Wednesday, March 17, 2010

2010 Caucus

Exciting night for those who showed up.

Gubernatorial Results
Scott McInnis 60.07%
Dan Maes 39.27%

This can be seen as a major boost for Maes has he has run a low/no-budget campaign pretty much with his family as staff and has taken a well known former Congressman with huge money backing 40/60. While McInnis can claim victory, the eyes are on Maes. Holtzman didn't even make 30% at teh convention against Beauprez to make the ballot and he had a load of money. Could Maes come on top at the convention or lock it up to 50-50?

Republican Senate Results
Ken Buck 37.86%
Jane Norton 37.74%
Tom Wiens 16.64%
Cleve Tidwell 5.97%
Steve Barton 1.24%

This was a fun night to watch. Ken Buck in the end, came on top of Norton by 29 votes, and that answers the question to non-politicos out there why you care to vote. Tom Wiens almost lost his home county of Douglas to Norton which would have been horrible for the campaign. Wiens did well around his home area. Norton took the west while Buck did better in the east. Tidwell, though winning one county, performed very well in the Southwest and southern part of Colorado. It will be interesting to see who drops out now and if they will do so before the convention. What we have currently is an anti-Norton/Washington block of votes splitting between the more conservative candidates.

Watching all night Buck lead from 40-30 at times to Norton coming on top by those numbers. Wiens made it as high as 20% and at times under 10%. Cleve Tidwell went from 4% to almost 8% down to 6%. Steve Barton started strong for him with 3% of the vote, but continued to drop as more votes were reported.

Stayed tuned for more analysis and the democrat results this afternoon.


  1. Alright... This just seems to be pretty good for Norton, isn't it? At all of our Caucuses, its the serious (and not-at-work) folks who REALLY have a bone to pick who show up.

    Factor in the fun-filled ads that CFL is running to back their boy Buck and yet he couldn't pull off a convincing win? That's kinda sad, isn't it?

    The easy parallel is Romanoff... He's got no money and "owns the grassroots" but he didn't have a problem doing well at the Caucus and pulling off a commanding win.

    So I think the Buck "win" is hollow at best, isnt' it?

  2. Norton was going around saying oh how she's the great front-runner, the grass-roots choice, she has all the backing, all the money, and she losses to Buck, I call that a Norton loss. And Romanoff's best shot was the caucus so a 10% lead isn't good enough to make it seem like he can challenge Bennet


Anyone can post a comment.