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%
March 29, 2011 05:36 AM UTC
11 Comments
How much are Boigon and her husband worth again? Any chance you guys might be willing to release your taxes?
This attack is totally false. Neither Hancock or Linkhart is running for re-election. They will not see a dime of the pay raise.
is for the Council and Mayor. In fact, I’m sure of it.
You may not appreciate the use of the vote as a political tool, but this “attack” is not false.
Spend the time tomorrow learning how to register a website or something useful. Agree with GlassCup, this attack is bullshit, overhyped, and I’m pretty sure Boigon is NOT the one to be making it.
Why not Boigon? It’s not like this is a vote from ten years ago, they knew what they were doing. And none of the members are poor. So why not?
And because her campaign is BLATANTLY LYING.
Like the poster above said, this pay raise is not going to EITHER Linkhart or Hancock. Period. They aren’t running a again. They won’t see a dime.
But Boigon is losing, desperate, wasting money on a fools errand, she is willing to say anything to win. Too bad, because after she get’s crushed, she’ll just be a despicable former politician without a shred of credibility.
Let’s be real. If Boigon wasn’t loaded, she would be less relevant than Theresa Spahn. And in a month and a half, she will be.
Moreover, she only notes that the other candidates voted for it. The entire Council is getting it, it’s not good timing. Six of the current members are running unopposed. They gave themselves a raise.
Isn’t Boigon one of the At Large members? Do you know what that means? THAT’S why she’s more relevant than Spahn. Give Spahn time, she’ll be great. It’s too soon to run from her current position.
This kind of bullshit just makes me think you’re a shill. Just own it and stop pretending to care. Moron.
This is a legitimate issue that swayed me away from a couple of candidates. Pols’ diary was spot on about this.
I’ve mostly followed this issue on Pols and commentary, and in a sort of secondary way at that. I understood it just as a pay raise for the city council. I was wrong about that, and for mis-stating the facts, I apologize.
That said, it doesn’t fundamentally change my thinking, which I think gets at a deeper issue about the vote, and let me first just say that this “issue” has really annoyed me.
A.) There are lots of issues where candidates have made missteps.
B.)In a race where all of these folks have complicated bios which I’m sure are full of lots of potential negatives (I for one am going to see what I can find about Boigon on the Googles), some candidates did something relatively politically inept as part of the process of governing.
This singular issue should not be used – in the absence of interest – to define this race. If we’re serious about observing and commenting on this race – and just not being a series of opposing-aligned shills (which, speaking for myself only, I am not) – then I hope we do better than simply rehashing this.
If it comes down to it, I’ll happily defend Linkhart and Hancock’s votes – for much the same reasons the Post did:
http://www.denverpost.com/opin…
But I feel like it doesn’t and that would be of relatively little interest to folks.
And more importantly, I want to say this: I feel like the implication that either of them would in any way be influenced by this salary bump in seeking the mayor’s office is an entirely dishonest distortion. Both of them want to be mayor for their own policy reasons, and anyone with a brain knows that this attack is false. I’m relatively disinterested in talking about whether it is politically smart. I concede it isn’t, but I think we can be a better forum than simply repeating that. And in so much as we can use this forum to debate the politics of questions, we also can and I think must use it to discuss the veracity of them. And this attack – and the Boigon campaign’s association with it – is low, despicable, and desperate.
So, that’s what I think.
Again, you may disagree with this being used as a political ploy, but it doesn’t change the actual facts. No one said that they are seeking a higher office for the pay raise, I merely pointed out that that statement is factually correct.
Although that “better forum” that I suspect is meant to make me feel badly for your lack of actual interest and research does seem a little rich. You know, since you still haven’t actually found a “false” attack here, defended the vote (wrong thread anyway), or actually explained what’s wrong with using a policy to “define” an election or candidate.
I stand by my hate of shills and think you still are one. That’s what I think.
This is the 2nd time in this diary you’ve pulled something whole cloth out of your ass. You’ve already had to apologize for getting it wrong once.
Now you’ve got it wrong twice. Where does she suggest this in the diary?
Oh, that’s right. She doesn’t.
Look, I’m sorry one of your favored candidates screwed up and made a very bad vote. Own it. Stop blaming other people, stop spinning your bs and just own it.