« Did Owens Pull a Fast One on the Donkeys? | Main | Smaller Government, Lower Taxes...and Schiavo? »


Alva Adams

Actually, if Salazar was elected governor I believe he would be able to appoint his own successor, since he would technically not resign until about the same time he was sworn in.


According to the Constitution, a US Senate vacancy is seated by the Gov of the state in question. Think of the possibility... it could be a Salazar Hat Trick: Ken for Senate then Gov., John for Congress then Senate.


Alva, that's exactly what Arkhangel said.

Maybe you didn't know this, but after Salazar appoints his successor, a special election would have to be held in 2008 for someone to complete the rest of Salazar's term to 2010. Is that were you were confused?


what an asshole

Alva Adams

Oops, sorry. I just skimmed that part.


Salazar is calling for a recount on the Dem State Party Chair? @#%$!

That does nothing but hurt the party. What is he thinking?! He is loosing points with Dems fast.


Boy, those good government types (AKA the Waak-ies) sure forget about "Counting All the Votes" really fast when it doesn't suit them, don't they?

Phoenix Rising


This is just weird. I doubt he'd put his brother up for the Senate seat, though; the elder Salazar is the perfect Dem candidate for CO-3 - we won't find an easy replacement. OTOH, we could easily fill a Mark Udall or Diana Degette seat, and Udall's already in the hunt for a Senate seat.

I put the recount support down to Gates' firm support of Salazar. It does nothing to help the Dem unity ticket, but at this point I think it's not unexpected by most of the Be The Change crowd.

The Be The Change folks always thought Salazar made a much better Governor candidate; in national issues he's been all over the place, but in state issues he's on firm ground. Still, weird.


"Waakies"? Is this what is has come down to?

Great idea. Lets split the Democratic party here in Colorado between the "Waakies" and the "Gatesies". What a wonderful plan for success!

Where is the love baby?

They counted the votes at the State Central Committee for 2 HOURS. He lost. The DNC made it's ruling. Further deliberation on this hurts everyone in the party.


Just so we're all clear--YOU are the ones that divided the party with this Quioxitic attack on a successful Chair for no other reason than he failed to back your candidate, a candidate who ultimately went in the tank (and who I supported, btw.)


So what in your opinion would fix this, fellow Dem brother? I am interested in a unified party. I am sure you are too. How do you think we should move forward?


BTW I was NOT a Miles supporter. I worked on Ken's campaign.


Offer Gates the Executive Director job that they posted - if he refuses, he was doing it for the prestige and not for the party. It is a fence-mending procedure, and a way to split of some of his support if he refuses.

He would still be working as a party offical, and that position has a large amount of what the chair should do. The difference is that in the one case he is the head, in the other he runs most of the show.

I thought it was Gatesises - like those nasty Gatesises stole my precious senatorial candidate. I'm joking.


I don't care about ideological purity so much as stopping this hideous administration. Gates won. Waak has never won. Would you trade Greg Maddux for Jamey Wright?


Gates was offered First Vice Chair in a nomination from the floor at the reorganization party. Had he not declined the nomination he would have won easily and united the party.
Gates was not interested.

Phoenix Rising

If Maddux was in a theoretical team election against a new player named Wright and Wright won the election, then yes, I'd replace him because his fellow players didn't recognize him as the force behind their wins and felt he was the less useful of the two. The Dems don't operate on Selective Democracy; votes were counted and recounted, and Waak had more votes; we can't just ignore the vote and put Gates back in because the Dems won seats.

Also, what Ted said. Why would he take the Ex. Dir. position if he turned down the 1st Vice Chair spot? He's still contesting his loss instead. Aside from that, he can apply for the position just like anyone else - the ball's in his court.

Now can we get thoughts on the Salazar "not ruling anything out" comment instead?

Lefty Rivera

I'll be happy to oblige, Phoenix. Personally, I think that his remarks can be ascribed more to lack of rest than to anything else. Speaking for myself, I hadn't seen anything in print (online or offline) mentioning a Salazar gubernatorial bid before this, and a quick Google search didn't turn up a thing.

I've always thought that the issues that interested him (natural resources) predicated a run for Governor, rather than a Senate bid, and prior to his '04 campaign, I thought that he was, by far, *the* no-brainer candidate for Governor. Had he not run, that would still be the case. And if he had lost to Coors, I think that that defeat could have been blamed on greater spending by the GOP, and the coattails of the President.

But he did, and he won. I can't imagine that this is a serious thing, and if it is, there are a whole lot of people that are going to be asking questions. There is such a thing as being too ambitious in politics (normally an arena which rewards it), and that charge will dog him, both in the primary and in the general election.

I can't think of any other good context for that strange comment, and he's absolutely got to make his intentions clear one way or the other. I'd imagine that you'll hear him ruling out the Governorship real soon now.

The comments to this entry are closed.