U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Michael Bennet
(D) Phil Weiser
60%↑
50%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Jena Griswold
(D) David Seligman
40%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez
(D) J. Danielson
(R) Sheri Davis
50%
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(D) Jeff Bridges
(R) Kevin Grantham
40%
40%
30%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(D) Somebody
80%
40%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Trisha Calvarese
(D) Eileen Laubacher
90%
20%
20%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Somebody
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Manny Rutinel
(D) Yadira Caraveo
45%↓
40%↑
30%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
January 22, 2012 05:23 AM UTC
82 Comments
Just saying “I told you so.”
“Newt plays the keys of everything the repubs hate…
Obama, government employees, “liberal press,”…..
his repubs hate more than they love..their country..
I can’t wait until we have a First Lady who f*#(C that porky pig figure while his second wife had MS.”…
by: dwyer @ Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 13:32:29 PM MST
I will discuss how Newt’s assignment of Perry to a 10th amendment strategy will work.
Very bad for Team Romney. Maybe Newt’s coming to Colorado after all!
My bet has always been Newt too. I’ve based that on the act that he is an incredible campaigner. And Mitt is not that good at running.
Santorum still has a shot or two left. He did win Iowa, or something.
is dismantling companies.
any primary where 25% to 30% (. . . the tattered remnants of the old-guard, sometimes semi-sane, our job is to do anything for the rich, wing of the Republican party?) is sufficient to win the plurality. The old-boys are counting on this pampered, spinless, inprincipled, entitled son of the elite to slog it out in the mud and the trenches.
http://www.borowitzreport.com/…
and quite believable knowing Willard will do and say anything to get elected.
But if he wants to win, Romney should be chasing more than one. Even more than two.
so it wasn’t that hard to pick then.
He dropped in the polls for a reason: because no matter how much his nastiness temporarily excites Republicans, in the end he’s still Newt Gingrich.
From here I think Gingrich will continue to win a couple, Santorum will probably win at least one more, and even Ron Paul may get one. But Romney will still be the nominee. Literally the only way to like Gingrich is to not know enough about him.
He said on Morning Joe Newt isn’t given enough credit for being a perfect gentleman (highly valued in the southern states). He politely asked his wife if he could have a mistress. He’s very thoughtful that way.
Whatever the reason Newt had a surge, Ali must be happy. Congrats for calling it, Dwyer. I would have put money on Santorum and was shocked by this outcome.
And why isn’t he spinning this “second place finish” as a great moral victory?
being unable to write a coherent thought.
Ethics violations. Multiple affairs. Total 100% hypocrite. Flip-flopper to the nth degree. One after another GOP insider says the guy is a “walking time bomb,” a “hand grenade.” Insufferably arrogant and petulant.
About the only bad thing he hasn’t been is a child molester.
This is who the Republicans today want as their standard-bearer? Are they joking?
I’m glad the Republicans seem intent on handing the election to Barack Obama on a platter, but this is really, really sad for the country.
This is Dan Maes/Scott McGinnis played out on the national stage.
…or is Colorado politics becoming a harbinger of Natiional Politics since 2004?
And I think it predates 2004 to some extent. The Colorado GOP is ahead of the national GOP by almost a decade in many aspects; why the national party is following in the state party’s footsteps when it doesn’t seem like the state party is actually leading the national party I don’t know, but I would not dispute your observation.
…it tells me that the National GOP is going to walk off a cliff just like the Colorado GOP has.
Newt Gingrich is a Fucking Moral Reprobate Pig.
The Republicans hate Obama. It’s not so much his policies although they use them as an excuse, it’s about an intelligent black man living in the White House. His style irritates the be-Jesus out of them and they call it arrogance. It matters not if the nominee has cheated, is found unethical as a congressman, made millions being a historian/lobbyist – the list is long. They will forgive anything and turn a blind eye if it means getting that “boy” out ‘o the White House.
Clinton had all the same things thrown at him. Remember how many on the right were convinced Clinton had Vince Foster killed?
A gigantic chunk of the Republicans seem to think the White House belongs to them and it is morally wrong for a Democrat to be President. Not a political loss, but a moral wrong that must be righted.
Yes, they threw everything they could at Clinton but I’m the unfortunate beneficiary of a large number of Republican broadcast e-mails and cartoons. I’d say 75% are racist to the core and I’ve fought back so often that a few people have taken me off their “friends” list. The others are selective and generally accept their going to get an argument back from me.
The Republican goal is to always cast any Democratic president as illegitimate. Racism is a tool for undermining this president but character was used against Clinton and Reagan negotiated behind Carters back to get the hostages released. Undermine a Democrat and destroy their presidency. Only the tactics have changed.
The Republican problem this time around is that Obama is the Jackie Robinson of American politics and it takes a very special person to break barriers. He has taken some of the worst that they can dish out and has kept his composure. He doesn’t make big mistakes and keeps the issues as his focus. Republicans will continue to try every dirty trick they can come up with but Obama is more than a match for them.
the Republican theme that I never forget is that they believed – only a few years ago – that they would achieve a permanent Republican majority. They see the Presidency as belonging to them, and cannot stand any Democrat (but especially someone of the wrong skin color) occupying that office.
the hysterical reaction to the election of Obama surpasses anything we ever saw in reaction to any other Dem, including Clinton. Also the number of Rs who have had to apologize for forwarding racist cartoons and “jokes” continues to grow. There is definitely a very highly charged and blatant racist element at work here, along with the usual right on Dem hatred.
It is no coincidence that a huge part of the Gingrich strategy in SC has been the liberal use of very, very thinly disguised racial code.
I agree that the racist angle is pretty useful to the right wing, but I think the anger and vitriol this year is about the coherence within the republican electorate (as the moderates bail), as well as the coherence within the propaganda outlets (Fox, Rush, Chamber of Commerce).
Given this coherence in receptors and transmitters, it is easy to see how efficiently they can use huge dumps of money.
Anger and hatred are a psychological and tribal things, but they are very useful for building up that coherence.
and frame it!
I am not saying that it is “unfortunate” that you are right. But, rather, that what you are so right about is something very unfortunate.
but just the word “Hilary” could have poor ol’ Rush frothing at the mouth for a half hour back in the day.
Of course the racism is at the fore front regarding this president but your memory has dimmed if you think that the Clintons were any less vilified.
Then there was the “Swift boating” of Kerry which took someone who had received the Silver Star for bravery on the battlefield and attempted to portray his heroism as a fraud. A new term was invented for what they did to John.
Obama probably made a mistake early on thinking that Republicans would be more concerned with helping the country than playing politics but I think he understands his adversaries better now and can anticipate their behavior better. He is going to be one tough mother to beat in the general. It can be done of course but he isn’t going to go quietly into the night.
The viral opposition to Obama has always been about race. My inlaws are Christian religious right Mormon haters. But now all of the sudden they forgot that because they hate the Christian Black guy way worse and now are big Romney supporters. Go figure? It is a weird World. We will win and all will be right with the World. Wanna bet $10,000?
Let’s go to the videotape:
Obama – They hate him (from Inauguration Day)
George W Bush – They hate him (was mentioned only 1/10 as many times as Obama in last debate. Absent from ’08 convention to today)
Clinton – They hate him (even impeached him for what Gingrich was doing at the same time)
George HW Bush – They hate him (raised taxes after they read his lips)
Reagan – They claim they love him, but they would actually hate him today for raising taxes. He wouldn’t stand a chance with today’s GOP.
Carter – They hate him (weak on foreign policy and national economy)
Ford – They hate him (too moderate)
Nixon – They hate him (EPA anyone?)
Johnson – They hate him (Voting Rights and Civil Rights Acts)
Kennedy – They hate him (Ask not what you can do for your country — really?? And, he stole the election in IL)
Eisenhower – They hate him (too moderate)
Truman – They hate him (didn’t repeal the New Deal)
Roosevelt – They hate him (see New Deal above)
Hoover — Hmm, maybe we have someone they don’t hate! Solution: Today’s GOP is looking for the new Hoover!!
to mimic Hoover’s success. George W. Bush the GOP’s Rodney Dangerfield (minus all the adorable).
By Marcos Restrepo, Colorado Independent
Catholic leaders issued a letter Friday to GOP presidential candidates Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum, themselves Catholics, urging them “to stop perpetuating ugly racial stereotypes on the campaign trail.”
http://coloradoindependent.com…
Cutting to the chase the letter states:
So long as there’s someone out there that these candidates can point to and say “they’re taking your money – hate them”, it will be done. Government spending (except that which helps their ideology) has been the enemy of the Republican party – its stalking horse, if you will – since Reagan. They’re not going to abandon their longest-standing bogeyman now in the middle of a heated Presidential campaign.
tactic from the same people who have been extracting wealth and power from working, middle class Americans since Reagan raised it to an art form, then the middle class is pretty much doomed by its own bigotry and stupidity. Who knew Charlie Brown, Lucy and the football were going to turn out to be such a deadly accurate metaphor for the American electorate? Just let us get rid of the unions and welfare queens with their food stamps, stop taxing and regulating us, the deserving hard working masters of the universe, and we’ll create great jobs and return America to the glory days of middle class prosperity and upward mobility. Yeah, right.
to focus on the fetus.
Did you not read the letter excerpt from above?
devote Catholics everywhere to help give the hungry and disadvantaged a hand up.
The problem that ajb references is the immense effort that is being diverted to things like the eggmendments and the excessive and politically divisive focus on the issue. You don’t pass muster as a “Pro-Life” politician unless you want women to bear the children of rapists and abusers.
I believe it was Pope John Paul who decided that abortions represented a culture of death and needed to be eliminated so people would come back to the church and bring all their children to be cared for by the priests.
While you have a point Littletonian, you also choose to ignore ajb’s point.
Although there were arguments in the early days about when exactly did the soul enter the body of the fetus….
I haven’t heard about abortion at Mass in about 14 or 15 months. I hear about poverty every week. The idea that abortion is the Church’s number one agenda item just isn’t true at all.
when it comes to elections. No matter what the other issues are, it certainly seems the church considers supporting the right to choose the single absolute deal breaker.
the Catholic Church endorsed a candidate for political office? You have the occasional bishop who publicly criticizes a politician in favor of abortion rights, but that’s no different from what the letter above says about Gingrich and Santorum.
Catholics not to vote for anyone who isn’t with them on opposing the right to choose. It doesn’t have to be a matter of official name specific political endorsement. And they make a much bigger deal out of this issue than they do out of others, such as the death penalty, social justice, etc. Come on. You know it’s true.
Not that all Catholics listen. Far from it. Just like not all, in fact a small minority of American Jews still listen to the ultra-hawk, established Jewish organizations on policy toward Israel. A majority of us still support a mutually agreed upon two state solution and an overwhelming majority of us still vote Democratic, no matter how hard the unholy alliance of ultra hawk Jews and evangelical righties trie to drag us over to the dark side, using Israel as a wedge between us and other Dems.
Doesn’t mean there isn’t an effort being made in either case.
you’re right in saying that some public figures within the Church have a problem with politicians who support abortion rights.
But it rattles me when abortion is made out to be the most important political issue for “the Catholic Church.” The Catholic Church, like any other body, is composed of its constituents – and I happen to be one of those people. Under the Bush Administration, you could make a case that the right to preemptive warfare was a major priority for “the United States” – but as an American, I’d take issue with that characterization of me and my country(wo)men. This is no different.
You’re not a constituent of the Catholic Church. There are no constituents. It is decidedly not a democracy.
The church is owned and operated by the old men in skirts, centered in Rome. They give lip service to poverty but pull out the stops when it comes to abortion and birth control.
Or anything else that might bring acknowledgment that women can think.
I am a graduate of Catholic schools, from which I received a fine education in the basics. Fortunately, I had a Jesuit relative who punctured holes into the fed-to-the-masses doctrine and taught me how to think for myself. No doubt you’re well aware of the role Jesuits play.
For many years, my association with the church has been to support the soup kitchen operated by the nuns (not the priests), and attend weddings and funerals that happen to be held in a Catholic church.
Like all other churches, if they want to play in politics they should lose their tax-exempt status. I won’t lay awake nights waiting for that to happen.
what the word “constituent” means. The Catholic Church is constituted by its membership, as is any organization consisting of multiple people. Thus, when someone says that “the Catholic Church” recognizes abortion as the most important issue in politics, they’re making a statement about me and hundreds of millions of other people who are Catholic, have positions on abortion, and yet prioritize other issues while making political decisions.
The Church is owned by Dioceses and Archdiocese located around the world. It is operated by thousands of clergy and millions of laypeople, including me. Sure, it’s not democratic: like any Church, ours is a theocracy. But I would prefer not to elect my priests.
to a politician who voted to cut food stamps or AFDC or SCHIP?
I rest my case.
They called me a saint when I fed the poor, but a Communist when I had the temerity to ask why they couldn’t afford food for themselves”
then I would happily put forward the names of Oscar Romero, Samuel Ruiz, et al.
but I do follow headlines. And I also have a sense that the leadership is strictly hierarchical – it might be something about the infallibility of the pope and all. So when a bishop makes this stand, it applies to those under their control, and presumably it’s done with the full weight of the Vatican behind them.
If a bishop refuses communion, that’s a big deal for a church that’s based on the notions of original sin and forgiveness.
But more to the point, in cases where the Catholic church has insinuated itself in American politics, I only recall it concerning abortion. Not hunger. Not even capital punishment. And, quite frankly, I can never recall the church expending any political capital to help a Democrat, only Republicans. (Please correct me if I’m wrong. Like I said, I don’t follow the Catholic church.)
So call me cynical, but when push comes to shove, the Catholic church will write letters condemning racism, but will damn to hell somebody that condones abortion.
but priests have a lot of wiggle room, much more than is generally supposed. They’re also much more in tune with parishioners than the bishops. It’s likely that liberal parishes will not hear too much about this from the pulpit.
no priest actually refused Kerry or anyone communion, and it’s likely that that archbishop’s threats were entirely empty, meant to generate embarrassment for Kerry and negative attention on the topic of choice.
I guess the general public perception that the Catholic church obsesses about controlling women and devotes an inordinate amount of resources toward that end is a figment of our collective imagination.
It doesn’t help that almost every politician who identifies as a “Pro-life” person also holds very anti-poor positions. They say they respect life but then turn around and claim that the poor are poor because they are lazy and don’t need a hand up.
It is a safe bet that climate change and environmental collapse is going to lead to more poverty and suffering which is going to be every bit as real as the suffering of the unborn. I hope the Catholic church is also willing to take a stand on income inequity and ecological preservation.
Racism is one of the very few issues that cause me to loose my normally calm demeanor quickly.
Delegate count from South Carolina, which allocates its delegates proportionally based on Congressional districts and other factors…:
Gingrich: 25
Romney: 0
Santorum: 0
Paul: 0
I thought Romney got 2 delegates.
If one candidate receives half or more of all votes in the VA GOP primary, the entire state’s delegates are awarded to that candidate. Or so it says here: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-aPes…
VA delegate count:
Romney: 49
Gingrich: 0
Paul: 0
even though there have been great strides in the last 50 years. And, though I wouldn’t wish a manic explosion on anyone I think it might happen with the Newt.
psych evals posted on the internet, instead of tax returns.
the sociopathy scale.
Lest we forget Dr. George Lakoff’s teachings:
I don’t see it as the overriding factor in this campaign, but it does explain the strong reaction South Carolinians had to Newt’s recent debate performances.
Hopefully, other factors (Newt’s own propensity for self-destruction, a hobbled, but not totally impaired nominee in Romney, a right-wing 3rd party candidate, an improving economy, and Obama’s own ability to frame the issues and the debates) will prevail in the November election.
I believe that the strong reaction that Newt got to his response on Thursday night was because he attacked the media…and gave a rationale for why the “elite media” was “attacking him”..ie. they are covering for Obama by attacking Republicans.
I believe that the republicans have been in charge of the “message” since 2009 and they have conditioned their base to respond positively to
1) attacks on the mainstream media.
2) attacks on Obama as being anti-American…..
Caplis is an excellent example of this…tune him in at 3 pm on 630am on any given day…..he begins each show with a vicious attack on the President….
i.e. Newt’s “appeal” to his wives, mistresses and apparently, a significant number of South Carolina Republicans.
Republicans attacking the media has been old news since Spiro Agnew’s infamous epithet “Nattering Nabobs of Negativism”
As long as it works, Newt and others will continue to use the technique.
I’m willing to have, and appreciate, others (such as yourself) relay the messages being broadcast by the right-wing media. I can’t bear the pain, myself.
There are far more people who are in the sociopath category than the general public understands. Everyone should learn more about sociopathy – we might manage to keep more of them out of our lives if we did.
Not surprising. I read somewhere recently an anecdote about Oscar Wilde vising the South: To a woman there he observed how beautiful the moon appeared, and she replied something to the effect, Yes, isn’t it. But you should have seen it before the war!
Few of those people, male or female, are about to concede the war. (It was actually about “states’ rights, don’t you know? Even George Will is still paroting that one.)
Florida, being deep, “Deep South” in spite of the huge Cuban infusion in and around Miami, is going to be dangerous territory for Mitt if Gingrich, racist to the core, keeps sounding the Confederate trumpet charge.
Once the campaigns spread out, the first week of February comes to mind, the dynamics of speeches will change. (or maybe not – Beck and Buchanan might be consultants).
take up smoking cigars?
vote for whoever their husbands tell them to, especially in the deep south.
I was canvassing and the 50ish Republican woman who answered the door told me her husband wasn’t home and he decides who they vote for.
What are everyone’s thoughts on the fact that SC Gov. Haley’s endorsed candidate got thumped?
Who the fuck gives a shit about Newt Gingrich?
You know I love you but Paterno enabled sexual assault on Children. That actually makes me even a bit more mad then racism, see above. There is a very special place in whatever dark place you can think of for people like that.
and has been since before the scandal broke. What he says and does can shape the future, and his past actions have done more to bring us to where we are today than any football game.
I know you die hard for Penn State, but that doesn’t belong here.