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%
October 30, 2020 06:46 AM UTC
84 Comments
As we get up to the finish line, please remember that in most (not all) cases, we have opponents, not enemies. Don't ascribe different views to evil intent as that takes all of us to a very dark place.
And to clarify, I'm not saying to not call out corrupt intent when that is valid. Trump clearly is a grifter (and a narcissistic little boy). Most of those around him are too. But that does not mean that someone who agrees with actions he has taken is also corrupt, or even wrong.
If we can't get along with those who hold very different views, but do so based on their beliefs, then we will fail as a democracy. So suck it up and treat each other with respect here.
David: in general, I agree with you. However, I will make an exception for those who might call me a "babykiller" because I support a woman's right to choose. Ever drop by a Planned Parenthood office and view the "protesters?"
This is the hardest issue I think. If you believe that human life begins at conception, then any abortion is murder. And there's no scientific answer that says when in the 9 month process the growing organism becomes "human." It's an individual judgement call that has so much wrapped around it.
With that said, I think it is incumbent on all of us, even where we strongly disagree on this, to not use perjoratives like "babykiller" because that then puts it into the category of right and wrong when instead it should be one of fundamental disagreement.
But this is the topic where this is the hardest for many people.
Thanks. This is a good insight. Yes, they might truly believe Abortion is wrong, and the word "evil" is not appropriate. What if they sincerely believe non-white people are subhuman?
Again, the goal of enforcing their religious/moral perspective on others is about power-over. I'd say it's also be anti-constitutional.
To me it's not what they believe. There's people who believe the earth is flat and that just makes them stupid. It's where there is no scientific or factual measure. And where on the path from conception to birth that organism becomes "human" is an individual judgement. There's no scientific basis to set a point.
Not to minimize the above because this example is a lot less important, but what makes for a beautiful song or movie? We can disagree strongly, but neither of us is wrong for what we like (unless it's Country Western music – that's just awful).
Well, there’s Hank Williams… and also Li’l Nas. This version by Walk off the Earth absolutely rocks:
https://www.youtube.com/embed/hRXv_VU35Lw
Jimmy Rogers, Willie Nelson, a ton of others.
Country western may not be better when you play it backwards but, at least, it's happier:
You get yer dog back (maybe you should quit there), yer job back, yer house back, yer wife back, yer truck back…
Country music…”three chords and the truth”
Davids’ elitist snarling, notwithstanding.
Are you a yankee, David?
Ummm, Duke. Is this the question you wanted to be answered? Because I’m lost.
I have asked more than one. He has answered none.
Actually, the most pertinent question was; Which members of the current Republican leadership should President Biden invite to sit on his panel? Jared? Mitch? Peter Navarro, maybe?
The point was Davids’ suggestion of compromise. Enough is enough. Mitch made the rule. Now he needs to be crushed by it. Do what is possible. Do it right away.
current Republican leadership should President Biden invite to sit on his panel
Rush.
Mitch.
Kemp, Cruz, Ron Johnson, Kayla, Kellanne, Ivanka or Jared, Don Jr, Stone.
This is who speaks for the party – and without them, no one will take it seriously.
My comment to those opposing abortion … take a look at the downward trend of abortions nationally, and it is on a steady DOWN slope whether Republicans or Democrats are elected President. Biggest drop here in Colorado was when a foundation donated enough money for Long Acting Reversible Contraception for young women, showed its impact (and the cost savings to the state), and all the Republicans in the legislature STILL didn't support the government taking on the program and funding it. Democrats got it done — and the demonstrated decrease in abortions continued.
And as one conservative Christian told me, people can make more impact on whether there are abortions by befriending young men and women than they can on a picket line at the clinic.
While I was phoning for “No on 115”, a voter told me about a reversible male contraceptive procedure that’s apparently becoming popular in India. He was quite enthused about it.
The RISUG procedure, which involves injecting a dissolvable polymer into the vas deferens behind the penis, is not quite ready for prime time according to Vox.
So, yup, women still need final say so on whether or not to have babies. Duh.
I will point out that "respect" includes respecting everyones' intelligence. If someone in the discussion asks of another a relevant question…answer it. If not, you are insulting my intelligence, if you expect me to continue to heed you at all.
Those who want to troll, tease, and otherwise try to manipulate the negotiation should be excluded.
Do you still beat your wife?
You can ask questions, but it is not incumbent on others to answer them. You are free to then point out they aren't answering, but that does not make them evil. Oftentimes it just means they see that particular issue as something not worth the effort.
Try again. That is an impertinent and irrelevant question…not at all what you said we were discussing.
If I ask a relevant question in a discussion, and you decide not to answer it…we are not having a discussion. If you are the one who refuses to answer, your point becomes moot. Why engage in the first place, if not for some disrespectful purpose?
It has been nearly 12 hours since I asked this question. It was not rhetorical.
The word “evil” is tendentious and avoids the real problem. Substitute the word “POWER” for EVIL.
That changes your argument completely. These people may or may not be evil, but they are seeking power:
White supremacy is not evil; it is an expression of power.
Anti-abortion isn’t evil it is about christians trying to control women.
SCOTUS conservatives aren’t “evil”, they are Republican activists .
Libertarians aren’t “evil”, they want economic power.
And….Dick Cheney? Whatcha got there? 😁
So Hitler wasn’t evil, he just wanted Aryan Germany to be powerful? I don’t buy it.
“There were a lot of very good people on both sides of WWII” — Unknown (. . . but undoubtedly a registered Republican)
So was Finland an evil enemy of ours in WWII?
It's incomplete to the point of not helping us understand things.
The "Evil" label is convenient, but it's a single-category box. Was Hitler a sociopath or a power monger? Did he really hate jews, or was it a political strategy? Is hating jews more or less evil than not hating jews but using the hatred of jews for political power? To understand Hitler, and the German response to Hitler, you need to have a much more nuanced set of categories. Saying the word "evil" makes it harder to have a deeper discussion.
Does evil mean that Hitler understood his bad actions, or was he incapable of understanding? It is like trying to discuss whether a sociopath is capable of being a Christian… Can a sociopath be evil?
Trump might have a sociopathic personality disorder – I don't think he knows right from wrong. I don't think Bannon is a sociopath; I think he is being intentional and strategic. "Evility" doesn't help us understand either case.
Yeah, I might make an exception for Cheney. But, the word I'd actually use is "Cynic": that is, he KNOWS what he says is a lie.
And Power-Seeking. It's ALL about power, if it isn't about money, which is really power, and sex which is also power. Maybe ego, but that is psychological.
very good points!
I did some calling for “No on 115” yesterday. Almost everyone I actually talked with had already voted, but of those , about 4/10 were Yes on 115 / “pro-lifers”. So this could be close.
Nah. This is a manichean struggle. Trump stands foursquare in favor of family separation, genital lice and the designated hitter rule.
Biden is for free craft beer and multiple orgasms for women.
Choose wisely.
I guess our opponents aren’t evil, but it isn’t their differing view that is the problem.
They exhibit a ton of bad faith, dishonesty, and bad character and are never to be trusted. They concoct fake scandals, spread disinformation, and assail the character of good people. They make it harder for people to vote. They think they’re better than everyone else. They only follow principles when it is convenient, then they are abandoned. They are hypocrites and have no decency, and have no real, actual patriotism or belief in our constitution, and they shit on who they regard as the little people on a daily basis. They suck every benefit they can out of this country, yet sacrifice nothing.
The Trump family. Steve Bannon. Paul Manafort. Mitch McConnell. Jim Jordan. Matt Gaetz. Kelly Loeffler. Lindsey Graham. Kellyanne Conway. Jared Kushner et. al. Fuck them all.
As I said above, those that are evil, or put power/money ahead of country, or are just all-around sleeze-balls – call them out.
But don't then lump in others with the same political philosophy as also being dirt-bags.
Absolutely David. There are those with a different political philosophy who I quite admire – Mitt Romney, Jeff Flake, William Cohen, Chuck Hagel, Colin Powell, and especially the late John McCain to name a few. All good people.
When they were in the US Senate together, William Cohen and Gary Hart combined to write a thriller novel, "The Double Man." I have it; haven't read it in years, but recall it as being a good read.
Yes, David, I agree that the combined issue of abortion & contraception use is the hardest. For the self-proclaimed pro-lifer, it is an absolute. Anything interfering with creation of a baby in a woman of child bearing age, and the baby not going full term, is morally wrong. It's not a reach for the proponents of 115 in demanding that a woman, whose fetus/baby has died or has such deformities that it can't live, carry to term. I find that repugnant, reprehensible, cruel, and inhumane.
The pro-lifers are entitled to control their own lives, but not the personal & private lives of other people.
I read a letter in yesterday's Post from a woman who terminated a pregnancy at 6 months after learning that the fetus had no kidneys or lungs and would not survive even a minute after its lifeline was severed. Then there was my sister-in-law who had to be induced at 6.5 months because the fetus had died within her, but a miscarriage did not ensue.
Nostalgia doesn't make anyone in the Whitest House or Mitchs' Stonewall Senate into a responsible, honest player. If you support todays' Republican party, you are a threat to democracy. If you call yourself a Republican, you are enabling the Orange Destruction.
No ifs, ands , or buts.
Poor Duke. It’s probably good the election is Tuesday. Your anger is stressing you out. Chill out, dude. Sip some of that delicious Laughing Cat white wine from Carlson Vineyards, just down the road from you.
The last thing I need is advice or phony sympathy from a half-wit like you. You and David Theilen are very much alike. Arrogant and spineless.
It may surprise both of you to know that you are not, in fact, better than everyone else.
You can add me to CHB and David. They are neither arrogant nor spineless. They live in the real world and are not delusional.
Assuming Biden wins, there will still be a big chunk of the population in this country who voted for Trump. They did so for many different reasons: many were racists or xenophobes, or evangelical hypocrites, or enjoyed their "Big and beautiful" tax cuts. But they are still US citizens with whom the rest of us have to deal.
And even if the Dems take the Senate, it will be 51/49 with power in the hands of people like Joe Manchin, Angus King, Krysten Sinema, Michael Bennet, and Hick. All are traditionalists and some have publicly come out against abolishing the filibuster.
You asked with which Republicans should Biden work. A fair question. Not Mitch McConnell but Mitt Romney and Lisa Murkowski. Not Greg Abbott or Ron DeSantis but Larry Hogan and Charlie Baker. And Colin Powell and John Kasich.
After Trump, the Republican Party is going to be like Germany in the summer of 1945, trying to figure out how to go forward and dealing with its de-Trumpification process. It won't be pretty.
No, R&R. You answered the question they will not. You are different in that.
Larry Hogan, Mitt Romney, Colin Powell..Sure, reasonable men, among others. I seriously doubt the Pubs are going to regroup under the leadership of anyone you mentioned.
My point to Mugwumps like David and CHB is the futility of negotiating with anyone representing a corrupt party. The GOP is now the POD. There isn't an honorable soul still left in the Republican Party leadership.
Compromise….my ass. Ask the Director of the Bureau of Land Management about that. Ask Stephen Miller about compromise.
Yeah. Right.
It is going to depend on what happens in the Republican Party after Tuesday…..
Steve Bannon has said that he thinks that if he loses, Trump will run again in 2024. That means the GOP will be left with this civil war between the Trumpublicans and the folks like Kasich, Powell, Hogan, Baker, and Romney.
I for one cannot predict what will come out of such a struggle.
All I know is I see these Republicans – with whom I disagree on many things – talk about voting for Biden for the good of the country. And talking about retaking their party after the election.
I wish them luck, R&R. I just don’t see it happening. Just today some Trump Troops in Texas attacked a Biden bus.
Here we go!
I don’t consider myself better than anyone else. As for answering one question or another (“you answered the question they will not”), why do you think people should say “how high” when Duke says “jump?”
I do consider myself better than some .people, notably the entire Trump clan, except for his sister and niece.
Which sister?
He had an uncle (Fred, Sr.'s brother) who really was MIT professor of engineering. Fred, Sr. never understood his brother going into academia because he didn't see what was in it for his brother. (i.e., He didn't make a fortune as a university teacher.)
Sound familiar?
You are right. I made an unfair comment about your opinion of yourself. I cannot know that.
As for answering questions…If you appear, posit some sort of opinion about the subject at hand, but when challeged, refuse to answer a perfectly relevant question, your point, as I said previously, is moot.
When you do that, you resign yourself to troll status. I personally don't care one whit if you answer a question from me. You make your own reputation.
The way you create your argument illustrates my point. Remove the label "evil", and you now have categories that promote understanding of the problem.
Park hill, the only reason it’s important to understand what motivates our opponents/enemies/those evil people is to choose appropriate tactics to deal with their ravages against what and whom we love.
Overall strategy is usually the same, however we label our opponents:
* limit the harm opponents can do to Democratic institutions which in turn, empower citizens
* expand the strength of democratic institutions that empower or represent people
Tactics differ, depending on how we label “the enemy”.
I’m not going to list in this comment every way of defining the enemy.
But you get the idea. Tactics change as enemy is understood and defined.
* If we see the enemy as corporate imperialism, we try to enact policies that limit corporate power ( no overseas tax havens, fair tax rates, corporations are not people with free speech protections).
* If you see the problem as “Trumpism”, I.e. unashamed corruption and exploitation of public goods for private gain, along with xenophobia and scapegoating, then you’ll attack Trump and his enablers. (I.e. never-Trumpers, Lincoln Project)
* If you see the enemy as institutional racism or sexism, you will work to expose racist / sexist policies and to promote policies that empower and create equal opportunities.
But if you see the Enemy as Evil, incapable of change or reason, then destroying or disempowering them, probably by military force, is the preferred solution.
Like a couple of you posting, I’ve known Republicans who were just financially conservative and suspicious of government solutions to social problems. . I don’t know any of those people now- they’re all Trumpers, or have turned into never-Trumpers.
I advocate for the most democratic and nonviolent tactics that still work.
My uncle died last night. My other uncle called my mom this morning.
Both lifelong Republicans, both converted to lifelong Trump supporters. Both spent all year telling their kids and my others cousins that Covid is fake.
Most of the cousins on this side of my family have shrugged it off-
still not Covid. Doctors lie to get paid more. He had other health issues. blah, blah, blah
The cousins closer to my age have said whether he wins or not they want Don Jr or Ivanka next time.
Condolences to your family, MADCO. Sorry to hear of it.
Coinkidinks. I also lost my oldest living uncle this week. He made it to 100. We had a Zoom Celebration of Life today, with all extended family from seven states, and it was actually pretty meaningful.
His family were mostly old school Republicans – and they are now mostly never-Trumpers. They just can't stomach Potus' antics.
Another thought on handling the Supreme Court packing by the Republicans (and this is why I really like Biden's commission – all the ideas like this will be thought through):
We "compromise" by adding 3 justices and are very straightforward about it – the court has become a political body and so we divide it evenly 50% liberal, 50% conservative. That will sound fair to a lot of people.
Then… they split all the circuit courts in two. This makes sense regardless because they are all so overloaded. But key is split, not add circuit courts. And for each existing court, half the judges go to one, half to the other.
And then Biden appoints the other half of the judges for each of the circuit courts. You now have a liberal majority on each circuit court. And when their judgement is appealed to the Supreme Court, if it ties 6:6, the liberal circuit court decision holds.
Indeed, a thoughtful consideration, David. As to the nuts and bolts, I’m not going to wade into that. But I think you are making the same mistake from the beginning.
Compromise, my ass. You are setting the Dems up to be outmaneuvered again. If you give liars and cheats the opportunity to obfuscate and move the goal posts, THEY WILL DO SO. You know that.
What will make them change? Losing? Ask any warrior who has gone toe to toe with the likes of Cory Gardner. Their word is only good until you leave the room.
Who would you recommend, from the CURRENT Republican party leadership, President Biden should trust to negotiate in good faith on such a panel?
Do you consider my question impertinent, David.? Is that why you won't answer me?
It is difficult to say who among CURRENT Republicans could be trusted to negotiate in good faith. In the main, a problem dilemma exists: those I would immediately trust are not those who can speak for Republicans. Those who can speak for Republicans are not those who can be trusted.
For example, I would trust Kasich or DeWine of Ohio, based mainly on the opinion of someone I know and trust who works in Ohio government. But neither of them appear to have any chance of speaking for Republicans nationally. Govs. Hogan and Baker are in a similar circumstance.
Those who are in power and have taken over the Republican party are, in my VERY biased point of view, willing to follow their leaders to produce results — ones I think ill-advised, short-sighted, and antagonistic to the majority of both voters and the larger population. They are willing to invent rationales to abandon prior positions and principles. Calling the abolition of the filibuster on federal judges unwise and unprincipled, they then abolish the filibuster on Supreme Court Justices. Calling for more decisions from governments closest to the people, they back interference in state government choices on the environment when they conflict with current Republican "anti-regulation" positions.
That willingness to follow (or not) their leaders, is the key to my point. There seems to be an irrational belief on the part of some folks that they can “get their party back”.
Sorry, fellas. That horse has left the barn. There will never be a Republican party that is not the party of Donald Trump. The party so many remember as the GOP, is dead and soon gone.
Another question. How many of the Orange Kings’ subjects are going to say, ” OK, the Orange Dumpling lost…we give up. You can have your political party back.”?
A percentage estimate will be fine.
Addendum: To clarify my point…if you continue to call yourself a Republican, you are enabling this shitshow. It IS his party.
I cannot agree.
in principle – sure.
Images come to mind – Lucy promising to hold that football for Charlie Brown, Oone European head of state promising another that there will be no further incursion or buildup, etc
Since Eisenhower died, what the Republican party says and what they do entirely depends on who is speaking for the party. The Republican voters who punished President Bush for raising taxes speak for the party. Rand Paul and Ted Cruz and other Hypocrites speak for the party. Rush Limbaugh and Fox peaks for the party. Q speaks for the party.
The party is gone. It's time for American voters to stop trying to kick that football. Or negotiate with Mitch. We should stop talking about 'bipartisan' and start talking about nonpartisan. We should stay focused on who has and who has not.
We should read, teach, and understand the Constitution of the United States.
And now Democrats should follow the McConnell rule – if Voters give you a majority – TAKE it.Do what is possible, not what is sensible. Do what can be done, not what should be done.
If just two were added, there’d still be an odd number, but each justice would have only one Circuit Court under their purview, lightening their workload. As it stands Sotomayor has the 6th and 10th Circuits, Alito has both the 3rd and the 5th.
That makes it 6/5. That still gives Roberts the tie breaker. You OK widdat?
This Court's going to be a hot mess until one of the right-leaning ones retires with a Dem president in office, no matter how you slice it. Pence (let's not kid ourselves) has gotten three picks. That's tied with Reagan, who also shifted the balance of the Court.
there are 13 circuit courts, cookie, so if that’s your rationale, you need to add four.
Deleting duplicate.
Former Denver Nugget Malik Beasley is in some legal hot water in Minneapolis for allegedly pointing an assault rifle at people during a parade of homes tour and being in possession of pot.
Well, this is rich: "Fake Hunter Biden folio pushed by Steve Bannon was written by a genuine fake person"
BUT, the same story was already being shopped by Steve Bannon:
Wow…just, wow.
Of course.
I have no surprise left in me.
If Martin Aspen isn’t real, it’s difficult to depose, indict, try, or lock him up. Convenient.
lock him up anyway
"we have opponents, not enemies"
And, we have FEMA reëducation camps ready for our opponents becuase they supported evil.
We have enemies too. But we need to differentiate between opponents and enemies.
Today is National Breadstick Day
My wife continues to get Trump email donation requests. Today they promise to match her contribution by 975%! That’s getting close to matching her contribution to infinity and beyond!
Sheldon Adelson, the casino magnate, was planning to put in another hundred million or so into Republican efforts.
Casino trivia: some years ago, the casino barons were making more money from gambling in Macau than they were making in Vegas. Macau is the only place in China where gambling is legal. Then the Chi-Coms started complaining about alleged corruption and cracking down.
Josh's article today at TPM is pertinent to this discussion: "Scales Falling"
“they will mix and match any theories……..”
Yep, that’s how the Federalist Society, and its pet judges, work.
If you enjoy podcasts, I am halfway through a series of podcasts on this very subject. Deep Background
The podcast is Deep Background with Noah Feldman. He is a Harvard law professor. The series on the Federalist Society and how they have f’d up the federal judiciary is called Deep Bench. I highly recommend it. Extremely interesting, educational, and disheartening.
yep
Reminder — Daylight Savings ends this Sunday at 2am
If only it was ending.
It's the greatest tax increase scam in the history of tax increase scams.
Dump's "return to normal" is the script from the Purge films:
Indulging in the grotesque is what has given these films their prescience.
In 2013, the film asked you to imagine the owners of suburban mansions toting long guns while screaming at a Black person to get off their property.
Seven years later, the McCloskeys, a St. Louis couple famous for doing just that, spoke at the Republican National Convention. Indulging in the grotesque is what has given these films their prescience.
To be accurate – Ms. McKloskey may have wanted a long gun – she had that little tiny hand gun.
So is Beth McCann's husband a mentally ill firebug or a giant sociopathic douchebag? Either way, he's something of a menace.
Fire doesn't kill people... I can't do it.He should be banned from attempting to own or control fire ever again.
I think his wife is too lenient. But he should go to prison.
I think he was just lazy. Leaving unattended slash piles burning?!
You're right, V. I forgot that the D.C. and Federal Circuits are separate, Perhaps the senior-most Justice could pick up the Federal Circuit as well as the one assigned to them, as the Cheif Justice always watches over the D.C. Circuit.