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%
September 30, 2021 10:39 PM UTC
40 Comments
October 1, 1949 – The People's Republic of China is established.
Is today the day that we get to see the legislative redistricting maps?
Maps are supposed to be turned into the Supreme Court today. I think the Commission voted on the map and the motion only allowed the staff to make "minimal" changes.
Commission page with what is labeled "Final Approved Congressional Plan" AND its supporting materials is here.
That's the Congressional redistricting John. I didn't see any materials relating to the State legislative redistricting. One map had Gilpin lumped in with Douglas County which makes about as much sense as Boebert. Hope we stay with our big brothers Boulder and Jefferson. They understand how unique our little piece of paradise is. Fall colors have been off the charts beautiful this year.
The Legislative Commission timeframe is different. Here's the list of their upcoming meetings as they work on maps.
Sometimes it's more important to lose taking a stand than accept the table crumbs offered with the view that something is better than nothing. I think this is one of those times.
I agree totally with the progressive caucus that it's both bills or neither. Accepting just the bi-partisan bill means that we only pass what Republicans are good with. And if we do that, why work our ass off to elect Democrats.
And the debt ceiling should be left as a stand-alone bill requiring 60 votes in the Senate. And we call the Republican bluff to destroy the world economy. Because if the Democrats blink again, then that remains as a powerful weapon that only the Republicans will use.
It's time to stand up for what we believe in and call the Republicans on it.
How many times can I "thumbs up" this post?
I agree, David.
“debt ceiling” is unconstitutional and an even sillier gimmick than the trillion dollar coin.
I like the trillion dollar coin idea and it passes muster with paul Krugman. We could put Miss Piggy's face on it!
RE: “I agree totally with the progressive caucus that it’s both bills or neither. Accepting just the bi-partisan bill means that we only pass what Republicans are good with. And if we do that, why work our ass off to elect Democrats.”
If Congress follows your logic and does not pass either infrastructure bill, doesn’t that mean Congress can only pass what the MOST CONSERVATIVE Republicans are good with, meaning NOTHING?
Why work to elect Democrats? If we don’t, we get more of McConnell’s vision for the courts, more Republican policy ignoring climate change, and a near certainty of less support for social welfare programs. Increasingly clear: we elect Democrats because we want a democracy.
Given a choice between nothing and the benefits from $1.50 trillion being spent on infrastructure, I prefer the money, jobs and progress that come from spending. Seems to me the better economy flowing from that expenditure is a better basis for campaigns than “we couldn’t do anything.”
It is not just the amount the left is being forced to accept ($6 trillion becomes $3.5 trillion which becomes $1.5 trillion). Manchin wants to protect the coal industry from the environmental stuff in the legislation. Why even bother….
Ayup! 👍🏻
There you go again, JID — being all rational and reasonable . . .
. . . I pray very little, ever. But, when I do, one of my most common prayers is, “Lord, save me from earnest people.”
Speaking of, Tim Miller at the Bulwark has an interesting perspective on Joe Manchin and this very subject – definitely worth a read, and definitely in the vein of 1.5 trillion > 0
An Ode to Saint Joe Manchin – The Bulwark
Some below…
Let’s start here. How does Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell sound to you, Manchin haters?
Not great, I bet?
Well Saint Joe is the one man standing between you and Majority Leader Mitch doing everything in his power to tank the Biden agenda.
That alone would make a rational observer expect that it would be Republicans who hate Manchin for cock-blocking their dreams, while Democrats shower him with adulation. Au contraire, mon frère. Because Republicans care more about making libs sad than any policy outcomes. And Manchin gives the libs a very big sad. So the Republicans kind of love the guy.
That’s actually Manchin’s secret weapon. It’s what allows him to continue getting elected in a state that went for Donald Trump by 39 points. Thirty-nine!!! You got that right. The people of West Virginia watched the roiling catastrophe that was the Trump administration and a mere 29.69 percent of them thought that Joe Biden was a better bet.
And despite that, Democrats still have a West Virginia senator getting all Wild and Wonderful ensuring that Chuck Schumer calls the shots. This is a damn miracle. Genuine loaves and fishes shit.
What meltdown said.
Sinema, however, is an asshole.
She can't even say what problems she has with the legislation that is causing her to not support it. So she's doing it for shits and giggles, or worse, the attention ? Definitely the mark of an asshole, like if Ted Cruz were a Democrat kind of asshole.
Oh, I would guess that she can say, but she won’t?
. . . Like things you can’t admit out loud — objections from interests that have some control over her somehow; fear of a strong group of AZ nutters on the right; fear of her own party’s conservative (. . . using that term in the proper pejorative sense, btw . . .) wing; holding all this hostage for a really sweet closed-door offer, etc . . .
. . . I have no doubt she knows her why-nots, but it would be more harmful to speak them.
"objections from interests that have some control over her somehow:"
Yes, I think that one in particular is correct Dio – and Trae Crowder would agree…
" Sinema in particular is a problem because she refuses to even specify any demands for reaching a compromise, or, more accurately, the big money donors currently elbow deep in her ass haven't decided which words her mouth should say yet…"
There is some provision in the progressives' $3.5 trillion bill that leaves some sort of carry forward provision in place. I'd have to research again the specifics. But as I read it a few weeks ago, it was a freebie to big hedge funds and the bloated plutocrats that invest in same, to help them avoid taxes. Maybe Sinema is aware of that.
Sort of took away whatever faith that I had in progressives to really get things right.
I don't think she runs again in 2024.
Or if she does, she runs as an independent, makes a mess of things, and Arizona ends up with Senator Chem Trails Kellie Ward who wins with somewhere between 40% and 45% of the vote.
She cannot win a Democratic primary and the Republicans won't have her either.
Oh, I would guess that she can say, but she won’t?
. . . Like things you can’t admit out loud — objections from interests that have some control over her somehow; fear of a strong group AZ nutters on the right; fear of her own party’s conservative (. . . using that term in the proper pejorative sense, btw . . .) wing; holding all this hostage for a really sweet closed-door offer, etc . . .
. . . I have no doubt she knows her why-nots, but it would be more harmful to speak them.
Even I, a centrist-corporatist-DINO, feel that the Progressive Caucus is getting screwed and I do not like it.
They started with their $6 trillion proposal and were led to believe that they had a compromise with the so-called moderates for $3.5 trillion only to now be told that Manchin will only agree to $1.5 trillion and he gets veto power over the environmental stuff. (At least Manchin is telling them how he wants to screw them. Sinema won't even give them that much, to wit: her asinine remark yesterday about standing in front of the elevator.)
A lot of the stuff in the $3.5 trillion is stuff with which I agree and a lot of it is not. But isn't that the nature of a compromise?
At this point, I just assume Manchin and Sinema become Republicans so we can blame the defeat of both bills on partisan gridlock, and make the argument in 2022 that we need at least 50 Democratic senators instead of 46 Democrats, 2 independents and 2 assholes.
We need to do the markup in the same format as America’s got Talent. Slo-mo camera double-takes as average Americans are shocked as Sinema votes down each of the elements that make up the “soft” social infrastructure.
Starting with the most popular ones until she caves:
$300 child credit extension
Funds for daycare
Funds for eldercare
Funding for 2-year community colleges
Reduce the age for medicare
Reduce prices for pharmaceuticals.
Even though Climate Change is really important, it is an area where individual Americans might feel put out or financially impacted. It is more important to demonstrate popular success for Democratic Principles.
Nothing will continue if the Democrats don’t maintain majorities after 2022.
1) $300 child credit extension. I’d want more thought on that. Stats I saw a few years ago showed only about 20% of households had kids under 18. 30% or so of adults live alone. Probably should have a needs assessment if it doesn’t.
2) funds for daycare. See above.
3) funds for eldercare. As a broad class, elders are the best off group in society. Again, some needs assessing to correctly target the funds.
4. funding for two year community colleges. Doesn’t the federal government already have a ton of scholarship and job training programs? There are over 80 different job training programs.
Reduce the age for Medicare. This has potential. But need to raise the cap limits on social security and medicare, where assessments phase out.
6. Reduce prices for pharmaceuticals. This has a LOT of promise, per the AARP.
Climate change is far more important than most of these.
Conclusion: this is how $3.5 trillion realistically becomes $1.5 trillion.
This is absolutely correct, but it seems highly unlikely that we'll even be able to preserve the current 46 Dems + 2 assholes arrangement in 2022.
Not a lost cause, despite all the wailing and gnashing of teeth.
The Republicans are so far out in extreme right-field and attached to Donald Trump, that the Democrats have a huge opportunity to devalue the GOP brand – if they ever figure out that branding is an option.
“The Republicans are so far out in extreme right-field and attached to Donald Trump”
He still got 47% of the popular vote last year after overseeing the deaths of over half million Americans. (And let’s not forgot that he won the electoral vote count in 2016 with only 46% of the popular vote.)
That's not going to last.
Suburbs are growing, and Covid is killing off the Republicans. Run Cuban Democrats in Florida, and…
Don’t know if running “Cuban Democrats” is any answer. But the Dems need better strategy in south Florida where they lost several House seats in 2020 that they should have retained.
Covid 19 is doing a number on Trumpian anti-vaxxers. That number is 5.5.
That is the multiplier for R deaths from Covid vs. D fatalities. Time is on our side.
But, Duke …. for the folks on the red side, math is hard (especially since you threw in a decimal point to mess then up).
😆
Golly gee Synema, do you suppose there was something that could have averted this inexcusable event? Let’s hope she gets roasted her next trip back to the Copper State.
Sinema slams delay of infrastructure vote: ‘Inexcusable’
Indeed. Pot, meet cauldron.
It's probably much simpler than that. I think she's nuts.
Most politicians are a little off the beam but she is in a class of her own.
She's not a linear thinker? Didn't we just get out of being tethered for four long years to a non-linear thinker (and I use the word "thinker" loosely) as president?
Occam (without the shaving creme).
Highly recommended viewing, aired last night on POV (PBS) . . .
If you've gotta get up in front of a friendly crowd and deny that the appellate court on which you sit is a "dangerous cabal," then the wheels have already come off.
You win some and you lose some. The “shadow docket” took out the lawsuit from students at Indiana University who wanted to avoid the university’s mask mandate. Thank you Justice Barrett.
The August “shadow” decision about halting the residential eviction moratorium may not have been a bad idea. Many landlords are small business people with bank loans to pay off.