BREAKING: New Recall Attempt Underway Against Evie Hudak

SATURDAY UPDATE #2: A photo forwarded to us from this morning's SD-19 recall organizing meeting in Arvada (after the jump) depicts a poster of the 69th General Assembly, with Sens. John Morse and Angela Giron labeled "recalled Sept. 10th." The poster labels Sen. Hudak and Rep. Mike McLachlan as targets for recall, and–interestingly–singles out Rep. Daniel Kagan as "needs recall bad."

—–

SATURDAY UPDATE: A statement from Sen. Evie Hudak via FOX 31:

“The approval of a recall petition will not change my focus on the 2014 legislative session, during which I will advocate for women and seniors, and for the best education we can provide our children – just as I have always done.”

Sen. Evie Hudak (D-Arvada).

Sen. Evie Hudak (D-Arvada).

‚Äč

We've just been notified that a new recall petition has been approved for circulation against Sen. Evie Hudak of Arvada (Colorado Senate District 19). There has been chatter about this possibility on conservative social media and discussion groups, but formal approval of recall petition language allows the petition gathering process to begin again–this time with a deadline in early December. It's worth noting that the previous effort to get a recall of Sen. Hudak on the ballot failed; that said, the previous signers should be straightforward to recontact to re-sign.

The key thing to keep in mind is that Sen. Hudak faced re-election just 11 months ago, narrowly beating GOP opponent Lang Sias in one of the most expensive state legislative races of the 2012 cycle. Being a presidential election year, the total votes cast in this election (and the resulting threshold for a recall petition) is substantially higher than the districts in which recall elections took place in September. Sen. Hudak has longstanding ties to this district from her time on the State Board of Education, and has a reputation as a tireless retail campaigner–two assets operating in her favor that voters will remember due to the recency of her last election. As a result of the two hard-fought races she has won in SD-19, her name ID is higher than many other legislators in the General Assembly. This manifests in both favorable and unfavorable opinions of Sen. Hudak being pretty strong. Say what you will about Sen. Hudak, she's a known commodity to the voters in this district.

The big question, of course, is whether or not a paid signature gathering effort of the kind that was necessary to get the recall of Senate President John Morse on the ballot will be attempted in SD-19–which we do believe would be the only way to get it done. The obvious hypothetical consequence of victory, flipping the Senate to GOP control for at least part of the 2014 session, is offset by the risk of killing off their political momentum with failure. That's the choice Republicans face, and it's far from an easy one.

With so many unanswered questions about this latest effort, we'll leave further speculation to our readers. But those of you who were dreading a future of endless recalls substituting for our functional small-d democratic process may be about to have your worst fears realized.

recalltargets13

sd-19

183 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. gumshoe says:

    It's clear the Tea Party Republicans want us to be in continuous recall mode. What a waste of taxpayer dollars. 95% of the bills passed last session passed with bipartisan support. This isn't about guns. This is about taking over the State Senate. 

  2. Well, I can't say it's surprising. Republicans seem to hate on Sen. Hudak with a passion they have for few other legislators in our state, and they did already try once.

    I also agree with the assessment that they'll need the paid petition gatherers in order to get that many signatures.

    • Vote4thePeople says:

      You tip your hand and show extreme bias by using the word hate…….No one hates anyone else here!  Its about the LIES hudak told to get elected and now the voters want to hold her accounatble.  I guess in dem/lib land it was only Repubs who were able to recall giron and morse???? Time to accept that MANY, MANY DEMS also signed petitions for their recall!

      • BlueCat says:

        Care to specify the lies to which you are referring? Links to print or video evidence of the lies in question would be appreciated. 

        • Vote4thePeople says:

          Most specifically that she would uphold the Constitution of the United States???????  Which allows for LEGAL gun ownership by law abiding citizens!  Instead she falls in with the likes of Slickenpooper and obammy…….  But you FAIL to respond to the 40% recall signatures for morse and giron?????? What say YOU????? Catter got your tongue?????

          • DavieDavie says:

            Yep, it's right there in the Constitution — I can own machine guns, bazookas, Stinger missles, personal nukes…

            How dare those CongressCritters desecrate the Holy Constitution like that?

            But the good news is that End Times are nigh, so we can enjoy all that when we get to Heaven, right?

            • Vote4thePeople says:

              Funny how all anti gun libs have to resort to extreme lies and rhetoric to try to distort the truth……but I know it all they have left, since the truth does not fit their agenda of misinformation.

              Since you bring it up……IF you have a Federal Firearms License (FFL) which means the Federal Goverment has the RIGHT to walk into your place of business or home at any time and inspect your sales logs……AND IF you have a Class 3 Tax Stamp, then YES you can own a fully automatic machine gun.  Knowing the government is watching your every move.  BTW the background check for an FFL and Tax Stamp is far more investigation than obammy was put through.

              Please provide the link to the REBUBS wanting to allow EVERYONE ownership of bazookas, stinger missiles, personal nukes, etc. or you will just have to ashamedly admit your lies…….

              Heaven?????  Um no.  Funny… but there is no such thing as god, heaven, the devil or hell.  Made up stories in a 2000 year old book, which attempts to explain a "big scary" world which they did not understand.  You believe in stories of the end of the world?  Keep digging that underground shelter and filling it with canned goods! LOL

              • roccoprahn says:

                Whoa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

                little bit's pumped up!!!!!!!!!!!!

                That last paragraph though. Can ya kind of maybe connect the part about there not being any afterlife with the bit about the bomb shelter?

                Jethro, I think your meds are the wrong dose.

                And get me those answers you owe me.

                • Vote4thePeople says:

                  Are you okay……I mean all the name calling and mean spirited comments…..I thought you obammy lovers were all peace and unity…..LOL!!!!!!!!!!  I think you might need some anger management.  BTW cant DAVIE defend himself….needs your help????

                • Vote4thePeople says:

                  Did you look up those 5 in chamber votes yet????

                • Vote4thePeople says:

                  I owe you nothing…..all you have are insults and crying.

                • Vote4thePeople says:

                  Did all those facts about FFLs and Federal Tax Stamps confuse you…….read it again, look up what you didnt understand and come back later…..maybe a nap or something there old timer…….

                  • roccoprahn says:

                    Were you there for the part where there hasn't been a director for the ATF forever now,and the FFL enforcement isn'teven being done any more?

                    Didn't think so.

                    • Vote4thePeople says:

                      That is another liberal / dem lie.  How can you live in fantasyland of lies like that?  My buddy owns a gun shop and he was visited last week!  How do you explain that?  So in lib fantasyland, when there is no director, everything stops?  Sure……LOL!

                      BTW where is your hero obammy? Why cant he fill the position? Just more dems and lack of strong leadership.

              • DavieDavie says:

                @VoteLikeA_NitWit:  So you agree that there are limits to the Constitutional right to bear arms afterall.  You just don't like where the line is drawn.  Tough nuggies.

                So you so think you're some sort of Supreme Court justice to declare the laws passed by Colorado's legislature as UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!!!!

                BooF*ckingHoo.

                • Vote4thePeople says:

                  Sure, the current laws (which are rarely enforced) are fine, we dont need goofy laws which do nothing.

                  I guess there is my view + 55 Colorado Sheriffs……and then there is your view + ????? …….. crickets….crickets….crickets……

                   

                • Vote4thePeople says:

                  Oh now I see, your still trying to understand my first post.  "tough nuggies"…..you got beat up a lot as a child, didnt you?

          • roccoprahn says:

            I'll play for a while. Ok, BC asked you "which "lies" are you referring to"?

            Now, I'll assume your smartass answer indicates you believe she failed to uphold the Constitution. AND……………"which allows for legal gun ownership by law abiding citizens" seems to indicate Senator Hudak cast a vote, or votes that deny legal ownership by law abiding citizens.

            Here's where the old rubber hits the road. 

            Please tell me how Senator Hudak lied re:oath of office, how she denied any law abiding citizen (remember, a convicted wife beater's not a law abiding citizen), and this one's a bit of a thinker, but I'll challenge ya anyway……..How'd she violate the Constitution?

            Hint………..Research and identify the 5 Legislative Bills passed earlier this year. Try to the best of your (or "yer", whatever you prefer) ability to separate your "that thar gummint's comin' for are gunz" phobias from what actually was voted………THAT'S VOTED……..IN CHAMBERS!………into law, and then explain how Evie Hudak violated the Constitution, lied in oath, and denied firearms ownership to you or any other (I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt) "law abiding citizen".

            Get crackin', Jethro.

            • Vote4thePeople says:

              Are you okay?…..with all the mis-spelling, curses and ill fated insults….I am not sure there is a question in there…….OH okay,  she did not vote to uphold the will of the people (just like giron and morse) and instead decided to vote the will of Slickenpooper and obammy.  When she took the oath, she vowed to uphold the will of her constituents and the constitution, she lied.  I guess there is just me and the 55 Colorado Sheriffs who disagree with her vote and with YOUR characterization of the laws.

              But thanks again for all the insults and curses, it simply lets me know I have won the argument.  BTW I will let you spend your considerable free time looking up the 5 in chamber votes.  Nothing but feeble liberal distractions.

              Please contact Sheriff Doug Darr (dem) in Adams County for an ear full of how as more CCW permits are issued, crime goes DOWN DOWN DOWN.  But that reality does not fit the anti gun lib agenda, now does it.  But you are scared to call anyway…..

              I guess in hudak's strange, twisted little world, all rape victims should just lay there and take it……never fight back and you dont need anything to protect yourself……how pathetic!  Maybe too many years in the vacuum of the school board twisted her sense of reality.  School is where they teach the victim mentality, so its no suprise.  But this is all moot, she will be recalled just like morse and giron…..bye bye

              • roccoprahn says:

                So you're not going to answer, just the standard goony spew.

                Ok.

                But all kidding aside, even though you don't know it, you just made a fool of yourself.

                And the Sherriff Darr thing? Do ya just figure people don't know it when you change the subject?

                WTF, Jethro, drink some water. Take your temp. You've blown a fue.

                 

                • Vote4thePeople says:

                  So your not strong enough to make a call and get the facts…..that is sad.  Not strong enough to stand up for the beatdown hudak put on an RAPE VICTIM?  I though hudak was you HERO?  But as I always say, when the name calling begins, I have won.  You are only fooling yourself…….

                  • roccoprahn says:

                    Were you there for the part where she apologized and said she'd gone too far?

                    At that point, when the agrieved person accepts the apology, it's on the hacks that want to continue to stir up bullshit with it.

                    And check those meds, Jethro.

                     

                    • Vote4thePeople says:

                      That is the biggest crying baby fest I have heard…..Politicians always apologize LATER after they are busted!  She is a thug and a bully who would not last 2 seconds in the real world.

                • Vote4thePeople says:

                  Why are you refusing to talk about hudaks comments about rape victims needing no form of self defense???????

                • Vote4thePeople says:

                  So your not going to answer?  Let me help you hudak LIED AGAIN when she stated CCW permits do not equate into lower crime rates and lower incidents of rape.  Look it up and see how accurate you HERO hudak really is… Are you going to call the sheriffs office for the CCW stats or not?

                  • roccoprahn says:

                    Can you refer me to actual proof of Senator Hudak lying about CCW permits?

                    Like a link?

                    I mean I can research it, but if you're right, wouldn't my acknowledgement be better sooner than later?

                    Along with those SD19 economic numbers?

                    But take a breath first. Blood pressure's best about 70-80 lower number.

                    • roccoprahn says:

                      Jesus, jethro, I said take a breath, check the meds, do the 120/70 thing and get back to me, not skip to a safehouse in New Hampshire.!!!!

                      Ok, Ryan Parker, Denver Post, March 7th, Evie Hudak CCW.

                      No wonder you fell off the fucking planet. 

                      Yes, it's true Senator Hudak gave wrong numbers that night in Chambers. She said a female with a loaded firearm was 83 times more likely to be killed in an attack by a stranger than to successfully discharge the firearm against the assailant. Stay awake skeezix, we'll get back to the word stranger.

                      Yes, she was wrong. According to the Violence Policy Center Study in 1998 (admittedly it's old), the number is actually 302 times more likely for  an armed female to be killed by a stranger than the reverse.

                      Two things. First, she didn't lie. She actually quoted a LOWER number. 302 is more than 83. Should be, even in Missitucky. (This one's for you, Curmudgeon).

                      Second, she apologized to Ms. Amanda Collins the very night it happened when she was informed her numbers were not only incorrect but that they were for strangers, not intimate aquaintences.

                      Ms. Collins was very classy in accepting Senator Hudak's apology, which needed to come and did. More classy than you, for sure.

                      Now, you come here with nothing but bullshit, bluffs, chest thumping, fist pumping, gun goon attitude, non truths and checks you can't cash,   and don't think you're going to get called on it?

                      How the fuck did you think this was going to end?

                      If you don't know there are posters here a whole lot smarter than me who will take you apart at the seams, if you think this is going to have a happy ending for you, you haven't been paying attention.

                      Better change your diaper, kid, as well as the meds. You don't have the juice to play in this league.

                      But first, get me those numbers for SD19.

                    • Vote4thePeople says:

                      Look it up for yourself…..no spoon feeding of liberals here.   I certainly do not need your acknowledgement!  There goes that liberal / dem overblown sense of self importance again……. Silly libs……..

                    • Vote4thePeople says:

                      Wrong numbers?????????? LOL ….At least have the character to call it what is was a LIE!!!! hudak the hutt LIED and she knew it was a lie.

                • Vote4thePeople says:

                  I am sorry to burst the little dem/lib bubble………but the truth is the truth and facts are facts…….regardless of the name calling and personal attacks, which have become the calling card of libs……..

          • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

            Caps lock stuck, Votey?

            Better go breathe and stroke your carbine a bit, lady, your blood pressure's rising. And I did respond to your claim that 40% of the recall sigs were Dems. The recall sigs were 22% Dems.   That figure is from the infamous Commie rag, the Pueblo Chieftain, and that rabble rousing plumber, Victor Head.

            The recall votes were 5-12% of the registered Democrats in the district. I've already explained this too many times.

            The Constitution says that people have the right to bear arms. It says nothing about the size of the magazines, nor whether local authorities can require background checks. Even the NRA is only trying to challenge the concealed carry law, based on the Colorado Constitution. There isn't any other basis for it.

            • Vote4thePeople says:

              It was 40%, regardless of the names you want to call the paper.  Funny how libs cannot control themselves long enough to string a sentence together without insults or personal attacks.

              That is what all anti gun libs say, its only the magazines. Next it will be something more……libs cannot be trusted……

              • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

                Votey,

                Click on the red link. Read the article. The Pueblo Chieftain hated Angela Giron, did everything they could to discredit her. 

                Victor Head was one of the three Pueblo plumbers who organized the recall. They're like your soul brothers. And they said they had 22% Democratic signatures on the recall petitions. 

                Again? OK. Some people are kind of slow. Here it is again:

                http://www.chieftain.com/news/politics/1391843-120/recall-giron-percent-petitions

                Since you seem to be having some trouble with the whole "click the red link" thing, here is the quote again, copied just for you, from the July 24, 2013 edition of the Pueblo Chieftain:

                Slightly more than half of the voters, 51 percent, who signed recall petitions against state Sen. Angela Giron, D-Pueblo, were Republicans, with 27 percent being unaffiliated or minor party voters, and 22 percent Democrats.

                Those figures came from Pueblo County Clerk Gilbert “Bo” Ortiz on Monday and confirmed by Victor Head, one of the recall organizers.

                You're welcome.

  3. ClubTwitty says:

    How is this a good use of tax money?  WTF are elections for anymore?  Now the Teanutz will start trying to recall everyone, in the continued devolution of the system they profess to revere: our Constituional Republic. 

    PS-I think n3b stands for shitferbrains. 

  4. ClubTwitty says:

    And playing with your tablet is a 'bad move' I suppose, but are we really gonna start playing gotcha on that.  At least she wasn't feeding her gambling addiction online during a hearing on launching military action and bombing another Middle Eastern nation in the midst of a civil war between a host of bad actors, as the former presidential candidate of a major party.  Now THAT would be really embarassing. 

  5. BlueCat says:

    If this goes forward and the petition effort is successful my suggestion would be, don't follow the failed example of trying to change the subject. The subject of these recalls is the gun safety legislation. Best to face it head on and do everything possible to educate the public on what is actually in it and what is not. Otherwise the opposition just gets to say whatever they want, it's legislation to take away your guns, etc., while the challenged Dem is perceived as hiding and cowering. Mainly because the challenged Dem is hiding and cowering.  Just like so many Dems in Congress did on the Affordable Care Act while Rs defined it and made sure the public got only the GOPT scary misinformation.

    I don't want to talk about the elephant in the room that my opponents never stop talking about. I just want to to talk about all the other good stuff I do…. doesn't work.

    • ElliotFladenElliotFladen says:

      Oh yes – please keep talking about guns.  Surely a winning strategy for the Dems!

       

      /heavy sarcasm

      • Diogenesdemar says:

        Nothing left after your recent whoopin' but full troll mode, counselor????

        What the hey, I'm sure nubbbby needed a playmate  . . .

      • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

        I'm with BC on this one, based on my recent experiences in the Giron anti-recall campaign. Sure, there are some people you just are never going to convince that Obama and Giron are comin' to get their guns. The PFR guy in camo who was outraged that Giron wouldn't let teachers concealed carry, for example (FYI- no such law, he was delusional).

        But on the endless phone calls to "voting seniors", we were explaining the finer points of the actual gun laws passed, and they were hearing it. Up until the point that the paid staff made a policy decision that we shouldn't be talking about guns anymore. I kept on, anyway.

        There always are reasonable people in the middle. They don't hog the spotlight, and if they're confused, they don't want to advertise it because they don't want to sound ignorant. But we do a disservice to our cause, and condescend to them, when we refuse to talk about issues they're concerned about.

        For Evie Hudak, she's in Jeffco – Jeffco was blue the last 2 elections, and Hudak has good support among moderates split along the classic "Colorado 3" – Dems, Republicans, and unaffiliated voters. Jeffco Dems are also heavily organized, by some of the savviest people I know.

        The other thing Evie must do is stay grounded in her own knowledge of her constituents and their needs and preferences, and, if the petition gathers enough signatures and a recall is slated, not let the young Turks tell her what to do. 

        I respect Evie Hudak, and I'm sorry that she is going to be in for a lot of extra stress no matter which way the petition drive goes.

        • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

          aggh…"Obama and Giron AREN't coming to get their guns"

          • Vote4thePeople says:

            Its not about that in this case, regardless of how much the dems want to wish it into reality.  Its about the complete lack of enforceablity of the laws which were passed…..But I guess those 55 Colorado Sheriffs are all wrong and have nothing better to do???  BTW a large portion of those Sheriffs are DEMS!!!  But that does not fit the typical dem rant against anyone who supports the 2nd Ammendment.

        • dwyer says:

          I don't know Arvada, now, but ten years ago, it was extremely conservative.

          It was the home of evanglistic congregations and conservative catholics.

          Ironically, MJ55, the "life" issue might be in play here, as well as the civil union legislation.  Democrais can NOT afford to be passive or complacent.

          I also don't know if mail-in ballots are a big factor in Arvada.  Dems should get legal challenges in order, now, to make sure that there is no funny business with the mail-in ballots.  This recall is happening before the 2014 legislative session and so there is no chance/time for legislative action to address the problems with the mail-in ballots and recall election ballot deadlines.

          I am sorry this is happening.  I am not surprised.

           

      • MADCO says:

        Background checks are sooo unreasonable.

        Everone, anyone really, should be able to buy as many guns as they want, carry them anywhere they want whenever and how they want.

        But a background check is a horrilbe imposition. ok

        • Vote4thePeople says:

          Who said (voters or Sheriffs) there should be no background checks?  We ALREADY have FBI, CBI, etc. background checks on all retail weapon sales (gun shows and retailers)!!!  The current CCW permits allow for COMPLETELY BG CHECKED and LICENSED people to Concealed Carry in certain places.  How is that "carry anywhere anytime, anyway "they" like"?  Talk about a complete misrepresentation of the facts, BUT I know that all the libs and dems have is misrepresentation, lies and misinformation.  Informed people with actual rational thoughts rooted in reality, do not have to fabricate falsehoods to support their argument.

      • BlueCat says:

        You, as usual (make that always) missed my (make that any and everyone's) point. Ignoring a topic of which your opponent wishes to make an issue doesn't work. It doesn't make the issue go away and just makes you look scared and weak. It also creates a massaging vacuum which your opponent will be happy to fill for you in ways that you won't like. But then having any kind of genuine back and forth discussion has never been your thing. Your greatest talent is for coming up with excuses to avoid them and I've heard them all so please don't bother. 

        By the way,  if you have to inform people that you're employing sarcasm, it's really just not working for you. 

         

    • Miss Jane says:

      This will be about whatever gets their base all ginned up.  The more extreme this gets, the more it hurts the gop in the long run.  I agree you have to directly address whatever is getting the teaparty mouths all frothed up.  It's kind of sad that their chains are so easy to jerk. Sad for all of us.  I want my sane and coherent Republicans back, the pragmatic conservatives. I don't think Elliot is one of them, at least not now, anyway.

  6. MichaelBowmanMichaelBowman says:

    So, can the victor in a recall election be recalled after he/she are sworn in?  With only 18,000 votes cast in the Morse recall, would gathering 25% of those votes, 4,500 signatures, trigger a second recall election in SD-11?  I'm guessing there's 4,500 people with "re-Morse" that would be thrilled to sign a second petition.  There may be no end to this charade.

  7. crystaljespin says:

    Can a group of constituents in her district form together to file an injunction against this insanity?  She reperesents her constituents well, but like all elected officials, can not please every one. The previous recalls took off because their targets and the Democrats did nothing about it until the signatures were approved. For months these recall nuts went on the radio, flooded  political blogs, and swarmed all the media while the Dems did nothing, waiting only to come out and canvas and file a few lame legal challenges (too little, too late). The canvassing may have helped, but this is not a regular election and you need to do something to challenge the petitions themselves before they take off.

     

    • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

      Actually we did counter the petition signers, by standing in opposition to their signature gathering setup, with "Support Angela" signs and literature of our own. We were all volunteer at that point, about 50 of us, except for a couple of paid staff.  Hence, the infamous "handing the money to the volunteer" video,with which Carno's group did so much damage.

      But it wasn't until the petitions were certified that committees were formed, serious outside Dem & progressive money came in, and multiple layers of paid staff brought on board.

  8. Duke CoxDuke Cox says:

    I have heard it said that the best defense is a good offense.

    I would go after these people as nothing more than a bunch of sore losers who want perpetual do-overs until they get their way. Meet them head on and challenge their gun-nut  message and expose their hypocrisy.  As long as they are allowed to continue to write the dominant narrative, they will continue to be a threat.

    They are bent upon subverting our electoral process as long as the voters will let them. They need to be soundly defeated here, or this will become the new paradigm.

     

    • Vote4thePeople says:

      Nice rant….but you might remember the signatures to recall morse and giron were nearly 40% Dems…….only the far left progressive liberals support the radical and extreme laws which do NOTHING to address the issues of CRIMINALS obtaining weapons.  What makes both Repubs and rational Dems mad are laws AGAINST LAW ABIDING citizens which infringe their rights.  Criminals dont care about YOUR laws, that is why we call them criminals!!!!

      • BlueCat says:

        We've been through this before. If the argument against a law is that it's useless because criminals will  ignore it then it logically follows that all laws are useless because criminals, by definition, ignore laws. Duh.

        I know you won't answer but how about the people with mental health issues that make them dangerous? These people are not criminals with underworld connections who know how to obtain weapons in that world. How do we prevent them from easily obtaining weapons without universal background checks? 

        Where does it say in the constitution that the innocent will never be inconvenienced. Boarding a plane has become pretty inconvenient. Why no constitutional hysteria over that?

        Knowing that your kind just drops your little bombs and never has the guts to engage in a real discussion, I'll consider those questions rhetorical.

        • Vote4thePeople says:

          Duh????  That is the best you have really….  I have no problem with LOGICAL laws that are passed to protect citizens and prosecute criminals, but when 55 Colorado Sheriffs say the law is UNENFORCEABLE, please show me how many recent gun law including the Clinton ban of the 80's had any impact on gun violence? ZERO!  Cities which have 100% gun bans (Chicago, Wash DC) have the HIGHEST levels of gun violence, because criminals know the law abiding public cannot defend themselves.  Please tell me how the magazine ban would have stopped the Aurora shooter?  OH NO just limit him to 15 rounds! LOL 

          The breakdown in the system is to blame.  Here in CO, in AZ, in CT ALL these shooters had extensive mental health issues, all documented and some (AZ) even reported to police….who did nothing because bleeding heart liberals and liberal judges will never stand for reporting the mentally ill to police.  Its their right to be mentally ill (HELLO NY).  Most often, when the police are informed of the issue (AZ), they do nothing.

          Where in the constitution does it say that the rights of law abiding citizens will be infringed by guberment, over the actions of a few wackos?  Lets see,  10-15 mass shooters in the past 50 years and the liberals us it as a spring board for infringing the rights of 300 million people? wow……You do realize that 3 times as many people in the USA dies from "accidents" than from gun violence.  Better get on the banning accidents bandwagon too!  BTW I dont believe when the guberment attempts to infringe the rights of law abiding citizens, it is simply "inconvenient".  I guess when liberals give all power and control to the guberment, and its over-reach takes your personal property by eminent domain and kicks you out of your home, I would call that just YOUR inconvenience.

          My "kind"….that is funny!  Commenting on here is like commenting on HuffyPuffy post…..Its the mutual liberal admiration society on here!  But I have three final questions for you (you likely will not answer because your "that type"):

          If the dems are so organized, why the 40% dem turnout in the recall elections?

          If the dems are so unified on the recent gun laws, why are 55 Colorado Sheriffs sueing because the laws are unenforceable?  BTW there are MANY DEM sheriffs in the group.

          Do you think all guns are evil and should be banned and taken from people on a door to door basis or the guberment should have the right to TELL people IF they can own guns?  If so, how do you explain the rational of the CO Sheriffs (Dems too) who issue CCW permits by the hundreds and see CRIME go DOWN DOWN DOWN in all those counties?  Just call Doug Darr for the TRUTH….he is a DEM sheriff who issues CCW permits in Adams county!  I doubt you would call him, libs prefer to live in their self inflicted world of denial and fantasy…..

      • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

        Per Victor Head, Pueblo Chieftain, 20% of the 11,000 valid recall petition signatures were from Democrats. 11,000 x .20 = 2,200 Dems signed that particular recall petition. I don't know what the numbers were for Morse, but probably a similar percentage. I can provide the link if you insist.

        I've gone over the recall election votes here until everyone's sick of it. However, you have a range of numbers of Democrats voting against Giron, to recall her. Minimum is 2200 or so, of the 19,000 recall votes. Of the 14,000 Democrats who turned out to vote in the recall, if you are saying that more than 2200 Dems voted to recall, then you must also say that a substantial proportion of the 10,000 Republican and 6700 Unaffiliated voters voted not to recall, since there were also 14,000 "No recall" votes.

        The PPP poll done the weekend  before the recall election polled 579 mostly moderate to very conservative voters. 33% of the Dems surveyed by PPP were for the recall. 33% of the 14,000 Dems who turned up to vote would have been 4620. So the range of Dems voting against Senator Giron would probaby be somewhere between 2250 and 4620.  Either way, that's at most 12% of the registered Democratic voters in her district. She should have won handily.

        Fact is, after mail ballots were denied due to legal brangling, we couldn't get the anti-recall voters to the polls.

        So your numbers of 40% are way off. Even Victor Head admitted that. I suspect that you're going to run up against the math when you try to recall Senator Hudak, too. What will be a treat for all of us on here is watching the different factions chew each other up -

        There are at least two anti-Hudak recall factions, each with their own websites, money, and publicity. The old one still has $1400 in the account, and I bet there are campaign finance laws regarding what they can legally do with it.  The new one is criticizing the old circulators. Nobody is receiving big money yet from the usual suspects, so you'll be gathering signatures as volunteers, at least for awhile.

        In addition to those conflicts, the Republican party chairman,Ryan Call, does not support this recall effort – see the article on here. And Rocky Mountain Gun Owners Dudley Brown is trying to promote a lawsuit testing the constitutionality of the gun laws.  Jennifer Kerns, spokeswoman  for Basic Freedom Defense Fund,is boasting about the group's legislator questionnaire, which was supposed to have been published October 1, but has run into some mysterious problems.  Apparently, legislators of both parties are reluctant to put their names on BFDF's target list. Who would have thought they'd have sense like that?

        So I'm not too worried about a recall. You all are too busy fighting amongst yourselves. 

        So Vote4, you can troll all you want on here. If you seriously want people to consider your positions, you'll have to provide backup links and references to websites. Otherwise, people will pretty much ignore you, no matter how many times a day you post.

        Evie Hudak has been a good legislator for seven years. I've seen no proof that this latest recall effort is wanted or needed by voters in her district. The only thing you will do if you do collect enough signatures is run up a mountain of debt ($230K in Pueblo, $150K in the Springs recalls) for taxpayers to pay for an unnecessary recall election.

         

  9. dwyer says:

    What are the chances, mamajones55. that you could run for State Democratic Party Chair?  IMHO, you are the talent and the guts that we desperately need.

  10. mamajama55mamajama55 says:

    I've thought about trying for a paid political staff position. I do have this unfortunate habit of speaking my mind, which tends to close off advancement in a variety of fields.

    I'll probably stick with trying to help the next generation to think and write critically, while writing myself and trying to eventually get paid for it.

    • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:

      It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat. 

      - Teddy Roosevelt

    • dwyer says:

      @mamajana55

      I can really appreciate your position, particularly wanting to get paid for all the work that you do.  However, unless you are in a "command" position, you are always going to be faced with the dilemna of being quiet and "safe" or "speaking out" and risking a job.

      I just wish you were on the front lines, leading the charge.

      • MADCO says:

        "State Democratic Party Chair"

        Pretty sure it's unpaid.

        • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

          I don't know if it's paid or not, but the people in those state positions are much better at it than I could ever hope to be.

          Now what I think I could do a good job of is running interference within a campaign – making sure that everyone listens to each other. Campaigns need paid staff, and volunteers. Running a campaign on the corporate model, in which the lowest paid (i.e. volunteer) workers have the least input. Since those tend to be the local people, they are not listened to, and this hurts the campaign's outreach.

          Organizing for America used to work and promote the "Snowflake Model", in which theoretically, decision making was distributed and power was delegated.  It was a model for grassroots campaigns. In the last few years, although the "Snowflake" posters were still in evidence, and it was included in training for OFA fellows, the reality was that all decisions were made by the candidate and several high level staffers, or even at the national level, which led to some real disconnects locally. It was hella efficient, and it was consistent from state to state, but it was no longer any kind of empowered grassroots structure. I suppose that I miss it.

          Obviously, there needs to be a decision making and command structure in place, with the candidate at the center of it. The original feminist leaderless model worked well for small local actions, and for raising awareness and energy, but we needed NOW and NARAL for change at a national level. I see those same problems now with the "Arab Spring" movements, but that's another discussion. Then you have the "astroturf" model, in which a corporate entity such as Americans for Prosperity pretends to be a grassroots group, and uses people's outrage and frustration to further a corporate agenda.

          I'm just talking about a real feedback loop, which isn't built in to the modern political campaign.
          This is a problem endemic to any political campaign of any party.

        • BlueCat says:

          It's unpaid. I believe the higher state officers in the GOP are paid but no party officers at any level in the Dem party, including State Chair, are paid. I know this for a fact and you can look it up. I also know this as a former minor local (HD level) Dem Party elected official who had my lowly place in the organization from state down to county down to local so I do know how it works. 

    • nota33 says:

      These right wing radical extremists can't win in regular elections. In 2014, here's hoping that many republicans lose their seats. This recall needs 25,000 signatures in 60 days.

      • ElliotFladenElliotFladen says:

        I missed the part where DEMOCRATS voted against Giron in her recall.  Maybe you should consider the fact that the Democrats have their extremists as well.

        • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:

          Yes we have extremists too. But we tend to ignore them while you have them running your party.

          • langelomisteriosolangelomisterioso says:

            It's probably important to remember that when EF une Chapeau Derriere speaks of "extremists"( especially"extremists"of an opposing political ideology) he means anyone who differs from his beliefs.

        • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

          Yes, Elliott, about 5% of Democrats voted against Giron. Significant? I think not. You want links? I gotcher hot links here. I was writing a long post to answer BC's claim that I was "in denial" about the recall.

           

          • ElliotFladenElliotFladen says:

            So you are saying Giron won Democrats by 95% to 5%? I want to see proof of that. 

            • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

              Elliott, re: 5% Dem voting against Giron: The recall succeeded in Pueblo because of low Democratic turnout, and low turnout in general, except for the NRA's energized base. I'll go into turnout numbers below.

              Bluecat,   you had commented that I'm "in denial" over how much of a factor Dem on Dem infighting in Pueblo was in the recall,  so I'll respond to you along with Elliott.

              Turnout:

              Only 36% of registered Democratic voters voted in the Pueblo recall election, which was about the same as total voter turnout in the district. Total Democratic voters:

              In 2010, Giron defeated Ortegon 55%-45% in an election dominated by mail ballots – 53% of all ballots returned were mail-in ballots. Total voter turnout in 2010 was at 50.9% in Colorado. Giron received almost 10,000 more Democratic votes in 2010 than there were total Democratic voters in the recall. The mail ballots were the deciding factor in 2010,( Early voting, including mail ballots, accounted for  so their deliberate suppression by frivolous legal action in the 2013 recall election worked to suppress voters in general, but particularly the Democratic voters of Giron's base.

              Even Elliot's compadre, Secretary of State Scott Gessler, knows that mail in ballots and online voter registration contributed to high voter turnout. In a smarmy and (to me) ironic self-congratulatory pamphlet entitled "2012 General Election Review:
              A Colorado Success Story"
              , Gessler and deputy S.o S Suzanne Staiert crowed that Colorado's turnout had bucked the national trend, going up 1.8%, while nationwide, voter turnout trended downward by 6.8 points. 71% of Colorado voters turned out in 2012, and 97% of mail ballots were returned, according to Mr. Gessler.  From the "Colorado Success Story" linked above:

              According a recently released analysis by George Mason University, at 71.1%, Colorado ranked first in the nation for overall turnout based on voting eligible population, third in the nation for presidential turnout based on voting eligible population, (70.3%), and sixth in the nation for turnout based on voting age population (64.7%).3,4

               

              Here comes the irony: Gessler worked very hard to suppress those mail in ballots in 2012. He attempted to purge "non citizen" voters and "inactive" voters, but kept getting thwarted by the law, and his own election clerks. Yet, he still wants to take credit for Colorado's being #1 in the nation on voter turnout.

              So those were our voter turnout figures in 2010 and 2012, 51% and 71% respectively.  Yet, in 2013, we only managed to turn out 35% of Democratic voters. Why? The lack of mail in ballots was the most important factor. 70% of Pueblo voters voted by mail.  They were either not able to get to the polls, since Pueblo has a 24% disabled population, or they were expecting a ballot to be mailed to them. Days before the election, we were still hearing from voters: "When do I get my ballot?" Not everyone follows political blogs.  The NRA deliberately put out misinformation that there would be no mail in ballots at all, in spite of the fact that the Jjudge  had then allowed mail in ballots in early September. Confusion reigned. Deliberately and maliciously, confusion reigned.

              So who did turn out to vote in the 2013 recall?

              34,827 people. 19,451 (~55%) voted for the recall. Turnout: Democrats, 14,633; Republicans, 10,329; and unaffiliated, 6,867.

              Assuming that all Republicans and all unaffiliated voters voted for the recall, which I doubt, that would total 17,196 for the recall, leaving 2255 Democratic votes, or about the number who signed 20% of the 11,000 recall petition votes.  Out of the 19,451 recall votes, only 162 were identifiably Democratic voters who wrote in Anglund's name as a successor candidate.

              So your 30-50% of Democratic voters?  2,200 out of 38,195 registered Democratic voters is  5% of registered Democrats in the district. It's not a Democratic crossover problem – it is a voter turnout problem.

              If your premise is that more Dems voted to recall, and more Republicans and Unaffiliateds voted not to recall, somehow I doubt that you find that result more palatable, but you are welcome to it.

              Bluecat, on your complaint that I'm "in denial" of the vast vicious anti-Giron feeling within the Democratic party in Pueblo, I asked various party operatives about it, and got these responses:

              "Meh. Some people thought she shouldn't have been appointed in 2010 for Tapia's old seat, but everyone's gotten over that now."

              "Long blue knives? Seriously?" (laugh)

              "We have to work together. Nobody's got time for that old bs."

              As I've written on multiple occasions, I had and have criticisms of how the anti-recall campaign was handled – I thought that there was too much emphasis on reproductive issues, too little on guns, too little on water and jobs. I was a fricking volunteer. I expressed myself on here, and occasionally to paid staff, who thanked me for my input, and went on their merry way. Denial? How? Be specific, Bluecat. If I don't agree with your assessment, and you said that you know very little about Senate District 3, that doesn't mean that I'm in "denial" of the "truth" that you are party to.

              What is "not helpful" is to keep hacking the legs out from under strong candidates by implying that their defeat by well funded and organized opposition was somehow their own fault. 

              I hope that I've answered your questions, but anticipate further "hypotheticals" from Elliot. I've got to go up to Denver for my daughter's Bday party, will be out of touch for a day or so.

              N3B, where are you getting your "statistic" that 30-50% of Dems voted to recall Giron?  That wouldn't square with the voter turnout results:  Out of 34,827 votes, 19,451 (~55%) voted for the recall. Turnout: Democrats, 14,633; Republicans, 10,329; and unaffiliated, 6,867.

              Assuming that all Republicans and all unaffiliated voters voted for the recall, which I doubt, that would total 17,196 for the recall, leaving 2255 Democratic votes, or about the number who signed 20% of the 11,000 recall petition votes.  Out of the 19,451 recall votes, only 162 were identifiably Democratic voters who wrote in Anglund's name as a successor candidate.

              So your 30-50% of Democratic voters?  2,200 out of 38,195 registered Democratic voters is  5% of registered Democrats in the district. It's not a Democratic crossover problem – it is a voter turnout problem.

              We did not turn out the people we needed to, and the deliberate efforts by our partisan Secretary of State to discredit the law requiring an all mail in ballot election suppressed the vote effectively.

              Ain't math wonderful?

              - See more at: http://coloradopols.com/diary/50271/recall-successors-take-office-dem-senate-majority-now-18-17#sthash.YuqxGUT5.dpuf

              • nota33 says:

                I said the same thing before. Over 19,000 democrats did not participate in the recall election of Giron. I would argue thgat if mail in ballots were used, Giron and Morse both would have won. Those dam libertarian extremists were the reason why mail in ballots weren't used. 2014 there is a very good chance that both Rivera and Herpin will lose their seats to democrats.

              • ElliotFladenElliotFladen says:

                I see – you are saying only 5% of registered Dems, not 5% of people who voted.  You are still faced with problem that the majority of the voters in Giron recall were dems and Giron lost.  Badly. 

              • BlueCat says:

                I'm sorry, mama but you can link to everything under the sun. It won't change the fact that the problems you site are the kind that tilt a close election. The kind the screwed Morse. Yes, in that election they made the difference.

                But Giron lost way too big  for  it to be constructive at all to refuse to admit that some of the problems were her own fault and the fault of her campaign's ops. Sorry. 

                Bush's people couldn't have gotten anywhere near stealing the 2000 election, as they clearly did,  if it hadn't been close enough to steal. Large margins opposite to what would be a legitimate result via monkey wrenches, dirty tricks, whatever really, honestly can't be manufactured. Only small ones. That's reality, like or not. Refusing to learn from it won't help anyone.

                But we'll clearly have to agree to disagree here.

                • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

                  BC, where do you see me refusing to admit that some of the problems were the campaign ops’ faults? How many times do you want me to enumerate the many criticisms I had and have of the decisions made? I was not in the inner circle, so I have no way of knowing which decisions were Angela’s alone, and which were groupthink. I do know that all of the money and committees created problems of chains of command and communication, in spite of which things worked surprisingly well until the last 10 days when pressures from OUTSIDE sources – PFR taking over the neighboring building, the court’s switcheroos on voting rules, deliberate misinformation to voters from the local media and NRA – caused all kinds of confusion. In spite of all of this, people carried on heroically, and I am proud of them, and of myself, in spite of the election results. You seem to be denying that these outside forces even existed.

                  As far as the 12% margin of defeat, that is more than accounted for by the 15% lower turnout than 2010′s 51%, the closest equivalent non-Presidential election. With 53% mail in ballots. In 2012, as Gessler was crowing about, the percentage of mail in ballots returned was 97% of the 70% total votes.

                  How is the denial of mail in ballots not the predominant factor in the recall result?

                  Why I keep harping on this:
                  There is a narrative, put out mostly by Republicans and Libertarians, including some of the usual suspects here, that Dems voted in large numbers against Giron. Their narrative: It was all about the gun legislation. Your and Pols narrative: It was all because of some rumored in-party resentments or bad decisions – or whatever.

                  Now you’re promoting that narrative as well, with absolutely no facts to support it. I’ve asked numerous times on this blog for those perpetuating this rumor to come out with specifics – and nobody can, or is willing to do so. So the rumors persist.

                  This is harmful, not only to Senator Giron, should she decide to run for her old seat or another seat, but for other possible Democratic candidates.

                  Win or lose, they face not only the relentless, petty and often insanely off target critiques from the right, but the omnipresent Democratic “circular firing squad”.

                  It’s impossible to accurately second-guess without adequate information. The people with adequate information – campaign staff, Senator Giron herself, Laura Carno, Marilyn Marks, and those who carefully choreographed the recall fiasco – aren’t talking. I happen to think that my second guessing is more accurate than most, but as you said, we may have to agree to disagree.

                  • BlueCat says:

                    I am promoting no such narrative. I have said over and over that I don't know enough about the district to have any opinion of possible in fighting or anything else.

                    I'm simply saying that her loss was by such a large margin there is no reason to believe she would have won even without the mail in ballot issue and other factors you mention.

                    I admit that those factors had an effect and that she certainly wouldn't have lost by so much. I admit that the same type of factors were, in fact, decisive  in the much closer Morse election and that it's pretty clear he would have won if not for those factors. 

                    But it just isn't possible to change an election from a decisive win to a large loss by those means. If it were, you can be sure that Obama would never have made it into the WH, just as Gore didn't. 

                    There really isn't any point in continuing to argue this  because I won't convince you and you won't convince me. It happens.

                • nota33 says:

                  Are you a republican troll? Giron lost by only 4000 votes. 19,000 democrats did not vote in the recall election. One could argue that both Morse and Giron would have defeated their recalls quite easily if mail in ballots were used.

                  • BlueCat says:

                    Yeah, right. I'm a Republican troll. Ask anybody. And all 19,000 of those Dems would have voted in an off-off year recall election even though most voters have no idea who the hell their state house and senate district level elected officials are (try canvassing some time and asking people who their State Rep and State Sen are) and all would have voted for Giron if only the mail in issue had been resolved in the Dems' favor. There was simply no other way for those 19,000 thousand Dems who supported Giron just as strongly as her opposition wanted to oust her to cast their votes. 

                    Also, there is no need for any difference in analysis between a very close loss such as Morse's and a huge loss such as Giron's under the same conditions. And, just as the best way to win a single issue recall election is to avoid that single issue allowing your opponents to be free to frame it any way they please, the best way to learn from an experience like this is to insist that there were no problems that were the candidate's or the campaign's fault.  Just close eyes, clap hands over ears and whine as loud as you can.

                    Yeah, that's the ticket. 

                    I'd be interested to hear what color the sky is on the planet you live on, nota33.

                  • Duke CoxDuke Cox says:

                    If BC is a republican troll…I'm an oil and gas lobbyist.

                  • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

                    BC is not a troll. I just disagree with her analysis. I do think that the 12% margin of defeat was accounted for by the lower turnout (down 15% from 2010).

                    Bad news: the PPP poll two days before the recall election bears out BC's analysis. That is, there were definitely many  Dems in Pueblo determined to vote for the recall.

                    I blame the onslaught of media negative ads and articles painting Giron as corrupt, including the Pueblo Chieftain. I think that Rivera's insistence on water and energy issues (even though he was substantially misleading about Giron's record) gained the recall some traction. I wish that Angela had agreed to debate Rivera, instead of just standing on her record of accomplishment.  So, yes, there were other factors, some of which were the campaign or the candidates responsibility. 

                     I still think that mail in ballots would have made the difference, although perhaps the margin would have been closer than we thought it would be.

                    If the people trying to get petitions signed to recall Hudak get 18,000 signatures, the old "Recruit some 3rd party candidates at the last minute to screw up the mail in ballot delivery" tactic will probably be used again.  This points up the need to learn from history, not just stand around calling each other names.

                    • BlueCat says:

                      We all can't agree on everything. We are not the Borg. That used to be the GOTP thing but it appears the Borg may have suffered a terminal breach?  

            • nota33 says:

              Elliot, you just got owned with cold hard facts you moron. Kudos to mamajama.

      • Vote4thePeople says:

        Some libs and Dems are so extreme they dont even know they are exteme….Wish as you may, these recalls are rooted in the fact that the representative did NOT vote the wishes of the people, but instead followed Snikenpooper's lead from obama.  Vote against the will of the people and face a recall……..its a GREAT policy…..it puts the lifelong polititician on notice!

    • BlueCat says:

      I suppose you know Democratic Party positions, even the top one, State Chair, are unpaid, anyway. But you could try to get hired by a campaign.

  11. nota33 says:

    These republican extremists are abusing the recall process. Recalling someone because of one issue? The recall process needs to be changed. We need to focus our attention on defeating these radical republican extremists in 2014.

  12. JeffcoBlueJeffcoBlue says:

    Another stupid recall? In my own Jefferson County?

  13. mamajama55mamajama55 says:

    The Recall Hudak committee has about $1600 on hand. If the NRA's legislative arm, their "Restore Coloradan's Rights" committee, the Senate Majority Fund, or "Free Colorado, the group which just happens to share the same address and CEO as the Republican campaign committee, Senate Majority Fund, have funds to pay petitioners, it isn't yet obvious.

    Basic Freedom Defense Fund and PFR have put out a questionnaire to all state legislators, and all candidates for state office, which asks:

    Will you vote for a repeal of Colorado’s new gun laws if given the opportunity in the 2014 legislative session? ___ YES or ___ NO

    Would you support a Ballot Initiative that would repeal Colorado’s gun laws? ___ YES or ___ NO

    Jennifer Kerns, BFDF spokeswoman interviewed on the Breitbart Sirius XM show, and said: "“We won and now we want more."

    They planned to publish this survey Oct 1, but haven't yet, which brings up these questions:

    Are legislators and candidates answering , or refusing to answer?

    Is the purpose of this "questionnaire" simply intimidation, the "wave of fear" Caldara bragged about?

    I think that the answer to the second question is definitely yes.

    Somebody should write a diary about this.

    • Hawkeye-X says:

      Indictments needs to be handed down against NRA, RMGO, etc. for RICO charges.

       

      When we finally kick Sutters out of the AG, we'll begin investigating those morons for those illegal recalls.

       

  14. dwyer says:

    Musings:

    1) On MSNBC this am,  a political consultant opined that Colorado was totally a blue state because of the rise in the Hispanic population.  He "knew" because he had been in Colorado about a "month ago."  Evidently he missed the GIron recall or maybe he doesn't know that Rivera is Hispanic.  Naturally, everyone on the panal agreed with him….this drives me crazy…like Matthews calling the venerable "Sink" a dive bar and Matthews fishing desperately to say something relevant about Oklahoma when the awful tornados hit, and all he could think of was that Oklahoma was the setting for "Grapes of Wrath."

    2) What ever happened to the complaint against Caldera, anyway?

  15. cadenv says:

    I no longer live in CO (TX, I know), but still consider it my home (I do have property there). I think, if the R's insist on having a re-do, then we should make it large.  Start circulating a petition in every R held district, put as many of them on the ballot as possible.  Campaign like its 2014 and broaden the base of interest, voters, and issues.  Do not repeat what just happened: a single issue, base driven, pissing match.  Fight fire with fire, and if they strike the match again, lets this time spread it all over the state. (Terrible analogy, I know).  We know how to win big elections, theyve shown they can win small elections.  Solution: no small elections.

  16. DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:

    First off, for everyone who says that legislating by recall is wrong – what side were you on in the Wisconsin recalls? Equally upset?

    Second, this will continue as long as it works. The solution is not to change the law, it's to make the recalls fail. And that requires campaigning from the start and doing so effectively and on the issues raised.

    • MADCO says:

      Wisconsin recall strategy was stoopid – but this is different, and I think you know that.

      As for the rest – chinken dinner!

       

      • Vote4thePeople says:

        Sorry but it was the will of the voters…….Voters who decided that their elected officials were not representing their wishes, but instead voting the progressive liberal party line………..RECALLED and OUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

      With the Wisconsin recall, there was evidence that Scott Walker was involved in shady, borderline criminal campaign finance stuff. He's certainly trashed his state's economy and it is now 44th in the country in job creation. (firing all of the public sector workers and disabling their unions had real world consequences – whoda thunk it?) Since Wisconsin has no specific recall guidelines, the recall was a legitimate use of people power – there was real justified fear that he would irreparably damage the people of Wisconsin's economic future, which in fact he has done.

      He 's running for governor in 2014, has 3.5 million in campaign war chest, and is still putting his name out for a Presidential bid in 2016.  2014 would be when voters need to organize strongly to vote him out.

       

      • Further, it has been proven that Republicans in Wisconsin violated state law in their redistricting process by hiding the redistricting documentation and process behind a legal firm. Having said that, I think the Wisconsin strategy was a longshot because there was no hardcore proof of Walker's malfeasance (and still isn't, though his fingerprints are all over his office's wrongdoing). And in the end, Democrats and independents in the state decided that recalls were for removal of proven criminals – pity Republicans here don't believe the same.

        In contrast, everything passed by Morse and Giron this year has already been through the constitutional court vetting process – they did nothing wrong, except that their decisions were unpopular with a very vocal group.

        The recall process is, IMHO, highly flawed. It allows a minority of people to force a vote by what always winds up being a minority of voters at an off time, giving that minority a solid chance to disrupt an otherwise (mostly) functional system.

  17. Hawkeye-X says:

    This is one recall that the teabaggers will LOSE, tremedously.

     

    1) The mail ballots will be allowed to be mailed out (after the Supreme Court overrules the idiotic judge that colluded with the Liberterians and Republicans) 

    2) The floods are still fresh in their minds – some may have been already affected by the floods who are Republicans. They are getting full federal assistance. 

    3) Obamacare will destroy all Republicans – the more people learn about Obamacare and how much savings they will have – then the people will realize that the Republicans are trying to destroy something that is a given right to the American people.

    4) The Republican Party may likely be designated as a domestic terrorist group as they are attempting to extort the President as long as John Boehner continues to ignore a Senate-passed clean Continuing Resolution in favor of something that has been fully funded and ready to go.

    5) Not only that, the Republicans are threatening to default on the debt limit which violates the 14th Amendment, and definetely qualifies as a terror group.

     

    • nota33 says:

      very well said. They have to get a lot more signatures this time and mail in ballots will likely be allowed. Republicans are american hating extremists who hate democracy.

    • dwyer says:

      Hawkeye-X,

      I hate to break into your dream world, but there is no appeal pending in regard to the mail in ballots. So the Supreme Court will not overrule the judge  that ruled on the mail in ballots.

      I have no idea where you get the idea that somehow the Republicans are doing something that is illegal.  They are not.  The House of Representatives are wholly within their consitutional prerogatives. 

      Don't you have to take civics or something to get a HS Diploma?

      • Hawkeye-X says:

        Do you ever take civics?

        I certainly did. I learned it from Mr. David Artenberrry in 1992 at George Washington HS here in Denver.

        But sometimes I go too far. The mail ballots will still happen. 

        The Republicans shut down the government. They are committing sedition each day the government is shut down because John Fucking Boehner won't even bother to pass a clean CR or take up the Senate-passed CR in an futile attempt to shut down Obamacare, and hold the country hostage in favor of the 1%. 

        That is sedition, and the Attorney General Holder should start placing these fuckwits under arrest and sent to Gitmo under the domestic terrorist organization designation.

        So, whoever you are, Dwyer, you better start praying very hard that Republicans cling on to their power, because once they lose it, it's gone for good, forever – and the minority party won't have any power to do shit anymore. Hopefully by 2014, the Republicans will have suffered massive losses to lose their filibuster priveleges and down to 99 Republicans in the House and dropping down.

         

        • BlueCat says:

          I'm pretty sure you must know as well as the rest of us that the Republicnas aren't going to be arrested for treason or sedition or declared a terrorist group. I hope you're just letting off steam.  Real world problems aren't going to solved in anyone's ideal fantasy world.

          • Hawkeye-X says:

            I want to define the entire Republican Party as a hate group and a domestic terrorist group.

            They still haven't learned the lessons of 2012 – you can't just find ways to cheat if you didn't win the first time.

            *sigh*… only if I had a magic wand and plenty of money….

  18. Algernon MoncriefAlgernon Moncrief says:

    Do We Have An "Excess of Democracy" in Colorado Regarding State Budgeting AND the Recall of Elected Officials?  Both Require Constitutional Fixes.

    Colorado legislators are already term limited, and their budgeting authority is restricted by TABOR.  We will now subject them to endless political recall attempts?  So, who will want the job?

    "Nineteen states permit the recall of state officials."

    "Recall efforts against state legislators are slightly more common, but still unusual.  Recall attempts against legislators have succeeded in triggering an election just 38 times, and eleven of those occurred in a single year, 2011.  Fifty-five percent of all legislative recall elections have succeeded in unseating a legislator (note that this includes two legislators who resigned after petitions with sufficient signatures to trigger a recall election were submitted).  Seventeen recall attempts have failed, and the legislators subject to the recall remained in office."

    "Opponents argue that it can lead to an excess of democracy, that the threat of a recall election lessens the independence of elected officials, that it undermines the principle of electing good officials and giving them a chance to govern until the next election, and that it can lead to abuses by well-financed special interest groups."

    "Specific grounds for recall are required in only eight states:

    Alaska:  Lack of fitness, incompetence, neglect of duties or corruption (AS §15.45.510)

    Georgia:  Act of malfeasance or misconduct while in office; violation of oath of office; failure to perform duties prescribed by law; willfully misused, converted, or misappropriated, without authority, public property or public funds entrusted to or associated with the elective office to which the official has been elected or appointed. Discretionary performance of a lawful act or a prescribed duty shall not constitute a ground for recall of an elected public official. (Ga. Code §21-4-3(7) and 21-4-4(c))

    Kansas: Conviction for a felony, misconduct in office, incompetence, or failure to perform duties prescribed by law. No recall submitted to the voters shall be held void because of the insufficiency of the grounds, application, or petition by which the submission was procured. (KS Stat. §25-4301)

    Minnesota:  Serious malfeasance or nonfeasance during the term of office in the performance of the duties of the office or conviction during the term of office of a serious crime (Const. Art. VIII §6)

    Montana:  Physical or mental lack of fitness, incompetence, violation of oath of office, official misconduct, conviction of certain felony offenses (enumerated in Title 45). No person may be recalled for performing a mandatory duty of the office he holds or for not performing any act that, if performed, would subject him to prosecution for official misconduct. (Mont. Code §2-16-603)

    Rhode Island:  Authorized in the case of a general officer who has been indicted or informed against for a felony, convicted of a misdemeanor, or against whom a finding of probable cause of violation of the code of ethics has been made by the ethics commission (Const. Art. IV §1)

    Virginia:  Neglect of duty, misuse of office, or incompetence in the performance of duties when that neglect of duty, misuse of office, or incompetence in the performance of duties has a material adverse effect upon the conduct of the office, or upon conviction of a drug-related misdemeanor or a misdemeanor involving a "hate crime" (§24.2-233)

    Washington:  Commission of some act or acts of malfeasance or misfeasance while in office, or who has violation of oath of office (Const. Art. I §33)

    http://www.ncsl.org/legislatures-elections/elections/recall-of-state-officials.aspx

    Colorado – Const. Art. 21; Colo. Rev. Stat. §1-12-101 – 1-12-122, 23-17-120.5, 31-4-501 – 31-4-505."

    "Dissatisfaction sufficient grounds. Colorado is not a state in which official misconduct is necessarily required as a ground for recall.  Rather, the dissatisfaction, whatever the reason, of the electorate is sufficient to set the recall procedures in motion. Bernzen v. City of Boulder, 186 Colo. 81, 525 P.2d 416 (1974)."

    http://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/LawsRules/files/Colorado_US_Constitutions.pdf

    • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

      You're right, Algernon. This needs a constitutional fix. Republican candidates have the fear of a Tea Party candidate to keep them in fear, talking the conservative talking points, and toeing the chosen extremist party line.

      Democratic candidates and elected officials now have the fear of a recall to keep them in fear, talking the conservative talking points, (or keeping silent), and avoiding taking a stand on the extremist party line.

      If we believe in small-d democracy, we have to strictly define recall parameters to be only for criminal conduct or other malfeasance, not just "dissatisfaction".

  19. Danny the Red (hair)Danny the Red (hair) says:

    Welcome to the year round campaign people.  When will there be time for governing?

     

  20. nota33 says:

    Anyone can see that these right wing extremists are doing this recall because they want to take over the CO senate. These republican extremists cannot win in regular elections, so now they resort to recall elections where the turnout is usually much lower than in regular elections. This particular recall will be much harder than the Morse and Giron recalls. 25,000 signatures in 60 days is no easy task and the last time these wingnuts tried to get 18,000 signatures to recall Evie Hudak, they failed. For the Morse recall, the wingnuts got 16,000 signatures with 6000 signatures being thrown out.

  21. observe says:

    People have been suggesting the Hudak recall effort is just about one issue (guns). Don't be so sure. I've recently been around a number of SD 19 people and the complaints I've heard have been many, varied and not centered on guns.

    Coming to mind are:

    -Insensitive/insulting remarks to a witness during committee hearing

    -Supporting legislation far from campaign platform promises (sex ed standards that fly in face of many of her constituents, taking away from education time for eating, hammering schools with food requirements)

    -Supporting education tax measure that takes large $ from her home school district and sending to others

    -Not being well versed on the issues

    -Talking about supporting business and then supporting legislation that hinders business and hiring

    -The latest IPAD internet surfing thing. She said she does it to pay attention. She claims to be an education expert. An Arvdada resident wondered if she would recommend to all school children they should surf the internet/social media during classroom presentations. Isn't that the same?

     

    Based on those things that I've heard people in Arvada/Westminster say, I'm not convinved it's a "one issue recall movement."

    • DaftPunkDaftPunk says:

      Pure shill.

      Hudak's votes on sex ed legislation is exactly what she promised during her campaign.

      You may not like her positions on these issues, but she votes exactly how she campaigned.

    • Vote4thePeople says:

      hudak is a powerdrunk, egotistical slob (see also Jabba the Hutt) who looks down at EVERYONE else as inferior.  She is typical of dem politics.  Funny how the dems and libs profess to be highly educated, sophisticated and worldly……when their voter base is welfare and foodstamp "da baby mamas" looking for free cell phones…….LOL!

      • Republican 36 says:

        You obvioulsy don't know her.  I have for quite a few years and she always talks to me politely even when we disagree. You've posted a lot of comments on this thread today with very little evidence to back yourself up. Evidence please.

  22. mamajama55mamajama55 says:

    Ah yes. The old "some people say" argument. I actually agree with both you and Pols…it's not a one issue thing. It's a "take political power" thing.  

    Nice try on the "start smearing Hudak now".

    Which of the recall organizations do you work for, "Observe"? And, can you be specific on the legislative bills or witnesses you are referencing?

    Didn't think so.

  23. mamajama55mamajama55 says:

    Just a note on the whole "Evie Hudak surfs Facebook when she should be legislating" meme:

    I'm a Facebook friend of Evie's, have been since I was active in Jeffco politics years ago. What she posts to her FB followers are legislative updates, notes on community goings on, things that constituents would like to know: for example,

    Evie Hudak

    18 hours ago via Twitter

    Neighborhood mtg on flooding: Officials say you can't design ditch/canal to carry "that much storm water" (1400 cubic ft per second) #coleg
    Evie Hudak

    September 30 via Twitter

    Now at mtg of Police Officers' & Firefighters' Pension Reform Comm, which I was appointed to; meets 1x/yr overseeing pension plans. #coleg

     

    Hudak posts this kind of thing to followers and friends. Very few fluff posts. I think it's a legitimate use of social media.

  24. Vote4thePeople says:

    It was great to be at the Colorado Ski and Golf facility this weekend for my Epic pass and see the YELLOW SHIRTS lining the streets of Arvada collecting THOUSANDS of signatures to recall hudak.  Get ready dems……its going to happen!

  25. Hawkeye-X says:

    Vote4thePeople – sure – and we'll be throwing out all of the signatures.

     

    In the shredder where it belongs.

     

    Here's a free clue: Move north, and out of Colorado.

     

    Republicans are in line to lose this year, next year and for the next 200 generations.

     

    • Vote4thePeople says:

      I guess your post was written before the OBAMMYCARE MESS!  Better take a look at polling NOW! LOL  BTW there were plenty of valid signatures, and more than enough to scare DEMS into forcing Hudak the Hutt into resigning.

      Here is a free clue:  All indicators point to MASSIVE defeats for DEMS this year! What are you going to do when REPUBS control the senate?  Pray for more dem senators to retire? LOL  Then you can move EAST, far east, back to Iran where you can be ruled by a dictator, because all dems love dictators who lie to them, tell them what to think, how to act and what to do.  Just like little dem puppets.

  26. Vote4thePeople says:

    WOW! Supporters of Hudak the Hutt have now stooped to the lowest most desperate and disgusting level ever before seen in a political contest.  They have resorted to ILLEGAL robocalls to Arvada Westminster residents with a "Community Warning" urging them NOT to sign the LEGAL and LAWFUL petitions!  They are using FEAR and INTIMIDATION to ILLGALLY discourace people from signing the RECALL HUDAK the HUTT petition.  The only CRIMINAL is HUDAK the HUTT, with her browbeating of RAPE VICTIMS and allowing MOLESTERS and ABUSERS in Jeffco Schools.   I guess it should be no suprise that LIBERALS and PROGRESSIVE would resort to pathetic fear and intimidation tactics……They continue to show everyone they are the lowest of the low…taking their tactics right out of the obammy playbook….

  27. mamajama55mamajama55 says:

    OMFG. Weak Tea 4 the Peeps, shouldn't you be out holding a recall sign? Forging some sigs, maybe?

    • Vote4thePeople says:

      OMFG???????  Shouldnt you be on the phone trying to convince 5 million people who lost their health insurance, that obammycare is wonderful?  BTW how does if feel to have supported Hudak the Hutt, a criminal lover, a massive COWARD and a sleazy politician?  Didnt have the chops to face up to the voters and a certain recall? Where are all your pseudo intelligent comments about not having enough signatures?  Guess there were plenty to scare the crap out of the CO dem party! LOL  It really does not matter that Hudak took the COWARDS way out…..Dems have trapped and sunk themselves on obammycare, just like the 3rd class passengers on the Titanic!  2014 will be a REPUB year for sure!!!!

  28. Vote4thePeople says:

    I have to laugh at the utter hypocrisy, ultra partisan and myopic views of the liberals and progressives on this page.  Who in one breath call out voters (repubs) for orchestrating a LEGAL recall of Hudak. Calling it election via lawsuit, or calling people extremists, calling people names, etc. for using the LEGAL means to recall a bad politician.  Yet defend Hudak the Hutt in her using the LEGAL means of resigning, to ensure the seat remains under dem control.  At least the voters who wanted the recall were upfront and honest about why they were angry with the Hutt.  Hudak on the other hand shows exactly how dishonest, sleazy, unAmerican and utterly COWARDLY the dem party is.  She is such a coward, she could not handle the recall like an adult.  Thank the dems (again) for showing us just how low the lowest of the low can stoop.

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.