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
(R) Jeff Hurd
(D) Adam Frisch
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
52%↑
48%↓
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
March 21, 2023 09:42 AM UTC
11 Comments
Welcome, Birdie Roja. Thanks for pointing out the biased coverage of Leslie Herod….no other candidate for Mayor has facd this kind of scrutiny or accusations- and I’d guess that many of the candidates have had occasional problems with their staff. Wanda James’ op ed delineated that precisely.
I’m curious about specific criticisms of Trinidad Rodriguez- I didn’t see anything too objectionable on his website, although I’m supporting another candidate. Is it that he implies all Latine people deal with addiction, crime, and gangs?
This goes for others, as well- what did Johnston or Hansen do / not do?
My litmus test with mayoral candidates is that I want to know specific policies on affordable housing and homelessness. Will the candidate stand up to thereal estate lobby, or not? Are they in favor of an “ out of sight, out of mind” policy to “ clean the streets” of homeless people?
Perhaps your "litmus tests" might include a general cleanout of the homeless advocacy community.
I met people from that community a quarter century ago. There are more homeless people than ever and they still have their cushy jobs.
I think you might be missing a little bit of the big picture, CHB.
There are societal factors in the worsening of the homelessness problem. The people I work with, many of whom have been homeless, say that addiction and substance abuse accounts for about 40% of the problem. If people aren’t addicted when they land on the streets, being on the streets will introduce them to addictive drugs.
About 10% have serious mental health issues as well. The remaining half are there because of a combination of bad luck, high rents, low wages, and societal factors that people in those “cushy jobs“ have no control over.
Denver actually hd a relatively successful program to address homelessness in 2021. It combined “ housing first” and wrap-around sicial seevices that followed clients ovee time. I haven’t seen if tat program got funded again, and none of themayoral candidates are mentioning it.
Do remember that I worked in social services and had a fair number of homeless individuals in my various caseloads. Yes, mental health is an issue. But it was a rare client that so whacked out that they didn't know up from down; or right from wrong.
A basic problem is how to deal with the clientele that prefers the "freedom and independence" of living on the streets. No one really talks about that either.
I don’t live in Denver and I don’t know who I might vote for, but if I did I do know for certain who I wouldn’t vote for: anyone who claims the problem of homelessness is so simple as to have “a solution”; anyone who thinks I’m so simple as to believe that there is “a solution” to the homelessness problem; and certainly not anyone who claims they know or have “the solution” to the homelessness problem.
I would consider voting for someone who believably promises to thoughtfully work on ways to deal with all of the many difficult issues, and who is also believably willing to thoughtfully consider those difficult and unpopular proposals to mitigate the many and varied causes of the problem and not just the effects.
Great Op-Ed by Wanda…and Dead. Spot. On.
When I read the article I didn't appreciate the "servitude" line due to the correlation with slavery in describing the behavior of a women of color- it was tone-deaf and offensive. However, I've also heard from senior state staffers, including women of color, that have corroborated the reporting that Herod is awful to work for. She belittles subordinates, has no respect for them, and has been described as a screamer in meetings behind closed doors. So there's that. It's lousy reporting that relies on racial tropes, but the fundamental premise, that Herod is a toxic manager, isn't inaccurate.
Hansen is a back-stabbing son of a bitch who speaks out of both sides of his mouth and whose career should stop at his little renewable energy think-tank with its myopic focus on energy markets as the magical remedy to guide the energy transition in the west.
"Hansen is a back-stabbing son of a bitch who speaks out of both sides of his mouth"
So in other words, an average, moderately effective politician?
I ask the question yet again: why is that only women politicians are considered mean, nasty and abusive while similarly acting men are considered demanding?
I’m not so sure “back-stabbing son of a bitch who speaks out of both sides of his mouth” would be considered a strong recommendation by all that many “average, moderately effective” men?
Your larger point, however, is a valid one.
Those men are arrogant assholes who couldn't manage their way out of a paper bag. Yellers, regardless of gender, are terrible managers.
With 16 candidates, the next mayor of Denver will be one of the top two in the first round. I’ve heard several people guess the top two will attract 15% or less of the relatively small number of votes in the election ending April 4. So, small margins can make a difference,
I’d guess that many who might be swayed against Herod by stories of “she’s mean to staffers” would not have supported Ms. Herod anyway, so she’s not likely to lose many voters. On the other hand, one likely impact would be to make some MORE likely to take the time to vote in order to “vindicate” her.
The things this election (and the previous mayoral elections I’ve experienced) has convinced me —
* qualifying as a candidate for mayor by getting 300 signatures is a ludicrously low bar. There are about 450,000 registered voters in Denver. So, we insist on a candidate getting 0.067%, or 1/1500th of the electorate to back him, her, or them.
* “nonpartisan” elections deny casual voters a crucial data point and limit more engaged voters from having a demonstration of strength within an established community.
* having an election in April and a run-off in June diminishes participation, reducing opportunities for development of positive ties between community members and the eventual mayor.
* Ranked choice voting or acceptance voting would be a better way to gain a mayor with a mandate instead of a “survivor” of the first round being voted as “well, better than the other candidate.”