The Associated Press for Hickenlooper, who had 57% of the votes with nearly 78% of the votes counted. That margin continued to hold at 9:30 p.m. with 84% of the votes counted.

“Democrats are united,” Hickenlooper told supporters gathered in Denver at Steuben’s. “We are going to take back the U.S. Senate, we are going to take back the House. We are going to stop President Trump in his tracks.”

Hickenlooper, a pro-business centrist, pivoted to the left, at least in his campaign messaging, highlighting his work to expand healthcare access, boost housing affordability, cut environmental emissions and overhaul ICE.

Colorado election results for the 2026 primary

Gonzales, who declined corporate campaign contributions, had labeled herself as part of a new generation of Democrats looking to oust what she described as "do-nothing" incumbents backed by billionaires.

A community organizer and immigrant advocate, Gonzales graduated from Yale University in 2005 and was elected to the Colorado State Senate in 2018, where she currently serves as Majority Whip.

Among her key issues were reforming the immigration system and eliminating ICE; providing universal childcare, elder care and Medicare coverage; and protecting voter rights.

"The fight -- for an economy that works for us, a democracy that includes us, and a future that belongs to us -- continues," Gonzales wrote in a .

Progressives and democratic socialists had a strong showing in New York's primaries on June 23, where they swept deeper-pocketed rivals with a fraction of the financial support.

Named after New York mayor Zohran Mamdani, a social democrat, the Mamdani movement has found success mobilizing younger voters and tapping into working-class economic anxieties.

Gonzales raised only a tenth of the campaign finances that Hickenlooper had, according to public records. And Hickenlooper declined requests for a debate.

By highlighting his progressive accomplishments while at the same time staying true to his centrist leanings, Hickenlooper was able to successfully thread the needle.

Hickenlooper and Gonzales split the vote in Denver, the home base of each candidate. Hickenlooper, however, maintained a double-digit lead across most of the rest of the state, except for Adams County and some counties in southern Colorado, where his lead was in the single digits.

After two terms as Colorado governor, Hickenlooper had statewide name recognition in his favor. And he has championed rural causes during his first term in the Senate, noted Ken Salazar, a former U.S. Senator who spoke in support of Hickenlooper Tuesday night.

In his 2020 presidential run, he opposed "Medicare for All" and a national fracking ban, causes that Gonzales champions.

Among the groups that endorsed Hickenlooper are End Citizens United, League of Conservation Voters, Planned Parenthood Action Fund, and the Greater Metro Denver Ministerial Alliance.

Gonzales received endorsements from Oil Change Action, the Jane Fonda Climate PAC, GenZ for Change and Faith in Colorado.

Labor unions divided up their support among the two candidates.

The winner of Tuesday's primary will face Mark Baisley, the de facto Republican nominee who ran unopposed.

A Colorado Republican has not held a Senate seat since Hickenlooper defeated Cory Gardner in the 2020 election.

The venue cancellations, at least two of them said to be based on security concerns with hosting the event featuring Hasan Piker, prompted outrage by the candidates. The episode also underlined broader questions as Democrats from different factions of the party debate whether figures like Piker draw in voters or risk alienating them.

Piker, a Twitch streamer who has 3 million followers on the video livestreaming platform, has tapped a young, anti-establishment audience that the Democratic Party has struggled to bring into its fold.

He’s also been the subject of sharp criticism from prominent political groups, including , for some of his most controversial comments. Those include a 2019 comment because of its foreign interventions and Piker saying he would “ every single time.” Piker has apologized for the comment about 9/11.

His provocative comments have made Piker a . But some Denver Democrats, including Melat Kiros, who is running in Colorado’s 1st Congressional District primary against U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette, and state Sen. Julie Gonzales, who is running against U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper, have leaned into the figure’s sphere of influence. Both share progressive political views with Piker, and Kiros identifies as a democratic socialist.

“He has a large audience of really engaged voters,” said Annie Orloff, a spokesperson for Kiros’ campaign. “I think people like to throw a lot of shade at him, but he’s really supporting these candidates and helping them.”

Orloff said the two times have overlapped with some of the campaign’s best fundraising periods.

Gonzales, who wasn’t available for an interview for this story, to discuss her platform.

Both Kiros and Gonzales were set to campaign with Piker at a rally in Denver on Sunday. The event changed locations three times after venues canceled.

The original location, ReelWorks in the Five Points, canceled the event a week ahead of time after stating that its HVAC system wasn’t working, according to an email provided to The Denver Post. According to Kiros’ campaign, the venue hosted other events that same weekend.

A Reelworks representative didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Then a backup location, the Ogden Theatre on East Colfax Avenue, pulled out two days ahead of time, citing “significant pressure and concern from the local community.”

“This decision was made purely from a security viewpoint, there was no political viewpoint or political decision around it,” Dennis Dennehy, a spokesperson for theater operator AEG Presents, told The Post.

Organizers then turned to the Stanley Marketplace in Aurora. But it also canceled the event, citing security concerns related to Piker’s appearance, according to the Kiros campaign. The Stanley Marketplace didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Piker has spoken at Yale University and the University of Chicago. He was also set to speak at South by Southwest in London until he was banned from entering the country because officials believed his presence “may not be conducive to the public good,” .

After the Kiros campaign ultimately moved the event to the steps of the Colorado Capitol on Sunday, drawing hundreds of people, Piker and Gonzales both decided not to attend. Instead, during the event and later hosted Kiros and two candidates from other states who were in town for the event on his channel.

Kiros’ campaign alleged, without evidence, that DeGette had applied pressure to compel the venues to cancel the event.

“I think it is hard to make a distinction from the folks who fund people like Diana DeGette and the people who own these venues,” Orloff said.

AEG Presents is part of the Anschutz Entertainment Group, founded by Colorado billionaire Phil Anschutz, a Republican.

DeGette’s campaign denied the allegations, saying the claim was made up.

“I can’t believe I have to say this, but it’s an absolute lie that I or my campaign had anything to do with her venue cancellations,” DeGette said in a statement. “She’s free to make her own mistakes, and campaigning with an infamous anti-semite who says he ‘hates this country’ and thinks we ‘deserved 9/11’ is a big one.”

Democrats in other states who have appeared alongside Piker have seen a mix of harsh criticism and a boost of engagement with their campaigns.

Democratic left figures like New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders have also all appeared on his channel.

Other Democratic candidates — like Sen. Michael Bennet and Attorney General Phil Weiser, who are running for governor of Colorado — haven’t appeared on Piker’s channel. Colorado Democratic Party spokesperson Andrew Nicla said the party had no comment on candidates appearing on shows like Piker’s.

Colorado’s June 30 primary and other states’ party contests may serve as a litmus test of sorts for candidates who welcome that ideological corner of the internet.

When Politico reported that Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed was appearing alongside Piker in April, his opponents heaped criticism on him. But in recent polls, he in the three-way race.

Earlier this month, as primary election results rolled in, Piker celebrated the victory of a congressional candidate he had campaigned for in New Jersey, . But that same night, in California, three candidates whom Piker also supported lost their primary races.

Tell us what you think about this story

Re: “As Lake Powell’s levels recede, life reemerges,” June 7 news story

Congress should demand that the Bureau of Reclamation accelerate its efforts to modify Glen Canyon Dam to allow more water to flow from Lake Powell to Lake Mead. Doing so would enhance water security for the millions of people and vast agricultural regions in Arizona, California, Nevada and Mexico that rely on water from Lake Mead. It would protect hydropower production at Hoover Dam, which has about 60% more generating capacity than Glen Canyon Dam. It would also support the ongoing ecological restoration now flourishing in Glen Canyon.

Lake Mead is less than 30% full and can accommodate more than three times the water currently stored in Lake Powell.

According to the Bureau’s of Colorado River conditions, Lake Powell will drop below 3,500 feet throughout the entire first quarter of 2027. At that elevation, hydroelectric generation at Glen Canyon Dam will be severely curtailed, despite unprecedented actions to prop up the reservoir.

The same forecast projects that Lake Mead will fall to a level at which, for nearly a year, the cost to operate and maintain Hoover Dam will exceed revenues from hydroelectric sales.

The Bureau has been studying potential modifications to Glen Canyon Dam for years, but does not expect to complete even its “appraisal study” until the end of 2026.

Congress should appropriate funds immediately and direct the Bureau to develop the plans and engineering designs required to construct major modifications to Glen Canyon Dam — changes that would ensure significantly more water can be delivered downstream to Lake Mead.

Ronald L. Rudolph, Golden

Dems should ‘close ranks’ around Platner

Re: “Democrats cannot ignore Platner’s many red flags and hold the moral high ground,” June 7 commentary

Moral high ground? Elections are not about morals. They are about power — who gains power, how they are exercising power and accountability for that power.

Elections are not dating events. Voters do not choose a mate. A pure heart, an unimpeachable background, perfect manners and a dental plan do not matter. Graham Platner is not running to be Maine’s sweetheart. He is running for one of its Senate seats.

Platner is Maine’s Democratic Senate candidate. There is no other. It is him against Republican Susan Collins, who talks centrist and votes extremist. He is the Democratic candidate because he, as columnist Doug Friednash laments, “
has been leading in the polls and offers the party a chance to beat Susan Collins.” Democracy in action.

For the sake of us, the people, our country and the planet, Democrats must now regain power. Only with power can they combat the corruption and the chaos, legislate for the people, and reverse the prevailing “
.pattern of offensive and vulgar conduct” that Mr. Friednash sanctimoniously and wrongfully attributes to Platner, and which the current regime inflicts on us, the people, every day, all day long.

A covered-up Totenkopf tattoo? Cute, considering Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s uncovered vile white supremacist tattoos and corresponding vile, white supremacist activities. Foul language? Who cares in light of President Trump and Co.’s incessant sewage tweets? Impure manners towards women who are not his wife? He is not commanding them to “be quiet, piggy” or bragging about grabbing their nether regions without consent.

Those who want Dems to gain power must close ranks behind Dem candidates, not sabotage them with irrelevant purity tests.

Floy Jeffares, Lakewood

Hetal Doshi for Attorney General

Re: “Vote Michael Dougherty for Colorado attorney general in the Democratic primary,” June 7 editorial

I am challenging the Denver Post¶¶Òőap endorsement of Michael Dougherty for Colorado’s attorney general. The reasons given for the endorsement focused on his local experience. While admirable, it is my opinion that Hetal Doshi has more credible state and federal experience.

Doshi has already managed a staff of over 800 and will hit the ground running. She has well-established relationships with attorneys general throughout the country. She has taken on and won huge antitrust cases.

Both Dougherty and David Seligman will strive to do well by Colorado. That said, Doshi’s depth and breadth of experience, along with her bipartisanship, professionalism and temperament, make her the strongest candidate. We need Hetal Doshi’s leadership at this critical period.

Alice Applebaum, Denver

DeGette should remain in the U.S. House

Re: “DeGette has served 15 terms, but has she been effective?” May 31 news story

Yes! Rep. Diana DeGette is effective.

As a resident of Colorado House District 1, I’m affected by the leadership of our district. For years, I’ve supported Rep. DeGette, and I continue to do so. Not because she and I are both getting along in years (that would be blatant agism, much like candidate Melat Kiros is doing in her campaign materials), but because she’s been an excellent representative.

Experience must count for something, and that¶¶Òőap what I see lacking in Kiros’ materials. I see no experience with the political process; I see no grassroots work in the community; I see no elected or appointed political positions, not even in high school or college. How do we know she’ll work effectively?

It doesn’t matter how often she claims she’ll work for universal Medicare. If she doesn’t know how to function as an elected official, she’ll be ineffective. Rep DeGette’s office has always responded to inquiries, has always communicated with her constituents, and has always been informed about the details and possible repercussions of political doings.

Bonnie McCune, Denver

Hickenlooper should remain in U.S. Senate

Re: “Is Hickenlooper the one to fight Trump, or should voters give Gonzales a chance?” June 10 editorial

The Denver Post passed the buck by not endorsing either U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper or state Sen. Julie Gonzales. Call me old-fashioned but I believe Hickenlooper’s approach to statesmanship is what is needed.

Gonzales is apparently qualified and has demonstrated a zeal for change; however, I am troubled when persons aspiring to political office make claims that are unrealistic and, quite frankly, not possible in the current situation. Elimination of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is not feasible. There is much I find unconscionable about ICE, but it needs to be reformed, not eliminated.

Hickenlooper has demonstrated an aptitude for accomplishment, quiet, unheralded, and consistent. As mayor of Denver, governor of Colorado and senator, he has been businesslike, steady and knowledgeable.

Gonzales alleges some financial impropriety on Hickenlooper’s part, but The Post rightfully points out that he has been judicious about placing his finances in a “blind trust,” encouraging other senators to do the same. Gonzales says that she wants Medicare for all and will abolish private health insurance. I am sorry, but this demonstrates a naivete and lack of certainty in what this means in terms of costs and practicality.

No one doubts that Trump has to be curtailed, but remember, no one senator can effect change individually; it must be done by consensus and compromise.

Philip Arreola, Denver

Editor’s note: The policy of The Denver Post and its sister papers in Tribune and Media News Group is not to endorse in U.S. Senate and gubernatorial races.

Let Russell Wilson have his broadcasting shot

Re: “Wilson’s a Hall-of-Famer, but he’ll be brutal,” June 7 sports commentary

Sean Keeler has decided to carry on the nasty comments on Russell Wilson into a brand new TV job for him before he even has his first try at it. Okay, let’s remind Keeler to give people a chance. I’m sure people have done that for him and haven’t trashed him before he even started his reporting career. Back off!

Dea Coschignano, Wheat Ridge

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper wants Colorado voters to give him another six years in office to continue this fight. His opponent in the June primary — Colorado state Sen. Julie Gonzales — says she is sick of “do-nothing Democrats” who haven’t advanced the progressive agenda or blocked the worst of Trump’s impulses.

The question before voters is whether John Hickenlooper is the best man for the job or is Colorado in need of the change Julie Gonzales promises as the state’s first woman in Senate. While The Denver Post Editorial Board is not formally endorsing in this race, we interviewed both candidates as a service to readers trying to decide which Democrat to advance to November. Here is what they told us about their approach to the office.

“I want to make sure we win; we beat the Republicans and take control of the House and the Senate, and that means 100% focused on those elections and fighting Trump at every single step we can,” Hickenlooper said, saying that Trump is eligible for impeachment and removal from the White House, but it’ll never happen. “(We are) beginning to work on a lot of the stuff he has destroyed. When we build it back, and we will build it back, we’ve got to build it back better than it was before.”

Hickenlooper said building back better will take statesmanship — getting senators on board with changes to healthcare, taxes and other reforms. Our current senator has worked hard to build relationships in the Senate that he says have been crucial for getting legislation passed, like the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Act.

When asked what she’d do differently than Hickenlooper, Gonzales was clear that Hickenlooper and other incumbents have been sitting on the sidelines rather than using procedural processes to block this administration’s destructive agenda.

“It’s become too easy right now to just retreat to our corners and say nothing and then, you know, throw stones at the other side come election time,” Gonzales said, noting that shutting down the federal government over abuses of power was absolutely the right call in 2025. “I actually spoke to furloughed workers during the most recent shutdown when (Sen. Minority Leader Chuck) Schumer caved. They were livid because their perspective was, ‘I’m sorry, we were just starting to get somewhere. Why are we going to fold right now so that we can go on … Thanksgiving?'”

The contrast between their approaches is clear — Hickenlooper has built relationships and trust, including with key moderate Republicans, that he says will benefit Coloradans in the next 6 years. Gonzales wants to use power and pressure to first prevent the worst from the remaining two years of Trump’s administration and then to quickly bring about lasting reform.

Hickenlooper is a moderate candidate who wants to make changes within the system, while Gonzales is a progressive candidate who wants drastic overhauls of systems.

For example, Gonzales wants to abolish the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement. She says we need to implement a wealth tax on billionaires.

Hickenlooper said he’d support a graduated wealth tax on those making more than $1 million in taxable income a year, but said a smarter approach is to get Republicans on board with eliminating tax breaks for wealthy individuals and corporations.

Gonzales wants Medicare for all — a single-payer system that mimics European models of health care. She would abolish private health insurance.

Hickenlooper supports what he calls “radical transparency” legislation that would force health insurance companies to disclose exactly what they are spending, where for health care.

“Once an employer signs a contract with a United Healthcare or a Cigna, everything goes opaque. They can’t see what any hospital is paying. The American Medical Association says that the health care spending right now is about $5.3 trillion and that about a quarter of it is waste, duplication, inefficiency and some fraud,” Hickenlooper said. “We could capture that with this transparency bill.”

Gonzales has made no secret of her criticism of Hickenlooper’s current financial entanglements. She wanted us to ask Hickenlooper about a recent financial filing that disclosed Hickenlooper, who sits on an important transportation committee, had recently purchased about $150,000 in Uber stocks.

Hickenlooper, who has been in the Senate for six years now, told us that he and his wife have decided to move their money into a qualified blind trust.

We love it when and a healthy primary goad an incumbent politician into doing the right thing.

Here’s the complex backstory and why it¶¶Òőap important.

As the mayor of Denver – way back in 2007 — Hickenlooper famously sold his interest in a large restaurant group where he had made his fortune to avoid conflicts of interest.

“I put everything I owned into a blind trust, and it¶¶Òőap been in that same blind trust all that time. I’ve never asked or been told what has been bought or what has been sold,” said Hickenlooper, who signed onto a bill to ban congressional stock trades.

But the Select Committee on Ethics recommends that senators with substantial investments use a “qualified blind trust,” a stricter designation that only a handful of senators have attained for their investments. Hickenlooper said he will have to sell stocks, pay capital gains taxes and move his money to a new management company.

“I’m ready to do that because you have got to have public trust. And it¶¶Òőap frustrating because you’ve done everything right, and now they raise the bar,” he said.

Every U.S. senator – 100 men and women entrusted by voters with immense global power — should follow Hickenlooper’s lead and put their money in qualified blind trusts or stop investing in the stock market altogether.

Gonzales said if she were put in office, she would fight to ban members of Congress from making any stock trades personally, and Hickenlooper said he also supports a ban.

Corruption in Washington, D.C., is a serious issue, and we are glad that both candidates in this race are willing to step up and fight against the abuse of power.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

Re: “Attack on Pope Leo, posting of Jesus image criticized,” April 14 news story

When in the course of human events, could someone have ever foreseen the time when the president of the United States would have to explain why he posted and unposted a picture of himself as Jesus? Will there be additional low points of this presidency before Congress realizes it is time to face the reality of the president¶¶Òőap mind and protect what¶¶Òőap left of the reputation of the office?

Cindy Robertson, Denver

Just when you think President Trump can’t get any crazier, he does (e.g., attacking Iran, insulting the pope, etc.). What will be the crisis du jour tomorrow? I think it¶¶Òőap time for Congress to begin 25th Amendment proceedings. Please. Before it¶¶Òőap too late.

Flint Whitlock, Denver

Let’s understand the impeachment clause

Re: “,” April 9 commentary

Kirsten Matoy Carlson is mistaken about the consequences of a guilty verdict by the U.S. Senate after an impeachment trial. She states, “If the person is convicted and removed from office, only then can senators vote on whether to permanently disqualify that person from ever again holding federal office.”

That is not what the Constitution says! states: “Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States
” There is only one vote.

Nowhere in the Constitution with regard to impeachment is there any reference or mandate that after conviction, senators “may” or “can” vote to bar the convicted person from holding federal office in the future. Legal scholars hinge that false opinion on their false understanding of grammar. The word “and” is a conjunction. It joins independent clauses, indicating a connection between the two, especially between items of the same type or class. Removal from office and barring from holding any other office are of the same class and type! In essence, the Senate is saying, “You violated your oath of office and the public trust, therefore you are removed from office and cannot be trusted in any federal office in the future.”

Tom Hubbard, Denver

Tax return takes nonsensical route to Ogden, Utah via USPS

I sent my tax return to the IRS in Ogden, Utah, via certified mail on March 13. It took a vacation and flew to Sarasota, Fla., then to Tampa, then back to Sarasota before making a leisurely trip to its original destination. It arrived there on March 27.

Using flying distance, an approximate 400-mile trip became a 3,550-mile journey.

Conspiracy theorists want to know whether the USPS has been tasked with delaying our refunds as long as possible. Or are they just practicing for what they plan to do with our ballots for the midterms?

Dee Nelson, Centennial

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

Both men will appear on the June 30 primary ballot. Bottoms, a pastor who is one of the most conservative lawmakers in the state Capitol, won slightly more than 45% of the 2,145 ballots cast, comfortably beating Marx’s 39% and topping a field of more than a dozen candidates who vied for gubernatorial ballot access. When Marx’s total was announced and Bottoms’ victory assured, the lawmaker’s supporters shouted and jumped around him in the bleachers of Colorado State University-Pueblo’s arena.

“This is our year. This is the year we’re going to do this,” Bottoms, who is in his second term in the statehouse, said in brief remarks earlier Saturday. He promised to work with federal immigration authorities, to build nuclear reactors and to “reclaim safety and security.” He also pledged to “DOGE the mess out of everything in this state,” a reference to billionaire Elon Musk’s “Department of Government Efficiency,” which gutted a number of federal programs last year.

State Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer, who also is running for governor, did not participate in the assembly process and has instead submitted signatures to appear on the primary ballot. Marx also submitted signatures while seeking the assembly nomination.

The party also nominated state Sen. Mark Baisley for U.S. Senate, former Colorado Libertarian Party official James Wiley for secretary of state, and Fremont County Commissioner Kevin Grantham for state treasurer. All those candidates will be appear on the ballot alone in June, virtually assuring them places on the November general election ballot.

For attorney general, the assembly sent Michael Allen, the district attorney in El Paso County, and attorney David Willson to the primary election in June.

The day was marred by delays, mistakes, long lines and, as afternoon turned into evening, a voting discrepancy: About 80 more ballots had been cast than delegates had been credentialed to cast them. The assembly then voted to accept the new ballots as legitimate (the official running the meeting said they likely were).

The winner of the June gubernatorial primary will face off against U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet or Attorney General Phil Weiser, each of whom are seeking the Democratic nomination to replace Gov. Jared Polis next year.

The Republican candidates who emerge from the primaries will face a Colorado Democratic Party that has held all four constitutional statewide offices since 2018. No Republican has won the governor’s office since 2002, and the last statewide win for a GOP candidate was Heidi Ganahl’s win for a University of Colorado governing board seat in 2016.

Republican contenders repeatedly promised to reverse those trends Saturday. Eighteen gubernatorial candidates initially were slated to speak, although several didn’t turn up and their candidacies did not advance. One candidate — Kelvin “K-Man” Wimberly — appeared to have no supporters present to nominate him. That prompted someone from the crowd to run up to the microphone, gesture to Wimberly and offer to nominate “this guy.”

As party members slowly trickled into the building Saturday morning, campaign volunteers wandered, handing out bags with posters for Marx or walking in slow arcs with signs for fellow chief executive hopeful Robert Moore. Scott Pond, who hopes to take on U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper in November, signed a pair of baseball caps for one supporter. Many attendees — including the conspiratorial podcaster Joe Oltmann — wore “Free Tina Peters” stickers, a sentiment echoed by a banner hanging behind the assembly stage.

Several candidates, including Marx, pledged to free the former Mesa County clerk, who was convicted for orchestrating a plot to sneak a third party into a secure area to examine voting equipment after the 2020 election.

Oltmann briefly ran for governor before declaring his candidacy to become the state GOP’s chairman.

On Friday, former state lawmaker Ron Hanks was nominated to launch a right-wing primary challenge against U.S. Rep. Jeff Hurd, the freshman Republican who represents the Western Slope’s 3rd Congressional District. Hurd’s previous primary opponent, Hope Scheppelman, dropped out of the contest last month, after President Donald Trump re-endorsed Hurd.

The lawsuit, filed Friday, is the latest front in the intraparty fight over an October legislative retreat. Derrick Blanton’s suit asks a judge in Denver to order Sen. Lindsey Daugherty and Rep. Sean Camacho to turn over records related to the Colorado Opportunity Caucus and a retreat the group organized in Vail.

According to the lawsuit, Camacho, Daugherty and the Opportunity Caucus — a group of more than two dozen Democratic lawmakers who are generally more moderate on business issues — denied Blanton’s requests for records about the retreat, arguing they had no documents responsive to his request.

Blanton’s attorney, Scott Moss, wrote in the suit that Camacho and Daugherty — who co-chair the Opportunity Caucus — and the caucus itself should have records about the costs, fundraising and attendance of the retreat. He pointed to a grid he obtained elsewhere, which he said shows that the caucus charged organizations between $25,000 and $100,000 to attend the event and give presentations to the lawmakers in attendance.

“It’s obviously a lie to claim you held a multi-day retreat with overnight stays and meeting space at a luxury mountain resort without generating any records of payment,” Moss said in an interview Friday.

In a statement Friday, Daugherty said that she, Camacho and the caucus turned over the records “we were legally required to provide.”

“This frivolous lawsuit only validates the initial reasons for forming the Opportunity Caucus — to focus on collaboration and tackle the big problems on behalf of the people we serve — not performative politics,” she wrote. “It¶¶Òőap unclear who benefits from this lawsuit moving forward besides Mr. Moss; it¶¶Òőap certainly not Coloradans.”

The suit renews a simmering fight between progressive groups and the Opportunity Caucus, which formed in early 2025 with the help of One Main Street, a dark money group that financially supported the campaigns of several caucus members.

Last year, Colorado Common Cause — which Moss also represents — filed ethics complaints against almost every lawmaker who attended the retreat, accusing them of violating a constitutional provision that generally prohibits lawmakers from accepting gifts worth more than $75. The state ethics commission then began an investigation.

The caucus has refused to disclose how much organizations paid to attend the retreat, nor has it said how much it raised from the event.

The new suit invoking the open-records law, often referred to as CORA, asks for the judge to order production of the records — if, as Moss contends, additional documents exist — and, by extension, to declare that the Opportunity Caucus is subject to open records requests.

That’s an untested question: The state Supreme Court has ruled that caucuses are covered by the state’s open-meetings law, said Jeff Roberts, the executive director of the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition. But whether they’re subject to CORA hasn’t been addressed by the courts, he said.

If we’re serious about participation, fairness, and legitimacy, this must be the last time we rely on them — especially when the stakes are this high.

Let’s start with a simple, telling fact: the last time a competitive Democratic candidate who won the caucus and assembly process also went on to win the primary for U.S. Senate or governor was Ben Nighthorse Campbell in 1992 — 34 years ago. That’s not a system working. That’s a system deeply disconnected from voters.

Caucuses exclude the vast majority of voters. Even in a high-energy cycle like 2026, participation barely scratched the surface. Roughly 15,000 Democrats showed up statewide — out of more than a million eligible primary voters.

This small number of participants means a tiny, highly motivated slice of activists effectively determines which candidates advance. At the same time, the ordinary voters — those with jobs, childcare responsibilities, disabilities or scheduling conflicts — are largely excluded. The message to those voters is clear: you don’t get a voice.

A system that filters candidates based on a razor-thin fraction of the voting population cannot credibly claim to reflect the will of the party’s voters. That’s not representative democracy, it’s gatekeeping.

Caucuses impose unnecessary barriers to participate. Unlike primaries — where voters can cast ballots by mail or at convenient polling locations — caucuses demand hours of in-person or virtual participation at fixed times. For the Denver Democratic Assembly, check-in began at 9:30 a.m., and some participants were still there at 6 p.m. trying to support their candidates of choice. That’s not civic engagement—it’s a test of endurance with a high dose of disenfranchisement. A grassroots democratic form of government should encourage and lower barriers to participate.

The 2026 process didn’t just exclude — it broke down. Despite good-faith efforts to modernize through an app, the result was chaos. The system crashed under heavy use, causing confusion and potentially costing delegates their votes. Entire counties couldn’t complete voting on time.

In La Plata County, voting had to be pushed to Monday night — effectively disenfranchising anyone who couldn’t come back because of work obligations, child care issues or other obligations. In Arapahoe County, participants couldn’t even advocate for their preferred state House candidates, only elect delegates to the county.

News outlets reported that in some cases, party activists waited hours to vote, while others went home and could not participate. Across the state, people waited hours. Some left in frustration. Others weren’t sure if their votes were ever counted.

Fiona Boomer, campaign manager for Democrat Trisha Calvarese in the 4th Congressional District, expressed concern about whether their supporters were able to cast their ballots.

In Denver, delegates were given conflicting instructions; many told voting would be remote, causing many to leave before voting was finally done on site. A supporter of attorney general candidate Jena Griswold described her frustration in attending a Denver caucus and staying almost eight hours in hopes that the technology would work. Iris Halpern, a state house candidate, also expressed concern over caucus attendees leaving throughout the day. That’s not democracy, that’s dysfunction and shutting voters out.

And perhaps most concerning, the caucus system is easy to game. When outcomes depend on a small, insider-driven process, manipulation becomes easier — not harder. We’re already seeing bad actors openly discuss ways to exploit the system by misrepresenting support to sabotage candidates.

At its core, the caucus system concentrates power in the hands of a small group of insiders and activists. It’s a direct vote. It’s a multi-step delegate process that rewards those with the time, access, and familiarity to navigate party machinery. As a result, outcomes diverge sharply from actual voter preferences.

Consider 28-year-old Democratic Socialist candidate Melat Kiros, who is running for Congressional District 1. Kiros outperformed Rep. Diana DeGette in the Denver delegate vote by nearly a two-to-one margin.

Kiros posted an outrageous and offensive digital ad with an image saying centrist Democrats “fellate Israel” and “suck (expletive).” There is a difference between being anti-establishment and not supporting Israel as opposed to outrageous, radical views laced with antisemitism.

Kiros’s records speak for themselves and illustrate how extreme radical candidates are not only out of touch with Colorado Democrats but also with our state values, too. Yes, more and more extreme candidates in both parties have effectively used these caucuses to fly under the radar and effectively organized a small cadre of activists, like the Democratic Socialists, to show up at the caucus, leading to stunning results that make most voters shake their heads in extreme disbelief.

Caucuses may have made sense in another era. They do not today. And, they help explain the growth of the disgruntled unaffiliated voters — who, by the way, aren’t allowed to participate in caucuses — and make up 53% of Colorado voters.

If we believe in expanding participation and reflecting the will of voters — not just a tiny fraction of activists — then the conclusion is unavoidable: It’s time to retire the caucus system and let voters decide.

Doug Friednash is a partner with the law firm Brownstein, Hyatt, Farber and Schreck.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

On Saturday, at least, you call them Democrats. Then, in two weeks, you call them Republicans.

The Democratic Party faithful are gathering this weekend in the southern Colorado city for their first in-person statewide assembly since 2018 — and the party’s most consequential assembly since then, to boot. A slew of candidates are vying for the party’s nominations to the state’s top offices, nearly all of which are open because of term-limited incumbents.

The Colorado Democratic Party’s state assembly on Saturday at Memorial Hall marks the first major winnowing of those candidates. It’s also a chance for the victors to rally the base — and, they hope, ride a wave of victory headlines to the June primary election, where voters will have the final say on nominations.

In two weeks, on April 11, the Colorado Republican Party will follow suit with their state assembly, at Massari Arena on the Colorado State University Pueblo campus.

The stakes are similar in each case. Party members, picked among neighbors at precinct and county caucuses across the state in the weeks before, will name their preferences for a slew of elected offices, from U.S. senator and governor to members of the state House of Representatives. 

The assemblies aren’t the end of the nomination process — indeed, some of the highest-profile names in Democratic politics are foregoing it. But the event will exclude from June 30 primary ballots those candidates who rely on the assembly and fail to clear its 30% threshold of support. The assembly vote winners will land on the ballot’s top line.

“The most exciting thing about (the assembly) is how it levels the playing field for grassroots competitors to have a shot at sharing a message that, in some cases, resonates broadly,” Colorado Democratic Party Chair Shad Murib said.

The assembly puts candidates in front of swaths of some of the most dedicated Democrats in the state to make their case, one five-minute speech at a time.

The candidates also get the chance to rub elbows in hallways and have one-on-one conversations with voters about why they should hold the office they’re seeking — making potentially invaluable inroads, particularly for lesser-known candidates looking to knock off longtime officeholders.

Already, the caucus and assembly process revealed an organizing gap for one longtime politician. Candidate for Congress Melat Kiros walloped U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette at the Denver County assembly in mid-March, winning nearly two votes for every one the 15-term congresswoman pulled in. On Friday night, Kiros easily cruised to a place on the June primary ballot, earning 67% of the party’s nominating vote to DeGette’s 33%. Though she lost, DeGette avoided the unthinkable — falling below 30% and falling off the ballot.

Former Gov. Roy Romer, a Democrat who led the state from 1987 to 1999, praised the caucus and assembly process as a way for regular people to steer the party, rather than letting someone just throw tens of millions of dollars into an election. He’ll be introducing Attorney General Phil Weiser, a candidate for governor, at Saturday’s assembly.

“This way is a movement,” Romer said in an interview. “When you’re petitioning, you’re a little more distant from people. This is working with people, community by community. This is a way to come together and say this is our nominee.”

Alternatively, candidates can qualify for the ballot by collecting petition signatures. U.S. Sens. Michael Bennet and John Hickenlooper both pursued that option. Bennet is running for governor against Weiser, while Hickenlooper is seeking reelection.

They each collected nearly 15,000 signatures, or some 10 times the number of people who will be at the assembly, and were the first candidates to qualify for the June primary.

On the Republican side, state Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer and pastor Victor Marx have both submitted more than 20,000 signatures to the secretary of state’s office to qualify for their party’s gubernatorial primary. More than a dozen other GOP candidates have also filed for the office. The GOP assembly next month is expected to pare down that field substantially.

Seth Masket, a University of Denver political science professor, cautioned against making assumptions about the routes the candidates take to the ballot.

Further-left and further-right candidates tend to benefit from the caucus and assembly process because they tend to attract a more passionate followings, he said. That doesn’t mean they necessarily do or don’t have a broad base of support, but they do have supporters who care enough to spend a weeknight at a caucus or a spring Saturday in a convention hall.

Candidates who are more mainstream in their party — and especially those with money — generally find it easier to petition onto the ballot. They can also avoid the risk of being kept off the ballot by an organized, enthusiastic base of opposition that only needs a few hundred people to potentially keep them below the 30% threshold necessary for ballot qualification. (The threshold drops to 10%, however, if the candidate goes a hybrid route of pursuing both petitions and the assembly vote.)

“(A successful assembly candidate is) not necessarily the candidate that’s going to win the primary, but it is a candidate that has a passionate following,” Masket said. “Not every candidate has that and, to be honest, more mainstream candidates don’t tend to have that kind of following. What they do have is more general name recognition and support from party members.” 

Recent electoral history in Colorado has shown that assembly victories rarely translate into overall victory in the primary.

In 2010, Bennet, who had been appointed to the Senate but not yet won an election, . In 2018, then-U.S. Rep. Jared Polis lost the caucus vote in his bid for governor. In 2020, Hickenlooper likewise lost the caucus in his first bid for the U.S. Senate.

All three went on to win the party nomination in the primary, and then they won the general election. 

So far this cycle, public polls show Bennet and with wide leads over their competitors, even as they cede the assembly to their rivals.

“Both methods require any candidate to earn the backing of voters from every single corner of this state,” Jordan Fuja, a spokesperson for Bennet¶¶Òőap campaign, said in a statement. “… Colorado voters are looking for a governor with the experience, vision, and commitment to delivering the results we need. Michael has held a commanding lead since he first entered this race because Coloradans know he is the right candidate to protect Colorado from (President Donald) Trump’s chaos and build an economy that works for working people.”

Hickenlooper, meanwhile, had initially intended to go through the caucus and assembly process before putting his efforts into the petition process. 

In a statement, his campaign acknowledged the switch, saying the intent was voter outreach.

“Our focus in participating in the caucus process at the beginning was to help energize the base, meet with voters, and support the work of our county parties,” spokesperson Jess Cohen said. “The senator appreciates everyone who has participated in the process and really enjoyed having conversations with folks across the state.”

Hickenlooper’s decision to pull back, meanwhile, left openings for his rivals — and a chance to rally a fired-up Democratic base that has shown it¶¶Òőap open to change.

“It¶¶Òőap clear to me that the base of the Democratic Party is interested in evaluating who talks a good game and who walks the walk,” said state Sen. Julie Gonzales, a Denver progressive who’s running against Hickenlooper. “Who’s actually done the work and put in the muscle to listen to people and to translate those frustrations, those hopes, those anxieties, into concrete and durable policy. That¶¶Òőap the work.”

Candidates seeking state and federal office through the state Democratic assembly

Besides state legislative races, here are the candidates seeking placement on the Democratic primary ballot at the state assembly in Pueblo. The party has been organizing multicounty assemblies separately for congressional candidates.

U.S. Senate: Karen Breslin, state Sen. Julie Gonzales and Jessica Williams

Governor: Antonio Martinez, William Moses, Erik Underwood and Attorney General Phil Weiser

Attorney General: Boulder County District Attorney Michael Dougherty, Secretary of State Jena Griswold and David Seligman

Secretary of State: State Sen. Jessie Danielson and Jefferson County Clerk Amanda Gonzalez

State Treasurer: State Sen. Jeff Bridges, John Mikos and state Rep. Brianna Titone

Source: Colorado Democratic Party

Bennet, the three-term senator, is the first candidate for governor to officially qualify for the primary ballot. His chief opponent for the Democratic nomination, Attorney General Phil Weiser, plans to qualify for the ballot through the Democratic state assembly on Saturday.

Republican candidates Victor Marx and state Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer have also submitted signatures to qualify for the primary ballot, but the secretary of state’s office has not yet validated their petitions. A slew of other Republicans are vying for the nomination through their party’s state assembly in April.

Hickenlooper, who served two terms as governor and was first elected to the Senate in 2020, is seeking reelection. He is the first Senate candidate to qualify for the June primary ballot. His Democratic opponents — Karen Breslin, state Sen. Julie Gonzales and Jessica Williams — are looking to the assembly to win ballot access.

No Republican has submitted signatures to qualify for the Senate primary. George Washington Markert, Janak Joshi, Dathan Jones, state Sen. Mark Baisley, Sean Pond and Amanda Calderon have filed paperwork with the Federal Election Commission, meaning they’d need to qualify through the GOP assembly to win ballot access.

Bennet submitted 14,851 valid signatures across the state’s eight congressional districts to qualify. Hickenlooper submitted 14,905. They each needed 1,500 qualifying signatures from Democrats in each congressional district to qualify for the ballot via petition.