https://buy-zithromax.online buy kamagra usa https://antibiotics.top buy stromectol online https://deutschland-doxycycline.com https://ivermectin-apotheke.com kaufen cialis https://2-pharmaceuticals.com buy antibiotics online Online Pharmacy vermectin apotheke buy stromectol europe buy zithromax online https://kaufen-cialis.com levitra usa https://stromectol-apotheke.com buy doxycycline online https://buy-ivermectin.online https://stromectol-europe.com stromectol apotheke https://buyamoxil24x7.online deutschland doxycycline https://buy-stromectol.online https://doxycycline365.online https://levitra-usa.com buy ivermectin online buy amoxil online https://buykamagrausa.net

All Politics is Local, Part II

In which Our Hero decides on local candidates. (I frankly admit I have not done all the review of the “confirm this judge” or “select this local district sub-lieutenant council…

In which Our Hero decides on local candidates.

(I frankly admit I have not done all the review of the “confirm this judge” or “select this local district sub-lieutenant council member adjutant secretary” races)

US Senate

With our current Senator retiring, and not actively campaigning for his successor, we get a fairly open race. And though Campbell was a Republican, he was actually elected as a Democrat, so there’s no assumption as to which way his seat will go.

My general perception of Pete Coors (official website) was (and is) that he’s a nice, quiet fellow, an interesting guy to have over to the house, and someone who quietly and profoundly believes in what he says.

My general perception of Ken Salazar (official website) is that he is passionate, but a politician, with all the baggage that carries. With a longer record in public service, he has some bigger targets painted on his back, though no real smoking gun to go with them. He’s definitely the “political insider” on this, and I don’t know that I’d enjoy him over for dinner.

That said, going through a list of political positions, I find myself significantly more in line with Salazar’s stands than Coors’. And so he gets my vote. That’s aided by my desire to see a mixed-party Congress for purposes of institutional friction and a drive toward bi-partisanship. (i.e., I’d like to see, regardless of who’s in the White House, the Senate and House of different parties, and since the House is almost certainly going to stay Republican …).

I also like that Salazar has avoided the “Bush is eeeeevil!” meme in his run. He opposes the Administration in varoius areas, naturally, but his partisan rhetoric has been much more restrained than some. That might reflect his effective campaigning (since Colorado is more of a Bush state than not), but it’s still refreshing.

(Obligatory disclosure: my company is a major contractor for Coors Brewing Co.)

  • Dave sez: Salazar (D)
  • Polls say: Salazar, narrowly

US Congress

I’m lucky enough, post-redistricting, to end up in the 6th Congressional District, pitching Tom Tancredo (R) (official website), the incumbant, against Joanna Conti (D) (official website). It’s strongly Republican (46% to 23% Dem), which means that Conti has little or no chance, unless Tancredo does something even more buffoonlike than usual.

Follow my drift?

Tancredo‘s biggest problem in my book is that he’s obsessed over immigration, to the point of xenophobia. He goes well beyond solutions that most GOP pols offer, and would likely be most happy if he could dig a huge moat from Texas to California, fill it with sharks, and put machine gun nests on the beach. He originally committed to a self-imposed term limit, but somehow changed his mind when 2002 rolled around.

He will almost certainly win, just because of the “(R)” after his name, which is a shame. Conti, his opponent, is mostly Democratic boilerplate in her sound bites, and a political neophyte — a shame, since she’s been a Republican until this year, and isn’t nearly as cardboard cut-out as her position papers look at first glance. She’ll get my vote.

  • Dave sez: Conti (D)
  • Polls say: Nobody’s even bothering to ask.

State Legislature

The GOP has a 1-seat margin in the State Senate, a larger margin (37-28) in the House.

I’d planned to vote against the State Senate District 27 incumbent, John Andrews (R) but, huzzah, he’s term-limited. (I disapprove of term limits on principle, but I’ll take the benefit in this case).

That leaves it open as far as incumbency goes, but, again, it’s a Republican district, by 2-1, so any Dem is in for a hard run. The GOP candidate, Nancy Spence (official website), is a 3-term State House member, and is endorsed by Andrews and Gov. Owens. Lisa Love (official website) is on the Dem side.

I’m not terribly impressed by either of them, to be honest. Spence is over-focused on school vouchers, but at least comes off as professional. Love needs to learn how to spell before submitting content to the newspapers.

  • Dave sez: Spence (R) — probably.
  • Polls say: Nobody’s even bothering to ask.

On the State House side over in District 37, it’s another 2-1 GOP registration advantage (sigh). Lauri Clapp (only candidate I reviewed without a website) is the GOP pick. Looking at her positions, she strikes me as something of a goofball. Tom Donohue (official website — and probably the worst official website I looked at) is running for the Dems; I’m much more impressed (website aside) with his position stances.

  • Dave sez: Clapp Donohue (D)
  • Polls say: Nobody’s even bothering to ask.
32 view(s)  

5 thoughts on “All Politics is Local, Part II”

  1. President: Kerry. Still wish Dean or Kucinich was in, but oh well.

    Senate: Salazar

    Congress: Udall

    State Senate: Tupa, Worked on two of his past campaigns. Nice guy.

    State House: Madden. Easy, the only one running

    Also voted on the yearly law to let boulder bypass TABOR, and to set aside money to forest fight fires next year.

    And shock of shocks…

    DA : Jason Savala a republican. A write in candidate. Just to get rid of the stupidity that is Keenan.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All Politics is Local, Part I

And, to that end, here are this year’s ballot propositions I’m facing (and I’m doing this exercise as much for my own clarifying-of-thoughts as to sway anyone, so don’t take…

And, to that end, here are this year’s ballot propositions I’m facing (and I’m doing this exercise as much for my own clarifying-of-thoughts as to sway anyone, so don’t take it as a “voting guide”).

(more…)

11 thoughts on “All Politics is Local, Part I”

  1. Amendment 34: Yes.

    Gets rid of the stupid law that the lege was bought off to put in place. After seeing my folks dealing with contractor defects, and suing them just to pay for the material costs that it took my step father to fix all 64 defects in the house that they bought, this was a personal one for me.

    Amendment 35: Yes

    Waffled on this on until last Friday’s bachelor party, and the stench of tobacco that I had to wash off my body just so I could go to sleep reminded me to vote for this one.

    Amendment 36: Yes

    I am a big fan of proportional voting. I think that it should be used on all elections at the State, Local, and Federal levels. It would hopefully end the death grip of the two parties.

    Amendment 37: No

    (note: I work for an non-Profit energy generator)
    A good concept, but a bad way of going about it. Renewable energy costs a lot to get things up and running. Cost’s that are passed on to those who wish to buy it. I costs about 33% more to buy renewable energy, and this is a cost that that most people are un-willing to pay for. This year we stopped buying renewable because the members were unwilling to pick up the costs. So to force a non-Profit organization to eat the costs of something that nobody wants is just silly.

    Ref A: No

    Like Dave said

    Ref B: No

    Ref 4A: Yes, the right thing to do.

    Ref 4B: yes, one of the best things ever passed in this state.

  2. Gets rid of the stupid law that the lege was bought off to put in place. After seeing my folks dealing with contractor defects, and suing them just to pay for the material costs that it took my step father to fix all 64 defects in the house that they bought, this was a personal one for me.

    I don’t deny that dealing with bad contractors/builders isn’t a real issue. I’m not currently convinced that amending the constitution in this way is the right way to deal with the problem.

    Waffled on this on until last Friday’s bachelor party, and the stench of tobacco that I had to wash off my body just so I could go to sleep reminded me to vote for this one.

    I honestly don’t think that Amendement 35 will reduce smoking at bachelor parties.

    It would hopefully end the death grip of the two parties.

    I have a general mistrust of “coalition government” setups; they tend to put too much power in the hands of extreme parties, and reduce stability overall (Israel and Italy are both good examples of this).

    A good concept, but a bad way of going about it. Renewable energy costs a lot to get things up and running. Cost’s that are passed on to those who wish to buy it. I costs about 33% more to buy renewable energy, and this is a cost that that most people are un-willing to pay for. This year we stopped buying renewable because the members were unwilling to pick up the costs. So to force a non-Profit organization to eat the costs of something that nobody wants is just silly.

    Agreed.

    Ref B: No

    Okay, now I’m confused …

  3. Ref B: No

    Okay, now I’m confused

    It’s just one of those things. I always vote against them because I can. I also Vote against every judge unless I one of them did something really good over the past year. And becuse of TABOR I always vote for Boulder, and Boulder County to keep tax money and override TABOR. Also Because of TABOR, unless it is something that I really believe in I will always vote against tax increases. I feel that Is why I spend time electing people. If the people I vote for are unable to deal with taxes, there is really no reason to have them. We might as well be like California and have 200 things to vote on every year and be done with it.

  4. I honestly don’t think that Amendement 35 will reduce smoking at bachelor parties.

    Let me ‘splain.

    Boulder and Boulder County have a no smoking ban for places like D&B and what ever the stripclub we ended up at is called now.

    I’ve gotten used to this over the years and enjoy being able to go out and not having to deal with smoking. 35 should reduce the percentage of smokers down from the current 20% of the population and make it no longer viable to have places that don’t offer smoking and non-smoking areas. And yes, the BusStop in Boulder has a smokers area (it’s great fun to walk by it because its all glass walls with one stage, that is almost completely obscured by cigerette smoke).

  5. Coming from California — which had gone from smoking areas in restaurants to no smoking there at all — to Colorado, a decade ago, and having to revisit “smoking or non-?” I can certainly appreciate the sentiment.

    I do not really think this proposal will actually reduce smoking substantially. If it does, it will be over the next decade or more, not short-term, and only in a minor fashion.

    I would be more than willing to directly a support a “no smoking in public buildings” ban, statewide. This, not so much.

  6. Amendment 34 – Construction Liability

    No. I don’t feel this warrants a constitutional amendment.

    Amendment 35 – Tobacco Tax

    No. While I am against smoking, I don’t think the government needs to become dependent on monies that will eventually die out, and I mean this in a literal sense.

    Amendment 36 – Electoral College

    No. I’m all for one person one vote, but I don’t think this is the way to go. Personally, I’d like to see the electoral college dumped all together, but that’s another story.

    Amendment 37 – Renewable Energy Requirement

    No. I’m all for renewable energy, but I don’t think this is the way to go.

    Referendum A – State Personnel System

    No. Generally, think this is a bad idea.

    Referendum B – Obsolete Constitutional Provisions

    No. I think marking them as obsolete should be sufficient

    Referendum 4A – FasTracks

    Wish I could vote on this, but I can’t. If I could it would definitely be a Yes.

    Referendum 4B – SCFD

    Wish I could vote on this, but I can’t. If I could it would definitely be a Yes.

    St.Vrain School District 3A – Mill levy over-ride.

    I had the hardest time with this issue. I want to support our schools, but especially with the problems that St. Vrain is having, I don’t like the idea of throwing good money after bad. That being said, a crappy school district hurts my property values. I voted yes, with the hopes they can get back on track.

  7. The anti-36 group has the best name of an issue organization:

    Coloradans Against a Really Stupid Idea

    Sure beats Forward Colorado Together for Children and Cute Furry Animals.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *