While these kind of things don't happen every day, at least
Republican leaders from Routt County agree.

And so does a first-time delegate from Boulder County, who has brought up an excellent point about the Holtzman campaign's earlier spin, which frankly disappoints me to see in retrospect:

Holtzman estimated that more than 2,500 Holtzman delegates were elected to state and county assemblies in the statewide caucus proceedings Tuesday night. “We will clearly reach our stated goal of sending at least 30 percent of the delegates to the Republican State Assembly in Colorado Springs on May 20th, assuming we receive fair treatment,” said Dick Leggitt, Holtzman’s Campaign Manager.

I have yet to see any real evidence to show Holtzman received anything but "fair treatment" at the Assembly - I was there. And let me tell you, 902 is nowhere near 2,500.

I hope it isn't true, but with each recalcitrant response to voices of reason from all over the state party it appears the Holtzman campaign is becoming more about Marc Holtzman than anything else. He can prove otherwise, doing the party and its principles, platform, and policy priorities a favor by stepping down and running in the future.

This recent Holtzman-delegate blogger was one of the very first to ask him to do just that.

Cross posted at Mount Virtus

Here were the rolling averages of head-to-head matchups for March:

Bill Ritter (D) 41%
Bob Beauprez (R) 40%

Bill Ritter (D) 41%
Marc Holtzman (R) 36%

Rasmussen released the April averages today:

Bob Beauprez (R) 39%
Bill Ritter (D) 37%

Bill Ritter (D) 41%
Marc Holtzman (R) 36%

Perhaps most telling are the individual candidate's favorable vs. unfavorable ratings:

Ritter is viewed favorably by 52% of likely voters, unfavorably by 25%. Beauprez is viewed favorably by 48%, unfavorably by 31%. Holtzman is viewed favorably by just 35% (a five-point drop since late March) and unfavorably by 33%, with 32% Not Sure what to think of him.

Among Republicans, Beauprez is viewed favorably by 69%, Holzman [sic] by 51%.

Voters appear to have less clear opinions of all candidates than a month before. Ritter's favorable rating held steady while his unfavorables dropped by 5 points. Beauprez's favorable rating declined 4 points and his unfavorable rating by 3 points. Holtzman's favorable rating fell 5 points and his unfavorables fell 1 point.

Bottom line: recent developments in the campaign appear to have generated more confusion and/or apathy about the candidates than anything else. The recent intraparty mud-slinging has definitely heightened since the end of the polling period, but its April effects appeared to have benefited no one and to have hurt the Democrat Ritter (who remains outside the fray) the least.

The numbers for all candidates have reached a plateau - at least temporarily - and neither Republican contender appears to have gained a rhetorical edge in their case for electability.

While Beauprez is the only Republican to have a survey showing him leading Ritter (though slightly), he still has the smallest "No Opinion" factor & presumably will have a harder time breaking through the ceiling.

Some negative press looks to have taken steam out of the Holtzman engine. But if he can emerge unscathed from the recent legal proceedings he has the greatest potential of any candidate to win over independent and undecided voters.

Cross posted at Mount Virtus

Last year Marc Holtzman challenged their stand on Referendum C, and they throw buckets of mud back - mostly innuendo. I wonder where the preponderance of the GOP's grassroots - who are scheduled to convene in Colorado Springs on May 20 - stood on Ref C. Well, let me tell you: with Holtzman, not with Katy Atkinson and Bruce Benson. I have a hard time explaining the timing of the release of these ads, except that the anti-Holtzman crowd are attempting to curb a defeat at the State Assembly, or at least to take their negative appeal to a broader audience.

Holtzman and his team had to have anticipated the escalation of these sort of vitriolic assaults. How they respond in the coming weeks will say a lot about the quality and character of the campaign. If done well, they may be able to rally more of the party faithful to their banner.

We have 16 days to see which candidate earns top line at the Assembly. Depending on which side you listen to, you get drastically different stories of where the levels of support are. A lot of jockeying is going on for the narrowest cadres of support. What I hope for, more than anything, is a fair and untainted vote at the Assembly (unlike the clouds of controversy that swirled in 2004).

While I tend to disagree with John Straayer in most cases, his analysis quoted in the Rocky that a "civil war" has been taking place in Colorado's Republican Party is not far off.

Make no mistake, however, that this "civil war" has roots far deeper than Holtzman and Beauprez and 2006. I can only hope that the candidate with fewer primary votes can urge his cohorts to lay down their arms come August.

Cross posted at Mount Virtus

Marc Holtzman claimed President Ronald Reagan appointed him executive director of Citizens for America, but the truth is President Reagan did not.

Holtzman's camp has staked its honesty on hard evidence by producing an actual copy of a letter from well-respected former Attorney General Ed Meese that they claim refutes Marshall's assertion.

I hope that Holtzman responds to some more of the charges with such evidence, but for now, he and running mate Lola Spradley should stick to a more positive message than their opponent.

We've also seen a Beauprez supporter file an election complaint against Holtzman attempting to quell his free speech. Is that what Republicans stand for? For some, when it's convenient, yes ... unfortunately. Don't think the other side isn't paying close attention to the hypocrisy:

Bob Beauprez’s gubernatorial campaign is going after Marc Holtzman’s campaign manager for making false statements to the press, and the statute they are citing is the same one that Democrats have complained has been violated by The Trailhead Group in robocalls designed to hurt targeted Democrats. If Beauprez gets his way, does that put new scrutiny back on The Trailhead Group? Two of Trailhead’s founders, Gov. Bill Owens and oilman Bruce Benson, are two of Beauprez’s biggest backers.

The bright side at this point is how few of us there are actually paying attention. Maybe a campaign of ideas is too much for this amateur pundit to hope for, but could we save just a little bit of mud for the other side... please?

Cross posted at Mount Virtus

Colorado law says no person may "knowingly" make a false statement "designed to affect the vote" for anyone running for public office.

We have a somewhat different take on this matter.

If Holtzman wants to employ someone who lies to the press in such brazen fashion, that's his business. Journalists will adjust their reports depending on whether they feel they can trust anything he now says. For some, the answer will be no.

But as for there being an obligation to fire Leggitt, that's nonsense. The Colorado law is - or at least should be - unconstitutional. You can't outlaw false campaign rhetoric, intentional or not. Indeed, we can hardly think of anything more destructive to free speech than inviting courts to rule on political truthfulness and honesty.

Then this, on the "substantive" complaint:

Holtzman appeared in a TV ad attacking Ref C, a 2005 issue campaign in which there were no contribution limits. But those ads did not mention he was running for governor. Why shouldn't a candidate enjoy the same free-speech rights to support or oppose a statewide referendum as any other citizen - whether or not it elevates his public profile?

It's bad enough these laws are on the books. It's worse when a Republican betrays party principle and uses them for their intended purpose - to squelch political opposition.

Bill Ritter (D) - 40%
Bob Beauprez (R) - 33%

Bill Ritter (D) - 41%
Marc Holtzman (R) - 28%

The March results show positive movement for the Republicans, while Ritter is stuck standing still:

Bill Ritter (D) - 41%
Bob Beauprez (R) - 40%

Bill Ritter (D) - 41%
Marc Holtzman (R) - 36%

And Rasmussen concludes with this summary:

The rolling average of the last three Rasmussen Reports polls shows Ritter leading Beauprez by 3 percentage points, 40% to 37%. Ritter leads Holtzman in the three-poll average by five percentage points. These figures confirm the tightness of the race at this time. With seven months to go until Election Day and more roughly 20% of Colorado voters undecided, this looks to be a wide open campaign. [emphasis mine]

Beauprez has an insignificant two-point edge over Holtzman in head-to-head matchups with Bill Ritter - and this despite other polling information that shows many more Coloradans have yet to frame an opinion of Holtzman than of Beauprez. So what do these data suggest?

The overwhelming concern I hear among friends and others who support Beauprez is the question of electability. Consider the reliable Rasmussen poll as a piece of evidence to challenge that concern and show that a principled, hard-working Republican candidate with strong fundraising and a clear, positive message can and will keep the statehouse in the party's hands come November. Marc Holtzman continues to upset the armchair pundits who dismissed his campaign and said it would be dead months ago. On the contrary, his campaign is still building momentum on its way to the State Assembly on May 20 and beyond.

Also in the news, you can tune in today to hear Marc Holtzman at 10:00 AM on the Amy Oliver Show (1310 KFKA in Greeley).

Cross posted at Mount Virtus

I can say that the only effort made to sway me last night was by a Holtzman man. There was remarkably little politicking, most people left for the Town Hall portion of the evening, and the only speeches were by a couple of black ministers in favor Marriage as We Know It.

With Ben for Marc and Clay for Beauprez, and myself still officially uncommitted, the debate is now officially on.

While my heart's with Marc and his efforts, the campaign is starting to look a little like the Mike Miles-Ken Salazar matchup. So any pressure that can be brought on Beauprez to force him to talk more about ideas is good for the party. I sent an email with some of the following observations to Holtzman, not because they haven't thought of them, or because I'm declaring for one side or another, but because I think a good primary is good for the party, and helps win the battle of ideas.

First, about that speaking style. Holtzman has gotten better, but Beauprez's humor is still disarming. Holtzman really sees himself as continuing the Reagan revolution, but while the words are optimistic, the voice and facial expressions are a little too strained and earnest. It leads to Beauprez walking away with a higher Q-rating, even though there's no need for it. Instead of saying, "I have a plan, and I know what I want to do," Holtzman could earn points by getting out from behind the lectern, gesturing to the crowd, and telling them that, "you already know the answer," before telling them what it is. He's not tall enough to lean over the lectern, but doing that would really compliment his audience.

A terrible moment came at the end of the debate, where Beauprez was responding to some of Holtzman's comments, invoked Reagan, and Holtzman lost his cool and interrupted Beauprez. While the look on Beaprez's face was worthy of Al Gore in the first debate, Holtzman lost any advantage by breaking the rules and giving Beauprez a chance to stay in command, and put Marc back in his place a little. I'll have audio of that (and other portions) loaded up this afternoon.

Second, on issues, Holtzman is full of ideas, but needs to work harder to connect them with themes and with items that matter to people. On the other hand, his ideas are appealing to a Republican crowd, and are more specific that Beauprez's on water and transportation. Beauprez wants to address transportation through roads, rails, and airports. Honestly, that ought to sound terrible to a Republican audience. The Denver railyard is already slated to be moved out east, and airports are largely private enterprises alread. People want to hear about roads, and this talk about "studies" to "get ahead" of the curve sound like expensive boondoggles that don't address specific problems that we're familiar with.

On health care, Holtzman ought to be winning hands-down. Again, there's a limit as to what the state can do, but if you start with the fact that the government has turned the health-care "market" into a pretzel, things like HSAs and federal waivers are no-brainers. They should be at the top of the list, not where Beauprez has them, down at the bottom after, "encourage electronic recordkeeping."

The biggest difference, though, the one that Holtzman kept hammering on to create contrast, was immigration. Holtzman repeatedly banged on Beauprez for not being tough enough on illegal immigration, including references to a bill to crack down on sanctuary cities. Beauprez cited Tom Tancredo's endorsement, and given Tancredo's willingness to be a one-issue candidate and one-issue endorser, that does carry some weight. And the fact is, while Beauprez can't cite the same 100 and 95 ratings on immigration that he can on more general issues, Vote-Smart has him doing pretty well, there, too. Still, it's clear that Beauprez would rather not talk about immigration as his top issue, and Holtzman seemed to get under his skin a little there.

One area where I just flat-out disagree with Holtzman is on CAFTA. My only western-hemisphere free-trade regret is that we didn't get a chance to extend the thing all the way down to the South Pole before Latin American governments started going Left and looking to China for succor. Beauprez's right on this one, and Holtzman is wrong, and we can deal with immigration without ditching free trade.

Look, it's not like Beauprez has no ideas about what to do. He's probably looking ahead both to the general and at having to govern, possibly with a minority in one or both state legislative houses. And Colorado's governor has, at some level, less power than Denver's mayor. The two candidates are probably identical on that issue, except that Beauprez can draw on legislative experience dealing with other states on the issue. Colorado's centrality comes from geography and population rather than any particular talents Beauprez has, but it's still an advantage for him.

I hate airing dirty Republican laundry like this, but when you are close enough to the sources to know what's going on, and the whole thing needs to be cleared up, well... the choice was easy.

The story came to life when the highly trustworthy Sean McCarthy of Pueblo County gave the following account to Holtzman's staff:

Re: Telephone solicitation, Tuesday, March 1, 2006 I received a phone call from a telemarketer at approximately 8:23pm on the aforementioned date. The caller said she was calling on behalf of the Colorado Republican Party. I listened while she went through her prepared pitch. She asked for my donation of $600. I told her that I was not able to donate that much at present, as I was focused on local elections, but, I intended to donate at a later date. She immediately went into her “overcome the objection” pitch. She told me that she understood, but that timing was critical as every dollar carried the weight of two dollars during this particular period. She said that we were winning in the polls, “Bob Beauprez is ahead 58% to 13%.” This last statement caught me off guard, but she continued her line without allowing me to question her. She continued by saying that any contribution would help us win this election. At this point I asked her if she was calling on behalf of the party, or Bob Beauprez. She seemed to stumble a bit. By this time I was very agitated. The call had interrupted my preparations for bed, and this caller was not making sense. I told her that I was supporting Marc Holtzman, and that I was not interested. I hung up the phone.

When confronted with the facts, State Party officials conceded that they had contracted with the same telephone fundraising vendor as the Beauprez campaign. They claim that the problem was with one rogue caller employed by the vendor who stepped over the line, and nothing more. The Holtzman team was not aware of any evidence to show that the problem had been more widespread than the one caller, though they have received numerous reports from supporters who had a similar experience.

There are no serious allegations of which I am aware that charge either the State Party or the Beauprez campaign with malicious intent. However, the Holtzman team does have a legitimate concern about conflict of interest, and no guarantee can be made that further incidents like this will not occur. It's standard best practice within the field not to do work in overlapping cases. Regardless, it reflects poorly on the GOP, some of whose operatives appear to have learned nothing from the disastrous seeds they sowed during the 2004 Coors-Schaffer Senate campaign. Holtzman's people should be praised for shining the light of day on the situation (read running mate Lola Spradley's letter to State GOP Chairman Bob Martinez) , not cowing to underhanded tactics used by one or more to pressure them out of the race, and running strong on a platform of internal state party reform.

I hope this is just an isolated incident of an overambitious caller and poor judgment by State Party officials. But if it can be shown that more extensive elements operating within the Republican Party structure are concerned enough about Holtzman's candidacy to run underhanded tactics like these against him, they must have someone quite formidable on their hands.

One final note: it's cases like these that have tremendous potential to push good people from participating more actively in the political process. And that, my friend, is sad, indeed.

Cross posted at Mount Virtus

Republican state lawmakers who opposed Referendum C are lining up with ideas on how Colorado should use the extra money the state will collect over the next five years, raising eyebrows among some of the Democratic leaders who fought hard to pass the measure.

Just two weeks into the 2006 legislative session, several Republican lawmakers who opposed lifting the state's revenue cap and pledged to be the state's fiscal guardians are pushing bills that would use some of that Referendum C money.

...

That litany has caused some Democrats to complain that those lawmakers don't have the standing to say what should be done with the money.

"These people chose not to be part of the solution," said House Majority Leader Alice Madden, D-Boulder. "Part of me says, 'Too little, too late.' They're a day late and $300 million short."

This explains why Alice Madden isn't House Speaker. And may soon be Minority leader.

In fact, it also indicates at least the second time that the majority Democrats have had to re-iterate that fact, indicating more insecurity than they'd like to let on. After all, the House rules are such that if the Dem caucus were united, this sort of browbeating wouldn't be necessary. The only way any of these ideas gain traction is if some Democrats support them, making the target of this outburst obvious.

It also suggests that the Republican gubernatorial nominee has a chance to carry down-ticket seats with him, if he chooses to.

Spradley, who has been welcomed to the team with open arms, expressed her support for her new running mate's vision and philosophy. Among other things, she brings the credentials of a highly-respected term of legislative service and a strong base of popularity in the region of Pueblo and southeastern Colorado. There is excitement and enthusiasm among grassroots supporters across the state for Holtzman's decision and for the direction his campaign is headed. Following in the wake of last week's favorable poll numbers from an objective and reliable source, the Holtzman campaign is gaining some real momentum heading into the March caucuses.

Cross posted at Mount Virtus

As a Holtzman supporter (full disclosure), I'm certainly pleased by the news - which is generating some buzz out there in the blogosphere:
- Of course, the Dead Governors started quite a conversation -
- Students for Holtzman comes to life with the good news that their candidate beats the currently declared Democratic frontrunner Bill Ritter in a head-to-head matchup -
- Over at Red State, partisans spread the polling news from the Centennial State and provoke some bickering between supporters of the two candidates -
- A discussion thread is underway at Free Republic on the same topic -
- Terri at GOPUSA Colorado has posted the information -

The earliest echoes of national interest into the important Colorado gubernatorial race... you know where you need to look to stay updated on what will be going on. The next important date on the calendar here is March 21, when Republicans convene in their caucuses to select delegates to the State Assembly - scheduled for May 20. A candidate needs to earn at least 30 percent of the delegates' support to get on the primary ballot. And then the Beauprez-Holtzman showdown likely will gain a lot of steam. Stay tuned.

Cross posted at Mount Virtus