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
60%↑
40%↑
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) 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%
May 01, 2024 08:05 AM UTC
21 Comments
WOTD: “You’re an environmental lawyer. How about you go back to your office, and we’ll call you when there’s an oil spill.”
Jeffry Clark, coup-lawyer in January, 2021, is now about to lose his license to practice law.
From the disciplinary counsel’s proposed finding of fact and conclusions:
Come mothers and fathers
Throughout the land
And don’t criticize
What you can’t understand
Your sons and your daughters
Are beyond your command…..
For the times they are a-changin'
The Revenge of the Sane Centrists …..
Political center revolts against fringe, as leaders rebuke Greene, protesters | The Hill
From MTG's motion to vacate to the Intifada on college campuses over Gaza, the center says, "Enough!"
What is the centrist position on the conflict between Israel/Netanyahu/Settlers-gone-wild and Gaza/Hamas-we-lit-the-fire?
I understand the centrist position on MAGA vs Democracy: All Democrats (plus Liz Cheney) are centrist, all Republicans are MAGA.
And while we're at it, What's the centrist position on Abortion and Miscarriage protections? All Democrats are centrists because they believe women should be able to get reproduction care, and all Republicans are MAGA because they want Abortion bans.
"What is the centrist position on the conflict between Israel/Netanyahu/Settlers-gone-wild and Gaza/Hamas-we-lit-the-fire?"
Netanyahu must go. He is a corrupt thug who thrieves on maintaining the status quo.
As for Gaza/Hamas, Israel has a right to defend itself.
I noticed that you avoided the issue I raised which was campus safety and ethnic initimidation of Jewish students.
What is the hard left position on that?
I'm a supporter of a two-state solution, as difficult and remote as that might be. The alternatives are a one-state or I guess a zero-state. A path to reconciliation can only start with small steps in the reconciliation direction, and Hamas, Netanyahu and the Right-wing settlers are absolutely opposed to that.
I haven't the slightest idea of what the hard left position on campus safety or ethnic intimidation of Jewish students is. Do you know any hard-left voices? How do you know they are hard-left rather than hard-right? I don't know… read Mike Littwin's article in the May 1 Colorado Sun.
Anti-semitism (bigotry or racial animus) is wrong whether directed at jewish ethnicities or arabic ethnicities. Criticizing israeli policies or having anti-zionist opinions is NOT anti-semitism, much as right-wing Jewish lobbying groups (like AIPAC) might try to conflate it.
I have no way of observing what's actually going on, and I don't trust the news reports to gauge how much of the protest is from off campus (50% ?), nor how much of the noise is from specific agitators (5% ?), nor agents provacateur. I assume some neo-nazis, and Xitter troll farmers are trying to egg on the conflict. MAGA Republican vultures are also circling.
My most trusted source on the situation is Josh Marshall at TPM. As a historian his comments and discussion of the topic are measured, nuanced and careful.
Most recently, Josh Marshall reminds us that both Netanyahu AND Hamas have been in a tacit alliance, that goes back to their destruction of the Oslo agreement and prevention of a two-state solution.
Pox on both their houses? Well, yeah except that most jews and palestinians within Israel, the West Bank and Gaza don't want nor deserve the horrific destruction.
I do assume that the Hamas attack was cynically intended to cross a line that would force Israel to respond.
I do believe Israel's invasion of civilian areas in which Hamas has been embedded was inevitable (and justified), but it has been extreme, has no reasonable end-game, and will stoke hatred for generations to come
I also believe that West Bank Settlers expansion campaign and their attacks on Palestinian villages & Wilding behavior has been supported by the present Israeli government.
You can run the tit-for-tat blame game back as far as you like.
Here is the measured article on the current campus anti-war protests from Josh Marshall.
There is no question in my mind that multiple players are taking advantage of and manipulating the protests in the US, including some foreign powers. Also, do not forget – Republicans want the protests (and accompanying violence, destruction, etc) to negatively impact Biden in this re-election year. Bottom line – someone needs to pull the plug on Netanyahu ASAP. There cannot be resolution in that deadly mess until he is no longer the leader of Israel.
"Also, do not forget – Republicans want the protests (and accompanying violence, destruction, etc) to negatively impact Biden in this re-election year."
Absolutely, because it has worked so well before. I don't need to imagine "foreign actors" taking advantage of the protests. We know that there is one actor – currently seated in a NYC courtroom – who will use this because it's worked before.
I'm old enough to remember 1968 when a war was raging in a far off land and students were turning on the Democratic nominee who was not stopping the war. The Republican nominee implausibly managed to sell himself as the man who would unite the country, end the war, and stop the campus riots.
The Republican nominee won. He did end US involvement in that war albeit five years and many, many lives later. (He also laid the foundation for the Khmer Rouge takeover of
CambodiaDemocratic Kampuchea. Talk about genocide!) He did quell campus unrest (think Kent State). And by 1974, he united the country in contempt for his administration.Trump is stupid but he isn't THAT stupid. He knows his history – at least the late '60's and early '70's.
Gaza will be heard this November in the US election.
"What's the centrist position on Abortion and Miscarriage protections?"
Restore Roe v. Wade legislatively if not judicially.
"I understand the centrist position on MAGA vs Democracy: All Democrats (plus Liz Cheney) are centrist, all Republicans are MAGA"
This is a false choice. You aren't comparing apples with oranges, you're equating apples with dishwashers.
"Democracy" is in the eye of the beholder. The MAGA people genuinely believe that their form of populism is "democracy," I disagree with them. You probably do too.
Liz Cheney is not a centrist; she is ideologically a conservative. Larry Hogan and Lisa Murkowski are more centrists than Liz Cheney.
Liz Cheney is a non-MAGA conservative.
Like the MAGA people, the folks on the far left also see everything through a simplistic binary choice.
Here's one "centrist" position on the mess from nearly everyone in the Israel/Palestine conflict.
While urging that the direct participants need to find a way to a ceasefire and negotiations for a way forward, there ought to be an equivalent move among all nations involved in support: stopping supply of any offensive weapons, pressuring proxies to find a way to ceasefire among themselves, and engage in negotiations for a more lasting peace.
Menstruation police? WOTD-2 from Time Magazine interview with Donald Trump.
Get ready for your pregnancy ankle bracelet and fetal monitor if you get pregnant in a red state.
More from that interview, via Josh Marshall.
On Nato Allies Contribution:
…
Already having trouble sleeping. Think about this scenario ……
Trump’s Contingent-cy Plan – Sabato's Crystal Ball (centerforpolitics.org)
Is it likely? No. (Biden would need to win all three Rust Belt states and Nebraska while losing Nevada for this to happen. He will probably lose Michigan but win Nevada placing him under 269.)
Is it possible? Absolutely. And that's when all the drama really begins.
The single best argument for replacing the electoral college is the fact that a tie is even possible. The Framers weren't that bright.
Ahh, but before the enactment of the 23rd Amendment giving DC electoral votes, there was an odd number of electors by virtue of the Senate always having an even number of members and the House traditionally have an odd number of members.
I am not suggesting that DC be stripped of its electoral votes. (On the contrary, I think DC should be a state and I would image that many others in here feel the same way but that is not likely to happen anytime soon.)
There are a lot of good reasons for eliminating the electoral college. You've just come up with one more to a very long. But those reasons are irrelevant since there is no way in hell that 38 states will ratify a constitutional amendment to get rid of it even if by some miracle 2/3 of the House and 2/3 of the Senate voted to send an amendment to the states.
I actually was aware of the 23rd Amendment and the math. But I thought it'd be less fun to bash the framers of the 23rd amendment. The whole electoral college was an interesting 18th century thing. But the 21st century demands something a little more modern. Of course, I favor eliminating the tripartite system in favor of a parliamentary system, and splitting the US into 3-4 separate nations, so who am I to kvetch about the EC?
I like your idea of breaking the US up into three or four separate nations although I'd be satisfied with just two: Blue America and Red America. Blue America can use the US of A label. Red America could adopt, or readopt, the Confederate State of America ("CSA").
I imagine you've read Colin Woodard's book, the Eleven Nations of the U.S. If you have not, it's really worth reading.
I haven't read that. Thanks for the rec!
Initial Electoral College had "69 electors."
The last adjustment to the EC was the 23rd amendment …. it created a problem by giving DC precisely 3 votes, rather than designating that it would a number to insure "ties" couldn't happen.