President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Kamala Harris
(R) Donald Trump
80%↑
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) V. Archuleta
98%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Marshall Dawson
95%
5%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd
(D) Adam Frisch
52%↑
48%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(D) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank
(D) River Gassen
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) John Fabbricatore
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen
(R) Sergei Matveyuk
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
60%
40%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
January 23, 2019 06:46 AM UTC
37 Comments
Morning.
In times like these when the Trump administration is making moves to make life worse for trans people and the discourse around trans people is getting incredibly toxic, y'all really need to take the opportunity to listen to what trans people have to say and not blithely deny pretty basic facts about us.
Consider, for example, that you might not actually be as knowledgeable about trans issues as you think you are, and certainly not as much as actual trans people.
For your part, you can accept your white privilege and stop showing bigotry toward black women, many of whom endure far more discrimination than you do.
Ok. I accept that I have white privilege, just like I experience oppression for being trans, queer, neurodivergent, and working class. But what bigotry are you speaking of in particular?
God, you are hooked on victim status. It's an opiate to you.
Maybe you can back up what you're saying with argument instead of using empty right wing rhetoric. Oppression exists against people of color, queer people, including trans people, women, neurodivergent people, disabled people, working class people, etc. These can be seen in metrics such as increased poverty, increased likelihood of being killed, or increased rates of suicide as well as in social structures, such as lack of control over yourself at work, legal standards which exclude who you are, or hostility from agents of the state, such as cops. These are facts about the world, however much you might want to deny them.
Don't forget you once claimed no less than four mental illness. One was ocd, i forget the other three.
Go back to living in your Ay n Rand novel. It's all about you in yourworld but your constant whining is boring.
Right, I'm the one whining by *checks notes* talking about the effects of social systems on groups of people unlike you who's, uh, *checks notes* getting upset that someone is mentally ill and is trans and talking about the social effects of that. Cool, cool.
Any chance we can simplify to "everyone is unique" and deserves the same rights? Your experience is no doubt different than Colonel Jennifer Pritzker (ret.). And different than the first trans person I can recall, Professor Deirdre Nansen McCloskey, who I first knew at Professor Donald McCloskey. (reference here.).
Not that you are implying this, but…
Sorry, "everyone deserves the same rights" is inadequate to the problem. Oppression is dependent on the power relationship between the "unique" individuals.
The classic case is the one of "Everyone has the right to sleep under bridges, both the rich and the poor."
Everyone has the right to enter Harvard, the legacy applicants and the graduate from a public school.
Racism against African Americans is different from racism against White people. (Remember, racism is about structures of oppression; bigotry is about not liking someone.)
Conservatives, especially Conservative Judges on the Supreme Court, claim that if we have a color-blind legal system, racism doesn't exist: "Lynching is just old-history, We gave them the vote, They are free to go into the stores, schools, restaurants and hotels, They are free to buy houses anywhere they want…"
My point is that racism and other structural and cultural forms of oppression are not history: "The past is never dead. It's not even past."
Well put.
Thanks PH for the reminder about the difference between racism and bigotry.
Very well said.
The issue is with implementation. Like, apply this to abortion, and we can get "everyone deserves the same rights, and those rights don't include abortion". That's the same rights, but it's done in such a way that one group (people who can get pregnant) is negatively effected in another group (people who can't) isn't.
Similarly, with trans people, everyone being referred to by the people around them and by legal documents exclusively by the gender they were assigned at birth is everyone getting the same rights, but it's negatively impacting trans people in a way it isn't negatively impacting cis people.
Hey, Alva…
How about citing sources on these Trump quotes you keep pumping out? I am thinking you are making up at least some of them.
On the other hand, I don't have a Twitter account, and none of it seems out of character for the Baby King…but, really?
C'mon…fess up.🤔
According to this:
As I hope a response I made to Cook made clear, I am open to learning much more about transgender people. I agree I need to listen and that assumptions based on language or my previous life experience are, so far, not very helpful. So, teach.
Well, what's been tripping you up regarding trans people? I find it easier to start from something you might not understand than to have no starting point at all.
Not tripped up. Just absorbing what I see and hear. It was difficult to begin referring to her when I'd known him. Felt bad when I referred to her as him a few times.
What is cis?
Ah, yeah. It can take some getting used to when switching pronouns. So long as you try your best, she shouldn't mind too much. Even I struggle sometimes with pronouns when someone I knew as cis comes out as trans. So long as you're trying and you aren't a dick about it, messing up isn't that big of a deal.
Cis is the opposite of trans, basically. A transgender person is someone who's gender doesn't match up with what they were assigned at birth. A cisgender person is someone who's gender does match up with what they were assigned at birth.
Gray, Dead Bird’s right. As long as it's not malicious (you'd be surprised at how often it is) dropping a pronoun now and again shouldn't cause a transperson that much distress. If you do it in their presence, just acknowledge the goof and move on.
Yeah. I generally only actually have a problem when they follow up the mistake with whining about bullshit grammar rules or how I shouldn't be so offended or whatever or if they seem to be making no effort to gender me correctly. So long as you're trying and you're not a dick, you're fine.
Cook, bird: it was in her presence. I did ask forbearance and she said "don't worry".
As I said, this past summer and continuing now, in my very small town, which I've always found extremely tolerant, at least 4 folks are transitioning, one even with a full beard
Yeah. She clearly realizes you're trying. You don't need to be perfect. You just need to try your best and improve as much as possible. 🙂
Nancy: “What do want to end the shutdown Donald?”
Donnie: “I want $5.7G for my Wall.”
Nancy: “You’ve got it. Are you sure that is enough?”
Donnie: “What?”
Nancy: “I want 12M green cards. Do we have a deal?”
No. I have said it before and I will keep saying it, just as you keep repeating your 12 million green cards line.
The first and most important thing when negotiating with a hostage taker is to prevent him taking hostages again. Give Donnie his wall only as part of legislation that will prevent any future shutdowns. No more debt ceiling bullshit, no more last minute budgets, legislation that will fund the government in the absence of adult behavior by congress, the president, or whoever.
No.
Just because you and Pelosi are both over 56 doesn’t mean she’s forgotten how to deal with a toddler.
https://newrepublic.com/article/152936/nancy-pelosis-finest-hour
You don’t give a pouty five-year old $5B just because “more Lego blocks” are his favorite obsession-of-the-month.
Finally, a market-based solution for the wall. I’m guessing Reacharound won’t be supporting this idea, particularly in light of his non-essential status.
That bill is some rippingly hilarious stuff. Pay $20 to the Arizona Commerce Authority for the privilege of being able to continue punching the clown to internet porn. The money funds something called the John McCain Human Trafficking and Child Exploitation Prevention Fund (poor John is dead and thus unable to oppose his name being tacked onto this horseshit), which provides grants for noble public purposes, including without limitation building a wall on the Arizona-Mexico border.
Also:
I feel safer already! Let's five-knuckle-shuffle our way to national security!
I never knew until now that Arizona was a “discernibly turgid” state?
Florida, maybe. And, Texas always seemed to me to look a bit swollen. Alaska, whoa!! But, Arizona??
(I guess Rhode Island, and New Jersey are safe?)
I thought the "square state" characterization of Arizona, like the other 4 Corners states, referred to its geography, not a description of its legislators.
When free porn is outlawed, only outlaws will have “discernibly turgid . . .
Oh, never mind . . .
Only a good guy in a discer …
Yes, never mind indeed.
It seems a RWNJ tracker attending an informal coffee shop gathering with Rep. Joe Neguse last week taped him mentioning in response to an attendee's question, the potential of an investigation into perjury by Brett Kavanaugh.
The sound in the video isn't very good, so my old ears can't confirm this story that I'm sure conservatives will take as proof their persecution complex is totally justified.
I suspect if someone asks Rep. Neguse, now on the House Judiciary Committee, about this, he'd be happy to make it clearer than the bad recording.
Finding out if prominent people are honoring their oaths while testifying to Congress seems like worthwhile oversight to me.
I believe Rep. Jerry Nadler, now the Chair of the Judiciary Committee, is on record supporting such an investigation. Neguse saying "there's no doubt" is a bit strong, but the documentation is pretty strong… there's direct proof he lied during his prior confirmation hearing, and he did nothing to resolve that during his SCOTUS hearing.