Great! I wish 'em all the best of luck over there... Now if only I had more money to give there!

I'm just really tied down in SoCal now, and my candidates here need my help.

Another reason is the concentration of college graduates not only on the coast, but in the Denver-Boulder-Salt Lake-southern Wyoming Area.  Look at the map here on what has happened to college graduate distribution in the last 30 years.

Nevada, New Mexico, and Colorado will all go blue in 2008 if we have a decent presidential candidate. In 2006, I expect Nevada to keep a Dem Assembly, New Mexico to keep Dem Gov and Leg, and Colorado to elect a Dem Governor and keep the Dem Leg.

Ironically, it was the exodus of conservative Californians in the early '90s that turned the Rocky Mountain West far to the right....Colorado's TABOR was the brainchild of a transplanted Los Angelino landlord, after all. That's also why the home of Ronald Reagan, John Wayne, Proposition 13, Proposition 187, Richard Nixon, Orange County, Bob Dornan, ect is one of the bluest states in the Union.

Hopefully, we'll see the much more liberal Cali expats swing the rest of the west our way over time.

To turn the Repoublicans into a regional, Southern party, sans Florida, that always loses Presidential elections, and can't muster a majority in Congress.

Sounds like we're heading in the right direction.

This is a pretty shallow analysis.  Many of the white transplants to the Intermountain West are replicating white flight on a continental scale.  They have turned many previously Democratic areas Republican, or at least more conservative.  I think the Dem candidates who are doing well are successful more because of their personal qualities than demographics.

Here in NM, once solidly Democratic counties are now swing counties.  Kerry lost NM by 6,000 votes whereas it was carried by Clinton and Gore.  What happened was Hispanic Democrats either voted for Bush or did not push the Prez button because of Kerry's pro-choice stance.  NM is a very religious state, due to large populations of Catholics, Mormons,and evangelicals. Even Methodists, the largest Protestant denomination, are mostly conservative.  The Albuquerque burbs, which used to be controlled Democratic blocs, tilted for Bush. That's where the new migrants are settling.

Richardson is popular because he's winning GOP voters. Wilson will probably win re-election even though her Congressional district around Albuquerque has a significant Democratic majority. Why?  Because many Dems won't vote for the Dem canididate due to ethics concerns and many Hispanics will cross lines because of Wilson's good constituent services.

Southern NM has a large Democratic majority, but the right-wing Republican will coast to re-election, and it's his seat for as long as he wants it.  

East Coasters should not write about the West, just as us Westerners should never try to explain Pennsylvania politics.

4 seats in Colorado are likely Dem, two others are difficult-but-possible, and the last one is a long shot.

Jay Fawcett is probably the best Dem you could run in CO-05, a district with a heavy influence from retired military and some big extremist Christian groups. Fawcett is airforce, straight-talkin', and moderate. He's up against Doug Lamborn, an anti-tax right-winger. If Jay can knock on enough doors, his quiet personal charisma demonstrates that (like Jon Tester) democrats don't wear horns. Just maybe he can win. If not, he does the Hackett thing, and opens a path for other Democrats.

Note that, CO-05 just made number 50 on National Review's "most likely to change parties" list. That would have been unheard of 6 or even 2 months ago.

Coming in at 39 on National Review's list is Angie Paccione, a hard-working, enthusiastic, SMART Colorado State Rep who is challenging the (hisss) evil lady in pink, Marilyn Musgrave. A third party moderate-republican sucks up 8%, giving Paccione more of a chance.

Metaphorically and literally, CO-04 and CO-05 have had a lot of California immigration, high-tech workers, family's seeking a traditional suburban or exurban lifestyle. This growth has trended Unaffiliated or Republican, but I'm not sure very many of them are the hard-core, ideological Republicans. More likely, the Democrats have not given them much of a reason to vote the D button.

The second big change in Colorado has been the end of the anti-tax hysteria. Voters finally realized that taxes pay for higher education, jails and roads, and voted in an anti-TABOR initiative. Even business Republicans are in favor of investing in education and roads. So a moderate Dem (Bill Ritter) is 17 points up over a standard anti-government republican (Bob Beauprez). Frankly, most Western people still trust that government works for them, and isn't intrinsically corrupt.

The upshot of all this, is that Colorado probably faces a trifecta in the state Government.

CO-01, CO-02 and CO-03 are all but certain.

CO-07 is probable, giving us 4 of 7.

That same warm wind fills the sails of CO-04 and CO-05, despite a strong GOP registration advantage.

CO-06, held by the racist Tom Tancredo is just too rich, too white and too Republican to be an easy target. Bill Winter is a great speaker and warm personality, but he would have to knock on a lot of doors to convert enough people.

I agree and don't agree with the changing Western demographics suggestion.

The religious affiliation point is well-taken. The Mountain West is not at all like the South; not much like the Midwest or East, either.

First, Colorado, Washington and Oregon have always been a lot more like California than like Kansas or Utah. Liberal, educated, environmentalist on the one hand, but also with a traditional farm and business population that tends to be more Republican. The important point is that these three states have major Urban centers, which are about as Liberal as San Francisco or LA.

Second, a large part of the growth has been middle class, family-oriented, "exurban", high-tech, white, whom we might label the "David Brooks demographic". Many of these are California (or Texas, or wherever) refugees seeking cheap but large housing in a "nice" area with good schools. Not necessarily right-wing unless they are religious fanatics, but more likely to be Unaffiliated then Democrat.

Third, another large demographic shift has occurred in the near-in Suburbs, which offer starter homes for moderate income teachers, secretaries, single females, hispanic (i.e. mexican, both legal and not), students, etc. This is the source of the Democratic trend in CO-07, Bob Beauprez's old district which is likely to go Democrat this year with Ed Perlmutter.

Fourth, the latino growth is due to immigrants (legal and illegal) and birth rates. But also, we have always had a largish latino population. Sen Ken Salazar's family predates Jamestown, for example. Frankly, the Democrats have not worked very hard for the Latino vote. There are some issues (education, health care, immigration) that would certainly appeal to Latinos, but the Democratic strategies of "race-to-the-center" and the "we're-like-republicans-only-not-so-much " are not designed to consolidate the Latino vote. This shows up as a 66/33 loyalty instead of the 95/5 dems get from African Americans. This is truly a shame, as the Republicans certainly have a strategy designed to keep the Latino vote competitive.

The demographics here in Colorado are interesting. Boulder has actually moved right in the last few elections (it was so far left to start that it is still very blue) and I suspect this is due to an influx of wealthy white-flight types. Denver has moved way left in the last ten years, much like cities across the country. I think what is driving the change is urbanization. As cities in the west get denser they tend to vote more democratic. I have theories as to why, but it certainly seems to be the reality.

More than a third of the state's 1.4 million population now lives in the Boise metro area. Boise has passed Spokane to be the third-largest city in the Northwest. Boise also is one of the fastest-growing metros in the nation. Some folks here represent white flight from SoCal, true; but I think the more recent arrivals  are here because this is a kick-ass place wth great weather, fantastic recreation, a decent job market in some professional and tech fields, and abundant culture. We also have a growing university that breaks enrollment records every semester. (Boise State)

If the whole Boise metro area was in the 1st CD, Larry Grant would win this race in a walk. But as it is, the most Dem parts of Boise (BSU, the North and East ends, the Bench) are in the 2nd CD. However, the neighborhoods in the 1st CD have grown far faster in the past two years, including folks who've moved to West Boise and the suburbs for cheaper housing.

Boise proper has definitely been trending blue for a few years. We have many Dem state legislators; a Dem mayor; and voters last year soundly turned down religious zealot Brandi Swindell's bid for a Council seat. So the question for the 1st CD is whether the Boise burbs will follow this trend and vote for at least a few Dems (including Larry Grant) this year, or not? My guess is they will, but it's gonna be close, and it's gonna come down to Ada and Canyon, and possibly Kootenai (Coeur d'Alene) counties.  

We at Grant for Congress thank the netroots for the coverage and the contributions!

http://www.actblue.com/page/netrootscand idates#8944