voting question

[Atrain1]

It was refering to the affidavit on a mail in ballot. Not to the individual races or initiative questions.

I mailed mine in and as far as I remember it stated that I had to complete it. I am not sure about this and stated that in my first post, which is why I said I believe. I could be wrong but I did complete it just to be safe.

[Aloha_Shooter]

(My emphasis added below)

Lower than average recommended retention or one single nay vote from the panel and I vote for them to be ousted. I know appointments are by panel and it's supposed to be bipartisan in Colorado, but I look more closely at any judge recommended in by any Dem.

You're placing a lot of faith in that commission if that's how you do your rankings. After reviewing all the judges and their reviews, it looked to me like the commission recommends retaining any judge that doesn't receive a lot of complaints from lawyers. I would have liked more detail on their rulings and less about whether they were nice in court. Frankly, that's not my top criterion for retaining a judge.

[brutal]

Lower than average recommended retention or one single nay vote from the panel and I vote for them to be ousted. I know appointments are by panel and it's supposed to be bipartisan in Colorado, but I look more closely at any judge recommended in by any Dem.

(My emphasis added below)



You're placing a lot of faith in that commission if that's how you do your rankings. After reviewing all the judges and their reviews, it looked to me like the commission recommends retaining any judge that doesn't receive a lot of complaints from lawyers. I would have liked more detail on their rulings and less about whether they were nice in court. Frankly, that's not my top criterion for retaining a judge.

What I meant to say was Lower than average recommended retention by attorneys responding to the survey or one single nay vote from the panel and I vote for them to be ousted.

There are other factors, including reading the full reviews, that go into my decision. More than I cared to post at the time. There was at least one judge that had very unfavorable reviews.

[centrarchidae]

So anyone has any info on the judges? I am too lazy to google them all.

I leaned heavily on http://www.clearthebenchcolorado.org/evaluations-2012/ for mine, at least for the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals.

Basically, I look at two things with appellate judges: guns and TABOR. (And whether they just follow the damn law in general instead of trying to make the law).

With the county and district judges, the best I can think of is to google them and see who's bitching about them and why.

I don't bother with the Blue Book. It's all boilerplate with nothing terribly useful.

One other thing to remember about the judges: If one is not retained, his replacement will be appointed by the sitting governor. That's Howdy Doody Hickenloser for at least another two years. Just like Antonin Scalia is likely to retire from SCOTUS in the next four years, and who would you like to appoint his replacement?

[CO Hugh]

For the judges I referred to knowyourjudge.com . I look at the Retention Survey Report and particularly pay attention to the criteria that I think are important for a judge. Typically if the judge ranks lower the than the average on these items, I will vote to remove.

This site reports recommended to keep all the judges that I could vote on, but based on my criteria, I voted to remove a few.

For me the judges take the most time and effort to make what I think is an informed decision.

The judicial commission and knowyourjudge are shills for the Bar Association. Feckless is a total understatement when it comes to judges.

I have had friends serve on the performance commissions and work for real evaluations, to no avail. I don't think the system can be reformed.

The only reason the knowyourjudge site came out is due to Clearthebench.org. Thanks to Matt Arnold for all his hard work.

Keep in mind that probably since this system of retaining started, and definitely for more than 20 years, no judge has not been retained because they did not follow the constitution, or ruled against liberty or the law. Judges are not retained because they cannot move their cases, or horror of horrors they are rude to litigants. As long as you say pretty please to people you can be a damn socialist judge.

I want judges that follow the law, and manage their cases so we can try them and get out without spending a bunch of time and money listening to an oprah show.

Generally, my recommendation is do not retain unless you have specific information that weighs in favor of retaining a judge. Also checkclearthebench. Also keep in mind that many of the comments from parties are from the losers, particularly in hotly contested family law cases. It is difficult to impossible to find constructive comments on the judges from more objective perspectives or even losing parties in business type cases.

[Sharpienads]

To the original question in the OP:

Q12. Will my ballot be counted if I don't vote every race on it? What if I leave some races blank?
A12. You do not have to vote on every race unless you choose to do so. Some electors only cast a vote for President while others may vote for every race. Whatever races you do choose to vote on will be counted.

http://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elec...ectionDay.html


So no, you do not have to vote on every race.

ETA: It can be a PITA, but like someone else stated, take the time to do your research on each race. It is too important not to. Just my $0.02.