Talk:Colorado Caucus

Latest comment: 6 years ago by Sbwinter2 in topic Props 107 and 108 were in the 2016 election.
WikiProject iconElections and Referendums
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.
WikiProject iconPolitics Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Pro and Con section needed

There are good and bad sides to everything. What do you like most about the Colorado Caucus? What don't you like? JohnSWren (talk) 22:56, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

If we get a good response (10 or more comments) they will be compiled and added to the main Wikipedia listing for Colorado Caucus. JohnSWren (talk) 22:58, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Best: Best chance the common person has of serving in elected public office. See recent books that have documented this: Grassroots Rules, Why Iowa? Others.

LEAST: The Secretary of State is not producing a TV special about the Colorado Caucus. Yet. :-) JohnSWren (talk) 23:02, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Overnight Reporting via Wikipedia articles by 6000 volunteers at all caucuses March 1

See also

If you will be able to attend the March 1 Colorado Caucus you are invited to write a Wikipedia article about it starting now to list location, current (and new when they are elected that evening) precinct committee people, who is elected chair person (sometime precinct committee people assume they are to chair, but by Colorado law that's incorrect), who are elected delegates, and for Democrats who are they pledged to, for GOP what did they say that seemed to get them elected, etc.

Could someone help build a standard template for gathering this info? My hunch is that even half of the 6000 precinct caucuses are reported on this way it will make the national news and shed a lot of light on the caucus systems strengths and weaknesses. JohnSWren (talk) 23:29, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks JohnSWren (talk) 23:31, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Props 107 and 108 were in the 2016 election.

We voted for those in the 2016 election. The referenced article clearly states that they were from "last year" (article written in 2017). The header is misleading, so I suggest that it be changed to "The 2016 Propositions 107 and 108."--Sbwinter2 (talk) 04:51, 6 March 2018 (UTC)