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
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
50%
50%
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
70%↑
30%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
March 11, 2022 11:13 PM UTC
45 Comments
Don't you hate it when everybody speaks out at once?
Those of us in GJ continued to enjoy the Tina Peters circus, so the week was not a loss.
The coming [maybe] Civil War
10:15 a.m. and the state House is still going on the Reproductive Health Equity Act debate, started yesterday late morning.
McKean and Sandridge “belly bumped” over disagreement on Republican anti- abortion stalling tactics. Adorable. Thanks to Marianne Goodland for immortalizing that tender moment.
So this codifies or reiterates what the law in Colorado has been since 1967?
I certainly have no problem with that but did they need to waste 24 hours debating it?
I realize that the GOP is entitled to a number of hours of debate time and they need to use their share of debate time to fundraise off of the Right-to-Birth community, but why didn’t the Dems simply yield their time and then vote to pass the bill? And since actions speak louder than words, the Dems could run for re-election while proclaiming their support for right to choose.
Oh, yes, the Dems too need to give nice speeches so that they can hit up the reproductive choice community for money.
Here’s a suggestion for both sides: focus your battles in those states where a battle may make a difference.
After 47 years, Francisco Franco is still dead. And after 55 years, abortion is still legal in Colorado.
You sound like it was 24-hours out of your life? (I’m guessing it wasn’t) . . .
. . . at the very least, we can all be thankful that the inebriated Republican House members, their vehicles and along their guns, were all kept off the roads, if only for just one evening.
There is, of course, a bright side to spending time of bills like this.
It's 24 hours less of time they have trying to raise my taxes.
Idle minds are the Devil’s workshop . . .
. . . every day (and night) through May 11.
I'm not going to analyze how much time Ds spent speaking vs. Rs, maybe some poor journalist might, but I'll guarantee it was extremely lopsided. These sessions are recorded and archived, and Ds maybe didn't HAVE to spend time rebuking certain claims but probably should've to make sure some points were countered for the record.
Oops, just saw on the twitterthingie that the bill passed at 10:18.
Woohoo! Thanks legislators!
This is wonderful news. And a great counter-point to the states trying to return to the 1950's.
1950s, not 1950's
Brought to Your Attention by the Committee to Save the Apostrophe from Abuse
A committee led by a Dickwad who thinks the highest form of writing is to say Dickwad, Dickwad, Dickwad at every opportunity.
I just can't believe they spent a whole day debating settled law.
It is only settled until the Supreme Court rules. Depending on the ruling, even Colorado's reproductive rights may have been endangered.
I don't think so. I think the worst that will happen is returning to the way things were pre-Roe. It was left to the states, and Colorado was the first state to permit it in 1967.
I'd guess you already know this cook, but most of it wasn't really a debate. It was more like extended speechifying and message amplification, with next to zero likelihood of anyone changing anybody's mind.
Makes me wonder if they really need 120 days in the session if they can waste time like that.
But what about the fundraising both sides can generate from the debate…
Thoughts on Ukraine today:
My suggestions for today:
Appreciate your thoughts, DT. Here’s a piece on Ukrainian agriculture worth perusing:
Ukraine’s farmers stalled, fueling fears of global food shortages
"Sell it not as addressing climate change, sell it as gaining energy independence" and clean air.
Climate change is not a winning proposition.
I am absolutely in agreement about man-carried anti-[insert vehicle here] weapons.
So, you're against women carrying weapons?
Why?
David, WAPO sez production capacity for Javelin is 6,500 a year, with current contract for 2100. Hard to see how we’d make 40,000 a year quickly. But by all means, turn em out as fast as we can and ship them to Ukraine. In return, Ukraine should support efforts in the UN to outlaw the designated hitter rule.
Polish Piorun—https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piorun_(missile)
UK—https://www.thenationalnews.com/world/uk-news/2022/01/27/british-army-unveils-new-weapons-system-with-3700kph-missile/
and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starstreak
Yeah we need to increase that big time. Like how in WWII we went from I think it was manufacturing 1,500 planes/year to 60,000/year.
Yes, David, but it took about two years to make that shift. You need machine tools and workers trained to use them. Ukraine needs help now, not in 2024.
Yes, ramp up production. Big time, with big bundles of cash.
But divert existing stockpiles from NATO and other friendly countries to buy Ukraine time.
Two books, A Call to Arms and Freedom’s Forge show how we militarized our economy.
We outproduced all other belligerents, friend and foe alike, combined — and still increased our standard of living.
Thank gawd for Voyageur for keeping the candle lit for banning the notorious DH rule. It is truly an abomination that stains America.
While we're at it, maybe Russia would like Alaska back? Mexico wants Texas back (and then in turn the Aztecs get it all back?) Apt analogies for the preposterous "territorial claims" theory.
(Possible) FSB Analyst Translations. Russia has entered Hotel California Situation.
Some random thoughts discussed in the thread:
– US set a trap for Russia by sucking them into a fight with Ukraine
– China's intention to take Taiwan in the Fall is now off the table.
– High oil prices will be disastrous for China
– US strategically buying up Venezuelan oil at rock-bottom price, and releasing Iranian oil onto the market
– Food crop collapse means necessity of food aid (not just bartering for oil) both in Russia and elsewhere in the world (Egypt, India, etc,)
"You can check out anytime you want, but you can never leave………"
Seriously, I couldn't wade through the entire thread, including comments. But definitely some interesting thoughts both in the translations and in the comments. I also like that at least the head narrator ("rayne??") isn't taking anything as gospel truth.
I see three potential outcomes for Russia:
1. Putin, seeing a humiliating defeat pushes the button before the generals can stop him.
2. Putin reigns over a new Weimar Republic, is overthrown, and another dictator takes over like the Fourth Reich
3. Putin reigns over a new Weimar Republic, is overthrown, and a Western friendly government tries to reconcile with the world like post war Germany
If 1) is the outcome — well, so long and thanks for all the fish.
if 2) is the outcome — China will extract a heavy price to come to their rescue (like the devil's bargains China has made in Africa)
if 3) is the outcome — US and EU would need to negotiate a new Marshall Plan in exchange for denuclearization (and possibly demilitarization) by Russia, leaving the US and China as the major superpowers, with EU as a backstop
I'm betting on #2, and Russia will be in the clutches of a Payday lender for decades to come.
I'm thinking in terms of off-ramps; for Russia and for Putin.
There are numerous bad outcomes. What are the possible OK or "good-ish" outcomes? China brokering a soft landing might be one of the good-ish ones.
I've read some stuff about how f-d up Russian society has become. I've been aware of the oligarchs and kleptocracy at the high-level, but I think the mafia mentality may permeate Russian society down to the lowest levels. Combine that with a suspicious national security State and criminal gangs running everything. (My short experience in Russia was exhilarating, but you start to see petty corruption everywhere. You bribe someone to get the contract to supply the chocolate to the factory; just the cost of doing business.)
The military is particularly corrupted, as prison gangs extort earnings from soldiers and mercenaries. Young recruits are forced into gay prostitution. Theft and neglect are rampant. Success is punished, and incompetence reward (because a competent military would be a threat to the State).
At this point, any off-ramp that isn't seen as a humiliating defeat for Putin will involve carving up Ukraine. Not a good message to send to Lithuania, Estonia, et al. We are meeting with the Chinese next week to let them know that throwing Putin a lifeline before hostilities cease will result in consequences.
But wouldn't it be better if it's #2 with a few footnotes, the "what comes next" stuff:
* The U.S. and Europe, united because of Putin's actions, exact sanctions on China and send a clear message that human rights, dignity, and democratic forms of government are top priorities and will drive the politics from now forward.
* In other words, a "new world order" is not just a catchy phrase.
Of course, I'd rather see #3 – but China will always be a significant risk to us, in multiple ways.
If we get through this without igniting a wider war, I do think that this has strengthened NATO in particular, but also restored much of the US/EU partnership tarnished by Trump — precisely the opposite result Putin was expecting.
Exactly.
And it seems Russia needs help resupplying their weapons. One 3 week battle with Ukraine has drained their stockpiles? Unbelievable!
The Chinese beancounters need to weigh the profit opportunity of trade with the US and EU with economies worth $40 trillion a year vs. propping up a $1.7 trillion economy that will drain a lot of cash before seeing a significant return on their investment.
I'm not sure this means anything. Russia has been asking for some Chinese assistance since Day One.
China seems hesitant, especially after noticing the difficulties being experienced by Russia. I think they are astounded by the inadequacy, given the engineering and manufacturing prowess within China. "How could Russia possibly be so absolutely incompetent in execution?".
Russia is already embarrassed by their stumbling drunk performance. That’s why they have shifted their tactics to indiscriminate bombing of civilian structures in an attempt to bring the war to a quick conclusion. The world is recalibrating their opinions and relationships with Russia. It isn’t something Putin will overcome any time soon, if ever.
China has to do a cost/benefit analysis. They have an $18 trillion economy (but a huge amount of non-performing debt). I don’t think they will rush to Russia’s defense. Rather, they will let Russia exhaust itself until the very last minute as Putin stares into the abyss. China probably doesn’t want a wider war either — bad for business.
I really believe there will be a post-Ukrainian War collapse of the Russian state. It’s just a matter of who picks up the pieces.
QOTD: “Ukraine is engaged in a national people’s war against a Kleptocratic potentate. “
Best wishes for Barack Obama’s recovery from Covid19. Another example of how someone vaccinated and boosted may still get infected, but unlikely to become very sick or hospitalizd.