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%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
April 14, 2011 03:40 AM UTC

Attempt to Recall Nate Easley Fails. Badly.

  • 113 Comments
  • by: Middle of the Road

(Oh Lordy, that’s it? – promoted by Colorado Pols)

The attempt to gather enough signatures to force a recall of Nate Easley onto the ballot for a special election has failed.

The signatures needed: 5,363.

Signatures submitted: 5,899 (Not the “over 6,300” being claimed by DeFENSE.)

Signatures validated: 3283

For you number crunchers out there, that’s a 55% validity rate.

And for the kids of DPS, that’s a savings of $100 grand for your district that won’t be wasted on a recall that was never based on anything more than a grudge and a power grab.

Ed News has a copy up of the Clerk and Recorder’s letter to Mr. McBride. 2,603 signatures were invalid; 13 were excluded.

Tweet
Share

Comments

113 thoughts on “Attempt to Recall Nate Easley Fails. Badly.”

  1. As well as their past statements.

    They were obviously lying about the number of petitions gathered to try and get good press out of it. As I recall, they got the Denver paper to write that they got 6,300 signatures? Which, obviously, wasn’t true at all. Then they used that to attack Easley for how many more signatures they got than votes he did. It turns out that if their signatures were votes, I think they would have finished a solid 3rd or 4th in that election?

    But their dishonesty should also raise questions among the reporters they scammed about their campaign finances and the claims by Andrea Merida not to be involved. These people are dishonest…probably because they are wrong. They shouldn’t have been trusted before and they can’t be trusted now. Who knows what their next stunt will be, but Andrea Merida and her gang should be under a lot of scrutiny from now on.  

    1. On a local cesspool blog, they claimed over 5,000. At their super awesome press conference, they claimed they turned in “at least 6,000 signatures.”

      Apparently, they can’t count any better than they can tell the truth.

    2. Any support they gained by sensationalizing they probably lost.

      But hey, there is just this much more bad will on the Board to keep them fighting instead of focusing, you know, on the children they’re to be teaching.

    3. This is just a warm-up lap for the crap these groups are going to be slinging in the denver school board elections.

      And apparently I was wrong, they didn’t buy VAN access.

        1. To thank John McBride and all others involved in this recall for their astounding incompetence. From using spots for petitioning that are prone to low validity rates, not using VAN to check signature validity, using shady groups to keep money off the books, using race in campaign literature to smear Nate Easley’s reputation, claiming to have no expenses, not abiding by financial reporting requirements and then failing to even collect the required signatures; it’s really been a blast.  

  3. “People Power?”

    Maybe the people were turned off by slimeballs who refused to disclose where their money came from.

    Or maybe DefenseDenver was just wrong.

    The spin will be interesting.

    Like all spin, however, it will be complete bullshit.

    Easley recall: fail.

    Romies who never got over the primary:  go find another issue.  Or not, depending on how much you care about wasting taxpayer money to feed your bruised egos.  

    1. Because Democrats for Excellent Neighborhood School Education apparently needs to deeply involve themselves in sliming a mayoral candidate and whoring Guerin Green’s latest opus.  

      1. Unless he should somehow aspire to become Governor of Colorado, in which case I have the opportunity to care during the gubernatorial campaign.

        Perhaps they should go outside and play “hide and go fuck yourself.”

        Which would be about as productive.

        1. I know what you’re trying to do. 🙂

          (But if you want to post a video of a certain awesome explanation of a certain word, clearly I cannot stop you.)

      2. So help me God, if they make me defend GRUMBLE GRUMBLE GRUMBLE MUTINY MUTINY MUTINY.

        And McBride is considering a challenge. Based on what? He doesn’t know, but surely his paid circulators grassroots folks aren’t that inept. Anyway, Denver has plenty of cash and it’s not like the elections division is doing anything right now. It IS really important that his fifteen minutes of fame becomes twenty should have been constituents are heard from. Whether they like and support it or not.

        1. from McBride’s people powered organization. I hear Doug Bruce is about to have some free time. Perhaps he can offer his brilliant insight into even more ways to get around the system.

          And won’t it be a bright sunny day when DeFENSE finally figures out what they are and files…something…with someone…somewhere…

                    3. Look, wasting our government’s time on a recall petition we all know is a lie is not funny. Having two warring groups running our school board with a complete disregard for children – also not fucking funny.

                      A shady group calling attention to it all and turning would be supporters off, then bragging about it before and after a massive fail on their part is hilarious.

                      And I’m sorry, do you currently have children in DPS? If so, for how much longer? Tell me again why it matters while you’re at it. Or for the first time.

                      Before responding I’d appreciate if you’d read all the comments in this thread and the one you’re actually responding to very carefully. Try to stay on subject. Thanks.

      3. … are part of what has me liking Hancock. I’ve been torn between Hancock and Linkhart, and I have to admit that the Defense crowd’s love of Linkhart, and attacks on Hancock, tipped the scales for me. I hate to hold against Linkhart his supporters’ douchiness, because he seems like as good a guy as Merida/McBride are a-holes, but I’m afraid a Mayor Linkhart might give administration jobs to folks like that.

          1. for city council, county clerk etc., so I’d know which folks not to support.

            I hope Defense doesnt next  try to recall Suthers or Gessler because that might force me to support them. I I guess I’d call my group DeFENDeR (DEmocrats For Every Non-DouchEbag Rrpublican)

        2. between the DEFENSE crowd’s love of Linkhart and they’re recall of Easley is their adoration for Romanoff. The recall was an attempt to settle beef from the Senate primary, and Linkhart has the Romanoff campaign schtick down pat (even to the email list).

  4. Easley raised $20k for the campaign that won’t happen now. Is he allowed to transfer it to his next election bid?

    If not, or perhaps either way, I hope he donates it or something. Most of his donors had it to give. A homeless shelter/program for teenagers does not.

    1. but I know in Fort Collins we had a city councilwoman that was threatened with a recall and when that also failed, she was able to legally roll those donations into her race this spring. So I guess Nate should thank McBride, Take Back our Schools, DeFENSE and all of their unnamed friends for building his coffers and his donors’ list. Just one more super savvy move from the genius crowd.  

  5. The DeFENSE crazies never understood that they turned off many fellow liberals, like me, who are not at all convinced that reformist lunges in education are getting at the real problem. Maybe now I can listen to both sides without acting out a petty grudge match between friends?

    I also propose a new law. The “Donkeyass Corollary.”

    As an argument between Democrats on Colorado Pols grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Andrew Romanoff vs. Michael Bennet approaches 1.

    (hahahaha)

      2. I saw Mejia’s post as a mix of platitudes and “both sides have valid points” straddling. My view is close to that middle ground, but I like that Hancock, for example, expressed a view on the Montbello closing (he’s in favor) while Mejia seemed not to take a side, instead saying the “process” shouldve been better

        I  don’t mean to bash Mejia here. I like Mejia for other reasons, like his writeup of infill development (which seems well-informed, thoughtful, and a good mayoral focus), and his experience; he may be my second choice after Hancock now that I’ve soured a bit on Link; and  if the runoff is Romer/Mejia I’ll be an enthusiastic Mejia guy

        1. do not fall into either of the two categories that the more polarizing factions of those two groups love to toss everybody into.

          I appreciated the fact that he acknowledges that ideas of reform coming from both sides have merit. Because they do. And that falls more in line with my own beliefs. But for most people, it’s much easier to label someone which makes it much easier to dismiss everything they say. (You know–“corporate sellout”, “union hater”, “union lover,” “anti-reformist”–pick your phrase. I’ve been called them all.)

          Yeah, he definitely took the liberty of being vague. I’m with you on that. And I don’t see your comment as bashing at all. Pretty good insight, actually.

          1. Even the vague sits about right with me. The Mayor’s support is helpful, but not strictly necessary.

            We (completely general) keep addressing the issue as if they’re running for school board. They aren’t.

            Frankly, if any of the candidates had some magic solution for education, I wouldn’t support them. I’d support them for other things, loads of them, but not mayor. It’s just not the job description.

    2. Yeah, as a Romanoff supporter (though not a democrat) it has really annoyed me that any dissenting dem is automatically labled a “bitter Romie”.

      Please D’s. I’m begging you. Don’t become like the R’s, who reject any and all dissenting opinions and ostricize any person who stands up against someone who feels entitled to their position without earning it.

      Dissent and discussion are healthy. The R’s have mostly done away with it within their ranks. Please, please, please don’t follow suit.

      1. Hell, I have friends that went petitioning for the recall! In the stuff I wrote about it, I made sure not to mention the primary OR the education reform debate (what a can of worms!).

        As for ostracizing Romanoff supporters, how the hell would we win in 2012 without them? I’m going to enjoy watching the Rs fight it out in a primary while we are busy unifying.

         

  6. Sure drug a lot of fine people through the mud for your precious recall that failed out of the gate, eh Andrea Merida and the Progressive Juice/Squarestate crew?

    Fuck you. I hope none of you work in this town again, as the saying goes.

    2. Tho I’m not sure if that’s because theyre (1) in bed with the Defense a-holes or (2) a generally lame blog where only about 5 people participate

            1. Because while I dont go to SS a lot, I dont recall ever finding his own stuff annoying; it’s the others. Come to think of it, why is he there? He should join us here! If he’s there b/c like SS he fancies himself more progressive than the median Pols person… well, a lot of folks here are pretty lefty, despite the SS pretension that they alone are keeping the liberal flame flickering

          2. I didn’t know SquareState could actually get creepier after John Earhardt was banned, but it did.

            Fong’s disgusting promotion of Guerin Lee Green’s hit piece on MotR–as just one example–showed that isn’t a community who respects basic online values. It’s a device for power desperate, grudge-holding wannabes to think they have some kind of influence to make public asses of themselves.  

              1. … I’ve spent a fair bit of time there today & yesterday playing troll, calling out Fong & Co. on their obvious bullshit. And making fun of them for being the blog nobody reads. I can be kind of an asshole.

        2. Fong’s obvious hand in the recent outing of a Polster who had the audactity to disagree with her agenda has proven that she simply can’t be trusted to keep private the personal information her site users entrust to her.  

      2. “Grassroots Group Nearly Unseats Education Privatizer,” says the headline; apparently dEfEnSe “nearly unseated NE Denver’s School Board sellout Nate Easley,” and “Colorado’s education privatization bloc … took a major hit.”

        In other news: up is down; hot is cold; and a recall drive that collects barely half the number of signatures they need to even just get on the ballot “nearly” succeeds at “unseating” the target of the recall.

        1. were just as laughable. “Easley Recall Approved.” More respectable sites left in the “Petition.”

          Ah well, let them have the bullshit for breakfast they want. Even if they never have to choke on it, they’re still eating bullshit.

    1. The teacher’s unions are filled with wonderful, noble, selfless, dedicated teachers. The fact that a few crazies pretended to represent them then trashed their image, is not their fault.  

    1. And while I certainly cannot speak for him, I think if he were to comment he would express …. frustration or disappointment or anger that anyone who could have had time and resources to be part of a solution chose instead to be part of a problem. A problem of their own creating.  

      Not unlike the ill informed or even misinformed* who propose solutions in search of a problem, they created  a problem when they could have been creating solutions.

      ,

      *a great use of the word misinformed

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…

  11. Is this the group behind a robo call I just got about “watch for an important mailing about Debbie Ortega”??

    They did identify themselves, and I was not paying attention – so I cannot swear that it was this group.  I did not trip to the possibility until I read these posts.

    Who are these people??

    1. At least not the same group name. I got the robocall too. The robo-group was something like Citizens for Political Accountability or something like that.

  12. If a recall initiative fails, the new numbers become either really steep, or no one is allowed to recall at all (two questions then). In either case, does the attempt have to reach the ballot for that to kick in?

    What I’m asking is are we done with this crap, or will we see a resurgence? If they want to fight on the Board itself it’s disgusting, but fair enough. I don’t appreciate the wasted money for a political game.

      1. do you assert that Halliburtonizing the public schools is a win for the children?

        … Are you assuming the kids all own stock in Neil Bush’s “business” or something?

        1. you lost, in a fruitless idiotic power grab that had nothing to do with the welfare of DPS children.

          So fuck off.  You lost. And by the way, if I didn’t mention it before, fuck off.  

          Can you ” adduce ” that ?

          1. of America’s public schools has everything to do with the welfare of our kids, you half-witted proto-fascist lackey and/or flaming fucking sociopath.  

          2. Now we’re on to the projecting. Never a good sign. Let me translate the reply above this one, “You’re crazy and here’s a crazy rant to prove it. Because I know crazy. Crazy!”

            You can’t beat crazy. Well, a lack of registered voters signing a petition can, but not enough to keep it off a blog apparently. I’m finished. Are you finished? We’ll let them do crazy all by themselves. As one of the voters they hate so much, it seems only right.

            🙂

            “Proto-fascist lackey”? No need to stick a fork in it.

            1. It’s too bad you’ve been exploited by the Corporate Dem AstroTurf syndicate.  Hopefully you’ll realize the error of your ways at some point.  

          1. Halliburton nor arsonists in the public schools, and I have no connection whatever to McBride or DeFENSE.

            But I do believe you, Ralphie, when you say you’d trust the schools to Halliburton, because that would go hand-in-hand with the practice of leaching uranium into the public water supply for the sake of personal short-run gain.

            1. You’re on notice, quad. Unless you produce something to show that Ralphie has anything to do with what you allege, I will call on the dead govs to ban you.

                    3. You accused me of guilt by association — that I “chose an arsonist as [my] registered agent,” which is a patently false statement. If you try to hold me responsible for the actions of McBride and DeFENSE, neither of whom I have any connection with whatsoever, then it stands to reason that you would be willing to take responsibility for actions committed by people you’ve been professionally aligned with by working in the same industry, regardless of whether you actually condoned those actions or had anything directly to do with them.  

                      Speaking of libel, you would probably be well advised to stop flatly referring to McBride as an arsonist, as that is a very serious allegation and he was not convicted of it.

                    4. You have no fucking idea what I did for my last company, or for that matter, what the company itself did.

                      Quit throwing around libelous assertions.

                      And re: McBride and arson, see my comment above.  You’re right, he copped a plea.

                    5. other than throwing around reckless allegations yourself. Apparently my hypothetical analogy was effective in helping you recognize the error in your conduct. Good to see you’re now trying to clean up your act here a little, even if it’s only a perfunctory face-saving gesture.

                    6. and that everyone can seem them, right? It’s pretty stupid to deny something in the same thread you’ve written it twice.

                      There’s that projecting thing again.

                    7. He’s apparently smarting from an embarrassing defeat. He has to take it out on somebody.  Better me than he kicks the dog.

  14. I think this was probably the single most important, and most thought out bit of citizen journalism Pols has hosted. You’re awesome, Middle!

    1. She copied and pasted from the website of the corporate front group Education “News” Colorado.  And “Pols” reflexively frontpaged it because part of their corporate-funded mission is to facilitate the ongoing rape and pillage of America’s public school systems.

      This is not “journalism” any more than Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity constitute “journalism.”  

      Ari, how does it feel to be a corporate tool? Are you proud of that?

        1. don’t you have something else to do, like pumping uranium into our public water supply? Oh, maybe is business kinda slow these days since that little mishap in Japan a few weeks ago.

  15. It is ironic that a bunch of poodle trimmers are on here whining about recalls and Romanoff. You don’t have anything better to do, like poke a Pomeranian?  

    I find it fascinating that Democrats are crying that 60 members of the community, without any help from big money organizations, collected 5,899 signatures to recall a school board member who got 4,479 votes in the election that brought him to office.  Really?  This is what my party has come to?

    I am betting this is a group of people who couldn’t find 100 signature supporting a ban on child porn, mostly because the lot of you are too busy Bangin’ it to Bennet in your musty basements.  

    And, as for the $100,000 saved by DPS, what a bunch of fools you are.  $100,000 doesn’t even catch notice in DPS.  DPS had over $920 million in revenues last year. DPS just closed on $810 million in debt this week, the cost of which will be $1.9 billion over the next 30 years.  

    I know, I know, you Pol’sters don’t read the Denver Business Journal, right?  It is better to clean each others genitals on ColoradoPols than to pay attention to how your tax dollars are being spent.  And why?  Well, on ColoradoPols, you get to chant, We Love Michael Bennet over and over again. Let’s all do it together, now:

    We Love Michael Bennet!

    We Love Michael Bennet!

    And why do we love Michel Bennet?  Well, because Michael Bennet is so smart, he entered into a $750 million financing deal in 2008 while all of Wall Street was melting down, costing the Denver school district $136 million just to service the debt (no principal was paid off as part of this $136 million).  Even better, DPS got to pay roughly $50 million to refinance the debt 3 years later, while stacking another $110 million onto the original $750 million taken in 2008!  

    We love Michael Bennet!

    Thank God for Michael Bennet. We love him, and his side kicks Tom Boasberg and Nate Easley?  We love them all, right?

    Nate Easley couldn’t tell you what side of the budget is revenue vs. liability.  Nate Easley couldn’t be bothered to attend a community meeting with this constituents, unless of course, some rich guys from central Denver were going to write him a check.  

    Nate Easley did show up to meetings to take almost $40,000 from members of the Denver Scholarship Foundation’s Board of Directors to prevent people from signing a petition allowing the recall to happen. I wonder where that money came from?

    We Love Michael Bennet!

    And why do these people love Nate Easley so much?  Well, Nate Easley is the kind of guy who would never ask about Michael Bennet’s $810 million mistake.  

    And Tom Boasberg, Nate Easley’s employee?  Tom loves Nate, ’cause Nate’s out there sniffin’ Micheal’s ass like any good dog would, and smiling while Uncle Tom says he and Michael have decreased DPS’ dropout rate to 3% and increased graduation rates by 30% at the Denver Scholarship Foundation annual dinner.

    Wow, Bennet is a reformer, isn’t he? Say with me, Pol’sters, We Love Michael Bennet!

    Worse yet, this group of “pro-union” sympathizers actually expects DPS to enact school reforms that work, rather than reforms that have failed everywhere they’ve been enacted, like at North High School and Smiley Middle School. Further, the nasty sympathizers expect reforms that do not rely on school models that have never been proven, like SOAR Academy, which has no performance data yet, and DCIS K-8, which has never been tried.  

    Best yet, in far NE Denver, the DPS reformers will reenactment the play, Three Schools in One High School Building, which failed miserably at Manual HS.  This reenactment will now be played out on Montbello’s stage.

    We Love Michael Bennet!

    We love Michael Bennet!

    Mean while, back on the Liberal Ranch, the community actually has the audacity to believe its representatives should, well, er, represent. And because they believe this, the community actually had the audacity to implement the Colorado Constitution, which allows for the recall of representatives who don’t represent.  

    Middle of the Road my ass.  You Pol’sters are a bunch of wannabes pretending to be liberals on the backs of Denver’s kids.

    As for you, Middle ‘o the Road, until you get a job other than puttin’ curlers on poodles, stop surfing the political porn put on this website and go gin up some real business.

    2. You should fuck off, too.

      The majority of the posters, by my count, pissed off about the lie, like me, were Romanoff supporters. In fact, some of the larger Bennet supporters support the minority side of the Board now, but not the shady group delegitimizing their goals.

      So keep surfing that rift and making shit up. Killing time while complaining that others are killing time. It’s super effective! Everyone except the voters in Easley’s district are behind you. Congrats!

      And speaking of real jobs; any old writing does not make you a good journalist. No one’s scared of MotR, you just randomly felt compelled to “out” someone who’s not scared of you. Everyone’s buying it, you’re brilliant! Success!

    4. You mean these guys:


      DPS sells $396M in pension bonds

      Denver Business Journal

      Date: Tuesday, April 5, 2011, 6:09pm MDT

      The Denver Public Schools on Tuesday sold $396 million of pension bonds at better-than-expected interest rates, the district said in a press release.

      The district’s offering was oversubscribed by nearly two times, meaning market demand was almost twice as high as the sale amount, which helped lead to the lower rates.

      Under the pension financing, the district is converting about half of its $750 million in pension bonds to a fixed-rate structure and keeping half in a variable-rate mode.

      The district expects a total interest cost next year of about 7 percent on the combined fixed-rate and variable-rate debt. This is significantly below the 8.5 percent rate the district was paying to its pension fund before the original 2008 transaction, the district statement said.

      “This is very good news for our schools,” DPS Superintendent Tom Boasberg said in the release. “The high credit ratings have enabled us to enjoy lower interest rates, and these savings mean more dollars for our classrooms and our schools.”

      DPS estimates it will save about $10 million next year compared with what its costs were pre-2008. Those savings are inclusive of all fees and termination costs associated with converting half of the variable-rate debt to fixed rate, the district said.

    5. valid signatures : 3283

      “60 members of the community”

      Who? Why?  Did they all agree with John McBride’s stated reason about the conflict of interest that wasn’t?

      Did all 60 sign?  Oh, wait – they weren’t all from Denver were they?

      Who speaks for the 60? How do you decide it can be you?

      As for the the 2100 or so required signatures – why didn’t people sign? If the 60 moc were so motivated and correct, was it a messaging problem? Was it a timing issue? Was it the large megacorporate effort from Mr Easley?  Oh, that’s right, there were no crowds of anything out knocking on doors to oppose this.

      So with no opposition on the ground, the 60 moc, could get about 56% of the required signatures.

      Or about 55 signatures each.  I’ve gathered signatures (unpaid) before. 14 people got 54,000 in just over 5 months. Maybe we were really lucky (the concerts helped). Maybe everyone agreed with us. (they did- once we got on the ballot it passed 74-20 something)  Maybe something else.

      Why was it so hard to get another 2100 signatures?

      And what’s the point of coming on here to now to gloat about failing? And bashing Polsters?

      Whatever – I like Andrew Romanoff.

      I support public education.

      I support those who support public education.

      I want to understand the best way forward for DPS and other school districts.

      Good luck with your approach.  

      1. What my friend MADCO just said:

        Whatever – I like Andrew Romanoff.

        I support public education.

        I support those who support public education.

        I want to understand the best way forward for DPS and other school districts.

        Except that, your approach sucks ass; that more than anything is what caused your abject failure — you and your approach, you fuckng nasty moron.  But, good luck changing your shitty personality — luck won’t help your approach.

        P fucking S — I not only liked Andrew Romanoff, I also supported him too.  I’m not a fan of Bennet; I undervoted that race.  But, I’ll bet you the three of us — Romanoff, Bennet, and I — have at least one thing in common: none of us supported you assholes and your shady, underhanded power grab campaign.

        P fucking P S (see Droll, I’m educable) — I haven’t been around the blogs all that long, but the one thing I think I’ve learned is that if it’s an idea actively supported by the braintrust at your SS gulag, it’s pretty likely doomed to failure from the outset.  Not because it’s necessarily a bad idea, but because you folks are not the kind of people that are ever going to build anything that requires other folks’ buy-in or cooperation.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

58 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!