardly even been in CO for the past 25 years, and just returned a few months ago to run for Congress. And run he has. The only prediction I can make with reasonable accuracy is that Duncan Bremer, Paul Bremer’s brother, won’t win. Rayburn has run a much better campaign and could garner the military votes if they vote as a block (Ft. Carson, AFA, Peterson Air Force Base, NORAD – the military is a heck of a group here).
Anything can happen. Any of the six candidates can win. That said, here are my guesses:
My gut feeling is that Lamborn buried Crank with the Right to Life endorsements. That, I think, probably sealed the deal for social conservatives and fiscal conservatives are excited about the Club for Growth endorsement. Lamborn now has much of the base.
As for yard signs, a crucial indicator because of name recognition and the activism involved in placing them, Rivera and Rayburn take the cake, not in actual yards but on every street corner in the city. And at that, not one per corner, but about 20, leaving 1000’s of Rivera and Rayburn signs everywhere. As for signs in actual yards, Lamborn and Crank probably squeak by the others, but that may be just my area of town.
Then there is funding. Thanks in large part to RedState and the Club for Growth, Lamborn has out-raised second-place Crank by about 90K. But for the most current fundraising period, Rayburn, the complete unknown, came in second, even out-raising Crank, and has raised as much as the Democratic challenger, with most of it coming from out of state. Another important note is that Anderson had no cash as of June 30.
My guess is that Lamborn will win, because I like that outcome. If he doesn’t, I think Rivera will. Crank could still win, but I’d be a bit more surprised. The military is the wild card in all this which gives Rayburn a good shot. See a lot of popular candidates yet? That’s my only worry. Throw in Bremer, and a five-way split becomes possible leaving an Anderson win still possible. My concerns about a Congressman Anderson have become nightmarish. Early on, he told one of his volunteers, a friend of mine whom I asked to find out, that he was pro-life except in cases of life, rape, and incest. The answer surprised me, since he didn’t advertise that all over his website in this conservative Christian paradise. However, he has since publicly become the only pro-choice candidate in the field. My friend has since left his campaign, saying “he comes off as kind of arrogant,” confirming my fear mentioned in the above blog that he’s in this for the power trip. That analysis was much nicer though than College Republicans who volunteered for him early on and who used words less usable on this site. I will vote Democrat if he wins, since his winning could produce a Lieberman-Lamont style primary and general election two years from now, with Anderson having a good shot at winning. Democrats have already apparently changed parties to vote for him, probably because they know Democrats won’t be winning here during the next millenium. In fact, it wouldn’t shock me to see them vote him over their own, just to keep him around. Anderson’s campaign, in addition to courting Dems’ newfound Republican pro-war support, has mostly tried to get independent voters. Rivera has done the same. Tonight I pray that if such voters turn out, Rivera wins them, and I pray Anderson’s Democrats are few and far between. Bare in mind though that while Democrats hate the Iraq War, down here they hate Values Voters more, and Anderson may be their knight in shining armor. I still predict/guess that Lamborn will win, but watch this election closely.
Watch the results at the Rocky Mountain News tomorrow. Another important one to watch will be District 7 for the Democratic primaries, where the winner faces another Club for Growth endorsee Rick O'Donnell to replace Bob Beauprez, who is running for governor, and I keep reading that this seat is the most competitive in the nation.
Only in El Paso County would he be considered a moderate.
That's why I love Colorado Springs! Actually, while Lamborn would be great for conservatives, obviously that's why I'm voting for him, Rivera is my second-most desired outcome, because it would be a good sign for Republicans. The reason is that if he wins, it will likely have a lot to do with independents switching to Republican status, and feeling active enough to vote in an midterm primary which isn't normal anywhere. This would mean a drastic increase in Republican voters in an already 2-1 district at a time when we need them for the Governor's race in November.
I also agree that the Club for Growth attacks were out of line, especially against Crank (and even I had to laugh at his meat-cleaver explaination), but whatever happens, I hope we can put our ideological differences behind us. I moved here from District 4 two years ago where there was another 6-way close race. Needless to say, we lost to John Salazar.
Thus, I will make a deal with you: whoever wins (except for John Anderson), we vote for the winner in the general. I may even go as far as volunteering for anybody but Anderson. Deal?
although I disagree with your desired outcome. Lamborn may still win this one because of absentee and early voting, but his connections with negative ads (including the Club for Growth) have sent his support down the tubes in the last week. Crank came on strong just at the right time, and Rayburn has been phenomenal. I agree with you completely about Anderson! My hope is that Rivera will win. Only in El Paso County would he be considered a moderate. He's also the only candidate who doesn't have that "power-hungry" aura about him.
We'll see tomorrow.....