U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Michael Bennet
(D) Phil Weiser
60%↑
50%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Jena Griswold
(D) David Seligman
40%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez
(D) J. Danielson
(R) Sheri Davis
50%
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(D) Jeff Bridges
(R) Kevin Grantham
40%
40%
30%
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) Trisha Calvarese
(D) Eileen Laubacher
90%
20%
20%
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%
August 18, 2008 08:50 PM UTC
19 Comments
Loading ...
Reactions like that are not surprising. Average Coloradans probably associate hard times with whoever is in power.
All I can say is that with those numbers it’s a good thing he’s not up for re-election until 2010.
2010 will be a very tough year for Democrats across the country. Just look what happened in 1994, after two years of the Clintons.
In fairness to Bush, Ritter, and Hickenlooper, people vote as though they were electing a president, governor, or mayor… then they rate those officeholders as though they were kings or dictators.
A lot of what these chief executives do — or do not — accomplish is contingent upon the actions of the Congress, state legislature, or city council, respectively. None of these guys is omnipotent, yet we blame them when matters do not go the way we want… like it was solely their fault.
I was expecting to see more money for the education budget. Tuition at state universities has gone up quite a lot, and the only answer so far has been to provide more scholarships. Great, but if more of their budgets came from the state, tuition wouldn’t need to be so high.
That’s my only real disappointment with Ritter so far.
And get involved with Andrew Romanoff’s SAFE campaign. Refs C and D were band-aids, SAFE would be a permanent solution. These education issues are not Governor Ritter’s fault outright.
I’ve heard of the SAFE thing, but is it a legislature thing or something on the ballot?
And go to http://www.coloradosafe.org for more information. To answer your question, it’s a ballot initiative.
Although 50 percent is the magic number according to the so-called “incumbent rule,” this isn’t really a head-to-head poll against a challenger.
At this stage in a term, it’s so-so news in that it says that half the voters aren’t ready to look elsewhere, but it also says Ritter has some work to do to shore up his image.
If the downward trend continues, he’s going to have to pull a rabbit out of his hat to get re-elected.
The week after the DNC, and I guarentee those approval numbers go way up.
The rule of thumb in politics is if your approval rating is twice as high as your disapproval rating your in good shape. Governor Ritter’s approval rating is just about exactly twice as high as his disapproval number. Could it be higher, sure it could but politcally we are in turmoil at the moment with a shaky economy and the war in Iraq with huge budget deficits at the federal level.
Governor Ritter raised and focused on four major issues when he ran for Governor, including the new energy economy, education, transportation, and health care insurance coverage. He delivered on the New Energy Economy the first year he was in office and continues to do so, even as late as last week, when he announced the new turbine and blade plant for wind energy will be built in Brighton, plus the legislation the Governor was able to get from the legislature last year that is making Colorado the number one state in the new energy economy. Governor Ritter has delivered and continues to deliver a new energy economy.
With the economy uncertain, he has tempered his plans in light of economic reality but he has continued to move forward in the area of higher education. He continues to pursue more money for higher education which was one of his key planks during the 2006 campaign. He emphasized this issue because the Republican legislature had cut the higher education budget by 40% in the early part of this decade without even attempting to solve the problem or temper the consequences of TABOR. The ballot issue he endorsed to remove the property tax credit for oil and gas companies is on the ballot and will be voted on by the voters in November. If it passes, Colorado college students will have a great deal more money to finance their college educations which would be a key component in restoring the appropriate level of funding to our public colleges and universities. In short, he is in the middle of delivering in the area of Higher education.
Overall health care insurance and coverage reform is probably not possible since the Governor’s Blue Ribbon Commission’s cheapest recommendation would cost $1.2 billion each year. Besides the cost, depending on the outcome of the presidential election, reform may come at the naitonal level which would preempt any state plan. Better to wait and see what happens at the national level.
In the area of transportation, it certainly looks like reform will be the major thrust of the Governor and legislature next year. If successful, Governor Ritter will have delivered on three of the four major policy areas he promised action on during the 2006 campaign.
We must remember that three of these four require approval by the voters which means they can’t be all done at once and with the shaky economy, it is only prudent the Governor carefully calibrate and temper his policy choices based on the facts as they exist at this time.
I would have thought he was up in the 60% range… He better win the oil and gas amendment fight, or he’s going to look really weak as a governor.
What I can’t figure out is why you campaign on health care for all, better education and transportation funding, convene groups of smart people to give you ideas in all these areas, and then for your first big statewide initiative, go your own way and pick a fight with a group that isn’t afraid to spend $15 million to bloody your nose. Strange.
If he loses this one, he’s going to lose serious street cred. No pressure or anything.
(and no, I don’t think he’s in numbers he has to worry about) is people see all these problems and don’t see state leadership to address them.
So they’re happy that he’s doing well on the day to day stuff but they feel disquiet that there isn’t any visible action to address our major issues. If Ritter and the leg step up to do this in January, you’ll see his numbers shoot up quite a bit.
There were many Republicans that helped elect Ritter and now they see he is not what they thought. He wants Unions in Colorado and that is a major negative.
Ritter made many promises and those promises take money, this is the reason Ritter is not looking good.
If the Legislature goes for Ref E that will be a killer.
If and that is a big “If” the Republicans can find a good person to run against Ritter…Ritter is in trouble.
“If the Legislature goes for Ref E that will be a killer.”
The legislature has nothing to do with any referendum other than putting it on the ballot in the first place. Once on the ballot, it’s up to the people.
why would someone who is actually a professional writer even acknowledge her type of sludge? She’s wrong on everything else, why would she know anything about how government works, or how bills (or referenda) become law?
It’s a doubly strange comment, anyway. The referenda this year are L, lower age to serve in lege to 21, M, N., cleanup stuff, and O, tightening petition rules. There ain’t no steekin’ e.
Anyway, to answer your question, I try, not always successfully, to limit my input here to factual stuff. I pick up a lot of ideas and facts here in the exchange, but, obviously, most of my output goes to The Post’s blog or editorials or my column, or my partridge in a pear tree. As staffs dwindle in size, we all have to double in brass.
Always appreciate your input Bob.
They are uniformly civil and factual. We all get things wrong once in a while, which is why its great to be able to dialogue like this before I make a mistake that a million readers will see.
I missed this one. At least you were civil.