I’d love to go into more detail, but in the interest of getting this posted today between appointments the following thoughts will have to suffice for this municipal election cycle.

Mayor

I’m voting for Brian Bahr, but also gave serious consideration to Steve Bach.  A vote for either is a vote for conservative principles and a vote against the much more liberal Richard Skorman.  The bottom line is that Skorman is headed to win the popular vote, but unless he tops 50% there will be a runoff election between the top two.  I’d enthusiastically vote for either Bahr or Bach in a runoff vs. Skorman.

City Council, At-large

There certainly aren’t a lack of options when it comes to the city council race.  No less than 15 people have thrown their hat into the ring for a total of 5 seats.  You can vote for up to 5 candidates.

I’ll start with who I’m not voting for.  I’m not voting for Jan Martin who has consistently been one of the more liberal voices on city council.  (If you’re of a more liberal persuasion then Jan is an obvious choice for you.)

I’m also not voting for any of the “Reform Team” slate of candidates (Bruce, Bruce, Bircham, Collins, Kasameyer).  While I have great appreciation for some of the things Doug Bruce and company have accomplished (TABOR, for example), I disagree with them strongly on other issues (Southern Delivery System, for example).  However, more importantly than most specific issues, we need people on city council who can have a civil discussion about things without turning everything into a fight. Bruce has made himself into such a polarizing figure that I’d rather he didn’t agree with me on anything. Conservative causes would be better served by his absence – especially on city council.  I believe this applies to his cronies on the “Reform Team” as well.

I intend to vote for Sean Paige, Brandy Williams, Tony Exum, Daniel “R12″ Reifschneider, and Tim Leigh.  I would particularly encourage you to vote for the first three I mentioned.

Sean Paige has been a vocal voice for less government even when I’ve disagreed with him on particulars.  He is both influential and principled.

Brandy Williams is a civil engineer who would bring that knowledge to city council where it is very much needed.

Tony Exum has already served our city for decades in the fire department, and is now seeking to continue that service.  Tony brings a certain dignity and class to our city council which has at times been lacking.  (To put it another way, Tony is everything that Doug Bruce is not.)

There is much more that could be said, but I trust this will at least get you started in the right direction as you research the candidates for yourself.

The primary problem with earmarks is not their contribution to runaway spending or the deficit.

The problem with earmarks is not, primarily, that they redistribute one state’s wealth to another state or special interest.

The real problem with earmarks is that they are used to buy votes and thereby thwart the will of the people.  The real problem with earmarks is that they are used to buy votes and thereby pass ominous legislation that may otherwise die on the house or senate floor.  (And to make it worse, they buy votes through runaway spending and redistribution of wealth.)

This should not be a partisan issue.  All Americans should be interested in protecting the integrity of the legislative process and, and ultimately, the will of the people.

I just had a friend ask what the best online sources were for up to the minute results tonight.  Good question. Here are various sites I’ll be tracking throughout the evening.  If you have other sites you prefer, please leave them in the comments!

Live Video Coverage Online

CBS News via YouTube – live coverage is supposed to start at 9PM Eastern (7PM MDT)

Wall Street Journal – the WSJ is supposedly doing live video coverage as well, but I don’t see anything on their site yet

Just the results – Colorado

Fox31 in Denver – Their live results page is already up.  This page will update throughout the night.

Secretary of State – The election portion of the Secretary of State’s site should have live results.  I’ll update my link with a direct link once available.

El Paso County Clerk and Recorder – Same as above.  I’ll update with a direct link once I find it.

Just the results – National

RealClearPolitics – the single best source for national political news and results

NYTimes.com – the most comprehensive return data I’ve found

Colorado Commentary and Results

Don’t forget the Candidate Facebook Pages!  This is a great source for their spin on how precincts reporting affect current totals.  Also has been the first place to find out when a candidate concedes.  You can also find good info on Twitter, but I don’t have time to direct everyone to the specific accounts.

rossputin.com – my favorite single source for Colorado political news.  I expect various updates throughout the evening.

coloradopols.com – a very liberal perspective, but as the largest political blog in Colorado, I’m sure they’ll have some decent info

The Spot (Denver Post) – another site that should be updated regularly

National Commentary and Results

Dick Morris – Dick is one the nations best political minds.  He’ll be updating an audio analysis every 15 or 20 minutes throughout the evening.

A couple months ago I said Hickenlooper was a 95% bet to win the governor’s race here in Colorado.  A couple weeks ago I said his odds were still 80%.  Yesterday, I predicted he would win by 2 points, thereby obviously inferring that his odds were a lot less than 80%.  Today…

I believe Tancredo is going to pull this off…  my only hesitation being whether or not the Tancredo surge occurred soon enough to affect the early ballots.  In spite of that though, I do think he wins.  Here are some general reasons why:

• When a candidate surges over the last few weeks it is almost impossible to get reliable polling data because opinions are changing so fast that by the time a poll is released it is already outdated.  This means you almost have to predict outcome on a poll *trend* basis which would put the candidates neck and neck instead of Hickenlooper up by 4 in the Real Clear Politics Avg.
• The primary movement has been Maes to Tancredo and Maes should finish today with no more than 6%.  IF Maes goes down to even 4.5% or 5%, Tanc’s odds go up significantly.
• Hickenlooper cannot crack 50% despite running almost unscathed through the entire campaign.  However, he’s also not going to drop below about 46%.
• Anytime a race is this close, the smart money goes with the momentum., and the momentum is clearly with Tancredo.
• Due to the dynamics of this race, Tancredo never got hit with negative ads.  This, combined with the electorate’s general propensity to vote against the party in power (at the state and federal level) means Tancredo will get a majority of the voters still undecided going into today.

Here is how I parse the data to conclude that Tanc wins by 1. (I know the percentages don’t always add up to exactly 100 – I’m trying to keep this relatively simple)

• I believe it is safe to assume that Republicans will account for 41% of ballots cast, Dems for 35%, and Unaffiliateds for about 25%.  (Early returns show Republicans at approximately 41.1% of ballots returned, Democrats at 34.3%, and Unaffiliateds at 23% thus far.) Using this data…
• Republican votes should break roughly 76/13/10 for Tanc/Maes/Hick respectively.
• Democrat votes should break roughly 9/2/88 respectively.
• Unaffiliated votes are the hardest to predict, but appear likely to break 52/4/47.
• Using the above assumptions the final result is approximately Tancredo 47.5%, Hickenlooper 46.5%, and Maes 6%.

And two final notes:

• The Sarah Palin endorsement of Tancredo yesterday seems carefully timed – late enough that it won’t hurt Tom with unaffiliated voters, but might help swing a few more Maes stragglers into the Tanc camp.  This was a smart last minute push with robo-calls from Palin going out to registered Republicans.  Tanc gets credit for a strategic edge in the last 24 hours.
• David Flaherty, president of Colorado based polling firm Magellan Strategies, personally predicted a Tancredo upset a few days ago.  I don’t put too much stock in the opinions of any one person, but it’s nice to know I’m in the company of immensely competent and intelligent people :)

So am I right?  Perhaps.  After tonight, I’ll either be a brilliant political prognosticator, or a complete loon whose predictions are swayed by what he ate last night.  12 hours from now we’ll have a good idea which it is!

I’ve already given my opinions on who to vote for, but thus far I’ve held off on my predictions for Tuesday’s results.  Yes, I know, you probably care even less about who I think is going to win than why you should vote for them.  So humor me here… it’s kind of like March Madness – it just wouldn’t be the same if we didn’t try to divine the outcome beforehand!

I’ll start with a couple national predictions:

House: Republicans +79
Senate: Republicans +9
Governors: Republicans +9, Independent +1 (IF Tancredo were to win, I would consider him Republican)

Now the Colorado Details:

U.S. Senate: Ken Buck by 4%

Governor: Hickenlooper by 2% (When you start looking at the crosstabs on recent polls this race is very interesting.  I don’t think Tancredo will push the Maes vote down far enough to pull it off, but it will be close.)

Secretary of State: Gessler by 5% (The race hasn’t received a lot of publicity so the high Republican turnout will probably ensure a Gessler win by virtue of many voters going straight party line down ticket.)
Treasurer: Kennedy by 3% (After Hickenlooper, this is the Dems best chance at a statewide win.)
Attorney General: Suthers by 10%

El Paso County Races: Republicans will sweep these (4 of 6 are uncontested, so it won’t be hard) with the closest race being County Clerk and Recorder.  Williams will win this race by a 25% margin.

Retention of Supreme Court Justices: All three will be retained with about 65% of the vote. Rice will likely fair a couple points better than Bender and Martinez.

Amendments P, Q, & R: All will pass comfortably with 60-70% each.

Amendment 60, 61, and Proposition 101: All three will be defeated with less than 30% of the vote.

Amendment 62: Supporters should be thrilled to see over 30%.  I predict about 25% support.

Amendment 63: Should pass with 55-60%.

Proposition 102: Huge unknown, but I suspect it will pass narrowly with less than 55%.

Colorado Springs 300: Pass with 65%.

Out of those 17 Colorado predictions, there is a margin of error of 3 races/questions with 25% certainty :)  And with that, good luck to all who I voted for, even if I predicted a loss.

The 2010 Colorado Attorney General race is between incumbent John Suthers (R) and Boulder DA Stan Garnett (D)

I agreed with Garnett, who prior to entering the race himself, was supporting John Suthers despite their opposing party affiliations.  Now Stan Garnett has since changed his opinion of John Suthers, but I haven’t.

So why did Stan Garnett withdraw his support from Suthers?  One reason.  He disagreed with John about the constitutionality of what has become known as Obamacare.  Stan had the following to say to John Suthers in an email dated March 22:

“Your decision to engage Colorado in this legal battle is cynical and partisan, and outside the appropriate role for a state attorney general.  Those who wondered why I, as a progressive DemocraticDA would endorse a Republican AG, which I was doing as recently as yesterday, will wonder no longer.”

In other words, Stan thought John Suthers was a competent and qualified Attorney General until John took a stand on one issue, the right of Coloradans to choose their own healthcare.  My point is simply this, John Suthers is immensely qualified and has served Colorado well for the past 4 years – even his progressive Democrat challenger, Stan Garnett, agreed until John took a stand on this contentious issue.

This race is about one thing.  Do you, or do you not, support John Suthers in joining the lawsuit to overturn specific requirements of Obamacare which violate the 10th amendment of the constitution (commonly called the commerce clause)?  This isn’t even about overturning the entire healthcare bill such as being proposed by Republicans in congress – it is simply addressing this particular portion which is an egregious violation of the constitution.

So do you support Suthers in his defense of our constitutional rights or do you agree with Garnett that the federal government should be able to force you to purchase healthcare against your own will?  That is the choice, and for me it is an easy one.  Vote for John Suthers for Colorado Attorney General.

It’s easy to get caught up in the excitement of the state and national races and forget that we have county elections as well.  There are six county wide offices we’re voting on this year in El Paso county, Colorado.

Four of the six county races are uncontested, so your choice is to either vote for the one candidate or undervote if you feel strongly against them.  The uncontested races are:

• Treasurer – Bob Balink
• Assessor – Mark Lowderman
• Surveyor – Lawrence Burnett
• Coroner – Bob Bux

I don’t have any particularly strong feelings on the above four, except for Assessor.  As an El Paso County, Colorado Realtor, I’ve personally interacted with the Assessor’s office (currently under Lowderman’s leadership) on numerous occasions and have been very impressed by their level of service to the public.  I strongly support Mark Lowderman, and in the absence of any negative knowledge regarding the other three, I will vote for all four.

Now the two contested races:

El Paso County Sheriff – Terry Maketa (R) vs. John “Doc” Holiday (I)

I endorsed incumbent Terry Maketa in his primary contest and will gladly do so again.  He has proven himself with years of service to El Paso county and won his primary in convincing fashion.  Holiday has yet to offer any good reasons to vote for someone new.  You can read my primary endorsement for more information.  My vote is for Terry Maketa.

El Paso County Clerk and Recorder – Wayne Williams (R) vs. Tom Mowle (D)

Both candidates are making the switch from existing government jobs – Williams as a county commission and Mowle as the county public trustee.  As a Realtor I’m well acquainted with the job of Tom Mowle as public trustee, and believe he has done a good job in his present position.  Likewise, although I’m not in his district, I believe Wayne Williams has done a good job for the citizens of Northern El Paso county.

Regarding the job of Clerk and Recorder, I’ve had the opportunity to speak with Williams, and have heard him present on multiple occasions as well.  There are few people with Wayne’s grasp of election law and process who would be better qualified for the job of clerk and recorder and I will enthusiastically cast my vote for Wayne Williams on November 2.

Who to vote for in the Senate race – that is the question.

You could listen to the radio or watch TV for your answer… unless you’ve been living under a log for the past couple weeks, you’ve no doubt heard dozens of attack ads in the Senatorial race involving Ken Buck (R) and Michael Bennet (D).  In fact, The Fix reports that outside spending has now topped 25 million dollars in this race alone.

Of course, if you did that you would just end up not voting at all because I have yet to hear an ad that says something good about either one of them!  Most of you will still choose one or the other though so let me offer the following for your consideration:

First, we have to understand that the personal views of individual Senators actually make VERY little difference.  You are voting for a party – either Republican or Democrat – period.

Don’t believe me?  Michael Bennet votes with his party (D) 91% of the time.  On average, Dems vote with their party 90.1% of the time and Republicans vote with their party 85.3% of the time.  In an election year with a highly partisan atmosphere when control of the Senate will be decided by 1 or 2 races one way or the other your vote is only one thing – a vote about which party, Democrats or Republicans, you want to control the U.S. Senate. (statistics from The Washington Post)

That’s it folks.  It’s a choice between whether you want the Democrats to control the White House AND the Senate, or whether you want power split with a Democrat in the White House and Republicans in the Senate.

So what about all those nasty attack ads?  Well, like most attack ads, they misrepresentations, exaggerations, and even a couple outright lies.  But even if they were true, does it matter?  After all, unless their political party agrees with their view, Buck or Bennet’s one vote in the Senate won’t take their supposed “extreme” ideas very far anyway.

I believe the last two years have clearly shown us that there is no end to what Obama spend, regulate, and redistribute with a rubber stamp Dem congress.  I’m voting for Ken Buck.

If you live in School District 49, please visit my Colorado Springs real estate site where I’ve posted an explanation and opinion on question 3C.  For information on various other questions on the El Paso county ballot you can see our summary post.

In Colorado we have a judicial system in which justices are appointed by the Governor and then “retained” by a vote of the people.

Have you ever have to choose between two (or more) candidates for elected office and think, “I wish neither of them had to win!”  Guess what.  That is exactly the choice you have in the supreme court retention votes.  You don’t have to make a decision about who is the lesser evil – just vote “yes” or “no” based on whether or not you think they should keep their job!

So do justices Rice, Martinez, and Bender deserve to keep their current positions?  I don’t believe they do, so I’ll be voting “No” on all three.  The role of a judge is really quite simple (certainly not always “easy”, but simple).  Their job is to make sure the law is upheld.

It is not to make new laws, change old laws, or in any way legislate their own views.  It is simply to apply the present law, and at times, to determine the appropriate penalty when laws are broken.

So do justices Rice, Martinez, and Bender apply the law or do they create or change the law?  In my opinion it is clearly the latter.  They have redefined what is a tax, bypassed TABOR, upheld a obscene abuse of eminent domain by Telluride, CO, usurped the authority of the General Assembly in redistricting, and we could go on.  Tell the court that we want to them to enforce the law, not change it.  If Rice, Martinez, and Bender want to make laws they should be legislators, not justices.

Vote “NO” on all 3 Supreme Court Justices Rice, Martinez, and Bender.

Amendment 63 would basically prevent Colorado from enforcing the “mandate” to buy health insurance which was part of the health care legislation Obama and congress approved earlier this year.

Vote YES

Before you think this is only for partisan right wingers, even the Gazette endorsed this amendment saying, “This will be a great way to protect Colorado citizens from an unfunded mandate from Uncle Sam.”

Frankly, this isn’t about whether or not you agree with all Obama’s healthcare bill.  This is about telling the federal government that they can’t dictate what individual citizens of Colorado can or cannot do with our own money.  It’s about protecting our rights to purchase health care and health insurance, when we want, from who we want, and only if we want to.

I will enthusiastically vote “yes on amendment 63.

My first thought when I saw these two ballot questions was, “Again?!”  It seems that every election cycle the city wants to keep more of our money.  Well, they still haven’t learned their lesson, at least not all the way.

2B (The Retention of $600,000) – Vote NO

Again?  As long as the city keeps asking for money every election, I’m going to give them the same answer.  $600,000 isn’t really that much money in the context of their entire budget, nor is it a lot of money to go to the taxpayers on a per capita basis.  HOWEVER, there is a principle at stake here, and that is that we don’t want the city whining about needing money EVERY election.  I’m voting “no”.

2C (TOPS Reallocation of Funds) – Vote YES

Again?  Well, sort of.  They changed one detail from the last time you saw this on the ballot.  What makes 2C different from 2B though, is that it is only a re-allocation of money the city is already bringing in.  It also automatically sunsets after just 2 years.  So could the city find the money from somewhere else instead of asking us to re-allocate these funds?  Probably, but since it would expire in just 2 years (instead of the previous 5), and since I’d much rather re-allocate funds than find new taxes, I’m going to vote “yes” this time around.

As a Colorado Springs resident, I strongly encourage you to vote “yes” on 300.  Also known as “The Mayor Project“, this vote changes our city governmental structure to increase accountability and strengthen the voice of the voters in municipal matters.  This isn’t even a partisan issue so please read on even if you don’t normally agree with me :)  Support (and some dissent) has come from both parties and various individuals.

The concept of 300 is to change our governmental structure from the current city manager system, to a multi-branch system that more closely resembles the United States government.

Here is what we have now – we vote for the city council and mayor who appoints a city manager.  This means the top city executive (the city manager) is appointed rather than elected.  This is similar to having the Speaker of the House or the Senate majority leader appoint the President rather than elect him!  The result is that the top city executive is completely unaccountable to the voters and largely ignored.  (Quick, who is our current city manager?  See?)

The Mayor Project proposes that when we elect a new Mayor, he or she is the chief executive of the city.  Just like electing our President, the voters can now hold the person in charge responsible.  Now, instead of having a mayor who is just one more member of the city council, we would have separation of powers with a veto wielding mayor over a legislative city council.  The $210,000 a year city manager position is eliminated in this proposal and the new mayor earns only $96,000 as the new chief executive.

Vote “yes” on 300!

I really hate to do this, like REALLY hate to do this, but I am officially voting NO on these three tax cutting ballot issues.  As a small government conservative, it pains me to do this, but seriously, Doug Bruce, could you not find a reasonable way to cut taxes?  I’ve love to vote for lower taxes, but this is an over-reaction to recent over-reaching by greedy politicians.

Before I start getting hate mail from the Libertarians out there who are supporting these measures, you’d all do well to put your efforts where it matters since all three of these are only polling at around 20%.  So go vote your conscience, and no one will be the worse for it.

Amendment 60 – NO

This amendment deals with property taxes and education funding.  My first problem with this amendment is that it shifts education funding from the local level to the state level.  Since when is that a conservative principle?  Secondly, the property taxes in Colorado (and the Springs area in particular) are fairly reasonable.  If I had to choose how to pay taxes, I’d rather pay reasonable property taxes than have the government figure out other “creative” ways to get my money.

Amendment 61 – NO

The basic thrust here is to limit government borrowing.  However, amendment 61 not only restricts future borrowing, but it also mandates that taxes be reduced once they’re used to pay off current debts.  This is equivalent to saying that you can no longer get a mortgage on your home, AND that once you pay it off you no longer get to use the money that you had been putting towards debt service.  (i.e. You can’t save that money for your next house.)

I believe this would have a very negative effect on Colorado’s infrastructure, putting us perpetually behind the 8 ball, so to speak.

Proposition 101 – NO

Clearly a reaction to the FASTER car tax/fee, but a pretty extreme one.  Of the three, this one is the only one I seriously considered voting for, but in the end, I think there are better ways to cut taxes and spending.  Just because you need an amputation, you probably don’t grab the hatchet if there is proper surgical equipment on the other side of the operating room.

Finally, on a pragmatic note regarding all three of these issues.  Why do we waste time and money on something that only garners 20% support in a year when anti-tax/spending sentiment is at an all time high?  Why not reach for something that has a chance at garnering enough votes to actually reduce our taxes?

I never would have imagined that I would be endorsing a third-party candidate for governor, but that is exactly what I am doing.  Here is the current state of the race.  You are either voting for Hickenlooper or against Hickenlooper.  If you support John, who thinks we’re all hicks, Hickenlooper, then get out there and vote for him.

If you want someone else in the Governors mansion, I submit the following for your consideration:

• Three of the last five polls according to Real Clear Politics have Tancredo within easy striking distance of Hickenlooper (1 point, 3 points, and 5 points, respectively).  This race is NOT lost yet.  Given the dynamics of the race, and when Tancredo surged, I believe this race will end up with Tanc and Hick finishing within 3 points one way or the other.  Your choice in this race does matter, so please take it seriously.
• There has been some fuss about Maes finishing below 10% and thereby relegating the GOP to minor party status until at least the next gubernatorial contest.  Let’s face it, Maes is likely below the threshold with or without your vote so you might as well give Tanc a fighting chance!  Additionally, having a conservative governor during redistricting is probably more important than major party status anyway, and we can’t have both at this point.
• If the effort by Clear the Bench Colorado is successful in removing 3 of our activist supreme court justices, it will all be for naught if Hickenlooper wins since he will likely appoint justices from the same judicial mold as the ones we’re trying to kick out.

Vote Tancredo for Colorado Governor.