CO-04 (Special Election)
See Full Big Line
(R) Greg Lopez
(R) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Biden*
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%↓
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
90%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
90%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
(R) Ron Hanks
40%
30%
20%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(R) Deborah Flora
(R) J. Sonnenberg
30%↑
15%↑
10%↓
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Dave Williams
(R) Jeff Crank
50%↓
50%↑
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
90%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) Brittany Pettersen
85%↑
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
(R) Janak Joshi
60%↑
35%↓
30%↑
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
November 17, 2016 02:25 PM UTC
60 Comments
As
Time for democrats to clean house. So much corruption and cronyism!!
This from the side that just re-up their House and Senate leadership. So much for draining the swamp, huh?
yeah, cuz Trump giving his Son-In-Law an Administration job and getting his whole family Top Secret clearance isn't Cronyism?
As with most complaints of half-informed R's like moddie, his side does it far more often and far more egregiously. (Google it, Mr. M.)
Keeping Paul Ryan seemed like a good move in my estimation, but I would have rather seen the Republicans pick someone other than Mitch McConnell, 74, as their leader in the Senate.
Both parties need some younger leaders. I wish all the best to Tim Ryan.
I also wish both parties would stop choosing the most senior senator, of the majority party, as the President Pro Tempore of the Senate. Orrin Hatch is 82, yet is third in line for the presidency after the vice president and the Speaker of the House. That's a bit old to potentially be POTUS.
“Draining the swamp” cannot be done by any president here, as these top leadership positions are the exclusive decision of the two respective congressional chambers.
That's Democrats with a 'D'.
Whichever party lost this year's election was going to go through this. What was fundamentally flawed in the Republican party on Nov. 8 at 7pm Eastern is still a fundamental flaw today. Your team will be able to mask the divide and create a contemporary Southern Strategy-look alike to keep the pitchforks at bay, at least for a while. But you know well, Moddy, the (white) natives are restless. They want blood; if their master doesn't deliver it's going to get messy. Really fast.
So our team gets to do the cleansing first.
The facts are that Dems picked up House seats (despite the overwhelming challenge of gerrymandering), won the popular vote overall in the Senate races, picking up two, possibly three seats and won the national popular vote for POTUS.
None of that equated to maintaining or enhancing their political power, at least for the next 700+ days. We endured a perfect storm. We'll lick our wounds, address our fundamentals, face the demons and be back in 2018 for another round.
In the meantime, isn't it great to live in Colorado? Where Democratic majorities have created one of the most robust economies in the nation?
Actually, the Republicans have had the majority in the Colorado State Senate for the last two cycles.
While not every state has their state legislature do congressional redistricting, Democrats should be worried that the GOP now controls 33 state legislatures to only 11 that are in the hands of Democrats. Six, including Colorado are split between the two parties.
I'm aware of that. I'm referring to policies put in place when that wasn't the case. But you knew that. Trivia question: can you name a single policy the Republican Senate has initiated since their majority status that stands out currently as an economic driver?
Other states? You, nor I, can fight every battle. We have plenty of them to fight on the home front. Yes, redistricting is an issue. Do you think if we just work harder we could flip Kansas? Oklahoma? Wyoming? I’m more interested in MI, PA and WI given just 107,000 voters in those three states swung the election. I’m at a stage in life I’ll pick my battles.
Apparently, Hillary Clinton didn't think much of her effort in MI, PA, and WI. She should have listened to Bill. He really does know how to read a political map.
On that we ageee!
Michael: where is the third seat the Dems may have picked up? They got the Illinois and New Hampshire seats; and held Reid's seat. I'm not aware of any other potential Dem pickups?
Louisiana:http://www.salon.com/2016/11/17/looking-at-louisiana-the-race-for-the-senate-isnt-over-yet/
Ain't happening.
Michael: thanks for the clarification. Louisiana had slipped my mind. Andrew: suggest that you read the article before saying "ain't happening." The Republican probably has the inside track, but few figured that David Vitter would lose the race for governor either.
Forget the Salon fantasy. Here's what the Baton Rouge newspaper reported on the race:
http://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/politics/article_136e0c40-add8-11e6-85a7-1b9929daeeed.html
Donald Trump won this state by 20 points. The Republican John Kennedy is better known as he is the Louisiana State Treasurer. His opponent Foster Campbell is less known as a member of the state Public Service Commission.
In the 24 candidate "jungle" election, more than 60 percent of Louisiana voters went for Republican candidates compared to the 36 percent who voted for Democrats. They are not going to suddenly break for the Democratic candidate in the run off.
I love the inconsequential facts you choose to highlight. The overall popular vote in Senate races, as well as the popular votes for POTUS, are totally irrelevant.
Democrats had a net gain of 5 House seats, in 2016, and one of their victors is an ex-Republican. They gained only two Senate seats, with very little chance of winning the Louisiana Senate seat in December. This was a poor showing for Democrats, who are supposed to do well in presidential election cycles.
For the record, the Democrats have 25 Senate seats, including those of the two Independents, who caucus with the Democrats. Nine of those Democratic seats are in states that went for Donald Trump. The GOP only has to defend eight Senate seats. Only one — Nevada — went for Clinton and could be considered competitive in 2018.
Gerrymandering is a fact in some states, including Colorado. In our state it was the Democrats doing the gerrymandering… with no electoral success to show for it after three consecutive election cycles.
The huge nationwide losses, for Democrats in state legislative races, during the Obama years, have put the minority party in bad shape for 2018 election. Democrats have trouble turning out their voters in off year elections. I doubt 2018 will be any different.
Of course, Andrew, you forgot to include my closing statement:
Your smug, 'personal advice' to Democrats aside, we'll see if Bannon can keep the hate ginned up to a sustaining level the next 2-4 years to maintain the momentum. I have my doubts but only time will tell.
A minority of voting Americans just handed your party the keys to the federal government. Let’s see if you can ‘fix it’.
Probably more fascinating in the next election cycle will be how we deal with social media and the dissemination of information. http://www.vox.com/new-money/2016/11/16/13659840/facebook-fake-news-chart
It was just as the Founding Fathers intended with both the Electoral College and the way the two chambers of Congress were set up. They were not big fans of popularity contests. Remember, they initially had senators elected by the various state legislatures.
No, the Founding Fathers needed the EC to keep the uneducated from deciding elections. And other outdated notions like Negros being 3/5 of a person and women not being allowed to vote. Just to name a few.
Actually, I see a lot of validity in the Vox article. I am alarmed by how easily duped people are by what they see on the internet. It is also why negative political ads are so prominent in campaigns. If they didn't work, no one would air them.
Pelosi has some nerve even wanting this job again…..the entire Democratic Establishment failed and were given their walking papers by this year's voters.
Those who escaped the voter’s wrath need to take some notes and quit doing the same fucking thing over and over.
Take a walk, Nancy…….
Nancy has done more for this country while getting a manicure than you have in your whole flatulent life, fartface.
Pelosi = Establishment = rejected by voters.
In 2 and 4 years, we're going to have a bunch more pissed off voters who Trump has screwed.
They going to vote establishment again?
Why can't she be happy advising the young ones coming up?
You are a total crotchgrab. She works her heart out and you fart and bellow. Tim ryan jhas show.n her the respect she deserves but, you misogynist sack of shit, just show your hatred and stupidity with every belch from your trumplike brain. What's the matter? Your momma didn't love you?
Instead of insulting you, Ill just ask what specifically Pelosi did to earn your ire. I've been a fan of her work so far. I don't recall how she came down on the public option in the early days of the ACA. I do know we wouldn't have an ACA without her.
When V has no facts at his command, he resorts to nasty personal attacks. It's how you can tell when his arguments are weakest.
Mj on the other hand just makes shit up. Nancy Pelosi ranks as one of the finest speakers ever. She saved the Affordable Care Act with hard work and a clear vision that said keeping the majority was not worth it if she had to betray the people that majority was elected to serve. That, MJ, is why I wfill defend her ftom a putrid barf bag like Zappatero. Of course, your motto is no enemies on the ultra left. But even you can't make shit up fast enough to defile the reputation of Nancy Pelosi.
Oh my god. The phases of the moon must be shifting as I actually agree with Zappatero on something. I do agree that the Dems need new leadership in the House. Pelosi has some good qualities, but ACA is now long in the past. The losses in the House for Dems have occurred on Pelosi's watch. Even if she stays as minority leader, change is needed. Good example is how Schumer has enlarged the leadership cadre in the Senate for Dems.
V:
When you get me agreeing with Zapp and MJ, you have accomplished something.
AC,We don't agree on Pelosi. I haven't taken a position on whether she should continue to be minority leader. I merely asked Zap for clarification, rather than charging in flinging insults like monkey shit, as V does. I stated that I was a fan of what she accomplished with the ACA ( which you are on the record as not supporting), and asked a clarifying question about what Pelosi had done to earn Zap's ire. See how that works? You ask a question, then wait for the answer.
It just shows to go ya how nobody actually reads what others write – just see the avatar, read maybe the 1st few words, then launch the barrage against what they think was said.
We need Pelosi as Minority leader and Keith Ellison to head the DNC. Campaign on income equality with Bernie Sanders as chief advocate. With a team like that Democrats can capture the snowflake vote and be propelled to the White House.
'Snowflake'. Straight out of the Alt-right playbook.
What we need is Bannon in the White House, a Muslim registry, a trade war with China, a tax cut for the wealthiest 1% of the nation, Rudy as Secretary of State, a climate denier running EPA, Rick Perry running DOE and the Majority of both chambers whacking aware at Medicare. More KKK Victory parades. A successful book tour for Megyn Kelly (Settle for More). A civil fraud trial play out before the American people on live TV. A Pence email scandal.
For good measure maybe you could supplement Bible readings on the House floor with a chapter or two from Atlas Shrugged?
At that point, the snowflakes will be the least of your problems.
I see nothing wrong with Bible readings on the House Floor. Thanks for the suggestion.
How about readings from the Quran or Torah?
You good with that?
Democrats need to hear the word of GOD no matter what the source.
Oh God.
So, Powerful Prune, which god are you referring to? Hindus worship millions of gods. Myself, I've had some tendency to worship the great flying spaghetti monster as my god.
I suppose you have a point there. After all, why should Republicans alone be privy to the YHWH- approved protocols for rape and slavery?
I thought "two Corinthians" was the source for you trump-fearers.
Because that's exactly what Republican Jesus would want you to do: peddle Ayn Rand as your North Star to perpetuate your biblical beliefs. I think Paul Ryan is a decent guy – and want to believe his fetish for Ayn was an act to play to his base. I'm interested in seeing him make his case for reducing poverty and increasing opportunities – and whether he can mesh those ideas with the Teavangelists in his caucus, a President Trump and allies in the Senate. I'm skeptical he can thread that needle without the help he'll need from our side to offset the pitchforks in his own caucus. But let's see what he's got.
Now why don't you be a good little snowflake, log out, log back in as your other ego and we'll continue this conversation?
Only if it's King James! No Papists can. be allowed to speak in Congress.
That does present a conundrum, V, given that both our Speaker and Minority Leader are practicing Catholics.
Don't want no papists on the suepreme court either.
We wouldn't want that to happen, now, would we?
That impotence problem is really getting you down, huh, powerless pair?
Nancy Pelosi as minority leader and Keith Ellison as DNC chair would be doubling down on driving white working class voters out of the Democratic Party. They should go with Tim Ryan as minority leader and Howard Dean as DNC chair. It will be interesting to see which way Democrats decide to go.
The more I see of Tim Ryan, the more I like him. He looks like he could lead a populist movement within the Democratic Party. I also like Howard Dean but not sure if he could fill the role again as leader of the DNC
This Dem cleansing is focused on the wrong chamber. Peolsi is damn smart and damn effective in navigating her chamber. The full-out corporate/Wall Street Chuck Schumer as Dem leader in the Senate is the problem that should have been addressed.
I really like Nancy Pelosi's story. But, we've not corrected D representation. So, I'm ready to give someone else a shot. Just watched Tim Ryan on Maddow. Saw him several times today. Pretty impressive blue collar Rep
I agree, gray. My quarrel with zappatero is his misogynic smearing of a great lady. Ryan was careful to give her her due while showing where dems need to up their game. You don't have to be a pus bag like zappy to make a case for change.
Nancy carries the same, if not more baggage than Hillary, how did that work out for our "leadership"? Earned or not, we need a new bench and the tired old guard needs to step aside.
I hope there will be at least one additional candidate. No one particular in mind, but another younger candidate
I think Ryan would be a very good option for the post, and while I love Nancy and what she's done, I think showing the same old faces again for two more years (at least) is a massive mistake, particularly right now.
I also think the DNC Chair needs to be a full time position. This person is responsible for finding and recruiting strong candidates nationally… I don't think they can hold down responsibilities of governing while simultaneously doing that job. Or they can, but maybe they shouldn't.
I like Keith Ellison a lot. I'm bummed Martin O'Malley dropped out of the running. Is anyone else thinking of throwing in? I'm not crazy about Dean anymore either.
How about Bill? Someone said above, the man knows how to read an electoral map…
Bill is. Very long of tooth, tobias, otherwise I concur with you.
I'd think that Bill Clinton might have been a good candidate for DNC Chair some years ago. But not now. The Clintons really do need to disappear for a while; much like the Bushes after Jeb came nowhere near, earlier this year, to getting the nomination. It is very possible for politicians to be over-exposed to the public.
I agree with you, CHB, regarding both the Clintons and the Bushes.
It's also why I wish Mitch McConnell and Nancy Pelosi would give up their, respective, leadership positions. The country needs some new blood, preferably younger, in these posts.
I agree I like Ellison a lot, but I also agree the DNC needs to be a full time job. Dean may feel like a return to the past, but he did a hell of a job in 2006 and 2008. The key was the fifty (fifty one) state strategy. Dems have not really done that since and have paid the price.
What you wrote about Howard Dean, gaf, is why I think he would be good as the DNC chair again. The fifty (fifty one) state strategy was brilliant.
Despite the mistaken belief that I am a Republican (I am only during primary elections), I really think our country and our state are best served when both major political parties are strong. I really am not comfortable with either party controlling the executive branch and both chambers of the legislative branch at the federal or state level. One party rule is not a good idea.
Two guys, one Minority Leader Ryan and the other Speaker Ryan. Can you imagine the heyday Carnegies fake news sites could have with such a scenario?
I'm just now catching up with this thread. I agree, Michael. Fixed News would have way too much fun with two Ryans.on opposite sides.