U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Jena Griswold
60%
60%
40%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Alexis King
(D) Brian Mason
40%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) George Stern
(D) A. Gonzalez
(R) Sheri Davis
40%
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(R) Kevin Grantham
(D) Jerry DiTullio
60%
30%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(D) Somebody
80%
40%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Somebody
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(D) Joe Salazar
50%
40%
40%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
July 03, 2011 07:14 PM UTC
57 Comments
…I’m pretty sure it’s completely legal to dissolve and basically evaporate all debts (similar to bankruptcy), although this is a terrible way to handle such crisis
From there, the Larimer GOP could reemerge, however, I believe the next hurdle for them would be receiving a new recognized status (ie charter) from both the Colorado State GOP and the RNC – which could be tough, because I doubt either organization would immediately restore the charter, without some sort of probation period to discourage other Chairman from doing such awful things with finances
My personal prediction? The Colorado SOS will reduce the fine and the Larimer GOP will suck it up and raise themselves out of debt – as I’ve said before, I’m not against reducing their fine, but there should be some sort of punishment levied
Why disband when your hole-card is Gessler?
with the SOS reducing the fine. This is pretty common practice across all SOS’s, regardless of party affiliations of the parties involved.
(Full disclosure: I had a fine reduced while the SOS office was filled by an R.)
Larimer County R committeepersons and politicos who receive funds from the committee should have to undergo drug testing everytime the party up there receives a check.
like voter lists, donor lists, rights to name delegates, etc. You CAN go bankrupt and start a new entity; but you CAN’T avoid all debts by just changing your name while keeping the same operation running. So my guess is that if there’s a bankruptcy, the creditors will argue in bankruptcy ct that the same entity still exists so it’s not a valid bankruptcy. Disclaimer: I’m not a bankruptcy lawyer
Would they have to sell all assets, like donor lists, to help pay off the debts? That would be interesting if a third party bought those lists.
The “debtor” would be the State of Colorado, in the form of fines for non-compliance.
For the entity to simply cease to exist, it would end the ability of the SOS to regulate it by imposing fines. Since the SOS is saying that no one can be held personally liable for the committee (unlike a candidate committee), when the entity disappears, then theoretically the liability disappears too.
As I understand it, the really huge potential fines — from the LLCs — would go to an administrative law judge if anyone files a complaint. That’s unlike the fines for the delinquent reports, which are handled by the secretary of state.
Great to see you participating here!
I like Cory Gardner and I think he is a good man, but he has been noticeably absent from this drama
Honestly, one Cory Gardner-led Oil and Gas dinner in Washington DC could cover the entire $200,000 penalty – unless Cory needs it for Brandon Shaffer?
I can understand why Bob Schaffer is occupied because he runs LPR which really is an excellent group for conservatives in Colorado, so if he asked for a pass, I say he’s excused
But outside of Gardner, the man who is really missing is WAYNE ALLARD – Larimer has been really good to Allard and he owes them on this one
The article said he was doing a fundraiser. Last time I saw Allard was at a McCain speech in 2008. I think he’s retired.
If Allard is doing a fundraiser, then I take my criticism
Sorry – I meant – I take back my criticism
Sorry, didn’t make it clear.
I do believe this is the first time BJ has apologized for a mistake. I look forward to many future commemorations.
Doesn’t change my opinion, but wonderful nonetheless.
He’s been missing since 2002 at least
to be too weird even for his own party.
Assuming you mean that sincerely. I do have to say I think Steve Miller has done a pretty good job given what he was handed. Of course I don’t know the details, but he seems to have a level head on his shoulders.
a proven liar and fool such as you could not have done worse than imminently going out of business.
Them’s fighting words. Can you cite one example? No, you can’t. Nice try.
David Chestnut whether the beej is a liar? He might know.
unless your parents named you very poorly, I don’t think that is your real name.
your fraud with Facebook when you were deceptively trying to get inside the Bennet campaign in ’10? All you had to do is say you were trying to meet young Dem females and we’d have all understood.
while you are on the dole
Time for someone else, this clown is not worth my time
What I said is that I wanted cuts across the board, not an end to all scientific research.
when you believe that creationism is real?
There is no invisible sky fairy putting bones in the earth to test you, imbecile.
The fine calculation methodology is punitive and highly questionable. One offense can easily compound into a several hundred dollar per day fine. How so? Simple. There is a filing calendar. You miss ne deadline and you owe 50 per day. If you have yet to file by the next deadline, you now owe 100. So on and so forth. One singular event can metastasize into a 3-500 dollar per day fine.
Simply ridiculous. Who knew the First amendment was so expensive.
On a side note. Gessler managed to get his personal automobile dealer fine knocked down from 524K to the measly sum of 8k.
If only all SOS victims were waivered at this percentage of reduction.
Just more politics.
Of course, there is another option besides allowing one’s fine(s) to go unpaid for months. One alternative that I can think of immediately is to pay the fine as soon as it is levied. I’m sure there are other alternatives, including the old “2nd Amendment Alternative,” right?
The fines are only “punitive” if one refuses to take responsibility for one’s errors in a timely fashion.
Waaaaaaaaaaahhhh!
That MarkG believes laws are for losers.
is going to be for Gardner. Larimer County is Fort Collins and if they can’t organize or promote him then how does that affect this first time representatives chances for re-election in the critical first campaign as an incumbent? Even if Gessler plays the partisan card and let’s them get out of jail free, they won’t be able to run their free wheeling loosey-goosey operation that helped get Gardner elected. Maybe this is good news for John McCain but I don’t see how it can be good for Gardner.
So you’re saying he might have to rely on grassroots activists rather than party favors? Don’t know that I necessarily see that as a bad thing.
but it is a losing proposition for Gardner agains almost ANY D opponent. R’s don’t do grassroots. They don’t have enough roots to sustain life.
R’s do grassroots, it’s just been a long time. Reagan did it beautifully. And they did it again in 2010, nationwide.
Make that Brandon Shaffer.
They just cost a lot more.
I don’t see the Larimer GOP issues playing much of a role in the 2012 race, for a pretty simple reason. The Larimer County Republican Party hasn’t been particularly involved in 4th Congressional District races in the recent past. The Gardner campaign office was a couple doors down from the Larimer GOP office in 2010, and that was about as much as you can say for the county party’s efforts in the congressional race. The Gardner staff was far more likely to interact with the state GOP victory office in the same strip center.
Today’s article definitely helps clear some things up.
“the LCRP–apparently a glorified social club and repository for senile cranks–doesn’t really do much that is relevant to winning elections”
And this is the crux of the matter – although I would modify that statement slightly. Activists do plenty; it is the previous board that didn’t do much. Either intentionally or unintentionally, they apparently left everything to Larry – which turned out to be quite a bad idea. Perhaps dissolution is the perfect remedy for incompetence. Just get it over with and start fresh.
Although I should add one point – I have heard the view that Larry fronted the party money from his LLC’s, and later reimbursed himself. Shady, but the dates of the withdrawals and contributions could clear things up. In my opinion, it appears that there was wrongdoing by Larry (those casino withdrawals are hard to justify), but there is also the possibility of others on the board seeking to evade responsibility by pinning all blame on Larry.
This has hamstrung local organizing, but if we can get this handled up there, Larimer could be in better shape than they have been in a long time. That would be good for everyone. It’s a county with much conservative strength!
One way or another, we’ll be fine.
but if the situation were somehow not messed up, it’d be pretty gosh-darned good!
Or at least not messed up!
Yaaaaayyyy!!!!
You didn’t provide a link. That bit siunds like some unsubstantiated quote, not objective analysis.
And I certify that it is an unsubstantiated, subjective, and ad hominem claim.
prime Wilson source material.
Aristotle, I’m really starting to worry about your mind. Are you ok?
Even though Ah Choo cleared this up over 4 hours before The Beej responded …
The Beej, true to form, can’t admit that there’s no there there …
Our most illustrious vice-president must have been anticipating The Beej in May 1989 when he said:
I only skimmed this post, and made the mistake of taking Beej at his word. This isn’t an “article.” Those are published at news sites.
As Ardy points out, that’s a good enough cite for him, and more proof of his substandard education.
So? It was still correct.
Your original comment said this:
My question was:
Your answer was:
The article referenced in the diary did not contain these words. The diary itself did, but not the article.
So, how does this error mean that you “were still correct?”
They weren’t meant to be connected.
Confession is good for the soul.