I just got this response from the Denver Post Political Editor, Curtis Hubbard:

John,

 

Thanks for the note.

 

We published a story on the caucus deadline in Monday's paper and online at denverpost.com under the assumption that it would give people two day's notice to change their affiliations if they wanted to participate.

 

I haven't checked other media outlets, but I would venture to guess that we were alone among major news outlets in doing original reporting on the topic.

 

OK. That is true. The Post did more than the competition in the local Denver market. The AP is slow reporting the story (their brief item on the deadline was sent out at 3:45 a.m. this morning with no real details.)

But that doesn't mean the lack of coverage isn't a problem.

Looking at it from the media's side, what did the Democrats and Republicans and the Secretary of State do to try and get the story covered?

I just sent out this email:

To:  Greg Moore, Curtis Hubbard, Jessica Fender, Lynn Bartels

From: John Wren

Who should I quote from the Post?

I’m going to write something for my blog Colorado Caucus 2010 about how today’s deadline for affiliating as an R or D to be able to vote March 16.was covered.

My Post print edition hasn’t arrived yet, but there is nothing about the caucus on the homepage of DenverPost.com this morning. Is this just an oversight?

It’s especially surprising the deadline is not featured on your new The Spot. Seems like the Colorado Caucus is a story that could be used to draw a lot of readers to it.

There were almost no hits on the story that was done yesterday, but it’s clear that was because of the headline and the fact it was not feature as a lead story which I think it deserved.

People who go to their neighborhood caucus read the newspaper, I’m sure of that.

I’d like a statement from someone from the Denver Post about how decisions are made about covering the Colorado Caucus. Seems to me it’s the biggest story in Colorado.

You can reach me on my landline right now, or on my cell any time (720)495-4949.

John

John S. Wren, MBA+

Life is short, start now!

www.JohnWren.com

(303)861-1447

Deadline looms to affiliate for March political caucuses

From today's Ft. Collins Coloradoan:

BY ROBERT MOORE
RobertMoore@coloradoan.com

Tuesday is the deadline for voters to affiliate with a party if they want to participate in the first step in the nominating process, the March 16 party caucuses.

Voters who currently are registered as unaffiliated, or want to change affiliation from one party to another, must do so by today if they want to participate in the March neighborhood precinct caucuses.

"The League of Women Voters says that it's the place where the voice of just the common person has the most impact," said John Wren of Denver, who led efforts in 2002 to defeat a proposal that would have ended caucuses in Colorado. "It really neutralizes the effect of big money and big power. People that are tired of the politics of the usual should affiliate and vote in their caucus."

At the caucuses, participants will select delegates to participate in further assemblies that will help nominate candidate for state and county-level offices.

Northern Colorado Republicans, in particular, have a number of candidate selection decisions that will begin at the caucuses, including governor, senator and 4th Congressional District nominees.

Democrats in Northern Colorado currently have a contested Senate contest.

More details in Tuesday's Coloradoan.

Additional Facts
Declare affiliation
To participate in the March caucuses, voters must declare a party affiliation by Tuesday. If you want to change from unaffiliated to a particular party, or switch from one party to another, you can do so at these locations:

> Larimer County Elections; 200 W. Oak St., 5th floor, Fort Collins

> Citizens Information Center; 200 W. Oak St., 1st floor, Fort Collins

> Fort Collins Motor Vehicle, 1121 W. Prospect

> Loveland Motor Vehicle; 205 E. 6th St.

> Estes Park Motor Vehicle; 1601 Brodie Ave

Why is the Statesman online edition late?

I've enjoyed reading the Colorado Statesman since 1974. Recently they started an online edition. It hasn't been updated yet for their paper last Friday. Is this just an oversight?

Denver Post reports tomorrow's deadline.

As an adult educator, since 2002 I've encouraged government, media, and groups to make more information available about our wonderful neighborhood caucus-assembly system for nominating to the primary ballot. The system gives the common person the best chance for being elected to public office, in my opinion.

Jessica Fender called me yesterday and wrote this item for today's paper.

We finally got the Secretary of State to post information about the Colorado Caucus on their website. http://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/vote/PoliticalPartyCaucusInfo.pdf

Thanks to Secretary of State Bernie Buescher for finally getting this done, something those of us from Save the Caucus have been suggesting since 2002.

But why isn't there a link on the front page to make it possible for people to find easily? And why has the link to the registration form that was on the early draft I saw taken off?

Also, in 2008 it was possible to change party affiliation online. Why has this onboard technology been disabled?

This afternoon I'll be sharing at the Denver Speakers Corner on the topic of How would Ben & Martin vote today? Would they affiliate with a political party? If so, R or D or something else?

Thomas Jefferson is often given credit for being the founder of the Democrats and Abe Lincoln given credit for starting the Republicans off.

Today, my friend David Fogel says he is sure, they would join the opposite party. Lincoln and his concerns would fit more in line with the Dems, Jefferson would be giving talks at the Tea Party gatherings.

Jefferson would have preferred that there be no political parties, but he saw right away that if an opposition party was not organized Alexander Hamilton's party would win every election.

We are better off with just two parties, in my opinion, the European system of multiple parties and back room deals just makes it harder for the common person like me to participate and really make a difference.

So the question is, what would Ben and Martin do today?

Martin Luther King was a Republican, and I see no reason that would change today.

Ben Franklin? I think he'd see the good sense in changing affiliation from time to time. That way he'd get a chance to know all of his neighbors!