Who will win in Colorado?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 10:18:24 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Congressional Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  Who will win in Colorado?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Poll
Question: Who will win in Colorado?
#1
Mark Udall (D), I
 
#2
Cory Gardner (R)
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 92

Author Topic: Who will win in Colorado?  (Read 6200 times)
Senate Minority Leader Lord Voldemort
Joshua
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,710
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.52, S: -5.91

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: August 31, 2014, 06:08:25 PM »

Again, I'm not too worried about Colorado. If Gardner loses, he can challenge Bennet in 16

Gardner's chances at unseating an incumbent would be better with a midterm electorate.

I agree. If Gardner loses this year, he's probably done.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: August 31, 2014, 08:05:04 PM »

Again, I'm not too worried about Colorado. If Gardner loses, he can challenge Bennet in 16

Gardner's chances at unseating an incumbent would be better with a midterm electorate.

I agree. If Gardner loses this year, he's probably done.

Unless it's 1980 or 2004 again
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,841
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: August 31, 2014, 09:30:56 PM »

Again, I'm not too worried about Colorado. If Gardner loses, he can challenge Bennet in 16

Gardner's chances at unseating an incumbent would be better with a midterm electorate.

Eh, not necessarily. While it's true a presidential electorate would be more Democratic, it's also true that effect could be mitigated somewhat by Hillary being a bad fit for the state + Bennet being a weaker incumbent than Udall.

Anyway, Udall narrowly wins.
Logged
backtored
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 498
Vatican City State


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: September 01, 2014, 10:33:51 AM »

Democrats have outperformed their polling in Colorado for two or maybe three election cycles.  That doesn't make it a standard rule of performance.  If the polling shows Udall and Gardner tied, then that means that they very likely are tied.  Hickenlooper's implosion, significantly improved GOP GOTV, a highly motivated GOP electorate, a Democratic base weakened over divisions on fracking and education reform, and a generally good GOP national environment will all help Gardner win by three or four points this year.

Logged
backtored
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 498
Vatican City State


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: September 01, 2014, 10:37:35 AM »

What are we all basing our guesses on? Month old polls? A month is a lifetime in politics. Colorado GOP has been scoring victories as of late, so this is really a Tossup

Since the poll?

You do realize that the vast majority of polling data has either had the GOP leading or the race within a single point, including PPP, right?

The YouGov and Marist polls look like outliers because they are.  If your argument is that Udall will win because of the polling data, then your argument does not hold. 
Logged
backtored
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 498
Vatican City State


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: September 01, 2014, 10:46:36 AM »

Has anyone bothered looking at the voter samples in the polling this year in Colorado?  Pollsters do this for a living, and they know just as many of you have pointed out that they often underestimate Democratic strength in Colorado.  So most of the polling I've seen in Colorado this year has actually over sampled Democrats in polls.  There is absolutely no way that more Democrats than Republicans will vote this year in Colorado.  None.  Yet most polls have had samples with more Democrats than Republicans.  Why?  Because they don't want to mess the state up again.

Moreover--and I can speak to this as someone intimately involved with the GOP's GOTV effort this year in Colorado--the GOP will have a much improved ground game.  Republicans have actually outperformed the Democrats on the ground since 2012, even when severely outfunded in recalls and statewide ballot races.

Gardner is in a very good position, and he would not have run if he didn't feel very, very confident about this opportunity.
Logged
KCDem
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,928


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: September 01, 2014, 10:47:27 AM »

Democrats have outperformed their polling in Colorado for two or maybe three election cycles.  That doesn't make it a standard rule of performance.  If the polling shows Udall and Gardner tied, then that means that they very likely are tied.  Hickenlooper's implosion, significantly improved GOP GOTV, a highly motivated GOP electorate, a Democratic base weakened over divisions on fracking and education reform, and a generally good GOP national environment will all help Gardner win by three or four points this year.

Ok, you're actually nuts.
Logged
backtored
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 498
Vatican City State


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: September 01, 2014, 10:49:46 AM »
« Edited: September 01, 2014, 10:55:24 AM by backtored »

Democrats have outperformed their polling in Colorado for two or maybe three election cycles.  That doesn't make it a standard rule of performance.  If the polling shows Udall and Gardner tied, then that means that they very likely are tied.  Hickenlooper's implosion, significantly improved GOP GOTV, a highly motivated GOP electorate, a Democratic base weakened over divisions on fracking and education reform, and a generally good GOP national environment will all help Gardner win by three or four points this year.

Ok, you're actually nuts.

No, just fairly confident.  Which is a really, really new feeling for a Republican in Colorado.

If I'm wrong, I'll be here eating crow.
Logged
backtored
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 498
Vatican City State


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: September 01, 2014, 10:58:08 AM »
« Edited: September 01, 2014, 11:06:03 AM by backtored »

Has anyone bothered looking at the voter samples in the polling this year in Colorado?  Pollsters do this for a living, and they know just as many of you have pointed out that they often underestimate Democratic strength in Colorado.  So most of the polling I've seen in Colorado this year has actually over sampled Democrats in polls.  There is absolutely no way that more Democrats than Republicans will vote this year in Colorado.  None.  Yet most polls have had samples with more Democrats than Republicans.  Why?  Because they don't want to mess the state up again.

Moreover--and I can speak to this as someone intimately involved with the GOP's GOTV effort this year in Colorado--the GOP will have a much improved ground game.  Republicans have actually outperformed the Democrats on the ground since 2012, even when severely outfunded in recalls and statewide ballot races.

Gardner is in a very good position, and he would not have run if he didn't feel very, very confident about this opportunity.

You will have to excuse us out-of-staters for relying on polling data from good firms as the least-unreliable predictor of the outcome, rather than anecdotal evidence from a partisan from said state. While you may feel confident regarding Gardner's chances in this race, I cannot share that same confidence so long as Udall clings to slight leads in almost all available public polling. While the possibility of Democratic bias in the polls is certainly not improbable, I cannot pretend that it is more likely than not.

Which pollsters would that be?

PPP?

Udall +1

Rassy?

Udall +1

Quinnipiac--easily the state's best pollster?

Gardner +2

That is a tied race.  Period.  If you want to use YouGov to discern how a race will go, then you are, of course, entitled to do so, but I think it would be a mistake.

And, to be clear, I am not saying that the polls have Democratic biases.  I think the polling from the standard pollsters like PPP, Rassy, and Q, have been very, very good, actually.  The Democratic oversampling is probably even necessary to compensate for the Democratic advantages spoken of here.  

But that's my point.  Even with that built-in compensation, the race is basically dead even, and Quinnipiac even has Gardner up by two.
Logged
KCDem
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,928


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: September 01, 2014, 11:30:01 AM »

Has anyone bothered looking at the voter samples in the polling this year in Colorado?  Pollsters do this for a living, and they know just as many of you have pointed out that they often underestimate Democratic strength in Colorado.  So most of the polling I've seen in Colorado this year has actually over sampled Democrats in polls.  There is absolutely no way that more Democrats than Republicans will vote this year in Colorado.  None.  Yet most polls have had samples with more Democrats than Republicans.  Why?  Because they don't want to mess the state up again.

Moreover--and I can speak to this as someone intimately involved with the GOP's GOTV effort this year in Colorado--the GOP will have a much improved ground game.  Republicans have actually outperformed the Democrats on the ground since 2012, even when severely outfunded in recalls and statewide ballot races.

Gardner is in a very good position, and he would not have run if he didn't feel very, very confident about this opportunity.

You will have to excuse us out-of-staters for relying on polling data from good firms as the least-unreliable predictor of the outcome, rather than anecdotal evidence from a partisan from said state. While you may feel confident regarding Gardner's chances in this race, I cannot share that same confidence so long as Udall clings to slight leads in almost all available public polling. While the possibility of Democratic bias in the polls is certainly not improbable, I cannot pretend that it is more likely than not.

Which pollsters would that be?

PPP?

Udall +1

Rassy?

Udall +1

Quinnipiac--easily the state's best pollster?

Gardner +2

That is a tied race.  Period.  If you want to use YouGov to discern how a race will go, then you are, of course, entitled to do so, but I think it would be a mistake.

And, to be clear, I am not saying that the polls have Democratic biases.  I think the polling from the standard pollsters like PPP, Rassy, and Q, have been very, very good, actually.  The Democratic oversampling is probably even necessary to compensate for the Democratic advantages spoken of here.  

But that's my point.  Even with that built-in compensation, the race is basically dead even, and Quinnipiac even has Gardner up by two.

Quinnipiac always has overestimated Republicans' standing in Colorado.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: September 01, 2014, 01:08:42 PM »

Republicans were very confident in 2008, 2010 and 2012.
Logged
backtored
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 498
Vatican City State


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: September 01, 2014, 02:16:45 PM »
« Edited: September 01, 2014, 05:38:55 PM by backtored »

Republicans were very confident in 2008, 2010 and 2012.

No, at least some of us were not. I assure you of that.  Even 2010 was pretty tough given our gubernatorial woes.
Logged
SPC
Chuck Hagel 08
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,004
Latvia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: September 01, 2014, 04:31:45 PM »

I deleted my previous posts when I remembered how idiotic it was to defend the predictive value of polling leads within the margin of error. I apologize for suggesting that statistical ties are somehow indicative of a Udall advantage.
Logged
Vosem
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,622
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.13, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: September 01, 2014, 04:59:30 PM »

Probably Udall, but it should be noted that in 2008, polls significantly overestimated Udall against Bob Shaffer, at the same time as they underestimated Obama against McCain.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Colorado,_2008#Polling

No, they didn't.

More than two polls were conducted during the month of October -- that's a conveniently incomplete list. Yes, they did.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/senate/co/colorado_senate-556.html
Logged
Panda Express
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,578


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: September 01, 2014, 10:28:53 PM »

Well, well, well. Look at who has come out of his hole to grace us with his fantastical blathering. It's good to see you are hackish as ever. Perhaps after you get thoroughly owned for yet another election cycle, you will come to realize the truth about Colorado. I'm not quite sure where you live, but it certainly isn't in reality, yet alone Colorado.

If I'm wrong, I'll be here eating crow.

Oh, you're going to eat crow? Haven't you had more than enough crow already to last a lifetime? Your whole political life has been nothing but a feast on crow. The time has come for you to get schooled by Panda Express. I'm gonna crush you like a crouton. I'm gonna fry you like a fritter. I'm gonna smoke you like a bong.

Let's take a look at all the crow you've consumed throughout the years, shall we?

On 2010:

I wouldn't be surprised if Hick takes a look at the political environment and decides not to run.  He's already the third-string QB in a race that needs a Peyton Manning to beat McInnis.  And he already has rural Democrats lobbing bombs over the Front Range at him because he looks to a lot of people too much like a carpetbagging liberal (remind of a certain Senator from Colorado?).  The fact is that Obama's approval rating in Colorado is among the lowest in the country and Hickenlooper's (and Ritter's and Bennet's and...) ties to the president will hurt him a lot.  Add to that the fact that Hickenlooper's business ties could cost him some union support (which Romanoff apparently tried picking up over the weekend) and this looks like an absolute disaster. 

He'll keep it close enough to make it interesting, but my guess is that his rather liberal ideas seep into the suburbs and beyond, his poll numbers will take a big hit and McInnis could end up winning with Ritter-esque numbers.

PPP also had Hickenlooper up by 11 points which is ridiculous.  If he's up at all--and I doubt that he is--Hick leads by a point or two.  It looks more like PPP is trying to cheerlead their candidates rather than do an accurate poll.  

That's funny--Rasmussen is the only pollster who has had any consistency in this race.  The only poll (besides, ironically, Rasmussen's February poll) showing Hickenlooper winning was the liberal PPP poll showing him up by a ridiculous 11 points. 

On the 2012 Presidential Election in Colorado:

 Obama is doing far worse in Colorado than in Georgia, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Virginia.  Those numbers tell you where 2012 will be won for Team Obama.  And it won't be in Colorado.

I'm fairly confident that Obama will lose Colorado. 

PPP's poll simply over-samples Democrats.  That's fine, I suppose.  But you just have to consider that when analyzing the PPP polls out of Colorado.  And if you take a Democrat-leaning poll that has Obama up only 2 and another poll with his approval numbers at only 39% in Colorado, you have a big Obama loss in Colorado.

Colorado will end up moving more safely in Romney's direction,

people will be genuinely surprised that Colorado ends up with a PVI of R +3 or R+4 in November.


You're right--this poll slanted decidedly to the left.  As I noted visa-vis the ARG poll out of Colorado yesterday, it is likely that Romney has a small but significant lead in Colorado right now. 

The Survey USA crosstabs are 34 D, 34 R, 30 I.  But the actual active voter registration is 32 D, 34 R, 31 I.  Even in 2008, it was R +1.  It won't be any less than R +3 this year, especially considering the gains in voter registration since '08 made by the GOP here.  So no matter how you slice it, Romney leads Colorado.

Actually, if you look into the crosstabs, it's not that close at all in Colorado.  If they had polled the state correctly, Romney would have a decent lead.  ARG has 34 D 32 R 34 I.  The problem?  Active registration is actually like this: 37 R, 32 D, and 31 I.  In other words, they underpolled Republicans by five points, overpolled Dems by two, and significantly overpolled unaffiliateds (who favor the president by two in this poll).

If you work out the math, I imagine that Romney would be leading by at least three or four. 

Unbelievable how people accept this stuff carte blanche without actually looking into whether the books are cooked (as they frequently are, for whatever reason, in Colorado). 

Did the Bain ads even air in Colorado? Thought those were mainly targeted in the rust belt.



We've had plenty of them here in the Denver area.  And they're probably helped Romney rather than hurt him.

I would expect Romney to crank out a win similar to President Bush's margin in 2004.

It's a D +3 sample.  That doesn't even pass the laugh test.  The National Journal story was probably legit--if you can only must a three-point lead when you oversample Democrats by six points, then you're probably in real trouble.

With PPP, you have to peel beneath the numbers to get the real story.


On the political leanings of Colorado in general:


The reality on the ground is that Colorado looks poised to emerge after Election Day, once again, as a state that leans Republican in absence of a compelling, moderate Democrat running in a bad year for the GOP.  Way too many people drank the blue Kool Aid that pundits were serving over the charred carcus of the state Republican Party.  It was so weird to see that happening considering the fact that Colorado is still a fairly conservative state, all things considered.  It's hard to declare Colorado the newest Democratic stronghold when most voters in the state gravitate to ideas that run contrary to the heart of the Democratic Party (nationally, anyway). 

Coloradans have not become more "left-wing."  In fact, if you take the last 20 years out as a case study, the opposite might be more true. 

The poll's methodology is even more hackneyed than the sort of baloney that PPP usually produces.


The reality: Colorado's a conservative state.

The Colorado GOP is actually is pretty good shape here.  We'll likely maintain our 4-3 congressional split, and might even pick up CD-7.  We'll also probably keep the state house, and possibly pick up the state Senate. 

Colorado has snapped back to the right.  I don't know what that portends for the country more broadly, but I won't at all be surprised to see Romney lose by handful and still win in Colorado.  Frankly, the whole "new majority" narrative about Colorado and even Nevada has been wrong for six long years.

Did they poll the marijuana referendum?

Yes.  The Post will release those results probably sometime this weekend.  I really don't expect it to pass. 


You really only post about Colorado and when you do, you're completely wrong. Always. You're going to be wrong again when the GOP goes down in flames again. My hope is you'll finally wake up to the truth but you're one of the most delusional people here. Your predictions have been one big joke after another but it's no longer funny. Time to wake up and smell the coffee, son.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: September 02, 2014, 09:22:31 AM »

Well, well, well. Look at who has come out of his hole to grace us with his fantastical blathering. It's good to see you are hackish as ever. Perhaps after you get thoroughly owned for yet another election cycle, you will come to realize the truth about Colorado. I'm not quite sure where you live, but it certainly isn't in reality, yet alone Colorado.

If I'm wrong, I'll be here eating crow.

Oh, you're going to eat crow? Haven't you had more than enough crow already to last a lifetime? Your whole political life has been nothing but a feast on crow. The time has come for you to get schooled by Panda Express. I'm gonna crush you like a crouton. I'm gonna fry you like a fritter. I'm gonna smoke you like a bong.

Let's take a look at all the crow you've consumed throughout the years, shall we?

On 2010:

I wouldn't be surprised if Hick takes a look at the political environment and decides not to run.  He's already the third-string QB in a race that needs a Peyton Manning to beat McInnis.  And he already has rural Democrats lobbing bombs over the Front Range at him because he looks to a lot of people too much like a carpetbagging liberal (remind of a certain Senator from Colorado?).  The fact is that Obama's approval rating in Colorado is among the lowest in the country and Hickenlooper's (and Ritter's and Bennet's and...) ties to the president will hurt him a lot.  Add to that the fact that Hickenlooper's business ties could cost him some union support (which Romanoff apparently tried picking up over the weekend) and this looks like an absolute disaster. 

He'll keep it close enough to make it interesting, but my guess is that his rather liberal ideas seep into the suburbs and beyond, his poll numbers will take a big hit and McInnis could end up winning with Ritter-esque numbers.

PPP also had Hickenlooper up by 11 points which is ridiculous.  If he's up at all--and I doubt that he is--Hick leads by a point or two.  It looks more like PPP is trying to cheerlead their candidates rather than do an accurate poll.  

That's funny--Rasmussen is the only pollster who has had any consistency in this race.  The only poll (besides, ironically, Rasmussen's February poll) showing Hickenlooper winning was the liberal PPP poll showing him up by a ridiculous 11 points. 

On the 2012 Presidential Election in Colorado:

 Obama is doing far worse in Colorado than in Georgia, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Virginia.  Those numbers tell you where 2012 will be won for Team Obama.  And it won't be in Colorado.

I'm fairly confident that Obama will lose Colorado. 

PPP's poll simply over-samples Democrats.  That's fine, I suppose.  But you just have to consider that when analyzing the PPP polls out of Colorado.  And if you take a Democrat-leaning poll that has Obama up only 2 and another poll with his approval numbers at only 39% in Colorado, you have a big Obama loss in Colorado.

Colorado will end up moving more safely in Romney's direction,

people will be genuinely surprised that Colorado ends up with a PVI of R +3 or R+4 in November.


You're right--this poll slanted decidedly to the left.  As I noted visa-vis the ARG poll out of Colorado yesterday, it is likely that Romney has a small but significant lead in Colorado right now. 

The Survey USA crosstabs are 34 D, 34 R, 30 I.  But the actual active voter registration is 32 D, 34 R, 31 I.  Even in 2008, it was R +1.  It won't be any less than R +3 this year, especially considering the gains in voter registration since '08 made by the GOP here.  So no matter how you slice it, Romney leads Colorado.

Actually, if you look into the crosstabs, it's not that close at all in Colorado.  If they had polled the state correctly, Romney would have a decent lead.  ARG has 34 D 32 R 34 I.  The problem?  Active registration is actually like this: 37 R, 32 D, and 31 I.  In other words, they underpolled Republicans by five points, overpolled Dems by two, and significantly overpolled unaffiliateds (who favor the president by two in this poll).

If you work out the math, I imagine that Romney would be leading by at least three or four. 

Unbelievable how people accept this stuff carte blanche without actually looking into whether the books are cooked (as they frequently are, for whatever reason, in Colorado). 

Did the Bain ads even air in Colorado? Thought those were mainly targeted in the rust belt.



We've had plenty of them here in the Denver area.  And they're probably helped Romney rather than hurt him.

I would expect Romney to crank out a win similar to President Bush's margin in 2004.

It's a D +3 sample.  That doesn't even pass the laugh test.  The National Journal story was probably legit--if you can only must a three-point lead when you oversample Democrats by six points, then you're probably in real trouble.

With PPP, you have to peel beneath the numbers to get the real story.


On the political leanings of Colorado in general:


The reality on the ground is that Colorado looks poised to emerge after Election Day, once again, as a state that leans Republican in absence of a compelling, moderate Democrat running in a bad year for the GOP.  Way too many people drank the blue Kool Aid that pundits were serving over the charred carcus of the state Republican Party.  It was so weird to see that happening considering the fact that Colorado is still a fairly conservative state, all things considered.  It's hard to declare Colorado the newest Democratic stronghold when most voters in the state gravitate to ideas that run contrary to the heart of the Democratic Party (nationally, anyway). 

Coloradans have not become more "left-wing."  In fact, if you take the last 20 years out as a case study, the opposite might be more true. 

The poll's methodology is even more hackneyed than the sort of baloney that PPP usually produces.


The reality: Colorado's a conservative state.

The Colorado GOP is actually is pretty good shape here.  We'll likely maintain our 4-3 congressional split, and might even pick up CD-7.  We'll also probably keep the state house, and possibly pick up the state Senate. 

Colorado has snapped back to the right.  I don't know what that portends for the country more broadly, but I won't at all be surprised to see Romney lose by handful and still win in Colorado.  Frankly, the whole "new majority" narrative about Colorado and even Nevada has been wrong for six long years.

Did they poll the marijuana referendum?

Yes.  The Post will release those results probably sometime this weekend.  I really don't expect it to pass. 


You really only post about Colorado and when you do, you're completely wrong. Always. You're going to be wrong again when the GOP goes down in flames again. My hope is you'll finally wake up to the truth but you're one of the most delusional people here. Your predictions have been one big joke after another but it's no longer funny. Time to wake up and smell the coffee, son.


Republicans were very confident in 2008, 2010 and 2012.

No, at least some of us were not. I assure you of that.  Even 2010 was pretty tough given our gubernatorial woes.

lol
Logged
Knives
solopop
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,460
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: September 02, 2014, 09:31:27 AM »

The effortless clocking of the absolute delusional is hilarious.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,875


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: September 02, 2014, 11:58:38 AM »

The Democrat will win because it's a close race in Colorado. That's how this works.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: September 02, 2014, 02:21:32 PM »

Colorado will either be the eighth or ninth seat the GOP wins.
Logged
SWE
SomebodyWhoExists
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,234
United States


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: September 02, 2014, 03:17:07 PM »

The Democrat will win because it's a close race in Colorado. That's how this works.
Logged
Mechaman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,791
Jamaica
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: September 02, 2014, 05:37:12 PM »

Panda Express, you better be right on that prediction buddy.  If not I might be posting this to the Irony Ore Mine a few months from now.
Logged
Panda Express
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,578


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: September 02, 2014, 07:31:12 PM »

It turns out "bactored" means bacterial feed supplement for the use in aquaculture.

http://www.innovus.co.za/pdf_licensing_opportunities.php?pdf=783

Well Mr. Bacterial Feed Supplement, what say we have a wager, you and I.

I'm betting that BOTH Udall and Hickenlooper will win. In order for me to win, both have to win. If both or just one of them loses, you are a victor. Sounds good, no?

If I win

- You must change the color of your avatar from blue to red.
- You must admit you are retarded when it comes to Colorado politics
- You must have a picture of Mark Udall's face in your sig.

If you win

- I change the color of my avatar from red to blue
- I admit I'm retarded when it comes to Colorado politics
- I put a picture of Zooey Deschanel's face in my sig.

Come on big guy, what do you say?
Logged
RINO Tom
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,999
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: September 02, 2014, 07:43:28 PM »

Udall. Colorado is a tilt D state right now.

Not sure that's a fair conclusion to draw ... I think Udall is fairly popular and an incumbent, and that's why he'll win (in a close one).

Gardner certainly has a chance.
Logged
Senate Minority Leader Lord Voldemort
Joshua
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,710
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.52, S: -5.91

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: September 02, 2014, 10:58:00 PM »

Udall. Colorado is a tilt D state right now.

Not sure that's a fair conclusion to draw ... I think Udall is fairly popular and an incumbent, and that's why he'll win (in a close one).

Gardner certainly has a chance.

A Republican still has a good chance to win in a tilting Democrat state, so I'd say that characterization is fair. Democrats control the legislature and have won all but one of the biggest races since 2004.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: September 03, 2014, 12:09:33 AM »

Udall by 2
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.081 seconds with 14 queries.