President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(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%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
November 09, 2006 01:04 AM UTC

Senate Majority Elections

  • 84 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

From a press release:

The Senate majority will hold elections for leadership positions tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. at the Colorado State Capitol in room 352.

Comments

84 thoughts on “Senate Majority Elections

    1. He didn’t give up his Senate seat to run for SOS.  I can not find any reason that he would not be considered to continue as the Senate Majority Leader. 

          1. Do you have any sites that you can recommend that discuss IRV? I assumed that it was similar to the systems we see in some European countries, but I am wondering if there is literature out there I could look at. Anything would be appreciated.

            1. “Instant Runoff Voting” will do it for IRV,
              “Condorcet method” and the various “fixes” for Condorcet, especially “Schulze method” – used in many Open Source organizations – and “Ranked Pairs” – an easier-to-understand version – are good links for Condorcet.

              (Unless you really like math and path determination theory, the Schulze method page is pretty hefty.  In summary, Ranked Pairs says to sort Condorcet matchup results based on the strength of the win, and eliminate the weakest wins/defeats first to resolve conflicts.  Schulze analyzes results to find the “strongest” comparison between two candidates – including indirect comparisons through other candidate matchup results – and then makes a judgement as to which candidate has the overall strongest results.)

          2. I read some of the debates you had with those favoring other methods of vote-counting and was left with the impression that all the options were too darn confusing and that it was best to leave things as they are.

            1. I am not in favor of plurality elections.  It bothers me more than a little that someone can walk in, get 22% of a 5-way election, and walk away with it all.  Or that we don’t really know whether it was Paccione or Musgrave who really expressed something closer to majority support of the folks in CD-4.

              IRV is easy to understand, both procedurally and at a high level – it just falls over in some (pretty rare) cases.  Rank your choices in order of preference – votes will be tallied, the lowest vote-getter will be dropped and his votes redistributed according to voter’s next preferences; continue until you find a majority vote-getter.

              Condorcet is a better system, is easy to explain at a high level, but is difficult to understand in detail.  Rank your choices in order of preferences – each candidate’s vote totals will be compared against each other candidate’s vote totals, and the winner will be decided based on having the most and strongest victories in all matchups.

              Either of these is highly preferable to a plurality system in my opinion.

              1. I got lost in the details. You and another person were debating the validity of each system, and…I dont know, I just got lost.

                Is IRV what they have in Louisiana?

                1. Louisiana does essentially a one-round IRV.  That is, they eliminate all but the two highest vote-getters and hold a runoff of just those two candidates.  Because it’s a special election, the runoff vote always produces a majority winner.

                  In IRV, you vote for your 1st, 2nd, 3rd (etc.) choices all at once – hence the “instant” part – no need to come back to the polls.  If no majority vote-getter emerges on the initial vote tally, the lowest vote-getter is eliminated, and voters who chose that candidate as their 1st choice have their votes redistributed to their 2nd choice candidate.  Votes are re-tallied, and the process continues with the lowest vote-getter being eliminated and his votes redistributed according to voter preference until a majority vote-getter emerges.

                  You can see it work by viewing the results of any poll over at DemoChoice.  This is the system that MyDD uses to run its Presidential Polls – or used to before elections swung into high gear…

              2. There were lots of details that were overwhelming.

                I count myself as more informed than the average voter. If the folks supporting election reform can’t explain the reform easily and succinctly it’ll never fly.

                Your post makes it simple, but I’ll challenge you with this – do you think that many voters, when the field is crowded (like it was in the CD5 GOP primary) will want to give all the candidates a ranking? Maybe if it’s “mark your top two choices” it’ll be easier.

                I agree that someone should get the whole thing when they get 23% (I believe that was Lamborn’s showing in August). And I know runoffs are expensive. I just don’t see the average voter wanting to change the system if they don’t have a simple alternative, and the simple alternative shouldn’t have unintended consequences (I think that was the crux of your earlier debate – sorry, memory is hazy and I got lost trying to follow it then anyway).

                1. You don’t have to rank everyone.  In IRV, you can rank your first two choices – or even your only acceptable choice – if you want.  In Condorcet, you can do the same, and if the computer is set up for it, you can also rank from the bottom –  candidates you really *don’t* want to win.

  1. it’s time for you guys to change the big line. Seeing it now is such a let-down because it’s reminiscent of a time when we had something to look forward to…

  2. For the Trailhead Group, Progress Colorado, Coloradans for Justice, et al?

    They blew millions and didn’t win anything!  Will Coors, Benson, etc. take another route in two years by hiring competent pet boys?  Will the Republican learn that their slash burn politics may been called to a stop yesterday?

        1. for a three-way primary between Tom Terrific and the other two?

          What a field day that would be.

          Of course, Tom might also follow through with his Presidential campagin.

          Look for a demcratic Senate and House to pass a version of immigration reform that Bush will sign, and Tommy boy will go ballistic and truly jump into the Presidential race.

          1. …even before to Senate flipped last night.  I figured a Dem House and a nominally-GOP Senate would pass the guest worker program that Bush supported, and he’d sign it.  It’s gonna be a hoot watching Tancredo go off the deep end……

            1. I know this is off subject, but…

              Tancredo has been a one issue Congressman for years, and to his credit he helped bring illegal immigration to the front of the problem solving queue.

              But his unwillingness to bend on the issue to acheive a solution (as well as the rest of the ex-House) has led to a point where the Dems get to write the rules, while the Tanc stays in the background.

              So be it.

          2. That’s Tom being too chicken to run for Senate. I predict he’ll keep his safe, cozy $inecure in the 6th CD. He’ll get trounced if he runs for Senate – he’s got way too many negatives – and he’s nothing more than an Al Sharpton type in any presidential race.

            1. Didn’t he originally say he would term limit himself? I vaguely recall a bit of press when he ran for, was it a 3rd term. Now he seems quite entrenched. Big change in attitude for a guy who was originally big-mouthed about term limits, eh? Voters sure are forgiving of broken promises.

              Maybe it’s time to resurrect a rant about Tom not keeping his word and becoming a DC insider who enjoys the perqs of the job too much to leave.

        2. He knows that he wouldnt have to show up to congress at all to get re-elected in the 6th; he will continue to stump on immigration in Iowa, New Hampshire, and else where; and what better platform to campaign for the Senate than on the national stage.

          I’m only half kidding.

          1. Under Colorado law, you can’t run for more than one office at a time. Which means he cannot enter he nomination process (the caucuses) trying for both Senate and US House. He could however begin a bid a President, which he would be shut out of pretty early on (like in Jan.) and still be able to switch gears and run for either US House of Senate at the caucuses in March.

    1. Eidsness, the Reform Party candidate this time around running in CD4 with 11% of the vote, said he may challenge Musgrave again as a candidate from one of the two major parties…….so thats one possibility

    2. My biggest dream come true would be for Allard to retire and for Musgrave vs. Udall.  I want a personal opportunity to vote against her.  Udall will run for Allards seat either against Allard or against whomever.  Jared Polis is slated to run for the Democrat nominee in Boulder county.

      1. Don’t forget that Joan FitzGerald moved into the Second Congressional to run for that seat if Udall runs for Senate.  Personally, I think Udall will chicken out.

  3. You mean who is going to run against the appointed Bill Owens.  Yes, he will appoint himself when Allard bows out early.  Not later than early January of course.

    1. I’ve been hearing this for what, two years?  And that since he is allegedly an adulterer, that’s why he sort of disappeared off of the “rising star” Republican radar.

      Does anyone know the truth behind these strong rumors?  Specifically who this woman is and where she and her kid are?

      Or is it all vicious rumor?

      1. I wondered what would happen on the blogs after the election. What would we have to argue about?

        There’s your answer; surmise who will be in the next election and start slamming them.

            1. It’s true.  Owens proved this to be true when he decided against running for an open U.S. Senate seat in 2004 when he had nothing to lose because he was in the middle of his term.  The papers have the goods on him.  They as much as threatened him in writing in 2004 when he was considering a run that if he ran they would print what they knew.  If he didn’t they would leave it alone.  He knows better than to run.  Owens is done.

              1. Major news media don’t like to do big expose’s on elected officials.  They blackmail instead.  I mean, it’s never happened before, right?

                I don’t think Roy Romer’s fling ever made it into the media, right?  And there are dozens if not hundreds of other cases like that around the country that the media haven’t reported, right?

                You are completely full of shit.  If they had anything, they would print it.  They don’t – because it didn’t happen.

                It’s amazing that after he delivers Ref C for you assholes and Dems win across the board – that you’re still making this kind of stuff up about him.  All your targeted Dems used him in their ads.

                1. are all alike.  You can’t remember history and you forget that the rest of us know how to search the internet.  In a column by Jim Spencer dated March 4, 2004 (two days after Nighthorse Campbell announced suprisingly that he wasn’t going to run) Spencer said the following:

                  “Here are four words of advice for Colorado Gov. Bill Owens: Focus on the Family”

                  He went on to later say:

                  “You can’t spend a political career presuming to look in other people’s bedrooms and expect them not to look in yours.”

                  “So focus on the family, Governor.”

                  “Here’s hoping you get your life right before you run.”

                  “Here’s hoping you don’t run if you can’t”

                  “Otherwise, get ready to answer for everything.”

                  “You’re the guy who invited the inquisition.”

                  Several days later Owens to the shock of the entire world announces he won’t be running.  Nothing further was printed about the Governor’s “personal life.”

                  Don’t know about you, but it was pretty clear to me and the rest of the reality based world what this was about.  We all already knew he was separated from his wife.  I’ll let you and the rest of the readers draw their own conclusions about what the Post was talking about and whether this was a threat.  In the mean time, go back to RedState.  They won’t challenge you over there.

                2. Off drinking that Kool-Aid and passed out somewhere for the last week?  Ruthie coulda used some help, defending the indefensible.

                  As to Billy Boy, I made vey sure that I asked the initial question as an allegation, not a fact.  And I don’t think (I could be wrong) anyone here was chastising him for possibly being an adulterer.  The conversation was about how Bill was the R-Boy going places until these rumors popped up two years ago.  Suddenly Bill doesn’t seem to have much aspiration for higher office.

                  It’s SO hard to explain nuance to the right wing. 

      2. I wondered what would happen on the blogs after the election. What would we have to argue about?

        There’s your answer; surmise who will be in the next election and start slamming them.

        1. At least I hope, will get some good policy discussion. The day after any election people are counting there fingers and there toes, drinking the pepto, downing the advil, and speculating.

          1. 1.) the first discussion of who will run for _______’s term limited house or senate seat will start before next Fourth of July; and

            2.) Pols will have to creat a separate front page spot for running LHGQ commentaries. (By the way, LHGQ, I figure the first six months of his term should creat sufficient materials to publish “The Gospel of the Chosen – or how I brought my Godlike Qualities to DC)

          1. and hold the newly elected officials to those promises…or at least thats what i plan to do! the dems should accomplish anything and everything they have promised because they have such widespread control in the state of colorado.

            as for the national scene, it should be interesting to see if the republicans use the filibuster (which they had debated weakening) or if bush simply uses his veto pen more.

            1. It makes me laugh thinking how they were debating using the “nuclear option” as far as the filibuster is concerned.

              If the dems are smart, which I think they are, and play this right, which I think they will, they will pass a bunch of populist legislation within the first 100 hours and see what bush does. If he vetos stems cells, minimum wage, etc., then the dems need to take the offensive which I think they will.

              1. its always been my hope that each party will realize they can just as easily lose control and be the minority, so things like the nuclear option are completely stupid. anyway, i cant wait to get sound bytes from lamborn in DC!!!

                    1. is the increased power of the speaker, brought about by liberal northern democrats seeking to usurp the power the southern dems held on the committees. they finally got the speaker position really bolstered with power…and then 1994!!!

      3. I know for a fact that Frances does not stay with Bill in spite of what was said to the press. I no longer live in the area, but it is trivial to find out.

        From some of my friends who know them very personally, I have heard that yes, Owens has had multiple affairs. The one piece that was somewhat sketchy was a child. Several said yes, one said no. After what happened with Clinton, Gingrich, and Haggard, I would now say who knows.

        If Owens really wants a shot at future positions, I think that he should be forthcoming about the child (if so). While I do not like him, many Coloradoans do. I believe an admission of the affairs (if really true) and perhaps a renewal of his marrage would show a true family man (which he really is). I think that apologies seem to go over well.

        1. Having a child out of wedlock did not hurt Grover Cleveland, and that was way back then when it was a scandal.  I agree, confession is good for the soul.  And politics.  See “Haggard, Ted.”  Most will forgive, as they should because he admitted and asked for it.

          Cleveland’s opponents had a ditty:

          Ma, ma, where’ my pa?
          Down in the Whitehouse
          Ha ha ha!

          1. What are you guys smoking this morning???  It must be something that ruins short term memory.  Remember how well the apologies from Rick O’Donnell worked on Social Security?  What about Don Sherwood?? There are several more.  Apologies don’t work at all.  Voters have long memories, especially with politicians who wear the mantle of “family values” as a code words for banning abortion, slamming gays and theocracy.  Voters don’t forget that kind of hypocracy, and politicians of the other party won’t let them forget.  Owens is a done.  But of course, the Republicans have no bench.  Who in the Republican Party is a shining star?  Mike Coffman??? He has skeletons in his closet too.  John Suthers???  Too boring?  Who in the legislature, especially when their caucus is so right wing and so dominated by Colorado Springs that it will appear just absolutely looney for some time to come.  What, Tancredo, Musgrave, Lamborn?  Don’t make me laugh.  Allard you say.  The worst Senator in Washington.  The Republicans have no one and won’t for a long time.  Hahahahahahahahaha.

            1. The sins of the men you mention were political, not “moral.”  Every voter has had, or is related to, someone who has made a major moral error: adultery and unintended procreation.  Or at least had the “28 day sweats!”

              Not many voters can related to having suggested sending high school seniors to the border.

            2. Don’t under-estimate boring. Governor-elect Ritter was a boring candidate and ended up with 56% of the vote. (Of course, BWB’s performance helped out!)

            3. hehehehe. Funny thing. The interesting things to this, is that it is the republicans who can be harsh on each other. Yet, if you keep it in the closet, things are ok. But once somebody outs you, you are total trash. I have spent some time teaching in Texas to very high-end techies. Some worked for the state. Apparently, an ex-gov. was well known for his trysts as well as selling powder that he should not. Apparently, the liberal media is not so liberal (except when it comes to attacks on clinton and others).

              As I said earlier, I am not a fan of Owens. And yes, his skeletons will keep him from future offices if they remain as skeletons. By coming out (so to speak) and then working on his marrage successfully, he stands a good chance of getting back.  Coloradoans and Americans will forgive and forget.

              1. Have you ever met Frances?  That is one tough ballsy lady.  She learned about this stuff a long time ago and was too much of a lady and loved Bill’s mom too much to break her heart.  Once Bill’s mom died, she was out of there with a vengence.  Don’t know whether she will divorce him or not, because she believes the pope on divorce.  But, I can tell you he ain’t getting any that’s for sure and I doubt he’ll stick with her under those circumstance.

                1. Yes, I have met her. Nice gal. If she divorces, she will have a lot of guys chasing her. Sad thing is, she should have been the politician. I think that she would have made a good leader. OTH, Owens is too beholden to too many interests and puts them above the needs of our state. All in all, he was a bad leader. It is just that he was constained by law so could only cause so much damage.

  4. Miss Ive, you’ve been around here for a while.

    That makes your claim of newness a little suspect.

    That also makes your request to name specific people and slam them a little suspect.

    Here’s the deal.  In a little while, when things start sorting themselves out, most of us will probably take an opinion because we can’t help ourselves.

    In the meantime, if you have someone specific you want slammed, just let us know.  I’m sure someone would be happy to do it.

    However, slamming on demand is not the signature of smart people.  Many of us, myself included, would rather wait to see who the specific people are that we’re supposed to slam.  Also, many of us would rather wait until we figure out whether they deserve it.

    1. Yes, I absolutely do have a list of people I’d like slammed. I think I’ll hold off for now though. And yes, I am curious about the guvs past. I don’t want to be told though, I thought we’d have a short hiatus from the nastiness.

      I’ve been around probably 6 months and I think that makes me pretty new to blogs. I’ll have to admit, I spend more time reading them than anyone should, but still, I feel like a relative blog newbie.

      I did think that the subject of who will jump into the senate race and if Tancredo will run for pres interesting. Any other thoughts on senate hopefuls?

  5. The official rumour on Owens is he has two, and one is down in Texas.  Unless someone here is going to track the kid down, mug them and get a DNA sample, it will never get resolved, but that won’t stop anyone from bringing it up. 

    I doubt seriously that the new (D) majority can avoid the taint of something.  My prime suspicion is it take the form of some type of reconstruction effort in New Orleans and we will see incredible amounts of pork and corruption.  Honestly, would you vote for Ray Nagin?

    I doubt seriously that Tancredo will run outside CD-6.  He’s already announced he’s not running for pres.

    Benson/Owens/Andrews/Coors will do the obvious.  They will fall back, assess their failures, inventory their opportunities, and exploit weaknesses, mistakes, and failures.  Do you honestly think that everyone that just got elected can keep their hands out of the cookie-jar and off the fannies? 

    The (D)s ran a right-to-life, pro law-enforcement, former missionary, church-going family values guy for gov.  Yeah, the (R)s lost.

    1. You’re dreaming.  As I’ve said before, the Republican moderates like Benson will be whining for a long time that they didn’t do something to stop the rightward drift of the party before it was a done deal.  We told them, they didn’t believe us.  Now, the have a Democrat state.  If Benson thinks its going to be easy to manage a business (especially an oil and gas business) in this environment, I’m laughing and laughing.  If he thinks what’s he’s dumped into politics is a lot, wait until he sees the millions he loses through regulation.  And Coors????  Well, it might run into the billions.  You guys were warned.  I have no sympathy.

  6. No open thread today so here it is.

    Too cute!
    http://www.philly.co

    Reminds me of when I took my absentee ballot to the Arapaho Country center in Littleton, on my way out a very elderly man was headed for the clerk’s office.  He was walking with great difficulty, carrying two of the big envelopes.  I presume one was for his wife. He obviously was making a great effort to hand deliver their votes. Choked me up.

    1. A 99-year-old woman braved the lines to vote at Calvary Baptist Church (Monaco & Hampden). She was very pleasant and surprisingly spry for her age. I told her I fully expected to see her at the May Denver city elections and make sure I had a cupcake for her and we would celebrate her 100th with her.

      1. I’m not sure about spry, but very mobile.  And a damned proud Roosevelt Democrat.  She has hammered into my sister and three daughters about what women went through (death)to get the right to vote.  My oldest daughter made note of that lesson in an email after she voted.  I would like to think they vote D, but I know one that doesn’t.  I would rather they vote R than not at all.

      1. Isn’t she a bit too RINO-ish for the full moon wing nuts in the Senate GOP caucus.  I would think they would want something like Schultheis or Brophy as deputy leader…

  7. I was thinking her ambitions were bigger than that!!  Jared Polis has a substantial amount of money and has used that to the good graces of a lot of benefactors and supporters.  This would be a hard race.  Obviously though whoever wins the primary will win.  A Republican in 2 will never happen.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

69 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!