IN RESPONSE | Election math belies Bidlack’s erroneous claims


In response to Mr. Bidlack’s falsehood-filled narrative published on March 4, I would like to make some factual corrections.
Mr. Bidlack’s self-aggrandizing recount of the 2008 CD5 election, and subsequent tall tales regarding elections to follow, left out a few small (but rather important) details.
First, Mr. Bidlack states that Congressman Lamborn can only win due to plurality (multiple challengers) during a primary election. I want to jog his memory that in 2012, 2014 and 2016 Congressman Lamborn faced a single primary challenger and won each time, negating Mr. Bidlack’s assessment.
Congressman Lamborn won these three races handily, with the smallest difference a 5% difference in votes against Major General (retired) Rayburn in 2014. In the other two races in 2012 and 2016, Congressman Lamborn (for lack of a better word) shellacked his primary opponents by 23% and 27%. All vote totals from 2010 to the present are shown below.
2010
D. Lamborn (100%)
*Note: Unchallenged
2012
R. Blaha: 27,245 (38.4%)
D. Lamborn: 43, 929 (61.7%)
*Note: One primary challenger
2014
B. Rayburn: 34,967 (47.4%)
D. Lamborn: 38,741 (52.6%)
*Note: One primary challenger
2016
C. Vargas: 23,968 (32%)
D. Lamborn: 51,018 (68%)
*Note: One primary challenger
Moving on to 2018. Congressman Lamborn faced four active opponents, a few with prominent name recognition. I did some math, and if the four challengers had been one single candidate, Congressman Lamborn still wins by the 5% margin.
2018
T. Stevens 3,643 (3.5%)
B. Rhea 6,167 (5.9%)
O. Hill 19,151 (18.2%)
D. Glenn 21,472 (20.4%)
D. Lamborn 54,974 (52.2%)
Note: Total votes of 4 challengers combined = 50,430 (47.8%)
2020
D. Lamborn (100%)
Note: Unchallenged
So, in the seven elections since taking office, Congressman Lamborn has had exactly one time that he won only by a plurality, and that was his first reelection in 2008 when he was new to the office. In each of the other six elections since then, he was either unopposed or won with an absolute majority. It made no difference if there was a single opponent or multiple opponents. So in what universe is Mr.Bidlack in to claim that, “Lamborn has usually faced more than one opponent from his own party.” Or, “if the GOPers who don’t like Mr. Lamborn can ever get behind a single challenger, Lamborn could be in real trouble.”
When Mr. Bidlack was a professor of political science at the Air Force Academy, I hope what he taught young cadets was not as biased and erroneous as these baseless claims.
Lastly, to address Mr. Bidlack’s comment that seeking to get on the primary ballot through the petition process is “weak,” perhaps he doesn’t understand the sheer amount of volunteer power and support a candidate needs to have to get more than 3,000 signatures in just over three weeks. The petition process allows for a broad representation of the district to support a candidate they believe in without them having to be a Republican Party insider. The caucus and assembly process – although a long-standing, respected tradition in Colorado – can allow for a candidate to get on the primary ballot with only a few hundred votes.
Congressman Lamborn is no stranger to a challenge, a debate or a fight. In D.C., he stands up to big government, and doesn’t cower to Nancy Pelosi, the Squad, or any other Member of Congress. He works to ensure our men and women in uniform have what they need to defend our nation if called upon to do so and that once they return home as veterans, they receive the care and benefits they have rightfully earned.
Lamborn’s record is consistent, strong, and speaks for itself. I would be so bold to say that Congressman Lamborn has continuously beat out all his challengers in the primary elections because he works hard and represents his constituents well – and they know they can count on him.
Finally, I have spoken to folks who attended the 2008 debate that Mr. Bidlack claimed to win. They say that Lamborn “cleaned the floor” with you. So, Mr. Bidlack’s claim to victory in that debate, it seems, is a fallacy as well.
Cassandra Sebastian
Communications Director
Lamborn for Congress