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) J. Sonnenberg

(R) Ted Harvey

20%↑

15%↑

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

(R) Doug Bruce

20%

20%

20%

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%↑

40%↑

20%↑

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
September 15, 2017 11:53 PM UTC

Weekend Open Thread

  • 28 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“To be ignorant of what occurred before you were born is to remain always a child.”

–Cicero

Comments

28 thoughts on “Weekend Open Thread

  1. They're going #FullWingNut over at InfoWars…

    Alex Jones, Roger Stone claim Donald Trump is being covertly drugged

    The latest conspiracy theory from InfoWars host Alex Jones involves President Trump being slowly drugged with small doses of sedatives, and a former Trump campaign adviser claims the perpetrator could be the White House chief of staff.

    “I’ve talked to people, multiple ones, and they believe that they are putting a slow sedative that they’re building up, that’s also addictive, in his Diet Cokes and in his iced tea, and that the president by 6 or 7 at night is basically slurring his words and is drugged,” Mr. Jones said near the start of his internet and radio broadcast Monday.

    “I’ve talked to people that talk to the president now at 9 at night, he is slurring his words. And I’m going to leave it at that,” he added, citing unnamed “high-level sources.”

      1. Cheetolini TwoScoops has always been erratic, unpredictable, schizophrenic, unstable, incoherent, and out of touch with reality . . . 

        . . . makes me wonder what kind of drugs his RWNJs have been self-administering all this time that they only are now beginning to notice???

  2. WOTD: Equifax thoughts from Josh Marshal at Talking Points memo.

    What if one company were responsible for stockpiling most of the high explosives in the country in one place? Maybe in a major population area? It’s obvious that would create a huge amount of danger and liability. Stockpiling fraud-enabling personal data creates the need for massive amounts of security, double-layering and vigilance. That’s inherent in the business itself. But that risk and most of the eventual damage is absorbed by consumers while the profit goes to the company.

    In some cases consumers would rebel. That would solve the problem. But that’s actually a key part of the problem: consumers aren’t Equifax’s customers. They’re the product. You’re the product. Banks and other lenders like credit agencies because they offer a systematized and standardized way of evaluating risk. The banks are the customers. Credit rating agencies would prefer never to deal with consumers at all. They only do so when forced to or, more recently, as they’ve developed a secondary business in selling consumers services to help them protect themselves against errors or security breaches by credit rating agencies. That’s an amazing business!

    The real problem is that social security numbers, credit card numbers, and other information that you are supposed to keep secret were designed for identification, not authentication. How many different institutions have your social security number? Dozens? Hundreds? That’s not much of a secret. What we need is authentication (proof of identity), and we’re using identifiers for that purpose.

    1. I take my comment back, FU.  Once Moddy reads this he'll once again be able to tie that cherry stem with Adam's fist still firmly in place.  From WSJ:

      Trump Administration Seeks to Avoid Withdrawal From Paris Climate Accord

      NEW YORK—The Trump administration is considering staying in the Paris agreement to fight climate change “under the right conditions,” offering to re-engage in the international deal three months after President Donald Trump said the U.S. would pull out if it didn't find more favorable terms.

      1. Trump will say anything to anybody, take any position, if he thinks it will advance his political standing. Period, full stop.

        Right now, he's running scared. Mueller's raking in the nasty goopy stuff from Trump's kitchen sink, everyone gets that Russians were invited and encouraged to interfere in the 2016 election, Democrats are talking impeachment and 25th amendment remedies, and  Republicans are backing away from the Prez (Trump who?), and VP Pence pretty much has a full-bore 2020 campaign ramping up.

        Trumpito got elected on a populist, "I'm for the little guy" platform. Now he's just trying to recycle his greatest hits, and blow clouds of smoke to obscure the policy.  Factcheck says that the plan as written absolutely helps the highest-income taxpayers, to the detriment of everyone else, no matter what he claims.

        As far as the Paris climate accord, half the country is passing Trump's obstruction by. With 13 states in a Climate Alliance, 9 more plus DC supporting the Paris Agreement, (along with the rest of the industrialized world), that mighty hand or fist of the free capitalist market is going to move the country towards a cleaner economy, whatever Tweeterdumb wants.

         

  3. Mark Hillman had a thoughtful piece in last week's Wray Gazette on the stark realities for his party in a state becoming more, not less, purple.  Every time I embed the link Alva's magic machine marks it as spam.  If you go to markhillman(dot)com it’s is top article entitled, "Capitol critics ignore reality of changing Colorado"

    1. Well, somebody gets it. If they have any sense repubs who want to keep their jobs will get as far away from The Yam as they can. Moddy and his ilk will shriek “Traitors! “, but how much worse off will he be if Dems replace those “traitors”?

    2. Mark Hillman's piece highlights the reality that we can trust our legislators to look out for our short term interests – as he wrote

      …closing the only hospital in an entire county is the difference between life and death for some victims of severe accidents or acute illness.  Worse still, a community that loses its hospital faces a bleak future, with closure of businesses and schools looming.

      That's certainly true where I live. When I broke my elbows, a 5 minute drive to the ER was a whole lot better than an hour one. Plus, the threatened Medicaid cuts, which Gardner and Buck were so enamored of, would have shut down both of the town's nursing homes – which employ people, as well as care for those who can't be cared for at home any longer.

      So Sondermann, et al's Hospital Provider Fee vote made sense short term. Now, if we could only entice our congresscritters to see renewable energy as a long term solution. It might involve foregoing some oily gassy campaign contributions, though… but,

      Like it or not, progress in a split legislature involves give-and-take.  That doesn’t sell well in a white paper, but it’s the reality that our lawmakers must confront.  After all, what good is a pristine voting record if you’ve done nothing to make life better for the people who elected you.

      Link posted OK for me.  Must be that new vitamin supplement I'm taking. wink

      1. Thanks for sharing the link, MamaJ.  I tried six times; finally I posted without the link (which worked) and then went back into through the edit function and added the link.  When I did that I got the 'spam' alert and it rejected the entire post. 

      1. Absent some of Moddy's bff's (Steve King, Beauregard) this is a fairly nonpartisan movement.  We've enjoyed support from both sides of the aisle.  If I turn the time machine back to 2010, the Colorado legislature passed a resolution unanimously encouraging Congress to end the scheduling on CSA.  Mark Hillman in the Senate and Wes McKinley in the House were the leads as I recall.  We were the first legislature in the US to pass such a resolution. 

    1. What a great story!!  When we have our next get-together I have another to share with the group that involves the cannabis plant and the Dominican Sisters of Peace.  That one is practically script-worthy for a movie. 

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

45 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!