Well isn't this interesting! Musgrave may have a little trouble

[GardeningGal]

on her hands with this election. I hope so.

DENVER - A new 9NEWS poll conducted by Survey USA shows the race to represent Colorado's 4th Congressional District is difficult to predict.

The polling company called 452 likely voters between last Sunday, August 13 and Tuesday, August 15.

Incumbent Marilyn Musgrave, a Republican, led with 46 percent of the vote. Her Democratic challenger, State Rep. Angie Paccione, had 42 percent of the vote. Reform Party candidate Eric Eidsness, a former Ronald Reagan appointee, gathered eight percent of the vote. Four percent were undecided.

The results are within the margin of error of 4.7 percent.


more at link:

http://www.9news.com/acm_news.aspx?OSGNAME=KUSA&IKOBJECTID=195f44a0-0abe-421a-01e8-073c147c4fda&TEMPLATEID=0c76dce6-ac1f-02d8-0047-c589c01ca7bf

[KingFlorez]

1. She's always had trouble

But has survived the past two elections, this time she might lose her seat

[Viva_La_Revolution]

2. Oh, PLEASE! Get rid of Musgrave!

I lived in CO, we weren't even in her district and we knew she was horrible.

Go Paccione!

[meldroc]

3. Heh. If the Republicans are funding Green party candidates,

maybe the Democrats could fund this Reform party candidate, see if he can poach some of Musgrave's voters.

[Richard Steele]

4. Hey! That's the first thing that occurred to me as well.

Any money tossed that way could only help the Dem; it's not
Democratic voters that are gonna vote for that
Reform Party nonsense.

[theanarch]

6. yes, there is a god, and she has a sense of humor...

...as a Green, is theis where i get to point a finger and say "hypocrites"? Or call BS...or something? Could have sworn i just read something around here about how fucking low and fucking stupid it was of third parties to be the useful idiots of one major party or another; and how fucking dispicable it was for a major party to play such fucking games on their fucking own.

I will note that the few (Nader/Romanelli) instances of Green's taking GOP cash were strictly and exclusively to gain ballot access--not to bankroll the entire campaign, as the suggestion here has been made. In this case, the Reform candidate already did that, and (apparently) on his own dime...wouldn't it make more sense to just contribute to the Dem instead? Besides, i thought the point of all that Green-bashing/baiting was to reassure everyone Democrats were better than this, that you respected the integrity of the electoral process more...or are you just "rising above principle" when the opportunity to do so arose?

[Richard Steele]

7. Well, what you 'note' is just simply not true...

The GREEN in the current PA race has been ENTIRELY funded
by Republican Party insiders, excepting $35 from his own pocket.
And that is a matter of public record.

And you are barking up the wrong Dick with your claim
of hypocrisy. I have never had a problem with the notion
that "turnabout is fair play". If someone else said something
that caught your eye, I suggest you discuss it with them.

[theanarch]

8. yes, the GOP has bankrolled Romanelli's effort...

...to get on the ballot, but they are NOT bankrolling the campaign per se...a distinction i tried to make explicit, apparently not well enough. And i apologise if what was intended as a generic and rhetorical question to the entire board was taken personally.

[Richard Steele]

9. No apologies necessary, as I was not insulted.

Merely confused for a minute; I thought perhaps you had mistaken me for
one of the "take the high road" types, and I just wanted to clarify.

I do feel that the ballot/general campaign donation thing is
a meaningless semantic differentiation.
Funded by an opponent is funded by an opponent.

[countmyvote4real]

5. Send the cow back to FOTF ASAP.

And CO (and the rest of us) could do better than the Lieberman clone of Salazar, but that's another election cycle.