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, 2018 07:20 AM UTC
27 Comments
Trump says he has the votes to help Nancy Pelosi become speaker and beat back the challenge to her election.
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2018/11/17/president-trump-nancy-pelosi-votes-newday-sot-vpx.cnn
Now THAT'S bipartisanship!
Whaaaa?
Of course
– the right and his base already hate her
– he has the tweet pattern all worked out
– he thinks women are inferior
Does The Dumpster® believe that he can vote in the House?
Probably as he is a stable genius.
I think he thinks he can deliver Republican House votes for Pelosi.
Yeah, like that is even possible. The Republicans who were re-elected last week are the wackos from very safe seats. They are the Tea Party and Freedom Caucus people.
They would just as soon see their arm fall off than vote for any Democrat, let alone Pelosi, regardless of what he offers them.
I honestly thought it was an Onion or spoof piece when I saw the headline.
But…
Possibility 1: Trump is scared enough, and enough of an egotist to think that, by backing Pelosi, he can head off a more radical Speaker who will move for impeachment (of him and of Kavanaugh). Pelosi has already said that impeachment is off the table. (I'm for impeachment, if anyone cares).
Possibility 2: The Donald is playing some double bluff game that involves his "kiss o'death" endorsement of Pelosi. Does he want her as a foil? Maybe. All of those right wing memes would have to photoshop in a different face for the big, bad Democrat villain.
I'll go with scared and egotistical for ~ 227 – 198 . (eight races still outstanding) That's the approximate size of the new Democratic House majority, which has the largest number of female legislators ever.
Which is a good thing, because women get shit done.
2a. Trump thinks delivering GOP votes shows his power (thus gratifying his ego). It also keeps Pelosi as the chief nemesis for the GOP, creating discord and chaos (thus gratifying his ego). So in his eyes, it's a can't lose proposition.
It would be better if she wrangles the votes all by herself and give Trump the flying fickle finger of fate.
Put me in the column for Possibility # 2. It's a game he's playing. He's also putting his troops on notice that if they don't protect him, he will cut deals with the Dems. That, of course, assumes the Dems want to negotiate stuff with him.
As for impeachment, I am ambivalent. It would feel nice and would be a symbolic gesture but in the long run, it achieves nothing. Call me when Chuck Schumer lines up 15 or 20 Republicans senators to at least look at an impeachment trial with an open mind. Then it becomes real.
Hell no to impeachment. The Yam richly deserves it, but as I've said before, Pence would be worse in his own way and it's turtles all the way down after him.
I agree with you about what Pence represents. But the process will never get that. There will only be 47 Dems in the Senate and no more than 46 of them would vote to remove Trump from office.
Turtles???
I saw a clip this morning of an interview with Michael Steele. The questions centered around Steele’s 2010 to demonize Pelosi and how successful that campaign was, even infecting Democrats years later. As MS said, “you go after your adversaries strengths, not their weaknesses@ and was quite kind to Nancy’s ability to (paraphrased) “get shit done”.
I do hope she becomes Speaker (I have little doubt) she announces this is her last run and prepare for a transition in 2020.
I hope she becomes Speaker and quits within a week. She is too old. Age 56 should be the cap.
Here’s your explanation, for the turtles R&R
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down
interesting…..I will need to remember this one. Thanks!
Deleting duplicate
Also, impeachment doesn't even mean we're rid of Trump without support from the Senate, and that's not very likely at this point.
It's (probably) to head off a more radical Speaker. I mean, basically the first thing Pelosi did after the Democrats won the House was call for bipartisanship. Trump probably prefers that to someone who'll try pushing through progressive legislation without trying to work with the Republicans.
Actually not all "wackos", R & R. Among some others, Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA) and Elise Stefanik (R-NY) were re-elected. Stefanik has been introducing the annual, and well written, climate resolution for the Republican caucus for the past couple years.
True, but those you cite are few and far between.
Not really. Apparently you're not all that familiar with the Republican caucus. Look beyond the nut jobs of the Freedom Caucus.
The analysis of the Republican Caucus shows a pretty clear gap between Democrats (who of course are reasonable) and Republicans (who do have a bit of a range). See https://www.voteview.com/congress/house for a pretty picture.
You can sort the list by their NOMINATE scores, finding every Republican on one side, every Democrat on the other.
I'm familiar enough with them to know they only come in two flavors, the open monsters, and the monsters who are nice about it (the second type is what almost all of the Democrats are like, ofc).
We may have hit peak oil. Peak usage that is.
Which is going to be devastating to kleptocracies like Russia, Nigeria, & Saudi Arabia.
Two interesting factoids from that linked article:
And yet Republicans are bitching and moaning that we're adopting the California standards that the Feds (under Obama) and the automakers all agreed to years ago.
Bloomberg has a tight paywall. I can't find either of the articles you cited, Davie.
Bloomberg does not have a tight paywall.
Go into your browser cache and delete Bloomberg.com.
You will have to do this every 9 articles that you read.
Thanks, davebarnes. That worked.