Attorney General Field Finalized

Democratic Attorney General candidate Phil Weiser

The Colorado Secretary of State’s office today made its final announcement on the validation of petition signatures for candidates seeking to get their name on the June Primary ballot, and the big news is that the ballot for Attorney General is now complete.

Democrat Brad Levin failed to collect enough petition signatures to make the Primary ballot, and Democrat Amy Padden withdrew from the race before an announcement could be made on the validity of her signatures. The Democratic Primary for Attorney General will be between Phil Weiser and Joe Salazar, with the winner moving on to face Republican George Brauchler in November.


24 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. Mike W. says:

    Probably would've voted for Amy myself, not sold on either Weiser or Salazar for the primary.

  2. VoyageurVoyageur says:

    Like Mike said.  Amy seemed like a good candidate who started much too late.  That said, Weiser certainly seems well qualified.

  3. Gilpin Guy says:

    I've met Phil Weiser and he's no Cindy Coffman.

  4. JohnInDenver says:

    Amy Padden's resume impressed me. The couple of things I'd read on line about her time with US Attorney tasks made her seem like a solid candidate, perhaps the best prepared for the administrative side of the job.

    Hope she finds other ways to serve and develop the political chops needed for a future high profile run.

  5. mamajama55mamajama55 says:

    Pol's tacit endorsement of Phil Weisser seems biased. There is no picture and barely a mention of Joe Salazar, the other Democratic AG candidate, and the Big Line has been dismissive of Salazar in the past. Pols does not mention, when discussing how the AG field has been "finalized", that Salazar demonstrated solid (37%) support among delegates at the state assembly, and is polling (per Magellan) +29% against other AG candidates in the primary.

    So let me fix that bias for you, Pols.  Representative Joe Salazar (photo, below from @JoeforCOAG ) is the candidate most Democratic Coloradans want representing them as AG because of his proven track record of fighting effectively for them in the state legislature.

    Joe has introduced laws that have passed with bipartisan support to protect Coloradans from discrimination, unconstitutional incarceration because of national origin. His long years as a civil rights attorney are reflected in his legislative accomplishments. People know that. They trust that.

    He has also worked to limit the encroachment of the private prison industry on union jobs in Colorado, and to help mentally ill people not be further brutalized by the prison system.
    His record of protecting people from harm by overreach of the government or the oil and gas industry speaks for itself.

    He has been out there on the streets with ADAPT, with immigrants, with women fighting back against harassment, and for reproductive choice.  He is pro-cannabis and has spoken out against Jeff Sessions' implied threat to our state cannabis industries.

    North East Colorado Democrats Candidate Forums – Forum 3 – Colorado Attorney General Candidates from Craig Stevens on Vimeo.

    See for yourself how the two surviving AG candidates present: Most would say that Weiser is cool and cerebral, knowledgeable, competent, a good lawyer to hire if you can afford his rates.

    Joe, on the other hand, is your neighbor, scrappy, friendly, straightforward, relatable.

    Salazar has deep roots and support in rural Colorado, and with Latino and voters of color, which Weiser doesn't necessarily have, judging by the Magellan poll cited above.

    Phil Weiser would be an OK AG.  He would, of course, be better than Coffman.

    But in this political climate, we need a fighter. And that's Joseph Salazar.

    • spaceman65 says:

      I prefer an off-the-charts smart AG.  That's not Salazar.  In my view, which includes lots of dealings with the AG's office, Phil is the better choice.  But if Joe wins the nomination, I'll gladly support him.  Anyone but Brauchler.  Hell, I'd prefer Coffman to him.

    • RepealAndReplace says:

      In this climate,  we need someone electable. Like Weiser. 

    • Diogenesdemar says:

      “cool and cerebral, knowledgeable, competent, a good lawyer to hire if you can afford his rates.”


      “your neighbor, scrappy, friendly, straightforward, relatable.”

      I’ve honestly got no set opinion of either at this point yet, but, if I ever do need to hire a good attorney, I’m most likely to hire the “good attorney” over my scrappy “neighbor” almost always.  


      • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

        Valid point. I should have written, “if your scrappy, friendly neighbor was also a sharp, renowned civil rights attorney with a record of winning cases.”

        Joe started his career as a civil rights and criminal investigator for the State of Colorado, working for the Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies in the civil rights division and division of insurance. He left the division of insurance to attend law school at the University of Denver College of Law, where he became a founding member of the American Bar Association, Law Student Division, and a member of the Native American Law Student and Latino Law Student Associations.

        After law school Joe started his own firm focusing on cases involving employment law, civil rights, constitutional law and federal Indian law. He has successfully taken on many cases involving employment and constitutional issues, and was recognized by the publication Super Lawyers as a rising star in the area of civil rights and constitutional law.

        Not to sell Joe short….


  6. flatiron says:

    Question is which one can beat Brauchler and Weiser comes across as the one with more statewide appeal. I think other Dems have the same concern or Weiser would not have won over 50% support in the assembly among a group of sympathetic activists

    • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

      This may shock you, but party activists are not always good predictors of what the electorate will think. Ask Senators Romanoff and Miles.

      A better predictor of the general election: Salazar led by 29%, per Magellan poll of 410 Democratic and unaffiliated voters.

      • VoyageurVoyageur says:

        The same poll suggested voters confused him with ken salazar or john salazar.  When assembly democrats figured out who he was, support for him dropped like a rock.

        • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

          Shot up like a rocket, more like. From zero to 38% in 6 months.
          If you read the detailed crosstabs on the Magellan poll,  you would notice that most Latino voters (like 51%) polled preferred Salazar. And if you were getting around and knocking on doors in your precinct, as I have, you would know that one of the strongest  Democratic demographic groups these days are voters of color.

          Ignore these voters at your peril. Also not a great idea to condescend to them, or infer  that they are too stupid to tell one Salazar from another.

          A more likely possibility is that they know that he is part of that political Salazar family, and that this adds to his appeal. "He / she comes from a fine family" is one of the most solid recommendations you will hear outside of urban areas.

          It's also likely that someone they know has benefited from Joe's civil rights advocacy as a civil rights attorney for the last fifteen years. He is well known in the community.

          To quote in context from that Magellan poll you're fond of:

          Observations of the Colorado Attorney General Democrat Primary Ballot Test

          State Representative Joe Salazar currently leads the three other candidates in the Democratic nomination for Attorney General by 29 points, with 51% of likely voters being undecided. For many political observers in Colorado, this ballot test finding will generate questions about how well informed Democrat primary voters are about Joe Salazar. It is reasonable to wonder if Joe Salazar’s support is based upon a misperception that he is former U.S. Senator Ken Salazar, or his brother former Congressman John Salazar.

          However, regardless of any misperceptions about voters knowing who Joe Salazar is, the state legislator has a very strong image rating. Among all respondents, 44% have a favorable opinion of him and only 5% having an unfavorable opinion of him. The other three candidates for the nomination are completely unknown, with an average of 80% of respondents having never heard of any of them. The bottom line is it will be very difficult and expensive for any of the opposing candidates to clarify who Joe Salazar is and then convince them they are the better choice. (emphasis mine)

          So good luck being Phil Weiser and running some version of "I'm just telling you, since you were too stupid to  figure it out on your own, that he's not Ken or John Salazar".

          That's pretty likely to piss people off mightily. So GLWT.


          • VoyageurVoyageur says:

            I can always tell when you're getting desperate by the fury with which you throw the race card on the table.  I wasn't the one who suggested voters in the Magellan poll were confusing joe Salazar with the better known Ken and John, it was the pollsters themselves.  You loved the poll when you could spin it your way.  You hate it when it offers an exlanation for why your candidate dropped like a rock when people 

            Looked at the rivals on the same stage.   Ohh, you claim–in An obvious bid for the Moddy Rationalization trophy — my candidate  got 38 percent.

            Earth to Moddy — err, MJ.  Your man led Wizer by 29 points in the poll — and then lost to him by 16 points at the convention.  That's a loss of 45 points between the two events!

            A 45 point drop.

            Did I mention that is a 45 point drop?

            You were ahead by 29.

            Now, you are behind by 16.

            29 plus 16 is 45.

            So you dropped 45 points when people figured out that your candidate ain't ken or joe.

            Did I mention that you dropped 45 points?

            Ohh, I did.


            Well, somebody had to give you the news.

            • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

              "The race card"? Really, V? Who writes your talking points, anyway?

              51% of Joe Salazar's unaffiliated and Democratic supporters in the Magellan poll were Hispanic. That's a fact. You want to imply that they're all ignorant dupes (as the pollster "wondered")….well,  the implications are obvious. And my point was that this would also be a bad look for Weiser. Which is also what Magellan said.

              Most of us exist in a nuanced universe in which the same person, or polling firm, can be right about one thing….and wrong about something else.  I assume Magellan did their polling honestly, and reported it honestly. It's their editorializing about the implications that I question.

              Magellan polled unaffiliated and Democratic registered voters. Another fact. Not the same people as the party regulars who attended the assembly. However, you want to conflate the two, go for it.

              I can tell where this is headed –  you've already started insulting me by comparing me to our favorite troll. 

              So it's probably best for me to abandon this "conversation". Go ahead, keep on insulting me. It's what you do. It won't make your preferred candidate any more appealing, or your talking points any more cogent, but you do seem to enjoy it.

              For myself, I'll debate people who don't go immediately to ad hominem attacks to make their points.  (That's most normal Polsters, by the way).

              • VoyageurVoyageur says:

                Basically, you spent your last post implying that anyone who didn't support your candidate was racist and anyone who thought Latino voters might have confused Joe with Ken or John Salazar

                 was racist.  I called you on it.  Whereupon, after having reviled everyone who didn't back your candidate as racist, you accused me of making an ad hominem argument!


                The fact remains that your candidate lost 46 points. — 46 points! — between the poll and the assembly . Yeah, that suggests a lot of people polled were confused about which Salazar was which.

                And when faced between the real Salazar, a competent but hardly outstanding legislator, and a tru
                Ly fine legal mind, most democrats opted for the latter.
                Maybe some day you will stop screaming that everyone who disagrees with your often extreme views is a racist.
                Or maybe you won’t.
                Sorry if I don’t much care any more. You’ve cried wolf and racist so often it’s just boring.

  7. katdal says:

    I have met Phil Weiser on several occasions and hosted a meet and greet for him as he traveled to all 64 counties. I have been so impressed with his knowledge of what Colorado needs and his ability to articulate what he will do for Colorado. He is also extremely qualified and easy to approach. I do not know Joe Salazar and will support him if he is the nominee, but I urge people to continue to get to know Phil.

  8. PseudonymousPseudonymous says:

    Speaking of "not backing away from a fight."

    Attorney general candidate sues the secretary of state over rejected voter signatures

    The secretary of state’s office announced on Tuesday that [candidate Brad] Levin was out of the race after about 7,017 of his 15,996 voter signatures were rejected, leaving him short of the 1,500 signatures needed in five of the state’s seven congressional districts.

    Levin says about 3,400 of those signatures were tossed out because of scanning errors or because the secretary of state’s office did not take the required steps to verify them. In some cases, he said, signatures were rejected for no apparent reason at all.

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.