U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Michael Bennet
50%
50%
50%
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Jena Griswold
(D) Brian Mason
60%↑
30%↑
20%↓
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez
(D) George Stern
(R) Sheri Davis
50%↑
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(R) Kevin Grantham
(D) Jerry DiTullio
60%↑
30%
20%↓
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) Somebody
90%
10%
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%
July 20, 2023 08:05 AM UTC
24 Comments
Alva's evil twin Jon Caldara has submitted an initiative (#25) that would reduce the length of the Colorado legislative session from 120 days to 90 days. I don't know for sure if or when it will be on the ballot.
If anyone remembers the logjam that happened with bills near the end of session this year, just imagine what it would be like with 30 fewer days. This is basically taking the old "drown government in the bathtub" thing into a new dimension, along the lines of saying we'll solve the water crisis with shorter showers.
https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/Initiatives/titleBoard/filings/2023-2024/25Final.pdf
What a jackass. Though it's expected from Caldara. Let's see if they can get enough signatures for this one. They've been through the title setting but the petition is not yet approved for circulation. Plenty of time, though, so fingers will be crossed that this doesn't get on the 2024 ballot.
He'll get enough signatures. The question is whether he will get enough valid signatures.
Well, he and his buddies at the Independence Institute know the game, so if they have the funding to collect signatures, they're likely to get enough valid ones. But I don't think this is the only initiative he's got going, so there may be a need to allocate resources to the most important one.
The only thing they really must do is the budget. Everything else is symbolic stuff. Anything important is done by ballot initiative.
Gotta quibble here, unless I'm missing sarcasm. They do 600+ bills per year, and they're not all fluff. If even 1/6 of them were to be done by ballot initiative, I'd hate to see the ballot with 100 initiatives and the amount of advertising it would take for all these campaigns. Plus, running bills at the legislature allows for time-consuming public testimony and input, some of which has value. Yes, CO could probably do without some of the bills and a lot of the resolutions.
Therein lies the problem:
Agreed; not all, but too many.
Five bills per each legislator is too many, maybe limit that to two or three, except for top two officials in each party (e.g., five for Speaker, minority leader, etc.). Too many of the bills introduced are done so with a "let's throw it against the wall and see if it sticks" mentality. There should be more work and thought pre-introduction towards building consensus and crafting thoughtful, workable, meaningful necessary legislation.
The "late bill" system is a bad joke, and should be eliminated or severely curtailed. It was never intended to be a vehicle for moneyed lobbyists to sneak onto the field late in the game.
Finally, Caldara again shows his idiocy; with Jon whether he's walking forward or backwards he's always assfacing. Nothing would be gained by shortening the session, this is his buffoonish attempt to encourage more buffoonery and logjamming constructive doings.
The comment
seems oddly specific, but what do I know?
I tend to not take the sheer number of bills completely at face value. Some bills are very short, some are kind of no-brainer positive, some are technically necessary like mid-session supplemental appropriations, and some are so bad that they're dead on arrival.
Still, I'd agree if someone said leadership could try doing a better job reining in the scope of any given session. Of course legislators are typically over-ambitious, and nobody really knows if they'll have the power to accomplish stuff after the next election cycle.
Cook Political report rating changes for 5 house races. One of whom is our 8th favorite member of Congress from Colorado. 10th favorite if you count our US Senators.
Cook Political moved Boebert from Lean R to Tossup.
And then there was this …
Marjorie Taylor Greene Shares More Thoughts On Hunter Biden Nude Photos | HuffPost Latest News
Next week, maybe she will share some beaver shots of herself and the little bitch.
Pics are merely an attempt to imply a scandal. Empty G is ALL about media attention.
What I want to know is why Giulliani was in possession of Hunter's laptop. He was Trump's private attorney, right? Not an actual government empolyee.
duplicate
LBlabla wrote
That’s over the line. Alva? What say you? Sexist much?
Commence with your tree-bashing and fake victimhood posts.
Ah, la Pomposa to the rescue!
I use a term like "beaver" and apparently, I've committed some kind of a hate crime against all who identify as women.
But what's more, my remark was targeted at Marjorie Taylor Greene, a vile excuse of human being who delighted in showing the world photos of Hunter Biden's cock. (Oh dear, I used another offensive word. Page the Schoolmarm to enforce her view of what is civil discourse.)
Nevertheless and because of her fetish for collective victimhood, La Pomposa asserts standing to call me out on my comment directed at Marjorie Taylor Greene.
Why don't you let Ms. Taylor Greene complain if she is offended by my reference to her private parts? (Is it okay to call them "private parts," KW?)
Awww. Lblabla got his feefees hurt.
Same shit different day. You clearly just don't get it.
You're the one who doesn't get it. Censorship is a personality trait of MAGA Boogaloos.
Don't make me cut off Colorado Pols.
I'm on my second day of Twitter withdrawal.
How about some basic courtesy? Not because being a potty mouth is bad, rather that it is really BAD arguing: it never convinces anyone of anything.
Can I say that Clarence Thomas is a corrupt MAGA grifter without using the N word? Can I accuse Milo Yiannopoulos of racist pandering without using the usual homophobic slurs to describe him?
Can you accurately describe the criminal grifting and Trumpy pandering of Greene and Boebert without using the most offensive, sexist, objectifying language possible?
Well, you could. But we all know you won’t.
And to answer CHB’s comment below: criticism is not censorship. Censorship requires power to shut someone up. I don’t have that power- nor do you, as much as you might like me to stop commenting.
“Censorship? Oh, no, no, no; not me! Good heavens . . . “
So, bawling out for Alva wasn’t an attempt to enlist someone with “power” here into doing some censorship? That was, perhaps, just an an attempt to reconnect with an old friend? Expand the discussion?
Blah, blah, blah, indeed.
What a peach.
There are community standards here that prohibit hate speech and pornography. Speculating that two female lawmakers will or should share some “beaver shots” verges on the latter. Criticize those two for being corrupt, a danger to democracy, liars, all that they are and do.
Leave the slut-shaming for the other side.
There are community standards.
And you have arrogated to yourself the role of arbiter of those standards.
Not really. There’s a whole lotta stuff on here I don’t bother to comment about, because I do have a job and a life.
I’ll even admit that 95% of what you post I have no problem with, or find it informative or funny. The sexual content doesn’t bother me- I’ve posted innuendo or dirty jokes myself, although I’d like to think I keep it classy most of the time. However…
When you post stuff I find offensive or demeaning to women or other groups, I’ll speak up if I have the time. Your insults and constant personal attacks don’t faze me at all.
Do your remarks about women doing “beaver shots” offend community standards or are you merely upholding the patriotic American male’s right to “locker room talk” as free speech?
Take a poll. . I’ll be interested in the results.
"how slaves developed skills which, in some instances, could be applied for their personal benefit."
This from the folks putting together Florida education standards:
Florida's education board approves controversial set of standards for teaching black history – CBS Miami (cbsnews.com)
Tell me: what possible personal benefit could a slave put his or her skills to use at? By definition, a slave had no personal rights.
You can't make this shit up.
There are a few reported instances of a person enslaved, doing the job assigned by an owner, and getting some money from other sources. The accounts can be riveting.