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*

(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%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
November 03, 2007 04:24 PM UTC

Weekend Open Thread

  • 78 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“I have to confess that it’s crossed my mind that you could not be a Republican and a Christian from time to time.”

–Hillary Clinton

Comments

78 thoughts on “Weekend Open Thread

  1. Coffman is being asked by the Big Red Powers that if he insists on running for CD 6 he should at least resign SOS before (and if) he gets the CD 6 nomination in order to give the Big Red Machine and opportunity to keep the SOS office.  Ritter will appoint (Gordon?) but he will have to stand for retention election in November if Coffman resigns in a timely fashion.  Time for an SOS Big Line?  Oh yes, it will be fun.

          1. Diss the gummint, get the jobs.  Amazing, isn’t it?

            Just like my last landlord in CO.  Always bitching about taxes, both he and his wife worked for the city of Englewood.  And he took an early retirement at age 61….

            1. But before you kids go slamming Cynthia Coffman’s (nee Hossinger) work at the AG as being an example of GOP winking and nodding, you might want to check a little closer. I’m pretty sure Cynthia has been on staff at the AG for quite a while, to include when Salazar had the corner office. She’s an attorney guys, and one of the best in the nation supposedly when it comes to career prosecutors.

              1. I (underlined) have no problem with Mrs. Mike working there.  It’s the hypocrisy of the general philosophy of Republicans to hate government.  So why work there, then?

                1. Republicans hate government, as much as they believe in a balanced budget. They hate that THEIR and OUR money is not going to them. When it goes to a poor person or to help a cause that they do not believe in, then they have an issue with it.

                  1. One day they have no problem with overspending, giving hard-working folks monies away to filthy rich corporations… And then they have the nerve to claim taxes are being stolen from their pockets… Nothing worse then hard-working middle class folks voting Republican, are they ever going to realize they are being duped?

    1. “to give the Big Red Machine an opportunity to keep the SOS office”

      Last time I checked, the Big Red Machine holds minority positions in both houses of the legislature, and the Governor (who would appoint the SoS) is a Democrat.  In that environment, it’s hard to see how the Big Red Machine has a chance at anything.  A Coffman run for CD6 will reduce Republican representation in Colorado state government.

      1. exactly the point of the post (perhaps you should read it).  The Dems will get to appoint – the only hope, as slim as it is, is to be able to challenge in a retention election in 2008.  Otherwise, if Coffman waits too long the D’s hold it on auto-pilot until 2010.

          1. ok. I’ll speak slowly.

            Ritter will appoint the new SOS upon vacancy.

            If Coffman wins the nomination and waits until that point (assuming its a primary) or later to step down as SOS the Ritter appointee will hold office until the 2010 election.

            If Coffman resigns a bit earlier, the Ritter appointee will have to run for election in 2008 (it’s the law).

            If R’s can win in a 2008 SOS election Dems will only hold the office for a few months rather than years.

            I know the logic of an earlier election and the importance of it to the Red Guys just escapes your little brain and your blue heart – but just trust me on this one or try thinking with your big brain.

            1. .
              now I understand.

              But now I’m confused by another item you brought up.
              Big/little brain.
              Is that referring to brain stem vs. cerebellum ? 

              And my heart is green.  Olive Drab. 

  2. I know what’s involved in waterboarding. 
    A person is forced involuntarily to experience the sensation that they’re drowning.
    The people who are forcing them into this sensation have complete power over them. 
    It seems like these people could kill the person being waterboarded, and they would suffer no consequences. 

    This cannot be reproduced by a reenactment on TV.
    There has to be a real sense by the victim that they are completely helpless,
    and that it is of little consequence to the torturers whether they live or die. 

    Judge Mukasy knows what waterboarding is. 

    Senator Feinstein says she would vote for Judge Mukasy to be the next AG. 

    Do we now have 2 major parties that have no bedrock principles ? 

    1. It may have been you that pointed out the other day that calling it waterboarding is ineffective. Actually sounds a bit like a sport. Partial drowning is better and I am sure there is something better yet.

  3. Suppose the brains of the Senate….clinton, obama, biden, dodd….were full time in DC concentrating on the business of the senate…..focusing on issues instead of running for president….would things be different?

    1. If they relied on intermediaries to be out campaigning; i.e. any ex-Presidents that are in your family, would the poll standings be any different? If they were in DC would anything be different in the Senate? How many critical votes or negotiations have they missed? Do the people want the candidates out in the hustings? I think they do.
      What about Governor’s who run? Imagine if CA or TX had rules prohibiting the Gov from being absent from state more than X days/month. Could anybody have presented Reagan’s message so productively (or with a straight face) that he would have been elected? Would Reagan have had to get Bob Hope to say that trees cause pollution?

      1.   He refused to relinquish his office to the Lt. Guv (who was a fellow Dem), ran a crappy campaign for president, and totally neglected the state’s dire finances until after the election (when it was too late to do anything). 
          Then he bailed out on running for re-election in ’90 (didn’t want to clean up his mess), triggering a nasty primary which begot Bill Weld and 16 years of GOP rule, only to be ended by Mitt Romney making Mass. the punch line to all of his jokes.
          Bill Clinton managed to meet his responsibilities as Guv of Arkansas, but that was about as much work as being mayor of Greeley.

    2. Suppose the brains of the Senate were full time in DC concentrating on the business of the Senate ….

      I’m having trouble deciding whether that counterfactual presents a good thing or a bad thing.

      One perspective is that when lawmakers try to fix a problem, they create more problems than they fix.  There are loads of examples … the Telecommunications Act of 1996 that “fixed” the telecom industry with 90+ pages of legislation, the federal tax code that keeps growing in complexity rather than becoming simpler or more streamlined, US immigration laws that are written in a language that resembles English and spawned the world’s largest bureaucracy, education reforms that seem to result in more kids that fail to graduate from high school.

      When our “brainy” lawmakers focused on the war on terror after 9/11, we ended up in Iraq, can’t figure out how to get out, and the mastermind behind 9/11, Osama bin Laden, is still at large and still spewing out videos.  (I’m waiting for his “Osamas Gone Wild” series to be released.)  We also ended up with bans on sippy cups, can’t carry toothpaste on an airplane, take our shoes off to be x-rayed, and watch like sheep in metal detector lines while old guys with metal hips get wanded just in case they are terrorists.

      If all our lawmakers ran for President and stopped focusing on issues, maybe the world would be a better place.

      1. Oh, I forgot to mention that thanks to our government’s efforts and focus of our “brainy” legislators, that oil is $96 a barrel even though we occupy a major oil producing country.

        I can hardly wait to see what solution they implement for health care.

        1.   they have blood up to their elbows.

            And we the voters elected GWB – twice – also have blood up to our elbows. I voted against the sob twice and worked for Dims, but in this democracy I share responsibility for our collective actions.  That is why this war/occupation burns me with a fire that won’t heal.  My country is perpetrating a historic wrong and I can’t seem to do a damned thing to stop it. 

           

        2. Congress did nothing to prevent the war, and has done nothing that has extracted us from the war.  Lots of chest beating and newspapers quotes to express indignation, but there are more troops there today when the Dems are in charge than there were two years ago.  Troops are now on third and fourth deployments.

          If your reply is “They could do nothing.  It’s all George Bush’s fault” then what the hell kind of leaders are they supposed to be and why do we even bother to have a Congress if they are just a bunch of impotent, empty suits?

          1. Would you want to elect as President somebody who was  fooled by fabricated intelligence, failed to even ASK hard questions and went along with the President demanded because it was politically expedient?

  4. They were elected to the Senate to do the senate’s business, now.  We have not even had a primary. Harry Reid is second string.  There are issues of grave constitutional import that the “4 horsemen” have ignored and are instead focusing on presidental politics.  It is lopsided.

    The war in Iraq, the horror which could be an illegal bombing of Iran and the constitutional questions of presidential overreach are simply being ignored….I say shame on them.

  5. Predictions:

    1) BMD wins
    2) The incompetent incumbents win in the school board race. The media will announce a victory for reform and bennet.
    3) The alphabet soup tax increases will all win.  People are voting yes or no..not individually.
    4) the denver city government election divison will NOT make available voting totals by precinct or neighborhood so it will be impossible to identify where any oppostion was strong.

    The next project by BMD will be to propose a constitutional amendment to remove the denver public school system from the control of an elected board and place the system under the control of the major.

    1. The incompetent incumbents win in the school board race. The media will announce a victory for reform and bennet.

      Except for the bennet part. We’ll get the same bozos who will take pride in the great job they are doing while they can’t get even 50% of 10th graders to pass the math CSAP.

      1. That’s dwyer’s abbreviation for “Big Money Denver”.  According to dwyer, BMD is pulling on the strings on both the Ref. A-I elections and the school board races.  I think they used to be known as “The Establishment”.

        1. BMD, funny isn’t that the same group of folks that bank rolled Brad Buchanan’s 2005 extremely successful school board race?  Why are they going to be successful this year?  Isn’t that the same group of self proclaimed political experts…?

  6.   Apparently one of Fred Thompson’s campaign advisers, who also has donated a plane for campaign travel, is a convicted drug dealer.
      This will probably help neither Thompson’s poll numbers nor “Law and Order’s” TV ratings.
      I have this feeling that Thompson’s gonna drop out of the race before McCain.  Anyone agree?

    1. It would be ridiculous for any of the well-known candiates to drop out before Feb 5th (super-dooper Tuesday) after having gone this far.

      The writing is already on the wall for Thompson and McCain, and all the others who are not Giuliani, Romney, Clinton, Obama, or Edwards. But hey can truly say “the votes just weren’t there” if they wait until after the majority of the primaries/caucuses takes place.

      The “who?” candidates could drop out at any time and no one would notice, but I hope the people like Kucinich, Biden, McCain, and Thompson would wait til Feb to at least give us the chance to say we’re not interested in them.

      1. I think McCain can stick it out for awhile because he does have something of a base to fall back on. I don’t think he has a prayer of winning but he can remain semi-credible for a bit.

        Huckabee is a wild-card. He clearly resonates with a decent chunk of the Repub primary voters. As people get a closer look at Giuliani and Romney they may fall back to Huckabee.

        And finally Gore is still a possibility. If the first couple of primaries tie up between Clinton/Obama/Edwards Gore can then jump in.

        – dave

        1.   I don’t think he’ll take as many votes from Giuliani as he will from the faux conservative, Romney, since most of Giuliani’s supporters believe in newfangled stuff like evolution and the earth is round. 
            Romney’s conservative supports are a little queesy with him, between the theological issues and his sordid past (“I’m gonna out gay rights Ted Kennedy….”).
            It will be interesting to see whether money and christian conservative endorsements go to Huckabee if he should pull an upset in Iowa.

        2.   I was looking at CNN on line, and noticed a headline that said, “Former Vice President Set to Endorse Clinton,” and my heart stopped for a second.
            I read on and it said that Mondale has endorsed Hillary.

        3. and I’ll say it again – Huckabee comes in second in Iowa, and he’ll be in it for the long haul, because he’s the only bona fide social/christian conservative in the field. The sway of that wing of the party in on the wane but it’s still significant.

  7. It sure demonstrates how liberal the editorial board is! (NOT) They stopped just short of calling Ritter a g_dless commie, pinko socialist. How dare he give state employees a seat at the table to negotiate issues like workplace safety, state programs, quality improvement, or government efficiency!!? That should be, apparently, all top down.

    Let’s watch and see how many businesses decide not to come to Colorado as a result. Let’s watch and see how their hysteria is justified by state employees stealing from taxpayers.

    Yellow journalism?

    1.   Look at all the bartenders and drug dealers she’s keeping gainfully employed….how much is she paying Kevin Featherhead in alimony and child support?

      1. Good evidence that Americans won’t suddenly write lots of checks to charities as some of our conservative friends keep insisting will happen with high incomes untaxed.

          1. Britney Spears is a Republican, I believe. She said this about George W. in 2003:

            “Honestly, I think we should just trust our president in every decision that he makes and we should just support that, you know, and be faithful in what happens.”

            She’s also an airhead, obviously.

            But a COMPASSIONATE conservative she’s not.

          2. That’s why I thought it had at least some political value: she’s a typical modern Republican. She earns gazillions but doesn’t give a nickel to charity. She talks about being a good mom but is anything but. She tries to appear wholesome when it suits her, but also scandalously improper when that’s in her financial self-interest.

            OK, I’m probably laying it on a bit thick here – but it just seems so incredibly wrong that she’s giving so little to charity.

            1. I’m thinking that Brit isn’t such a typical example. A rags-to-riches girl, I think firstly that she’s probably pretty apolitical (her statement from 2003 notwithstanding – lots of people felt that way then, not just ‘pubs), although it’s possible that she pays attention to her taxes and votes to have them slashed. But she doesn’t strike me as someone who can be bothered to even go out and vote. (Remember Paris Hilton being part of that stupid “Vote or Die” campaign? And then she didn’t vote? Despite that she seems a lot more politically sophisticated than Brit.)

              Secondly, newly minted rich people tend to be less generous than old money types. Probably no sense of noblesse oblige. So even though she probably should give more to charity and not waste so much on her selfish pleasures, I still think that it’s really more her own business, at least until she gets more involved in politics.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

37 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!