Thursday Open Thread

“Victory has a thousand fathers, but defeat is an orphan.”

–John F. Kennedy

90 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. unnamed says:

    Updated vote tallies have Dems pulling ahead in HD-27, 47 and 50.  And the Jeffco Clerk and Recorder race.

  2. RepealAndReplace says:

    Thoughts and prayers are needed………..

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/08/us/shooting-california-thousand-oaks.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

    Negev, lets hear a shout out for the Second Amendment.

    • Duke CoxDuke Cox says:

      Wasn't there a good guy with a gun? 

      • RepealAndReplace says:

        At a country/western bar, you would think so. But if there was, he obviously didn't act fast enough. 

      • JohnInDenverJohnInDenver says:

        At least one good guy with a gun, a responding (under 3 minutes) officer who went in while there was still shooting and was shot — after 29 years on the job. Retirement was months away, according to one article I read.

        Ron Helus, a 29-year veteran of the force with a grown son, had been on the phone with his wife when he got the call about the shooting and headed to the club, Dean said. During the shootout, he was struck several times.

      • Negev says:

        The good guy was not allowed in

        You cannot consume any alcoholic beverage or be in a place having a primary purpose of dispensing alcoholic beverages for on-site consumption while carrying concealed in California. 

         

        • JohnInDenverJohnInDenver says:

          There also was a security guard shot … another article called him a bouncer. No mention of whether that person was armed or unarmed.

          And yeah, there are lots of states who think the combination of weapons and drinking isn't good, and so have outlawed it.

        • RepealAndReplace says:

          But can you carry openly in a bar? What is the point of concealed carry. If the point is to discourage bad guys with guns from opening fire – the deterrent effect – what good does concealing what you've got do? Better to show that my gun is bigger than your gun, no?

    • Negev says:

      Shout out to all amendments….

    • Genghis says:

      It has nothing whatsoever to do with firearms. Nothing. Whatsoever. 

      The simple truth is that Americans are inherently more homicidal than people in the rest of the world. If that dude had no access to firearms, he simply would have strangled those poor people or beaten them to death with a shovel.

      It's got nothing to do with firearms, though. Firearms are sacred objects, like the Shroud of Turin. 

  3. RepealAndReplace says:

    Be afraid, be very afraid….

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/08/us/politics/ruth-bader-ginsburg-hospitalized.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

    Amy Barrett is one step closer to her dream of sitting on the Supreme Court. 

      • Duke CoxDuke Cox says:

        Yeah…me too. It is ugly time in America. The American people have spoken. They do not want an unrestrained despot to toss democracy out the door and allow our nation to slide into despair. 

        T***p is losing his tariff wars. China and Russia are ascendant. Worldwide, alliances are forming AGAINST the U.S. I predict North and South Korea will unify and toss out the U.S.. Russia will restart its annexation activities and we will continue to slip further and further into a religious war…in the United States.

        My contempt for the fools that brought us here continues to grow. Thanks, Trump voters. Are you happy now, bitch?

         

  4. RepealAndReplace says:

    Any word who will be in the new legislative leadership posts? 

     

  5. MichaelBowmanMichaelBowman says:

    Poor, poor Ann.  Maybe she can find some solace with Nutter during these difficult times? 

  6. Conserv. Head Banger says:

    Two thoughts about the election on Tuesday that I haven't seen here yet.

    1) the unfortunate purge of moderate Republicans in the House continues. Many of the R seats targeted by the Sierra Club and LCV were moderates. A few remain. Elise Stefanik in upstate NY and Brian Fitzpatrick in PA were re-elected. Stefanik is the author of the good Climate Change resolution within the Republican caucus.

    2) with all the talk about investigations by new chairs of House Oversight, House Ways & Means, House Judiciary, House Intelligence, one critical committee has been overlooked. In January, House Natural Resources will no longer have Rob Bishop (R-UT) as chair. Likely chair will be ranking member Raul Grijalva (D-AZ). Can't be complimentary enough about this changeover.

    • DavieDavie says:

      CHB, while losing "moderate" Republicans (I'll just have to take your word for it) in any other political reality would be lamentable, that is the only avenue open to achieve the necessary goal of a Democratic House majority to act as a limit on GOP malfeasance.  Flipping deep red seats just wasn't a viable option.

      So as our lamentably absent BlueCat repeatedly advised — do not vote for a Republican under any circumstances until they come to their senses and break the cycle of corruption and ideological warfare on the 99% (ok, I took a few liberties and added my own update).

      If anti-gerrymandering initiatives finally start taking hold in GOP-controlled states, then we can once again sustain a balance of Red and Blue representatives that can limit the damage of radical wingers.

    • DENependent says:

      Is what is happening to Republicans this cycle any different than what happens to moderate Democrats in swing districts or ones trending more conservative in red wave years? From the point of view of environmentalists the positions of moderate Republicans on the issues are as pointless as the positions of the few conservative Democrats would be to the Independence Institute. They could be Republicans in all but name, but they are still going to give control to their party’s leadership.

      Also, unless the system is changed to favor a different party structure it is almost always going to be moderates in swing districts that are most often voted out as the political tides move in and out.

    • Duke CoxDuke Cox says:

      I couldn't agree more. I have met Rep. Grijalva. I do not think he is a Fossilonian.

      • Conserv. Head Banger says:

        Great Zot!! Duke and I actually agree on something that isn't music related.

        As to potential Grijalva investigations, a Ryan Zinke resignation would free up more committee time for investigation of national monument size reductions in Utah. My saying for that:  MAGA = Making America Great Again (for foreign owned energy companies). 

        Davie: the problem in the outgoing House is not the moderate Republicans. The problem centers on the radical right Freedom Caucus. Having fewer moderates or centrists means the Freedom Caucus gains even more influence.

        • DavieDavie says:

          True, but that is for Republicans to get their house in order.  Democrats can't do that for them.  If and until the rabid rightwing fever breaks, all we can do is keep them out of power, and wait for Republican voters in those districts to exercise their right to say "enough!".

          Remember — Paul Ryan would never advance any legislation that required Democratic support to pass due to the recalcitrant Freedom Caucus. Since the tail was wagging the Republican dog, the only solution was a Democratic majority.

        • DavieDavie says:

          Having fewer moderates or centrists means the Freedom Caucus gains even more influence.

          Which apparently was the GOP strategy as well:

          It was a campaign defined early by Mr. Trump’s divisive persona and hard-right ideology, and by Republican leaders’ unswerving decision to align themselves with Mr. Trump and his overwhelmingly white, rural base rather than politically vulnerable moderates in Congress who hailed from the country’s population centers and represented the political middle.

          A campaign of retribution against Republicans who did not pledge fealty to Mr. Trump — and to Speaker Paul D. Ryan’s legislative agenda — triggered an exodus of senior legislators that opened the way for a Democratic takeover.

        • JohnInDenverJohnInDenver says:

          Freedom Caucus will have more power, perhaps, but only in the Republican caucus.

          They won't be able to oust a Speaker.  They will not be able to influence what legislation is placed on the calendar with their power to employ the Hastert rule. They won't be a major factor in negotiating for legislation, as everyone knows they will oppose nearly all Democratic bills. They won't have a major presence on ANY committee or subcommittee.

          And the proportion of crazy statements from House members will continue to rise, with all that implies for the future of the Republican party.

        • RepealAndReplace says:

          Having fewer moderates or centrists means the Freedom Caucus gains even more influence.

          Sadly, I think that ship has already sailed and isn't coming back.

      • MichaelBowmanMichaelBowman says:

        Grijalva is really good. 

  7. VoyageurVoyageur says:

    according to Gun Violence Archive, There were 38,648 gun deaths in 2017, with 15,547 of that number being murders, manslaughters,etc. And the rest suicides.  Just 345 were mass violence like the latest bar shooting.

    If we really wanted to reduce the slaughter we'd try to reduce availability of guns to the mentally ill and severely depressed.

    But on this subject , not many people really want to talk statistics.  We'll yell at each other about assault rifles– less than 1 pct of deaths according to the FBI– for a couple of days, then forget about it until the next mass killing makes the news.

    Yes, we could use more thought on this issue.  But forget the prayers.  They are absolutely useless.

    • DavieDavie says:

      Here is a thoughtful perspective from across the pond:

      Kostas Giannakakis

      London, UK25m ago

      Times Pick

      Just out of curiosity, I have a question for all the US citizens reading this 'Comments' section.

      If you were someone living outside the US who is following the news about a new gun massacre every other day, would you feel safe and assured to visit the US as a tourist, or for business or study? What about allowing your child to travel there for study or holiday?

      Do you think it would be fair game for other countries to start issuing travel warnings about the US due to the gun violence? I assume the US government would have done the same for any other country that had similar incidents so often.

      It seems that this can happen anywhere at any time now. Wealthy suburbs, poor inner-city neighborhoods, concerts, schools, university campuses, bars, theme parks, the list is endless.

      I have a feeling that many people in the US must be feeling like the people of Baghdad, or Tel Aviv, or Kabul where a visit to the local market can turn into a bloodbath from a random bomb.

      That's a sad state of affairs and I sympathize with the common citizen of the country. But, in my experience, if this situation was happening in most other Western countries, the government would fall in a matter of days and the whole country would shut down from the massive demonstrations demanding the laws to change and better protect the citizens.

      • VoyageurVoyageur says:

        In a nutshell, Britain had no written constitution, ergo no first or second amendments.  But they still managed to starve or shoot a hell of a lot of Irishmen.  Oliver Cromwell was worse than Trump.

        • DENependent says:

          That's like saying, "Denmark had slaves 1,000 years ago that they raided from England so they shouldn't lecture anyone else about unfair labor conditions. Rotten Dane hellhole."

          • VoyageurVoyageur says:

            Actually, when it comes to killing Irish , there has been quite a bit of that in the 20th century.  But the point is Britain has no First or Second amendments.  They have much more restrictive laws on the press and on guns, than we do.  No doubt, you'd love their gun laws, might not be so happy when they jail you for libel if they get pissed off at the stuff you write.

             

      • Negev says:

        Huh. I wonder if the writer was aware that more people have been stabbed to death  in London than all the mass shootings in America nationwide, combined this year.

        • deathpigeon says:

          That's a really bad comparison. Mass shootings are a minor fraction of US gun violence. A better comparison would be between homicide rates, the UK has a rate of 1.2 per hundred thousand compared to the US rate of 5.35 per hundred thousand.

        • JohnInDenverJohnInDenver says:

          The latest figures I can find are 250 knife deaths this year in all of the UK.  The Mirror reported "The latest slaying is the fifth knife murder in London in just six days and brings the number of homicides in the capital so far this year to 117."  Elsewhere, there is the statistic that 30% of homicides are caused by knives, so the math suggests about 40 of the London deaths would be from knives.

          For the US, Wikipedia's list of mass killings shows 83 (plus more if you count the shooters).

          • VoyageurVoyageur says:

            The 349 dead in mass killings I reported is for 217.  

          • Negev says:

            My above link shows 95 stabbing deaths in London 2018. Names, dates, location, time, age. (here it is again) Wiki shows 83 plus 6 shooters is 89. 

             This year, if there are 95 stabbing deaths in London population 8.8 million, and 89 gun deaths in mass shootings in U.S. population 325 million, It's pretty clear your chances of getting stabbed to death in London are way higher than getting shot to death in a mass shooting in the U.S… Map that ratio any way you like. 

             

             

            • VoyageurVoyageur says:

              But your chance of being shot to death in the u.s. Is about 5 times higher.  U.s. Mass shootings account for only 1 pct of u.s. Gun deaths.  

              • Negev says:

                Why do we spend so much time trying to find a solution to 1% of the problem? 

                • Diogenesdemar says:

                  I guess because there’s still a few foolish folks who persist in their misguided thinking that lives, and people, might matter a bit more than some portion of the death industry’s sales??? . . .

                  • DavieDavie says:

                    Negev can tell you those deaths are just a cost of doing business.  Oh wait, gun violence doesn't cost them a nickel, because they are immune from liability suits.

                    The GOP business model is to privatize profits and socialize costs.

                    So maybe, at least here in Colorado now that the GOP is in timeout for bad behavior, we should look at privatizing those costs, say with an equitable tax on guns and ammo?

                    • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

                      License guns like cars. Take a safety exam, pass a test, including eyesight, dexterity, and knowledge of law.

                      Lose that license for misbehavior with firearms, including "accidental" death and injury. Lose it for domestic violence, threats, anything felonious.
                      Fine the shit  out of people who cause harm or danger to the public by, for example, any of the incidents on the NSPA site.

                      Put proceeds from fines into a victim assistance fund.

                    • DavieDavie says:

                      Perfect!  And repeal the post-Columbine immunity bill that Gov. Owens signed in 2000 too!

        • There were 215 knife homicides in all of England and Wales in 2017. That's 3.23 deaths per million people. *Source: UK Office for National Statistics

          There were 213 deaths by mass shooting in the United States in 2017. That's only two fewer deaths than all of the UK's knife homicides – just in mass shootings. *Source: USA Today plus the Washinton Post mass shooting tracker.

          There were 10,982 homicides by gun in the United States in 2017. That's 33.52 deaths per million people. *Source: Statista (compiled from somewhere I have to pay to find out)

          We have a problem.

          • DavieDavie says:

            The only problem Negev sees is his profit margins on guns suck because of the competition from Walmart.

            • Negev says:

              Actually Walmart stopped selling evil AR15's and other "assault" weapons, as have several other national box retailers. It has opened a niche in the ma and pop gun stores and probably increased the longevity of such locations, allowing profits to soar due to increased traffic to stores that were once unable to compete. 

              But thanks for your concern. 

              • DavieDavie says:

                Gee, you sure are cranky tonight!  Wishing you many more bad days smiley

                • Negev says:

                  Cranky? AOBC up 54%. You fuel my fire Daviekiss

                  • DavieDavie says:

                    Wow!  Even more than jerking off to autopsy pictures of AR-15 bullet exit wounds?  I guess I should be honored I have that much effect on you!!!!

                    Here's another one that must really get you off — did the NRA have you pose for that illustration?

                    AMRM199410

                    You can read all about how you and your fellow ammosexuals got brainwashed in the New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/11/08/opinion/nra-mass-shootings-thousand-oaks.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

                    • Negev says:

                      Gee, looks who's cranky now…….temper temper hot rod….

                    • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

                      Could have sworn that cartoon of “Liberty under assault “ was contemporary. 

                      I still want to see the cartoon in which Liberty decks the assailant with her torch. 

                      Deathpup is right (below) that the markers for being a mass shooter are being a male veteran with a history of domestic violence, far right wing politics, many guns, etc.

                      those are the very people Negev strives To protect…because they are his best customers.

                    • DavieDavie says:

                      For Negev:  an anecdote you might find humorous that you can share on your tour of Ma and Pa Gun shops barely hanging on, but for the profits from sales of military-style weapons:

                      “This is the second time in about a year and a month that this has happened,” Nicholas Champion, a fitness trainer from Southern California who posted a group photo on Facebook of Vegas survivors gathering at the Borderline in April, said in a television interview. “I was at the Las Vegas Route 91 mass shooting as well as probably 50 or 60 others who were in the building at the same time as me tonight.”

                      When a gunman opened fire at the Route 91 Festival in Las Vegas last year, Telemachus Orfanos somehow survived.

                      On Wednesday night, though, he didn’t.

                      “He was killed last night at Borderline,” his mother, Susan Orfanos, said, speaking rapidly into the telephone. “He made it through Las Vegas, he came home. And he didn’t come home last night, and the two words I want you to write are: Gun control. Right now — so that no one else goes through this. Can you do that? Can you do that for me? Gun control.”

    • deathpigeon says:

      The mentally ill aren't responsible for most gun violence. It's actually far more likely for us to be the victims of gun violence than the perpetrators. What actually correlates with gun violence really well is a history of domestic abuse and what correlates especially well with mass shootings is far right politics. (The Columbine shooters, for example, did their shooting on the day of the OKC bombing in honor of the bomber and shooting up the school was their back up plan when the bomb they planted in the school didn't go off.) If anyone should get their gun rights removed, it's domestic abusers and right wing extremists, not mentally ill people.

      Other correlates with mass shootings are being white, being male, being a veteran, etc but, while all of these correlate strongly with engaging in mass shootings, domestic abuse and far right politics strongly predicts gun violence in a way that these correlates don't.

      Depressed people is somewhat more complicated. Depression is not well correlated with engaging in gun violence, but is very well correlated with suicidal behavior and guns tend to make that easier, but that's a really different case than restricting gun ownership b/c they might shoot a bunch of people and arguably has better responses, such as community support.

      • VoyageurVoyageur says:

        Read my post above, deadbird.  The big majority of gun deaths are suicide.  I'm not trying to take guns away from the.mentally ill and depressed because they will kill somebody else.  I want to take their guns away so they don't kill themselves.

        Women try suicide more often than men.  By slashing their wrists, which practically no one does enough to be fatal.  Or they pop pills and are found in time too have their stomachs pumped.

        Men try suicide less– but succeed more often.  Because they use guns.  It's still a family legend about how my uncle killed himself with a double-barrel shotgun.

        It wasn't pretty.

    • JohnInDenverJohnInDenver says:

      I'm hoping the Colorado legislature will rapidly advance a "Red Flag" bill — one of the few ideas which should draw bi-partisan support and isolate the "guns today, guns tomorrow, guns everywhere" RMGO minions.  Used well, it can diminish suicides and domestic abuse killings.

      I'm also a big fan of looking for some sort of mandatory training or "safe storage" solution to diminish the number of "gunfail" accidents.

    • RepealAndReplace says:

      If we really wanted to reduce the slaughter we'd try to reduce availability of guns to the mentally ill and severely depressed.

      As some of our ammosexual friends might say, "There is nothing in the Second Amendment which excludes the right to bear arms to the mentally ill or severely depressed."

       

  8. PseudonymousPseudonymous says:

    Maybe some Democrats can help me with understanding this result from Missouri.

    • DavieDavie says:

      There are a lot of minimum wage earners in Missouri, but it's a dog-eat-dog, every man for himself world according to what Missouri Republicans tell us, so get it while you can, and the hell with everyone else?

      • PseudonymousPseudonymous says:

        They also rejected right-to-work legislation, referred by the the state legislature to the ballot, by 2-to-1 (just south of a million votes against) during the August primary.

        • DavieDavie says:

          Blue collar workers still waiting to hear a message from Democrats that resonates, apparently.  Are you thinking that if Missouri had open primaries in 2016, Bernie would have walked away with it?

          • PseudonymousPseudonymous says:

            Nah.  Not particularly into counterfactuals.  Just wondering why a Dem isn't winning in a state where “Dem” policies are.

            • DavieDavie says:

              Not being a Missouri political specialist, I can't say.  But it does appear that Missouri has a strong legacy of union membership (although that has declined drastically as it has elsewhere in the US).  But unions poured a lot of money into the issue and it absolutely resonated — only 14 of 114 counties supported the measure.  Even the GOP-controlled legislature is reluctant to take it up again for fear of voter revenge.

            • RepealAndReplace says:

              I suspect it has to the do with the Big Three G's: God, guns and gays. They want their minimum wage increase and right to organize but they want their guns and Jesus more.

    • Duke CoxDuke Cox says:

      I think you understand it just fine, Pseudo…it is just hard to accept. 

      I built a store in the Battlefield Mall in Springfield a few years ago. A lot of shit there doesn't seem to make sense. 

    • deathpigeon says:

      The US electorate tends to be further to the left in their votes for ballot measures than their votes for politicians b/c they tend to have left leaning positions on policy, but buy into a lot of the rhetoric of the Republican Party while also not finding much to excite them about the Democrats. The Democrats either need to maintain their policy positions while stealing rhetoric from the Republicans, push a new framework for how they argue for their positions that can appeal to people more, or convince people to vote more on policy than they do currently to win more.

      • RepealAndReplace says:

        Well, not in Colorado where our tax increases for education and infrastructure went down to resounding defeat while we elected some rather progressive politicians to office.

  9. DENependent says:

    The Denver Post has an article analyzing Colorado's voter turn out numbers. While digging in to more fine detail might be a possibility later, I would have nothing to add. The headline numbers are 78% of active voters and they linked to Election Project's analysis that 59.7% of eligible voters turned in a ballot in Colorado.

    • JohnInDenverJohnInDenver says:

      Given my comments on the current Secretary of State's web site, I'm curious about these numbers.  In one place, the site has October 31, 2018 registrations as:

      active 3,219,953, inactive 547,085, pre-registered 35,427, total 3,802,465

      In another location, the SoS site reports:

      Ballots Cast:  2,178,719    Reg. Voters:  3,900,744  [using those two figures, we have a 55.87% turnout].

      So, 98,000 registrations in the week leading up to the completion of the election?  Do those with more experience in voter behavior think it likely that 4.5% of those voting registered in six days?

      And the Election Project's precise math says there are 4,103,903 eligible voters; has a predicted voter count of 2,450,000, and gets to 59.7% that way.  Anyone think there are 270,000 votes yet to be reported to the SoS?

  10. PseudonymousPseudonymous says:

    Bernie coming in with the terrible take of the election so far:

    “I think you know there are a lot of white folks out there who are not necessarily racist who felt uncomfortable for the first time in their lives about whether or not they wanted to vote for an African-American,” Sanders told The Daily Beast, referencing the close contests involving Andrew Gillum in Florida and Stacey Abrams in Georgia. “I think next time around by the way it will be a lot easier for them to do that.”

    Actually, totes racist, B.

  11. MichaelBowmanMichaelBowman says:

    Rumor has it that Kyrsten has pulled ahead in the AZ race!

    • VoyageurVoyageur says:

      It'no rumor.  Democrat Cinebon now leads Republican McNasty by 9,600 votes!

      Republicans have filed suit in a desperate effort to stop counting more than 350,000 still untallied ballots from Phoenix Tucson areas, both Sinema strongholds.
      Stealing this election is GOP’s last hope. And honest count will put Sinema in the Senate.
      Stay tuned.

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.