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) Jena Griswold

60%

60%

40%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Alexis King

(D) Brian Mason

40%

40%

30%

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) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Joe Salazar

50%

40%

40%

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
March 14, 2014 11:26 PM UTC

Weekend Open Thread

  • 87 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

"Health is not valued till sickness comes."

–Thomas Fuller

Tweet
Share

Comments

87 thoughts on “Weekend Open Thread”

    1. I think it was Charlie Cook who was commenting on the Colorado Senate race and talked about how Colorado had always been a Republican state.  He neglected to mention  Democratic Governors Lamm and Rommer and Representative Pat Schroder, but he did concede that Colorado had once been represented by Democratic senators Tim Wirth and Jerry Hart.

      I add this to my growing list of Eastern Coast idiotic comments.  This one is right up there with Chris Matthews who called the Sink, a "dive bar," and said that Cochise was the Indian Chief who defeated Custer at the Little Big Horn.

      East Coast talking heads, got to love them!

    1. On the other hand, the Republican win in January of 2010 in the special election in MA to fill Ted Kennedy's Senate seat certainly did fortell the historic Republican sweep in November of that year.

        1. I will tell you that it is such a relief not to have deal with meaningless and vindictive posts that do nothing to advance the discussion.  I thank you for that and I excuse your minor break in the newly adopted protocol of just ignoring those posts with which you are in either disagreement or have no way to refute.smiley

      2. CD-13 was a Republican winning a seat historically held by a Republican.  

        In 2010, that was a Republican winning a spot historically held by a Democrat.  

        You don't see the difference? 

        1. @curmudgeon,

          I don't know to whom your comment is directed.  I posted a link to a NYTImes article that was published before the Florida election and the opinion in that article was that this would be an important election and a bellweather for the 2014 mid-terms.

      1. Really? If you were, it would be newsworthy.

        Polls about Nov. elections at this stage of the game are good for naught but insight on messaging, and perhaps some strategic considerations. Their predictive value this far out is not good.

        They are about as predictive as special elections, I would guess.l

  6. This story is getting weirder & weirder

    A Malaysian passenger jet missing for more than a week had its communications deliberately disabled and its last signal came about seven-and-a-half hours after takeoff, meaning it could have ended up as far as Kazakhstan or deep in the southern Indian Ocean, Prime Minister Najib Razak said Saturday

    Najib's statement Saturday gave further credence to mounting speculation that the disappearance of the Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 with 239 people on board was not accidental.

        1. The tweeters do so decree.  I sure wish someone would step up.  Tipton has been collecting lots of Koch and Texas oil money, but he is not popular.  <<understatement

              1. Agent 1987, I was kidding, but there have been several Kool aid drinking Polsters who have seriously suggested it and if they spend their money on that race it will not be spent on the races this year that will be competitive.

          2. A Cowardly troll don't know diddly about the 3rd CD.  And if it did it would certanly be wrong–based on its other contributions.  

            But, Tipton vulnerable, yes; in other comments, I have ranked Tipton as the 2nd most vulnerable GOP Congress-grifter in the CO delegation, behind lil' Mikey who by most accounts is in some jeopardy–but as a ranking they are all four on there.

            I have also always noted that Tipton–as routinely disliked and otherwise 'meh' politician that he is, and is widely perceived to be–still remains favored.  For one thing he gets a healthy stipend from Texas oil men and the Koch brothers.  (And that was all noted before Cory set up the scrap over his seat, which probably doesn't change that observation but may depending on who is in the match up there, I suppose).  Thus > Mikey, Scott, Ken Buck(?), Lamborn – – with Scott and Ken (?) maybe swapping positions in order of vulnerability, with Coffman's seat the one most in play.  I still hope that the DCCC puts some $ into the 3rd–Tipton deserves to be held accountable for his lock-step vote with The East Coast Establishment of Cantor and Boehner.  

             

    1. OBAMACARE killed my Uncle Charlie. 

      It's true! He was happy with his $100,000 deductible, because the policy was cheap, and it saved him gas money, from all the trips to the hospital that he didn't take, because he couldn't afford to pay for all the things that weren't covered.

      Then, like a half-breed mongrel subhuman thief in the night, OBAMACARE swept in, and CANCELLED his plan with Patriot Flag Freedom Insurance (He loved their slogan, "Die Like a Real American").   He had to end up getting a stupid Socialist plan that paid for stupid preventative care, so he thought he'd better go get his stupid $25 co-pay checkup before the jack-booted thugs came to get him.  On his way to the hospital, he crossed against the light (because he was never one to let a stupid government traffic signal tell him what to do) and got hit by a Prius.  

      So, as anyone can see, OBAMACARE killed my uncle.

      Now where's my check?

      1. Well it would just be mean to fact check the story abut your poor old uncle so I surrender. Obamacare kills and I'm going to start watchng Fox and listening to rightie radio and following Ted Nugent on twitter. Right now.

      2. Cur,  You lied.  You are a racist.  I would go on but you obviously have the Dem true believers denial bit down so I don't need to.

        1. Lied about what, chickenshit? Still waiting for you to NAME the group you cleverly alluded to that was "pushing" Obamaphones at the Welfare Office.  And no, you wouldn't go on, because you don't have an ounce of courage or two brain cells to rub together.   But you're great at the idle threats…..

    1. No argument there, MB. When anyone says there are no good politicians, one can always point to her as a rebuttal. 

      Imagine if the GOP allowed Republicans like her to practice on the mainland. 

          1. Hey, I'm a bleeding heart liberal, but that's my own slant. I don't expect everyone to agree with it, and they shouldn't. 

            I have nothing but respect for honest, reasonable, rational people in government. 

            1. As long as they don't make up part of any GOTP majorities in any legislative bodies, fund raise, vote for or support in any way fellow GOTP candidates who could become part of legislative majorities at any level or President or Governor or SOS or AG of any state.

              I'm glad David's mom supports some positive things but it's hard to believe that any individual R pol, including David's Mom, does not also raise funds, support and vote for GOTP candidates who are the opposite of wonderful for this country. So I'll stick with just saying no to any and every Republican candidate, at least until today's GOTP version of the GOP has been crushed. Whatever and whoever helps the present GOTP team prevail, hurts the country.

              1. I get what you're saying, BC, but I just can't see taking that position about every GOP lawmaker. Not when we have people like Sheila Jackson Lee, one of the dumbest people in congress.   There are stupid, worthless, and corrupt people on both sides of the aisle.   They're politicians, after all. For many of them,  the R or D becomes meaningless at some point, and it becomes Us and Them. And we who are not politicians, lobbyists, or the 1% … we're Them. 

                1. Reasonable people will disagree about this but my contention is that having a preponderance of Dems in congress or any other legislative body and in executive positions, especially those with veto power, is much better for the country than having a preponderance of Rs. Majorities just exercise so much power in our system, with the majority leaders having complete control of what comes to a vote and all sorts procedural calls being in their hands in federal and state legislatures. 

                  In my view no individual D can do as much harm as any GOTP majority can do.  And no rare individual R can counteract the harm done by GOTP majorities. Besides, they will support fellow Rs who are terriblewith their votes, and fund rising. That's what party members do. 

                  I'm speaking specifically about the situation we are in today. In the past, plenty of good legislation got passed with coalitions of good people on both sides of the aisle. It made sense to vote for the best individual. I don't believe it does any longer. I believe the contemporary GOTP must be crushed as a first priority.

                  Everyone naturally is free to decide how much importance to place on the team v the individual but I personally would vote for a Dem piece of toast at this point rather than have my vote possibly contribute to a GOTP majority in any legislative body or a GOTP President or Governor with veto power or SOS with the ability to affect elections or AG with the ability to push a GOTP agenda in that role. I sincerely believe a Dem piece of toast would do a good deal less damage than any R majority or R executive who could get past a GOTP primary.

                  I respect your  opinion. Just wanted to further explain mine.

  10. You know that Gallop poll that put Obama's approval rating at a new unusual low of 39%?  Well I looked at Real Clear Politics and on the very same day there was that one and this Rasmussen poll with an unusually high approval rating:

    President Obama Job Approval    Rasmussen Reports   

    Approve 49, Disapprove 50    Disapprove +1 

    Probably a good idea not to put too much faith in either one.

    1. BC, Rasmusssen, since Scott sold out his interest consistently has the most favorable Obama approval rating.  Personally I will stick with Gallup because they seem to be the most stable and thorough.  Most Polsters think Rasmussen leans right. It may have, but clearly that was then and this is not the same Rasmussen.

      1. Your favoring Gallup once again shows that you have terrible judgement:

        It was one of the best-known polling firms, however, that had among the worst results. In late October, Gallup consistently showed Mr. Romney ahead by about six percentage points among likely voters, far different from the average of other surveys. Gallup’s final poll of the election, which had Mr. Romney up by one point, was slightly better, but still identified the wrong winner in the election. Gallup has now had three poor elections in a row. In 2008, their polls overestimated Mr. Obama’s performance, while in 2010, they overestimated how well Republicans would do in the race for the United States House.

  11. Spoiler alert:  Do NOT, I repeat, NOT read the NYTimes or Maureen Dodd's column when it appears in the Denver Post; do not, if you have not already watched;  watach the Sunday talking heads show.  There is evidently a media conspiracy afoot, headed by no less than Robert Gibbs (remember when he said in the summer of 2010 that the dems were in danger of losing the House) that dares to suggest that the Senate is in danger of going republican……

    On an omg moment, Do read the Denver Post headline: "LA Subway Dig Uncovers Prehistoric Artifacts"

    http://www.denverpost.com/ci_25351180/la-subway-dig-uncovers-prehistoric-artifacts?IADID=Search-www.denverpost.com-www.denverpost.com

     

    Artifacts refer to man made items; the subway dig revealed fossils; not artifacts.   The LA article is scientifically correct.  But the Post evidently has no one who even took third grade science, let alone is familiar with the concept of fact checking.  The article, when it appeared yesterday, also had dinasours in the La Breta tarpits……..but that part has been deleted or else there wasn't space for the entire Post rewrite.  

      1. I think it has a term…happens every two years at a federal level, way more often when you consider local races and mosquito and library boards.  Gonna come to me in a minute…  has something to do with democracy, small 'd.'  If I recall there is an entire class of people that talk about it in between those eery two years, peaking in a frenzy of predicting and pundicry, none of which they are allowed to remind each other post hoc, as that is bad form and none of them would eer be paid again if accuracy had been some type of qualification.  Its almost as if I have seen it all, and read your same comment before, a time or six before.  

    2. OK, so I read Dowd's NYTimes article. And while I generally respect Dowd's opinions and writing, this piece did fly a few red flags for me:

      • Mark Zuckerberg called the president to vent about government incursions on privacy.  …..Mark Zuckerberg has privacy concerns? really? That's like Butch Casssidy getting smarmy about the security of my bank deposits.
      • "Some Hill observers compare [Obama's] crumpling numbers to an illness. The president didn’t do the basic things to take care of himself, and now he’s gone terminal and contagious." I really hate that "some observers" thing. Either they're brave enough to be quoted, or they need to STFU. What "basic things" do "some people" think BHO should have done?
      • "The president is having to govern through executive order and revising federal regulation", which, according to Dowd, is a "sign of weakness"…. Except that Obma's done less of this than any modern President.

      I think Dowd should have attributed some quotes, and provided a more balanced picture on the executive orders issue.

      dwyer, you know I'm not advocating for a what-me-worry attitude. I plan to work for candidates at all levels clear through 2016. Yeah, there's tons of conservative ad money out there. But a friendly face at the door trumped all of the ad money for Obama in 08 and 12. People are signing up for the Affordable Care Act. The "horror stories" aren't gaining much traction, except with very low-information voters.

      1. Typical Dowd. As usual she makes some very good points and, also as usual, she goes a little overboard. That said, I don't believe Obama has ever been the greatest partner for congressional Dems. He's always seemed pretty uncomfortable with schmoozing his own side and too isolated within his own inner circle. He's spent way too much energy over the years bending over backwards to appease Rs who announced before his first inauguration that their attention was to give him nothing and deny him any victories while complaining about his own Dems and often clearly finding progressive demands a pain in the ass. I'm guessing there's not a whole lot of love lost between the President and many congressional Dems.

        I also think things aren't quite as bad for Dems as Dowd says. She tends to go out of her way to prove she's not a Dem homer. ACA doesn't have to be such a negative if Dems grow a pair and aggressively counter R attacks instead of running from them. And it's not all Obama's fault. Yeah, the roll out sucked but long before the roll out congressional Dems got scared out of their minds and reacted by hiding their heads in the sand and leaving the GOTP free to define it as negatively as they could. That left a public primed to believe every phony horror story the GOTP puts out. That's the congressional Dems own fault and only they can turn that around.

      2. @mj55

        RE: "with very low-information voters."

        You know that the term "low-information voters" is a term coined by Rush Limbaugh to explain the democratic victory in 2912, right?

         

        1. However Rush uses it, it's a common term meaning what it says and describing most voters, what with the majority of Americans being extremely low info on politics. Go canvassing some time and find out how many can name there Senators and Congress members. Then see how many can name a single statewide office holder besides the Governor. As for their state rep and state senator, your're probably going to have to knock on a whole lot of doors to get much recognition for either of those.  

          That's what low info means. It's been been in use for ages. In fact, you can find it in zillions of posts right here at this site going back years. I know I've both used it and read it here quite frequently and long prior  to 2012.

          The commonly accepted code for "black" is "urban" BTW.  At least when they're making a token effort to be polite. Just FYI. Not tryng to start an argument.

  13. @mj55

    i went back and reread Dowd.  Dowd is an opinion columnist, not a journalist or reporter.  I can not agree with your analysis.  Her column is about how she sees Democrats in Washington reacting to the current political climate and what it fortells for November. She does not have any ethical responsibility to report a "balanced"  viewpoint.  She is usually highly critical.  She never had a kind word for Clinton when he was president.

     In this column, Dowd  cited Brown's entrance into the Senate race and how it will cost Dems money and effort to defend one more Senate seat. She also discussed how the Florida defeat is adding to Democratic worries. (I think she used the word panic…but I can not remember for sure..even tho, I read it about five minutes ago.)

    She also said that the dems are waiting for the "fabled" OFA to start raising money.  I think she does have that wrong. I went back to the OFA website and the link is here; plus, the questions and answers about their non-partisan political activities.

    http://www.barackobama.com/?source=site_20140304_splash#get-the-facts

    Is OFA involved in elections or supporting candidates who share a commitment?

    No. Neither OFA nor its chapters are involved in elections or partisan political activity. Its exclusive purpose is public policy advocacy and development, and in particular, both enactment of the agenda a majority of Americans voted for in 2012 and the identification and advancement of other goals for progressive change at the state and local level.

    Do the organizations working closely with or in alliance with OFA include the Democratic Party?

    No. OFA is not a partisan political organization and does not engage in electoral activity with any partisan political organization. It welcomes Democrats, Republicans, and independents to support its work, and its advocacy is directed to all Americans, without regard to party or other political affiliations.

     

    The website lists the general policy objectivies:  ACA enrollment; migration; gun control; etc.  The organization has not met those goals, so far. This is what I have heard on MSNBC talking heads…..some said that the "models" and the data and the GOTV will work in November, it is just a matter of getting the vote out.  Others, well, Chris Matthews….who has Hillary stars in his eyes…..says that all the young talent that swarmed to the Obama campaigns in 2008 and 2012 have left OFA  and are signing on with the Hillary organization,writing off 2014 and working for 2016.  Now, that is just his observation that could be wrong…..

    My opinion is that the dems in Colorado are short on talent.  I think, as I have said before, that you should be in a policy position to be developing stategises that may work….but, I think you just going to do what you did in the Giron recall….and I don't think that is going to work.

     

     

    1. dwyer, you have no idea what I might or might not do, or whether that will or will not "work" politically. I'm flattered, I guess, that you think that I should help to develop strategies. But there's nothing new under the sun to "develop". It's all implementation.

      Really, it's all community organizing 101. All OFA did was speed it up and expand it with technology. Plenty of other  organizations are taking up where OFA left off – Moveon, Americavotes, Salsalabs, etc.

      The reason people get pissed with you, dwyer, is that you start assuming and predicting negative outcomes, based on inadequate information. Please stop that.

      1. @mj55

        I don't really care if people are "pissed" with me.  Do you honestly think I give a flying f&*k about what people who post here think about me?   am not important. I post for people who visit the site and don't post.  I also think that the constant harassing of people who don't fall lock step in place with the common opinions is a real turn off.  I think it says a whole lot about how the democratic party operatiives behave. I absolutely do not want to be a member of this tiny group.

        I think it is far easier to be "pissed" at me than to deal with real problems.  There is a lot of opinion that 2014 could be a wave election for the Republicans. I don't see anyone, with the exception of BC, talking about why that might be happening and how to stop it.  BC's recommendation, if I remember correctly, was that only Democrats in Congress could solve the problem.

         I don't "predict."  I give my opinion.  I also cite sources that helped form my opinion.

         Hear me well, mj55, I think the possibility of a Republican Senate is would be diasterous for my country and its constitution.  So I refuse to make "nice nice."  I also cited the fact that so far OFA and all its allies have not been successful in moving the President's agenda through Congress.  The failure has been to create the necessary public support that is necessary for such success.  That is a fact, not an assumption.  Your assumption is that the data collelction model, the walking and talking to constitutents will work.  My opinion is that it did not work in the recalls and it did not work in Jefferson County School Board elections and it did not work for #66.  The latter was the real test, in my opinion, was #66.  

        On the brighter side, the Democrats have introduced legislation that would address some of the problems that plagued the recall elections.  I think that is absolutely wonderful.

        Now, please, unsolicited advice is hardly productive. Surely, as a teacher, you know that. 

        1. Booooorrring…..and I helped!

          Let me try once more. This is a political blog. People make predictions about political competitions, aka "elections". Your opinion, dwyer, is as valid as anyone else's, even if all the news is grim from your POV.

          Where I think you sometimes go over the line is in predicting specific consequences for specific polsters, as in,"What you're going to do won't work." I admit that I, being human, eat up the positive and spit out the negative predictions. But truly, you have no idea what I or anyone else will do, or if it will "work".

          IMHO, it takes community organizing, big money, small money, big party politics, everyday non-partisan issues, TV ads, political news shows,  web blogs, social media, canvassing, data, phoning, some real world impact in the voter's personal lives, and above all, a sense that there are larger and more fair possibilities that could just as easily be "the real world experience".

          I'm glad that Dem legislators are patching up the big 15 day deadline loophole that derailed democracy and lost us a good Senator in Pueblo. That is one part of the "big picture" solution, which even you, dwyer, with your pessimistic posts, are another component of.

  14. BTW I'm pretty sure neither mama nor anyone else knows that "low information voters" is a phrase coined by Rush in 2012 since it's been a commonly used description at least ever since I got involved as a political volunteer years ago and probably long before that.  Scratch that. Of course it's possible to know things that aren't true. Righties base their entire ideology on it. 

    1. dwyer: for those of us who don't listen to Rush & the wingnuts, the term low-information voter has been around for decades, if not longer. It's political operative (bipartisan) code for dumbshits who vote anyway.

       

       

      1. @gertie97

        Live and Learn.  I worked in democratic political campaigns in the 60s and the 70s, and less frequently since then.  I never heard the term until Limbaugh and  I only mentioned it because I thought it strange that mj55 would use it.

        I never heard average voters "dissed" as low information or dumbshits. I certainly heard republicans called all kinds of names. My recollection is that we reserved the worst for our democratic primary opponents….although never to their faces.  

        I don't like the term…bipartisan or not. 

        1. A I pointed out before I've both used and read the term here and elsewhere pretty much forever. Don't know how you can be a regular on this blog and claim you never ran across it until Rush used it. And you're still too much of a know it all to just say…oops.. my bad, even when it's pointed put to you that something you "know" and drip disdain over other people for not "knowing" isn't at all accurate.  The fact is most voters are low info voters which is why big splashy ad campaigns that require big splashy money are so important.  

          Years ago I worked on the Winter for CD6 campaign when it wasn't a competitive district and he didn't get big money. We had fund raising events, GOTV efforts, yard parties, and evening get togethers, canvassed and phone banked and sent out mailings. You know what the most common response was when we phone banked during the last couple of weeks of GOTV after all that?  Who's Winter? Most people had still never heard of him. Rinse repeat for Eng and Flerlage.

          Low info isn't so much a derogatory term as an accurate description of a huge voting demo that can only be reached by hitting people over the head with ads that can only be bought by those with big money.  When both sides have lots of money for lots of ads in a competitive district, only then can it be fought on the margins and the best boots on the ground organizing and GOTV wins. 

          That's why, until redistricting, the best let's all get together and put on a show in the barn grass roots effort was never going to get a D elected in CD6. Low info apolitical voters, and they're more the rule than the exception, tend to vote for someone who's name at least rings a damn bell in congressional races. And it takes a lot of money to ring that bell and nobody gives it to candidates in no hope districts. That's what low info voter means.

            1. Maybe you're just a self righteous prig who isn't all that sharp or knowledgeable and spends way too much time listening to rightie radio and nothing else. Just a guess.smiley

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Gabe Evans
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

38 readers online now

Newsletter

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