It’s not even close. From Politico:

Brent Seaborn, late of the Giuliani campaign and now back at his consulting gig, sends over some up-ballot numbers his firm, TargetPoint, took for a third-party effort out in the Colorado Senate race.

Per their polling, McCain would defeat Hillary in Colorado 52-40 and beat Obama 51-39.

It’s one mere poll in April, but given the state’s blue-ward tilt in recent years and the hopes many Dems (especially Obama backers) have to pick it off, the numbers underscore the need for the Dems to not just come together but to also chip away at McCain’s image.

(It was taken from 604 likely general election voters the first week in April.)

The real eyebrow-raiser here is Seaborn’s taking this poll for a “third-party effort” in the U.S. Senate race. Taken literally, that sounds like someone’s seriously considering running against former Congressman Bob Schaffer and current Congressman Mark “U-turn” Udall. The way Schaffer is going — down — makes it more likely that if there really is a “third-party effort” afoot, it would be from the right, not the left.

UPDATE: The poll was taken by a 501(c)(4), New Leadership USA, that is supporting Schaffer. You may have heard of the group. It’s responsible for the ridiculous “Thanks, Bob!” ads — the pro-Bob ones.

That’s the message Boulder liberals Will Shafroth, Joan Fitz-Gerald and Jared Polis are sending with their “charitable giving.”  From The Denver Post:

If Democrat Jared Polis wants to continue pouring his own money into his effort to win the 2nd Congressional District seat, it shouldn’t be a problem.

The businessman, who has already given his campaign about $666,500, is likely to make $14 million this year. Of course, that’s only a fraction of the $96.5 million he made the year before, largely from the sale of his company ProFlowers.com, according to his campaign.

…Only three of his tax returns released last week showed the amount Polis gave to charity. His yearly donations ranged from less than 1 percent the year he made $23 million to 50 percent in 2001 when he reported $103,915 in income.

Polis’ opponents, conservationist Will Shafroth and former state Senate President Joan Fitz-Gerald, also released their tax returns.

Shafroth and his wife, Erica, whose 2007 tax returns are not available yet, made $187,914 in 2006 and $180,244 the year before. From 2002 to 2004, they reported income anywhere from $137,333 to $208,813. Two percent or less of their income went to charity during those years.

Fitz-Gerald and her husband’s income was $73,184 in 2007 and $72,414 the year before. Between 2002 and 2005, the couple reported income ranging from $69,984 to $173,120. Less than 1 percent of their income was donated to charity.

Pathetic.

First, Mike Coffman belatedly — and, we hear, grudgingly — returned Rima “Riyadh” Barakat Sinclair’s campaign donation after it became obvious — even to Coffman — pro-Israel forces wouldn’t tolerate anything less. Now, only a few days after that fiasco, Coffman’s facing another fundraising fight. From the Rocky Mountain News:

Colorado Ethics Watch accused Secretary of State Mike Coffman on Thursday of raising money and working on his congressional campaign during work hours. Coffman, a Republican, is running in a hotly contested race in the 6th Congressional District.

Ethics Watch looked at Coffman’s calendar and obtained documents through an open records request. Between Oct. 1, 2007, and Jan. 31, Coffman raised money for his campaign at meetings with donors during his work week and official business hours, the group alleged. The group also pointed to more than 100 hours on Coffman’s calendar that were labeled as private appointments or meetings.

Does Major Malfunction ever take a day off from generating bad press for himself? And how devastated does someone’s credibility need to be for a partisan group like Colorado Ethics Watch to so easily — and regularly — produce stories like this? Only Coffman knows.

Unfortunately for Coffman, according to our sources, these types of charges are not without merit and not without precedent. According to those sources, Coffman often made fundraising calls from his campaign office during the work week and work hours when he was running for the job he now wants to give up.

It will be interesting to see whether the myriad charges CEW has made — and will make — against Coffman are ever investigated and where those investigations lead. But more interesting is the ease with which these stories are thrown like grenades, then explode on the news pages throughout the state on a regular basis. Soldiers in Iraq face less ferocious fire.

After long refusing to name the person who allegedly gave him information from the National Crime Information Center database, former Beauprez for Governor campaign manager and serial campaign-loser John Marshall has finally come clean. The junior Bob Woodward testified his “Deep Throat” was Cory Voorhis, the campaign’s neighbor and the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent now on trial for allegedly illegally accessing the database for the campaign. From the Rocky Mountain News:

John Marshall, campaign manager for former gubernatorial candidate Bob Beauprez, testified Wednesday that federal immigration agent Cory Voorhis was his confidential source for key information used in a campaign ad against now-Gov. Bill Ritter about an illegal immigrant.

Voorhis is accused of accessing the National Crime Information Center database to obtain information on illegal immigrants who received plea deals from Ritter’s office when Ritter was the Denver district attorney.

Federal prosecutors say his research was for political purposes and illegal, because the database can be used only for law enforcement.

…Voorhis’ information led to two television ads by the campaign of Republican Congressman Bob Beauprez, attacking Ritter, his Democratic and ultimately victorious opponent.

One said Ritter had allowed 152 “criminal aliens” to plead down charges for major crimes such as drug dealing to the minor charge of agricultural trespass. Many people assumed that all 152 were illegal immigrants, though the ad did not say that.

The second ad said Ritter had allowed illegal immigrant Carlos Estrada Medina, arrested for distribution of heroin, to plead guilty to agricultural trespass and avoid deportation. Then, Medina went to California and was arrested for lewd acts with a child.

At issue was how the Beauprez campaign figured out that a man arrested in Denver under the name Walter Noel Ramo was the same Carlos Estrada Medina arrested in California.

Marshall described “frenetic” days in the last weeks of the cash-strapped Beauprez campaign, waiting for confirmation of Voorhis’ most explosive tip, the one about Estrada Medina.

He described preparing 80 percent to 90 percent of a campaign ad based on the tip and then calling researchers in California repeatedly to find out if they had confirmed the information in public records.

“I was on the phone every day, saying, ‘What’s the status, what’s the status?’ ” he said.

The ads were prompted by Voorhis - who worked in an immigration office next door to campaign headquarters - calling Marshall with a tip about dozens of illegal immigrants plea-bargaining felonies down to the odd and minor charge of trespassing on farmland.

…The pleas meant legal immigrants would not be deported for a felony. Defense attorney Bill Taylor said it had the same effect on illegal immigrants, because federal immigration authorities didn’t have the money to deport those convicted of misdemeanors.

Marshall said he had public court records in Denver checked and gave Voorhis a list of about 150 agricultural trespass cases. In a small number of cases, the court records said the person was here illegally, Marshall said.

Federal immigration authorities will not say publicly whether someone is illegal, or even provide a person’s alien number.

Then Voorhis took the list and came back with more information, including the tip on Ramo being arrested as Estrada Medina for a sexual attack on a child, Marshall said. Marshall immediately saw it as a terrific campaign ad and ordered creation of the spot.

But he didn’t give the go-ahead on the ad until Republican Party researchers in California matched up the two names, apparently through the alien number provided by Voorhis.

Reporters discovered they could not verify the ads because public sources could not prove the two names referred to the same man. Only the NCIC database could make that connection.

Marshall said when Ritter alleged the ad came from information accessed illegally, he thought it was “a standard political allegation.” But when authorities began investigating, he talked to Voorhis and recommended an attorney.

There are many things about this case that don’t make much sense. Why did Marshall and Alan Philp, Trailhead’s former director, walk away without coordination charges? Why did Marshall think it was OK to have a federal agent run searches for a campaign? Why did former Denver District Attorney Bill Ritter’s campaign employees and current Denver District Attorney Office employees not face charges for coordination and accessing the NCIC database? Supposedly, the statute of limitations lapsed on the possible coordination charges, but the failure to charge the current district attorney’s employees with accessing the NCIC database for purposes similar to Voorhis’ is not as easily explained. What’s good for the goose should be good for the gander.

Unfortunately for Voorhis, good man or not, right or wrong, he will likely be convicted while others weren’t even burdened with that possibility.

We reported several days ago that Mike Coffman, perhaps the state’s worst politician, had Rima Barakat Sinclair, a known Israel-hater, hosting recent fundraisers for him. Our friend Lynn Bartels at the Rocky Mountain News picks up where we left off: Barakat Sinclair more than raised money for Major Malfunction, she donated to his flailing campaign.

…Congressional candidate Mike Coffman’s campaign on Tuesday informed Sinclair they were going to return her campaign donations because of an interview she gave where she called Israel “an occupier.”

At the Denver County Republican assembly last month, Sinclair won enough support to get her name on the ballot in House District 6.

Somehow, despite the controversy surrounding Barakat Sinclair following her nomination, word of her anti-Israel sentiments didn’t reach the Coffman campaign until a few days ago, almost a month later. From PolitickerCO:

CD-6 Republican candidate Mike Coffman has returned a $500 donation from Rima Sinclair, a Republican state House District 6 candidate whose pro-Palestinian statements have angered many conservatives.

Sinclair’s name also appeared prominently on an invitation asking supporters to attend a Coffman fundraiser held last week.

Coffman manager Dustin Zvonek said the campaign will return Sinclair’s donation, made in December 2007, after learning of statements Sinclair has made to the media in the past criticizing Israel.

In an interview with KCNC-TV in July 2006, as the Second Lebanon War escalated, Sinclair — then known as Rima Barakat — said that “Israeli soldiers now are known to be just bombing and killing babies.”

She also said in the interview that the Israeli government “is basically following the Saddam Hussein policies of imprisoning families of people that are wanted - their wives, their sisters, their kids - in order to get revenge on them or bring them in.”

…Zvonek said the Coffman campaign mailed her a $500 refund check within the past few days, explaining, “There were some statements that she made in the past regarding Israel and Palestine and Hamas, and when we learned of her statements we decided that that was something that our campaign did not want to be associated with.”

Sinclair was also listed as a co-host for a campaign fundraiser held last week by Bill Cox, a friend of Coffman’s.

Zvonek said Cox submitted the names of co-hosts to the campaign in February, and the campaign approved the list before they became aware of Sinclair’s views.

“After the invite went out some people approached us - me particularly - and said ‘Hey, do you know about her?’” Zvonek said.  “And I said, ‘No.’ And they gave me some background information and I did my own research and found that everything that they had said was true.

“And at that point we obviously couldn’t take back the fact that we mailed the invite or that we accepted the contribution in December , but we decided that it would be best to send her her money back to her - which we are doing - and just disassociate ourselves with her altogether,” Zvonek said.

Sinclair was named to the HD-6 GOP primary ballot at the Denver County GOP Assembly on March 1.

Interesting. Information must flow slower from Denver to CD-6 than from Denver to other parts of Colorado, because Barakat Sinclair’s nomination in March immediately caused a stir in conservative circles across the rest of the state, yet the Coffman campaign didn’t find it necessary to return the “terror apologist’s” money until a few days ago.

State Sen. Chris Romer’s convoluted I-70 toll bill died like an overheated engine yesterday, following a protest and angry testimony from Romer’s fellow Democrats, but a Steve Durham-backed Republican version is still chugging along. From the Rocky Mountain News:

Sen. Chris Romer, who kick- started the controversial toll debate, saw a committee kill his bill to levy tolls on I-70 during the weekend ski traffic rush hour and on Sundays year-round.

The Denver Democrat’s bill would have charged a toll of a yet- to-be-determined amount on vehicles with fewer than three occupants during peak travel times. The money would have helped fund bus service.

But a plan by Sen. Andy McElhany, R-Colorado Springs, to charge drivers a toll of up to $5 each way at the Eisenhower Tunnel was approved by the Senate Transportation Committee on a 5-2 vote.

…McElhany’s bill is aimed at providing $3.5 billion for whatever highway improvements between Floyd Hill and Summit County are determined necessary.

His bill would exempt residents of Clear Creek, Summit and Gilpin counties from the toll. But opponents complained that businesses in the mountain corridor depend on workers from Denver and elsewhere who shouldn’t be tolled for driving to work.

Greg Fulton, president of the Colorado Motor Carriers Association, which represents the trucking industry, told the committee that the bill could violate the federal Commerce Clause because it creates a special class of people exempt from the toll.

…Other opponents argued that toll booths would slow down traffic. While McElhany’s bill does not dictate where the toll booths would be built, he assured the committee that they could be erected off the shoulder of the highway so as not to impede traffic.

…Colorado is pre-approved by federal authorities to toll the interstate highway, so if lawmakers give McElhany’s bill the green light, the plan will in all likelihood take effect.

Sen. Dan Gibbs, D-Silverthorne, has vowed to make sure that doesn’t happen. “We have one down and one to go,” Gibbs said after Thursday’s hearing.

Gibbs led a rally of about 50 people from mountain communities, and the normally reserved Gibbs shouted as he led a protest on the west steps of the Capitol.

“We think (the toll is) bad for business, we think it’s bad for Colorado! In Colorado, tourism is our second-leading economy,” Gibbs said. “Us folks in the Front Range, in the foothills and in the mountain communities are united to work together to build a collaborative effort.”

Holding up Romer’s and McElhany’s bills, Gibbs said, “These two bills do not do that. These two bills were put together on the fly, without working with anyone in the mountain communities. What do we say?”

“No!” the crowd chanted.

Protesters held up signs with slogans such as “Tolls are for trolls!” One wore his ski gear, complete with helmet and goggles and held a sign reading “The ski pole rebellion.”

…Romer nearly shouted as he encouraged the transportation committee to approve his bill.

But in the end, two hours of testimony from dozens of mostly mountain-area opponents of his plan won the day.

Romer said he will now try to ensure that McElhany’s plan passes, especially if an amendment is added to allow for the toll amounts to rise and fall with congestion levels.

McElhany’s bill leaves the option of congestion-based tolling open, but does not specify how much to toll, other than to cap the amount at $5.

Frankly, McElhany has no idea what he’s doing, and the only reason he’s involved in this bill is because Durham is backing it. In fact, the only person to testify in favor of the bill, besides McElhany, was Joe Blake, president of the Durham-represented Metro Denver Chamber of Commerce. Blake, like much of the business community, wants transportation in Colorado improved, but having been betrayed by Democrats who failed to use Referendum C money for transportation projects, Blake and his golfing buddies are left with either supporting a tax increase or tolling to fund those improvements. Obviously, in the current economic climate, a tax increase is doomed to fail, so the business community has decided to push tolling. The irony is tourism is a major business in Colorado, and toll booths — which, despite what McElhany claims, could not be located on the shoulder anywhere near Eisenhower Tunnel — will only serve to hurt that business by further slowing traffic and increasing congestion along the mountain corridor. But desperate times give rise to desperate measures, so expect this bill to continue puttering up the mountain.

We’ve told you about — and you’ve seen for yourself — Mike Coffman’s mind-blowing judgment problems — from having a treasurer who filed false campaign-finance reports, to hiring a journalist media buyer, to multiple ethical lapses in the Secretary of State’s office — but Coffman’s latest moronic move is unfathomable, even for Major Malfunction. Coffman has an anti-Israel, pro-choice, pro-Hamas Islamic extremist serving on his finance committee and hosting fundraisers for him, as recently as last night. She goes by the names Rima Barakat and Rima Sinclair. Here are some gems about Barakat-Sinclair. First, from Brad Jones at Face The State:

Barakat Sinclair’s political interest does not expand far beyond the conflict in the Middle East as evidenced by her extensive writings on the issue. In a January 23, 2008 column in the “Voice of Revolution” e-mail newsletter, she wrote critically of Israeli “use of human shields, death squads and much more.” The newsletter is described as a publication of the “US Marxist-Lenninist Organization,” (sic) a far cry from what we would consider to be mainstream Republicanism.

Next, from Joshua Sharf at Politics West:

She doesn’t merely write. She acts. John and I asked her about MILA, Muslims Intent on Learning and Action, a group with the potentially laudable purpose of getting Muslims involved in the political process, on Backbone Radio on KNUS, December 3, 2006. Instead of simply answering that the group’s purpose was as stated, Mrs. Barakat Sinclair lied, claiming that she was only a member, who showed up to meetings, but otherwise had no position with the group. MILA’s own newsletter lists her as a member of the Steering Committee, in charge of PR. Typically a PR Chairman uses opportunities such as free radio to discuss her group’s activities, not to avoid doing so.

…In order to get the [Republican state House District 6] nomination, she represented herself at the District Assembly as pro-life. However, she has been quoted publicly contradicting that, “Sinclair, too, shares concerns about homeland security. She also likes parts of the Democrats’ social platform. ‘I would like to have a president who is pro-choice,’ she says.”(”Colorado Muslims Aspire to Become a Political Force” - Rocky Mountain News - August 14, 2004).

Unbelievable, especially for a Marine who supposedly went to war in Iraq to fight Islamic extremists. Come back for more as this story develops…

After finding it politically impossible to pass another tax hike without a vote, Ritter and his environmental wacko friends have all but settled on a massive severance-tax increase. And, wouldn’t you know, 30 percent of the revenues will be headed into the wackos’ pockets. How convenient for them. From the Rocky Mountain News:

Gov. Bill Ritter said he will wait until next week to decide whether to back putting a severance tax increase on November’s ballot.

But a lawmaker close to the decision-making process said that Ritter and the legislature’s Democratic leadership already have decided to back a measure raising the tax paid by the gas and oil industry. At this point, they are just trying to decide whether to allow the legislature to vet the question before it goes to the ballot, Rep. Kathleen Curry, D-Gunnison, said Wednesday.

Curry is drafting a bill that would refer to voters a severance tax hike question similar to one announced this week by environmental and higher education interest groups.

Both questions would ask voters to eliminate a rule that allows oil and gas producers to apply a large property tax deduction to their severance tax bill. And both questions would divvy up the money in roughly the same way, with 60 percent going to higher education, 15 percent to be invested in renewable energy, 15 percent in wildlife habitat and 10 percent to help communities impacted by drilling.

Democrats are well aware that the energy industry would oppose either measure. So officials now must decide which route to getting something before voters carries the greater chance of success.

…Also slowing down the administration’s decision-making is the pending release of new rules governing the oil and gas industry, Curry said.

Those rules are due out Monday and Curry predicted they won’t be as objectionable as the oil and gas industry had feared. That may give her side room to convince the industry to back at least some portions of the tax increase, Curry said.

“It’s getting late in the session I know, but we’ve been really counting on this March 31 date on the rule-making to open the dialogue with the industry,” Curry said.

The oil and gas industry questions whether now, as Colorado faces a possible recession, is a good time to raise taxes on one of the only industries keeping the state’s economy afloat, said Stan Dempsey, president of the Colorado Petroleum Association.

Like most reasonable people, we don’t see pumping cash into enviros’ causes as a major need in this state. We already have the lottery and governments — local to federal — doing that. And even if a severance tax were justified — which is debatable — why would enviros’ causes outpace communities’ by 200 percent, at 30 percent to 10 percent? Aren’t communities that are home to the oil-and-gas boom and the people who sustain it in more need, financially, than renewable-energy tinkerers and wildlife lovers? Seriously, who do you see begging for money who can point to immediate, verifiable need: Mad scientists and their enviro supporters trying to convince us of global warming and the wonders of solar energy; hunters and fishermen and their enviro supporters trying to convince us of dwindling habitat; or towns and cities who show us potholes next to overwhelmed schools and social services? It’s not even a contest. Add the industry’s deep pockets and the more pressing issues of this election year, and this is yet another Ritter proposal that — like Ritter’s administration — is already on life support.

We have to admit, this year’s Capitol team for The Denver Post seems better than last year’s “Blonde Squad,” but it won’t for long if story’s like this keep coming. From The Denver Post:

Plans to bank state funds for economic rainy days have died two years running, but that won’t stop leading House Democrats from trying again to bolster Colorado’s savings account.

It could prove a tough sell, however, given the unveiling today of the 2008-09 budget and news that revenues over the next five years are expected to come in $700 million short of previous estimates. The drafters are searching for a way to pay for the additional savings, said House Speaker Andrew Romanoff, D-Denver.

Setting aside part of a proposed tax increase on oil and gas companies is one idea under discussion at the Capitol. In the past, lawmakers have proposed investing a lump sum of tobacco-settlement money, though that tack might not work in current markets.

…About half the country relied on rainy-day funds to cushion the impact of the previous economic downturn in the early 2000s, the National Association of State Budget Officers reports.

These state savings accounts have an average of 5.2 percent of budgets, with a high of 10.4 percent, the report says.

Colorado annually sets aside 4 percent of the amount that flows into the general fund, leaving it with about $300 million in the bank next year.

But looking at looming years of slowed growth and rising expenses, legislative budget gurus still see themselves backed into a corner.

During the previous downturn, lawmakers drained and never refilled pools of money set aside for unemployment insurance, care for veterans and other special causes.

And the money sitting in reserve now can’t be used for long-term relief, as anything borrowed one year must be paid back the next, said Sen. Steve Johnson, R-Fort Collins.

Johnson said he is uncertain that state decision makers will have the discipline to save during a crunch.

“You can’t save money if you can’t feed your kids,” Johnson said. “The state being strapped is going to make it harder.”

He pointed out that times of fiscal turmoil drive demand for state-sponsored safety-net programs.

Romanoff’s proposal would loosen the quick-payback restriction on the state’s reserves and boost the amount socked away, he said.

Savings plans that he and top budget man Rep. Bernie Buescher, D-Grand Junction, pushed in 2006 and 2007 died in the Senate, as lawmakers balked at diverting funds from other projects. Both would have touched transportation dollars, a lethal third rail for many proposals.

Next year, they could have left the state with an additional $426 million or $79 million, respectively.

“If we had taken this approach earlier, we would have been in better shape today,” Romanoff said.

Hmm, we’re not non-practicing veterinarians like Steve “Squirrel In The Barrel” Johnson or professional students like Andrew “Nixon” Romanoff, but we’re smart enough to know these guys seem to be stealing this idea and The Post doesn’t seem to care. Haven’t state Sen. Josh Penry and state Rep. Cory Gardner been telling people for years that a rainy-day fund was needed for just this reason? Aren’t Penry and Gardner, gasp, Republicans? Why, yes, yes, they have been and, yes, yes, they are. So doesn’t this story and its headline, “Democrats push for state to save more,” seem more than a little misleading? Why, yes, yes, they do. You aren’t a blonde, are you, Fender?

Even the New York Times is laughing at us:

DENVER — A plan to use only paper ballots in Colorado in this November’s election, which was announced with bipartisan hoopla in January to replace the state’s troubled electronic voting machine system, died quietly in a state legislature committee room on Thursday.

Opponents of the plan said it was no longer needed, because what was broken then is now fixed. But supporters said that questions of reliability and security of the electronic voting and vote-counting machines remained unresolved, and could yet resurface before November.

The debate exploded in December, when Colorado’s secretary of state, Mike Coffman, a Republican, announced that voting machines used all over the state, including in many of the most populous counties, had failed tests by his office.

The proposed solution of using paper ballots faced immediate and stiff opposition from county clerks, who administer the elections and who said the logistics of a one-year transformation were insurmountable.

But lawmakers said on Thursday that they had circumvented the need for a drastic change by passing, earlier in the session, a system for expedited retesting and recertification of the voting and vote-counting machinery. A spokesman for Mr. Coffman said the process had resulted in all the machines being recertified in recent weeks.

Coffman’s waffling on this issue would be more amusing if it weren’t so vital to the continued existence of democracy as we know it.