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) Michael Bennet
50%
50%
50%
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Jena Griswold
(D) Brian Mason
60%↑
30%↑
20%↓
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) Manny Rutinel
(D) Yadira Caraveo
45%↓
40%↑
30%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
May 04, 2010 05:05 PM UTC
9 Comments
Isn’t it nice to brag about not having to go through that bothersome branch of government, the Legislature, that is made up of the peoples representatives and is supposed to make the laws ?
The arrogance never ceases to amaze me.
Haven’t Norton and Artist been divorced for decades? This is a bit of a stretch.
I’m not a Jane Norton for Senate fan but this thread is a bit much. Jane and Bill were divorced twenty-five years ago and just because he operates a lobbying firm, and a good one at that, can’t be used to characterize Jane as a lobbyist. It is unfair to use her former husband’s occupation as a way to taint her.
Leonard:
Jane Norton has directly and repeatedly said on the campaign trail that she has never been a lobbyist, because she doesn’t want to be seen as the insider she is.
The only job she has ever held in the private sector was being in charge of “state governmental relations” for a company called Medical Group Management Association, where here direct reports were registered lobbyists. The website of her ex, where her daughter still works, uses the terms “governmental relations” and “lobbying” as if they are indistinguishable, which they are.
If her own family doesn’t see the difference, why should we?
She worked for the Denver Police Foundation as the executive director.
Do you work for Buck’s campaign?
LB
In some sense a non-profit organization created to support the public sector is a private sector job. Just not in the sense in which I meant of a real world, real job. One where the goal is to make money and if successful might create additional jobs that add to the economy.
No, I do not work for the Buck campaign although I do support his candidacy.
Who is your dog in the fight?
I’ve worked with her, and I have a lot of confidence in her.
The fact that Jane in one of her jobs was clearly a lobbyist in fact, if not in title is a good point. But the rest of this guilt by family member jobs is, in my opinion, bullshit.
I don’t care if Norton’s relatives are all lobbyists. I don’t care if they are all bricklayers or auto mechanics.
Norton has said she was never a lobbyist and used instead the lobbyist/governmental relations distinction/non-distinction terms which the lobbying firm for which her dauther and ex work uses interchangably on their web site.
The DC Lobbyist relative piece would be of no interest except she says Buck is the DC insider and she is the only one that can raise money.
In the abstract, not related to this campaign, do I care what her family does? No.