U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Joe Neguse
(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) A. Gonzalez
(D) George Stern
(R) Sheri Davis
50%↑
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%
March 26, 2010 11:42 PM UTC
41 Comments
if the article is accurate.
what’s the difference?
We do read these things before we post them, but thanks, and we’re not editing our title.
I thought the poster made a valid point, thus earning much rebuke!
She’s family. We joke.
In the Sister Sledge sense or the Charles Manson sense?
I joke because I’m new!
and gets checks from Soros.
BTW my check is late this month.
about it.
A delightful word, isn’t it?
It’s far more useful.
Oh Indeed!
to hear it from an Alaska Republican. Isn’t that an elitist, latte and chardonnay sipping, bi-coastal, liberal Democrat word? Are you allowed to use that kind of language in Sarah Palin’s state?
from elementary school teachers, at a regular old public school. It’s a great word, and it’s a bit old fashioned, but I think of it more like “cantankerous,” which is not an elitist word.
Because everyone loves facebook groups!
When does Stan have to get in and get the petition process done? I forget the timelines.
Kirk does have the caucus support… so he better hurry to get in but no one knows what the hell Kirk is doing besides posting on FB.
What he does or doesn’t do is irrelevant — whether Garnett runs or not.
I understand Iowa Caucus, Colorado Caucus rules baffle me sometimes. Does that mean his caucus support is now null and void?
I would hope he’s stop running if Garnett steps in but I doubt he would provide more than a speed bump if he did not move aside.
Kirk is a very nice guy but is doing about everything wrong running for office.
For down-ticket races like that, caucus support is pretty much entirely theoretical until the state assembly. Whoever gets in the AG race has some time to decide. (And Garnett isn’t the only one contemplating it.)
Needs only to inform the Chair of the State Party 10 days prior to the State Assembly they wish to put their name in nomination. That would be by May 13th. They then need one delegate to the state assembly to nominate them and at least 30% of the delegates to vote for them to put their name on the primary ballot.
If they choose to petition instead, they will need 1500 signatures from each of the 7 congressional districts. The first day they collect signatures in this Monday (March 29th) and they would have to be submitted by May 27th.
This time perord by the way is the same for all partisan offices toplace their name on the primary.
I think you have to be an attorney licensed to practice in Colorado. For any other office the only requirements are an age minimum and a pulse.
District offices also have a residency requirement. Partisan offices have a requirement of how long one must be affiliated with the party.
have to swear fealty to TABOR and pledge to repeal Obamacare.
Unless he sees a competitive primary, in which case he’ll bow out so the other person can concentrate on the general.
if Kirk Nemer stays in the race? Really?
Are you basing your conclusions on anything other than a restatement of the blindingly obvious?
I’m don’t know if Kirk Nemer would count as competitive.
Kirk is a great guy but he’s not raising money and I keep harping on all of these folks if you are not spending 60% of your day raising money… go run for dog catcher.
Folks, you cannot win with warm fuzzy feelings, blog postins and facebook fan pages. :cough: Steve Harvey, Kirk Nemer, Bill Winter, Fern O’brien, Ect Ect. Go raise some damn money.
money is bad
money is unnecessary.
Money isn’t how campaigns are won – it’s …. well, it’s …. good ideas and… knocking on doors…. and you know, stiff.
You still have to knock doors and have a message but if you have no money to get it out there… there is only so much you can do waving a home made yard sign and yelling real loud.
I forgot yard signs – or yards sign for the budget
The ultimate goal, as far as I’m concerned, is to move the social institutional landscape, whether more locally or more globally (or both), in the direction of greater efficiency/robustness, sustainability, and fairness.
Everything else is subordinate to that goal. Other goals in pursuit of it are intermediate goals; means, not ends.
In pursuing those means, a person focused on the ends might consider probabilities of various outcomes, and what investment of time and effort, all things considered, best serves the ultimate ends.
In order to move my district in the direction that I think serves the ultimate ends, I am investing my time and effort in a variety of enterprises, such as, for instance, establishing a robust non-partisan community organization whose first project is to establish a volunteer mentoring and tutoring program for South Jeffco kids. That helps move my district in the direction that I think it needs to go, helps create a context for further improvement, and helps improve Democratic chances of electoral victory in this election cycle or in some future election cycle.
Winning in 2010 is not my monomaniacal priority, and never has been. Making marginal contributions to the improvement of the quality of life in my community, in my state, in my nation, and in my world, is. Running for office is just one iron in the fire in that more comprehensive enterprise, an iron which serves the ultimate ends in a variety of ways rather than in just one way.
Most of my investments in time and energy vis-a-vis that iron (the campaign) are investments that serve dual purposes rather than the single purpose of electoral victory. Given a complete consideration of probabilities, and of what needs to happen to change the local political-cultural landscape in my district in ways such that a Democratic electoral victory can at some point in the not-too-distant future occur in my district, I think my strategy is the best one.
Even narrowing the scope of discussion to turning HD 28 blue, just playing the traditional electoral game in my district is not a winning strategy, no matter how you cut it up and slice it. It may be in the next election cycle, or the one after that.
I get that the cognitive framework of political wonks is to reduce everything to candidates, races, bills, and other components of the political process. That’s natural, and, to some extent, useful.
But, as I argued to Barron X in another context not long ago, our compartmentalizations of reality need always to serve our more holistic understandings and goals, not to displace them.
Stan is very electable, and our best shot of taking that post. He’s well respected in the legal community and plenty of connections to be able to raise $ quickly, this would be a very competitive race. Its time for a Dem to step up to the challenge!
Isn’t AG kind of like taking your cousin to the prom? It’s a date, but you wouldn’t brag about it… (except maybe Steve!)
Tell that to
Attorney GeneralUS SenatorInterior Secretary
1st Go-To name when Ritter retired
Ken Salazar
and Gale Norton got promoted out of the job, but I can’t really say I recognize any of those other names on the long list.
Garnett is by far and away the best person the Democrats could put up against Suthers. He is very smart, articulate, well-connected to money, hard working and very likable. He did a great job as President of the Boulder Valley School Board, taking on tough issues, and while not making everyone happy, dealing with them in a constructive and effective way. I have to believe that Suthers is very uncomfortable with the thought of a Garnett candidacy. It will mean the Republicans have to spend more time and money on this race instead of only the race for Governor and Senate – and the state legislature for redistrictricting. I still think Stan will have a tough road ahead of him because of his lack of name id, but that’s something that money can buy.
I hope he goes for it. He’ll be a great Boulder DA but Colorado needs him more.
Do it Stanley!!