A judge has to be incredibly awful for the judicial group or even the local newspaper to suggest that they not be retained.

I suppose you could do a bunch of research on each of the judges to decide if they warrant your vote to retain. It's distantly possible that a non-partisan group like the League of Women Voters can give you an assessment of the judges.

Often, because I haven't a clue about the judges myself, I simply don't mark that part of the ballot.

The blue book that is mailed to the voters usually tells when they were appointed. So you match up the years of the governor's term with the year they were appointed. All you really need to know is that the Republican was governor form January 12, 1999 till January 12, 2007. So if they fall in those years, they should be thrown out.

Wikipedia has a table for the Colorado governor's terms

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_Governor

I rejected a handful of the judges in Colorado just based on reading the ballot information booklet that was mailed to my house. Yes, the group did vote to retain 100% but the comment section does say enough to give you a moment to think about whether you agree with the judicial group or not.

I have a friend who voted no on many of the judges--including the sitting state supreme court judge.

I've been out of state the past six weeks dealing with post surgical recovery of a close family member. My mail was held and I got my ballot but no blue book. 'Had to turn in the ballot today because I will be totally unavailable tomorrow.

So, since you received one, which justices did you believe should NOT be retained?

I can only guess the the bars had a "12 for one" in his area because this post (in reply to an election-related thread from November) makes no sense whatsoever (but apparently I am to be "watched"... )

She did a good job on that case, and I retained her, of course.