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) Jena Griswold
60%
60%
40%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Alexis King
(D) Brian Mason
40%
40%
30%
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) Yadira Caraveo
(D) Joe Salazar
50%
40%
40%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
October 30, 2008 10:02 PM UTC
60 Comments
God I’m good.
I’m looking for seats now held by R going D or vice versa. Isn’t that term-limited Ron Tupa’s seat now, a Democrat?
Because Ron Tupa parties like there’s no tomorrow while Rollie is the no parties candidate (and is in bed by 6:00 pm).
Now, pass the wine and cheese.
No one reads the tea leaves like you !
I’ve posted your responses on our Post-Ed notes blog http://blogs.denverpost.com/op…
Let’s see how this experiment in cross-pollination works. And thanks for chipping in.
I think Joe Whitcomb will win – by 3 votes.
I think Ali Hasan will lose by 2.5% proving that money alone won’t buy you a seat.
Senate, 20 D, 15 R
House 40 D, 25 R
She really wanted to be an Independent but when told that she would have to sit next to Dougie the Dingaling, decided to become a DINO.
She made some strong enemies with the Repugs last year. She won’t go back.
BTW, I’ve been involved with HD40 for some years now.
that Sfafford will rejoin the Republican Party. My prediction is that the SEAT will go back to the Republicans, as Republican
Cindy Acree defeats Democrat Karen
Wilde.
What do we have to base predictions on? Yard signs?
I do know that Democratic voter registration is way up in Arapahoe and there will probably be some “coat tail” effect. But we have Elbert County. And that screws everything.
voter registration and voting history in the district, and fund raising are some of the best indicators.
But, when you have a termed state representative leave and an open race, the personality of the former incumbent, and the personalities of the new contenders cloud any analysis, as do changing political tides.
In 2006, Wilde would have been DOA given what we know so far. In 2008, she has a credible shot of winning, if Cindy Arcee is considered to far to the right compared to Stafford.
You’re talking about districts – not individuals.
One here: I just don’t see why Mollie Cullom can’t beat David Balmer in HD39. She has run a very strong campaign. He is an extremist. The Post and Aurora Sentinel have a nasty habit of endorsing incumbents.
I have it on my own list of close runs.
in what is shaping up as a lousy year for the Rs. Lauri Clapp is the
R trying for a coming after being termed out of the House a few years ago
Newell is running a good race.
We’re getting anti-Clapp (that sounds like a health issue doesn’t it) lit in the mail by the carload almost daily. Somebody is pouring a lot of money into this one. Also a good ground campaign.
in a post at Colorado Pols.
One of the most likely pickups for Democrats is House District 17 in El Paso County.
other than merrifields, this is the one el paso district where a d could triumph, especially in a year where I’m seeing the GOP in disarray.
Any chance we’ll see a movement to get rid of term limits for the Leg in the off-year, or at the very least extend them? Am I the only one who thinks legislative term limits are stupid?
Harder to overturn.
And I know the only thing harder for the voters to approve than a tax increase is removing term limits.
I just think it’s a travesty that perfectly good legislators who know all the ins and outs of some complicated stuff, have to leave because we’ve decided to supersede the voters and just get them out of there.
Maybe I’m alone.
I’ve often thought that just one more term for everyone would fix most of the problems with term limits. So that would be a potential
3 terms for a Governor, 12 years
as well as the rest of the executive
3 for a State Senator, 12 years
5 for the Statehouse seat, 10 years
Local government:
3 terms if the terms are longer than 2 years; 4 terms if the terms are for 2 years or less
It could be an easier sell to voters than no term limits.
But I don’t mind the term limits on the Governor’s office. I think a rotating executive is quite good, and have no problem with term limits for President or Governor (and someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe that they can extend the Governor’s limit to three terms with the approval of the leg.)
I don’t necessarily think that the executive officers should serve three consecutive terms, but I think it should be an option. If the possibility is there it makes someone coming to the end of a second term less of a lame duck. Up to the point where he says, “No, I won’t run again,” he or she will still have the mojo.
And if three is one too many the voters can always decide that at the ballot box. But if it would make the thing go down easier how about a large majority in both houses of the legislature to allow a third run, say 60%?
Currently the legislature cannot extend the governor’s term in office.
should include Ref L, lowering age to run for state rep. I think that, seemingly along with the majority of us, that letting the voters decide is the best answer to this. whoever works the hardest and runs the best campaign for their district’s seat will win, that’s it. i like Ref L, because i’d like to see some younger faces at the capitol, and if they run a good enough campaign, why on earth shouldn’t they be able to legislate?
But it also keeps a steady stream of new people coming in and old ones moving on to statewide office or beyond. In principle I agree that voters ought to be the ones setting the term limits but incumbency is so powerful in a two party system. Maybe term limits aren’t such a bad thing at the state legislature level.
that the reason term limits are bad policy is because there isn’t enough time to for great leadership to emerge.
But, this year’s loss of leadership, Romanoff and Madden, prove term limits don’t stop leaders emerging.
As a goofy 20 year old , I was all pumped up about term limits in 94. Everything about “citizen legislators” and “getting new blood into the process” sounded nice…
I’ll take the corruption of a few entrenched elected legislators over a constantly rotating, inept legislature any day.
I was in favor of them as well, though I was a bit younger. Today I think they’re a bad idea. Still, we didn’t know because we had not tried it yet.
Of course I went all the way to the dark side and became a Democrat as well. Different journeys.
I’m trying to avoid going to the “dark side”…it’s definitely getting tougher each day 🙂
That’s a good point about not knowing until we tried. I think we’re probably better off for trying because now we know better…
If the legislator is truly corrupt (and not just partaking in the same institutional corruption that everyone else is) then they will be voted out.
Colorado voters are not stupid, they don’t need their elections decided for them before they even happen.
My wife’s aunt is a Republican and she agrees with me on this. She always said the same thing about term limits: “We already have term limits–they’re called elections.”
Each election they must win by a margin of an additional 2% to be able to run again. So if they get a margin of 10% the 5th time they run, they can then run for a 6th term.
And this does not kick in till their 3rd race so they can win by 1 vote up to then.
???
How very progressive of you. 🙂
I don’t know, it seems very strange. I would say leave it cut and dry.
It would never fly.
I like it…maybe not enough to vote for it if given the option, but I like your thinking nonetheless.
they increase the power of the professional political class, which is not elected officials, but lobbyists and professional policy people.
Bills are written by lobbyists and shopped to friendly legislators, who often do not have the background or experience to understand the full ramifications of the bill. Since the legislators are part time and have one underpaid staffer, they have no opportunity to educate themselves or craft their own legislation for the most part.
I am not opposed to lobbyists, many lobby for causes that I support, but I do believe the professional political class is better checked by a professional elected class.
While the demos of this particular seat have not moved much, Keith King is widely disliked by the economic conservatives that populate 80906-and Lee should do well in the rest of the district. Obamania is running high in 80904-and should help Lee. It’s a stretch, but I think Lee may well pull it off.
And BTW Bob, ref yesterday’s post, I’m not 68 yet-but I will be on the day after the election…hoping for an Obama presidency for my birthday!
SD-17: Pete Lee beats Keith King (by a nose)
SD-23: Joe Whitcomb beats Shawn Mitchell (even closer)
So a net +2 gain for Dems in the Senate
In the House, I think Dems will lose a couple:
HD-27: John Bodnar beats Sara Gagliardi
HD-30: Kevin Priola beats Dave Rose (Mary Hodge’s seat)
HD-40: Cindy Acree beats Karen Wilde (Debbie’s seat)
And a net -3 for Dems in the House.
So it’s 22-13 in the Senate and 37-28 in the House.
SD-26. I think Linda pulls it out.
Bodnar has been pretty open about “I’m just running at the last minute because nobody else would”. He has not had that much visibility. He is a pretty engaging, funny guy, but not many people know him.
Gagliardi has done a pretty good job with constituent communications – her open houses, email newsletter, etc.
I think she wins reelection.
Swalm’s the Republican incumbent but Holland has name recognition and is an attractive candidate. This is a Democratic year and Obama will have coattails.
R’s have a 2-1 registration edge there and I hear Bernie is getting slammed for several votes/endorsements he has made. He has the $$ but will that be enough to hold it? I sure hope so…
I wouldn’t call his race a slam dunk, but he’ll win.
but executives should…and why the hell do we have to vote on judges? whereas i appreciate the “maximization of democracy” or whatever they’re going for, the voting bloc has NO CLUE about these judges whatsoever. here in Golden we have one guy running a pretty vocal campaign against one particular justice, but that’s all the involvement i’ve seen; most people vote yes or no on all or just leave it blank.
The Nonpartisan Court Plan was developed in Missouri in 1940 to overcome the corrupt Pendergast Machine’s election of judges in St. Louis.
Colorado voters adopted the plan via constitutional amendment in 1966 as a part of a reform to make judges in Colorado less politically motivated.
I think it does need some modification, but is basically a good idea. The power to remove judges should at some level lie with the people. But I think it ought to start with some sort of legislative or judicial review board vote. Because in most of these cases they are good judges. We’ve only removed six in something like that last 12 years.
Then it would be just as messed up as Jersey.
Gotta be a reason why you and I live here instead.
If you don’t know about the judges, just ask around. Or read the judicial performance reviews at http://www.cojudicialperforman…
In Jersey, you just had to pay attention to which ones showed up dead. Here, it’s different.
I’m predicting this seat will stay in Dem hands, although I have heard many Republicans predict they will take it back. I don’t think they will. I think John Kefalas will keep his seat and defeat Bob McClusky, again, as he did in 2006. I do predict they will be within a few points of each other.
McCluskey is one of the best the GOP has.
But Obama-led registration drives and GOTV will help Kefalas. Meanwhile, Republican state support for legislative candidates has gone so far south it’s now in Tierra del Fuego. I watched a CSU student from California on Channel 7 who said she had switched registration to Colorado to vote here because Obama was sure to win California and Colorado was in play. I doubt very much that such new players in the Colorado political game will know that Bob McCluskey was a social and fiscal moderate who helped pass Ref C. And if the Rs are giving him any money, I haven’t heard about it.
I met him in 2004 when I was working on Doug Frisbie’s campaign for HD49. Doug really liked him, too. He’s a genuinely good guy. A decent man. He was moderate on social issues and he authored Lacey’s Law, which means a lot to me for personal reasons.
I like John and am glad he won the seat in 2006 but I was sorry to see Bob lose. At one point, the Republicans were claiming that they were all in for this race so I’m a bit surprised they haven’t sunk money into this one. They genuinely thought this might be one to pick off but I think John has done a good job and folks on both sides are generally pleased with his performance.
Swalm and Solano lose – net effect in the house is 0.
I posted about the HD 37 race in Ohwilike’s diary.
Al White loses. Net effect in the Senate D +1
The Colorado desperately needs its moderates like Al White to have a prayer of staying relevant.
Now Joe Whitcomb over Shawn Mitchell – that’s my hope for a slip in the Senate.
You’re so damned idealistic.
There’s currently no room in the Colorado Republican Party for moderates. That’s why it’s in trouble. But it might not matter.
What does the registration look like in SD-8? Do the numbers give Brenner a chance? Can he overcome White’s name recognition?
Those things matter much more than whether you or I like Al White.
which brings the Democratic caucus within striking distance of the two-thirds majority in both houses needed for reasonably bipartisan constitutional amendments.
I’ve always wondered this, since I have my own thoughts. I’d put Ellen Roberts, Al White, Don Marostica, Tom Massey and Nancy Spence in that list. Any others?
i think Jim Kerr should be on this list, he does good work on HHS and is a true bipartisan; also we should give a little nod to Stella Garza-Hicks (though she won’t be coming back) for not being totally insane. other honorable mentions: Marsha Looper for fighting Bruce on the guest worker program, and Ray Rose hasn’t been a total nut either.
My parents live right on the edge of Ms. Garza-Hicks’ district, and she’s been a very reasonably state rep. Marsha has done some very good work on property rights and, like you said, fighting Doug Bruce. She’s proven to be far more centrist and effective than her original campaign in 06 may have led a lot of people down here (near Widefield/Fountain) to believe.
i’ve seen him sabotage good bills with bogus amendments in committee to throw dems off the bill and then vote against the thing after the amendment is attached. he’s not a moderate.