Colorado State Senator Evie Hudak (D-Moron), who should never have been elected in the first place (more on that in a moment), this morning announced her resignation.
Hudak was facing a recall election due to her deplorable behavior during the Democratic rampage against Coloradoans' Second Amendment rights, not least her lying about gun statistics to a rape victim who was pleading with the senate not to disarm her. Even the liberal Denver Post excoriated Hudak for her callous misrepresentations.
Giron and Morse both chose to fight to the political death rather than resign despite the fact that a resignation would have allowed their party to replace them with another puppet of the party's choosing to serve out the rest of the term. While losing both the Giron and Morse seats left Democrats still with a senate majority, losing one more -- Hudak's seat in this case -- would flip control to the Republicans, so Hudak is resigning. Whether she wants to or was pressured to, we will probably never know.
Arguably, Hudak should never have been in office to begin with. She won her election by 342 votes in a race in which a Libertarian candidate took over 4,800 votes. (John Morse also won election because of the presence of a Libertarian candidate.)
Republicans can take back the Colorado State Senate in 2014, and likely will. The bigger question is whether incumbent Governor John "You Thought I Was A Moderate?!?" Hickenlooper, who has gone on a leftist rampage over the past year, can win re-election against whichever Republican emerges from a qualified but uninspiring field of primary candidates, which includes Secretary of State Scott Gessler, State Senator Greg Brophy, and former Congressman and perennial lightning-rod Tom Tancredo.
Tancredo has the best name recognition and probably the best fund-raising ability, at least during the primary season, but it remains unclear whether he can convince Coloradoans that he is not the far-right xenophobe which the media has painted him as (without Tom trying to do much to push back against the portrayal) for the past decade. In fact, Tancredo has libertarian leanings, such as being for marijuana legalization (in order to reduce the violence inspired by protecting pot profits.)
Gessler is a solid administrator who has done excellent work making it easier to do business in Colorado, at least as far as his office goes, such as with the cost and ease of business filings. The Denver Post seems on a mission to tarnish Gessler with petty ethics complaints, and while nothing is really sticking I still fear that if Scott is the nominee that will be the path the Democrats go down, trying to make him appear unethical or worse even though I believe he's a good and principled person.
Brophy is a smart and principled conservative -- also with slight libertarian leanings -- who comes from rural eastern Colorado. He was the leading state senate opponent of the Democrats' raft of anti-gun legislation. Greg's most controversial vote was his supporting in-state college tuition for illegal alien youth who go through, and graduate from, a Colorado high school. This may be a difficult sell to the GOP base but could serve him well in the general election (much like Tancredo's position on marijuana.)
For the record, I know all three of these candidates and consider them all friends. I can say without hesitation that any of them would be better -- much better -- than the wolf in sheep's clothing we have now. The question is whether the GOP primary will be civil enough that a candidate will emerge with enough money and reputation left to defeat an incumbent, even one who is substantially weakened by his own bad behavior as well as his strong support of all things Obama.