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 12, 2018 05:49 PM UTC
34 Comments
Updating on close Colorado House races that were at least technically undecided at the start of the long holiday weekend, none of which appear to be as of this writing–after Rochelle Galindo’s
Is 41 enough to send the other 24 off to the FEMA reëducation camps?
If I could only trust them to push through progressive legislation, like single payer healthcare, environmental protections, etc, I'd be much more excited about this, but, unfortunately, I'm sure the Democrats are gonna Democrat this whole thing and get none of that done in a hopeless attempt at bipartisanship and to appeal to their capitalist donors.
They can pass it but will voters fund universal health care and all the other “free stuff” the left demands?
deathpigeon: are you Zappy's alter ego or are you drinking the same DS Kool-aid?
The dead bird is ok, gertie. He suffers from several mental afflictions includ ing obsessive compulsive disorder. But he has a good heart and I can always use some reinforcements in the semi vegan faction!
They. I'm not a guy. Please don't refer to me with he/him pronouns. I'm trans and non-binary.
I'm not sure it's even pos sible to be both trans and non-binary at the same time, but I'll try to respect your feelings as long as you oppose the designated hitter rule.
It literally is. I am trans, so I kinda know a lot about it. Trans is an umbrella term to include anyone who's gender doesn't match the one they were assigned at birth. I'm not a man or a woman, which doesn't match what I was assigned at birth, so I'm trans.
A trans is either a woman who was once a man or a man who was once a woman. Non binaries, whatever they were born at , reject both male and female identities, which seems to rule out being simultaneously trans and non-binary. In short, trans people have just switched sides in the battle of the sexes. Non binaries are pacifists in that struggle.
but if you wanna say you transitioned from guy to non-binary, well whatever works.
Trans isn't just trans men and trans women. You don't actually know what you're talking about in the slightest on this subject.
Well, I know you're going to have trouble winning either mother of the year or father of the year with that attitude!
I'm on your side on this one, V. And you know I DO know a little bit about it.
I know a lot about this subject. I literally am trans.
Yes, you are trans, and non binary, which is like being both a square and a circle, and you claim to have not one but four mental illnesses. I suspect one of them is munchausen syndrome.
The Cook actually does know quite a bit on such subjects. You seem in many ways a bridge too far.
Oh, how could I forget. You're anarchist. And a communizer, whatever the bleep that is.
and a partridge in a pear tree.
i'd think you're Moddy pimping us, but you're too manic.
do you also play center field for the Chicago cubs?
And you were doing so well playing nice, V. It was almost civil discourse. And then the dirty bird had to go and impinge on your biases. Ah, well.
dp, I confess I don't know what "non-binary" is, either. I'm an old school bisexual, biased towards hetero. Is non-binary the new school version of that spectrum?
I should know, because I will always have students who are "questioning" or "gender fluid", and I would sincerely like to know what people mean by this. They want to be called "they", too, and while the grammarian in me cringes, I'll oblige if I can.
I could look up "non-binary" online, but would rather hear about it from you.
Nonbinary is an umbrella term for anyone who isn't a guy or a girl, so it's more along the lines of genderfluid people than bisexual people (indeed, genderfluid is a sort of nonbinary identity). I'm personally specifically genderqueer, which basically means my gender is something particular to me outside of the male-female spectrum.
Good try kid, but buying it I ain't. Let's settle on the more widely accepted "whack job" to describe your politics.
You are, not for the first time, blowing it out your ass on this one, mj. If you look back you will find cookie, who actually knows this stuff, isn't buying the trans and nonbinary thing.
Nonbinary just means neither male nor female. In some cases, babies are born with genitalia of both sexes, known as hermaphrodites. In other cases, as I suspect this one, it's a psychological thing. It's quite rare but does exist.
That literally is what nonbinary is. I know what I'm talking about with this, which you seem not to.
Being trans and nonbinary is like being a rectangle and a square. Trans people are anyone who's gender is not the same as the gender they've been assigned. Nonbinary people are people who are neither male nor female, which almost always makes our gender not the same as what we've been assigned.
Communization theory is a pretty recent development in ultra left circles developed by, for example, the Endnotes journal and Tiqqun. It's associated with the journal Riff Raff, the Invisible Committee, etc. Basically it's a modern synthesis of various ultra left currents with insurrectionary anarchist theory, drawing upon the council communists, Bordigists, situationists, insurrectionists, etc. There's been lots of really interesting work done by communizers on the anti-austerity riots in Europe, for example. The focus of communization theory is the act of communizing, ie the oppressed directly taking the property held by the capitalist class to prefigure communism immediately instead of having to wait for the far future. Communizers are known for being harsh critics of vanguardism and proponents of spontaneity.
Thanks for your response, dp. We all have to get used to ambiguity and folks not fitting into the usual categories of gender and race .
It's no prob. Thanks for being so understanding mj.
I'm not a democratic socialist, indeed I tend to think these sorts of things are nowhere near enough, but this is reasonable to expect from the Democrats who claim they want to look out for the little guy (even tho they really look out for segments of the capitalist class).
Nothing "alter" about the DeadBird, Gertie. I think they were twins separated at birth.
I'd prefer they not overreach and end up giving up the majority to recalls like they did the last time.
You can't because the the far, far, far left fringe doesn't get to dictate the agenda. Unless you can pull a Trump and tap into the working class masses who are demanding a working class collectivist governing model.
Single payer and environmental protections aren't "the far, far, far left fringe", speaking as someone on the far, far, far left fringe. They're moderate reforms which it's reasonable to expect from a party which positions itself as the main center-left party in the US.
Environmental protections is one thing (though we likely disagree on the extent and the mechanisms of such protections), but single payer health care at the state level is unworkable- it's either national or nothing for that golden goose
Education, infrastructure, family leave, childcare, healthcare price transparency are progressive items that can be successfully enacted at the state level.
It's not a national or nothing thing, but, still, even if you think it's unworkable to do single payer on a state level (it's not), that hardly makes it the far, far, far left fringe or even beyond what we should be expecting from a supposedly progressive party like the Democrats.
Wong is Right!
41 seats ≠ "41-seat majority." It was a grand and glorious result as-is. No need to gild the lily. 🙂
May we gently remind deathpigeon that universal health care; a variant of single payer; failed in the 2016 election by 78.77% to 21.23%.
Also worth noting that while the Dems ran the table this month with elected offices, Colorado voters remain generally fiscally conservative; as in 73, 74, 109, 110, 112 all going down to defeat. 69's mega-landslide loss two years ago reminds us again of this fiscal conservatism.
The General Assembly will be taking up these issues, probably with rational input from a few non-rabid partisan Republicans, and then pass sensible legislation (with a lot of Jared's input, no doubt, unlike Hick's "I'll tell you what flavor I like once it's out of the oven" attitude).
Then we'll do the TABOR Two-Step and put it up for a public vote. Something will pass (eventually).
I doubt there will be much time for no-hope message bills. Dems won't be leading with their chins on ideological issues.