President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Kamala Harris
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) V. Archuleta
98%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Marshall Dawson
95%
5%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
50%
50%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(D) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank
(D) River Gassen
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) John Fabbricatore
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen
(R) Sergei Matveyuk
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
70%↑
30%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
June 01, 2011 09:07 PM UTC
44 Comments
hope the responses help. I didn’t see the option for corporate handmaiden though.
I can be rather detail-oriented . . .
Oh, I’m pretty sure you’ll guess which are mine. You DID give us “other” fields.
I appreciate the fact that, while I disagree with just about everything written here, it is well written. But what this blog needs is a credible conservative with permanent front page access. This should not simply be conservative leaning posts under the Colorado Pols name, as that will get confusing.
Perhaps if you could go back to a Republican and Democrat elected front page editor?
We’re talking about at least half, probably more than 50%, of Colorado’s population. It’s not affirmative action to fairly represent HALF the people.
We elect who we want.
Setting aside a position for a conservative quite possibly leaves a MORE qualified candidate unelected.
Free markets are good, now how about you forfeit your nonprofit status, start following Colorado election law and register as an issue committee!
1. you are incorrect on your advice
2. you are violating the law
If you are trying to equate Ralphie or Pols (your pronoun is not defined)with “clear the bench” you obviously missed that the whole point of “clear the bench” was an issue of clearing the bench–a specific identifiable issue on which they expended resources on.
Put your paper hat back on and stop trying to do job’s you are not qualified to do.
BTW since nobody listens to you I don’t really care if you are practicing law without a liscense.
2nd BTW exclamation points don’t make things any funnier or truer. (well I’m not sure about that–let me try–Mark G. is NOT a buffoon!!!!!!)
…the best election lawyer in the state? Would that make his comment okay and legal?
Do you have a posting “liscence [sic]”? If you’re going to talk smack, please proofread.
1. Sorry for the spelling errors. It happens frequently when I blog. More frequently when I am writing out of the office on a slow connection. But I’ll honest License is one of those words I always misspell and I don’t know why.
2. I am unaware of any “spelling” liscense or license for that matter. I’ll have to check in with DORA.
3. If Mark G. is Grueskin I’ll eat my hat. Grueskin is a good lawyer and certainly has the best reputation in the state for campaign finance, Mark G. on the other hand has a wholly different reputation.
4. If it is Grueskin, I would be more concerned. It certainly would be legal for him to offer advice, but it still would have been incorrect. Since this is a public forum I doubt that the advice would rise to attorney-client relationship formation, so his malpractice carrier would be in the clear. My concern would be Rule 1.1: competence and it would call in to question that “best election lawyer in the state” thing.
…”standard” spelling is sort of language fascism. I’m interested in DORA’s reply, we just might have to wait six to eight weeks. You’re correct; Marky Mark is clearly not Grue, Esq. I was being a little “sarcastical,” a shame they don’t have a font for that. Good to see you know your way around the Colorado Rules of Pro Conduct…though it suggests you’re an attorney yourself, which is a fate I’d wish on no one.
By starting a rumor that will come up in Internet searches for the lawyer’s name?
Also, I think we can safely say Mark G. isn’t who you’re suggesting he might be, since you haven’t been banned yet.
…are you trying to get back at me for the time I called you out on the foolishness of your comment concerning Mejia’s supposed disinterest in mayoral endorsement? Methinks she doth protest too much. Because I was obviously praising the real-life attorney, not trying to slander him. He is a public figure and can take the label of “best election lawyer” on an inter-web blog.
Are you trying to detract from the illustrative example of ludicrous, Glenn Beck style ‘what-ifs?’
I suspect the real-life attorney would be entertained more than anything, but nobody accused hypothetical trolls of being smart–just malicious.
And I make no apologies for being shocked when James endorsed. I think everyone was, James genuinely included. I’ve spoken to him since and I believe he did it for reasons that I can at least understand, and they don’t involve being able to “write his own job description.” They involve being able to implement some of his most important policies.
But I’m glad I made such an impression on you, all those posts ago.
And I’m not a political committee.
I’m an individual exercising his First-Amendment right to express my opinions.
And I derive a great deal of guilty pleasure from reading your posts here on Colorado Pols, much the same as when I occasionally slow down to rubberneck a serious, gory car wreck.
Keep ’em coming, Mark G.
But not, apparently, 50% of the CoPols participants.
Extending your logic to other “elections” seems like we should have about a D/R 50/50 split of Representatives.
And school boards. And … I could go on, but I think you see that your suggestion is ridiculous. How many progressive voices have permanent front page access to any of the many R leaning websites?
Nice try.
Here’s an idea: nominate an R, get that nominee elected. Oh, and quit whining. (Is there a chance you owe me $50?)
It’s fun watching him argue against conservative principles just to try to get what he wants.
Hypocrite.
I think there’s a substantial lefty majority among active users. Wouldn’t Pols be fairer to represent its users, not a demographic that by and large does NOT have any stake in its services?
I mean, by that logic we should always elect Democrats president because, worldwide, polls tend to show that the international community supports American Democrats over American Republicans. We’d be fairly representing a LOT more than half the people in the world to simply never elect another Republican to national office.
Unfortunately, the international community can’t vote–and the Coloradoans who don’t use pols don’t have a vote here.
oh…please, Lord, let it be so.
Oh, I get it . . . NITBAFS, huh?
Let’s see 776,217 divided by 5,025,000 . . . carry the twelve,. . . multiply by Pi, . . . adjust for declination . . . Well, I’ll be hornswaggled, that’s nearly 120.7357%!!!
(Hell, I’m 5.3 Republicans all my little ole’ self — good info ArapaGOP.)
http://www.sos.state.co.us/pub…
http://www.bing.com/apps/geogr…
The number of Far Left, Left, and left leaning posters on this site is far greater than the number of Far Right, Right, and Right Leaning posters on this site.
Unless you are volunteering to do this full time, in which case I might suggest that we find you a job, then the likelihood of getting someone on the right to volunteer to be a FPE all the time is pretty low.
Besides, would you really want Libby to have that much power?
.
extreme far left radical
AND
Trotskyite.
But this is a community where even I get treated with a measure or respect.
AGOP, U don’t need the support of an echo chamber. Do your worst/best, let the chips fall in your soup, or wherever.
.
And a number of us on the left side of the discussion have advocated for that over time.
But you can help all on your own. Write diaries worth promoting (there’s some guidelines around here somewhere), and I’m guessing the current FP editors will promote them. They’re generally pretty good about that.
I do think Pols needs to go back to having an election for a front page poster from the right and from the left. It would bring some balance to this blog and that can’t be a bad thing.
Permanent front page access is nonsense. Having new FPers every six months gives this blog some well needed fresh perspective.
If you want permanent front page access on a conservative blog, perhaps you should start your own.
It used to be that the dead guvs did include a more conservative voice, and that person did have “permanent” FP access. Haven’t seen evidence that that’s still the case, but it’s probably not the fault of the current guvs.
We had a hard time finding people on each side of the aisle who could/would commit to being Front Page posters. We’d announce someone, and then they’d leave or they would rarely post. It was more of a pain in the ass than it was worth, but that was several years ago. Maybe it would be easier now?
Small guvmint! Guns! <– (Wait, that sounds too much like the real me) Pro life! Unborn holocaust! Property rights! I got mine!
but I seriously doubt a Repub’s opinion would be anymore welcome by most Polsters than one of the faithful Progressives on Pols arguing a point at a Tea Party/Conservative Caucus meeting in Mesa County.
My problem with most of the conservative voices on this blog is often my problem with some of the furthest leaning (and why, presumably, I’m often drawn into arguments and then called Republican – this doesn’t happen to me anywhere else): Too many of the statements start with a lie.
I believe many people on this blog have traditional conservative views, or are closet libertarians. But since so few Republicans are for things like smaller government and fiscal conservancy, it makes it hard to identify with them as a group.
Let’s take Libertad as a quick example, his posts on Obama’s approval ratings. Most of us don’t give a rat’s ass about his current numbers. On any given day I’d say many of us would rate his performance from 2% approval to 98%. The reason everyone jumps to Obama’s defense isn’t because we care about the numbers, or think he’s super fantastic all the time, it’s because we care about the lie.
I think you’re allowing a handful of posters who have clearly… disappointed(?) you in the past color the entire site. Or so I think. I’ve always enjoyed our sane-ish conservatives when we have them. I adore BX on military information, I miss Haners and Laughing Boy, and that new guy, what’s his name, Ellbee, or something (so hard to remember), I even occasionally appreciate him/her. I like sources and I more often than not come here to learn the nitty gritty of an issue I see for :15 on the news. That’s usually better with a different perspective that inspires PR (for instance) to post facty stuff. Makes for a good back and forth and a happy me.
was, “Why do you spend time on Pols when you could be on another blog?”
For me, it’s integrity. I’ve seen Pols enforce rules the same for everyone; I’ve seen libs and cons kicked off for breaking rules here. Although I have not always agreed with the interpretation of a rule (only one incident in all the years of reading here), I know the decisions are always made in good faith. If I chose to have a secret identity, I have no fears Pols would go to the wall to protect it, no matter what kind of posts I make. On another blog, people are outed left and right, based on whether or not one of the editors personally likes them or their politics. Unacceptable.
Thank you for making this a safe site, Pols. I appreciate it.
That is what keeps me coming back. Anonymity, the reliability of the information, the quality of writing and the awesomeness of snark.
Now, is there anyone or anything preventing right wing crazies from posting here? I didn’t think so. The problem is that right wing crazies are spoiled. They are used to certain cable new shows and 80+ hours of local talk radio that never questions facts or assumption of the right. So when confronted, the right wing crazies run away from this blog.
Or, scream “no fair.”
On local right wing talk radio, as I may have mentioned once or twice, “lefties” are not allowed on or are allowed on briefly and then attacked, ridiculed and hung up on. It is real hard to lie on this blog, because people call you on it. It is real hard to tell the truth on right wing media, because the truth is not allowed.
the “I agree with NancyCronk” in print until I noticed how you spelled my name. lol (Perhaps you are helping me maintain my true identity?)
My eyes are going. Then what?
Trust me, I am not that clever by half. I meant you and I did mean it as a compliment.
There was a study a few years back that looked at personality traits among liberals and conservatives, and it found that conservatives were much less likely to put any information online — including online shopping. That’s probably one of the main reasons that a conservative Colorado blog has never taken hold; many have come and gone over time, but there has never been a right-wing blog that is the obvious leader in Colorado.
In this case. (Honestly asking, you made me curious.)
Half-price lobbying services. Buy one politician, get one free. Something like that.
I’d like a judge and wouldn’t know how to go about it. Here’s a need, they’re stupid not to fill it. And a coupon (groupon?) would be a great motivator.
Politicians, lobbyists, judges, every elected official must go!