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%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
February 03, 2015 06:33 AM UTC

Tuesday Open Thread

  • 38 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

"Fast is fine, but accuracy is everything."

–Wyatt Earp

Tweet
Share

Comments

38 thoughts on “Tuesday Open Thread”

  1. Is there anyone who thought that CC-Big got that way eating Cheetos, pork rinds, genetics or just big bonedness?

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/03/nyregion/in-christies-career-a-fondness-forluxe-benefits-when-others-pay-the-bills.html?smprod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share

    While the image of Governor Christie of New Jersey is that of a populist Everyman preaching austerity, he has long indulged luxury tastes, sometimes in ethically questionable situations.

     

    Loving that picture with Jamie Foxx, btw . . . 

  2. Is it possible that by dissing vaccinations, Paul and Christie just blew up their presidential aspiration?

    If Bush is the nominee, he wins.  This helps him.

     

    I am sure there are some far right voters who are anti-vax, but mostly it's the elitist Hollywood types. I've, it doesn't help GOTP  candidates.

    1. It's the traditional GOP problem:  to win the nomination, they must say things that defeat them in the general election.  (Who can forget self-deportation and how that help you-know-who win the nod only to lose the general election.)

      Hillary had the best response to the vaccination issue (I can't believe in this day and age, it's an issue):  "The earth is round, the sky is blue and vaccines work.)

      Moddy, A/C care to comment…….

  4. They just can't stop talking about the causes of the Democratic meltdown last November and what Democrats should have focused on these past few years:

    Faced with mass unemployment and the enormous waste it entails, for years the Beltway elite devoted almost all their energy not to promoting recovery, but to Bowles-Simpsonism — to devising “grand bargains” that would address the supposedly urgent problem of how we’ll pay for Social Security and Medicare a couple of decades from now.

    …

    …Think about the notion that “entitlement reform” is an urgent priority. It’s true that many projections suggest that our major social insurance programs will face financial difficulties in the future (although the dramatic slowing of increases in health costs makes even that proposition uncertain). If so, at some point we may need to cut benefits. But why, exactly, is it crucial that we deal with the threat of future benefits cuts by locking in plans to cut future benefits?

    (This is what Udall called "strengthening" Social Security.-ed.)

    Anyway, even where the long-term issues are real, it’s truly strange that they have so often taken center stage in recent years. We are, after all, still living through the aftermath of a once-in-three-generations financial crisis. America seems, finally, to be recovering — but Bowles-Simpsonism had its greatest influence precisely when the United States economy was still mired in a deep slump. Europe has hardly recovered at all, and there’s overwhelming evidence that austerity policies are the main reason for that ongoing disaster. So why the urge to change the subject to structural reform? The answer, I’d suggest, is intellectual laziness and lack of moral courage.

    (Have to agree with that.-ed.)

    About laziness: …. All too often, or so it seems to me, people who insist that questions of austerity and stimulus are unimportant are actually trying to avoid hard thinking about the nature of the economic disaster that has overtaken so much of the world.

    And they’re also trying to avoid taking a stand that will expose them to attack. Discussions of short-run fiscal and monetary policy are politically charged. Oppose austerity and support monetary expansion and you’ll be lambasted by the right; do the reverse and you’ll be criticized and maybe ridiculed by the left. I understand why it’s tempting to dismiss the whole debate and declare that the really important issues involve the long run. But while people who say that kind of thing like to pose as brave and responsible, they’re actually ducking the hard stuff — which is to say, being craven and irresponsible.

    (Too harsh? Nah.)

    It goes without saying that Mr. Obama’s fiscal proposals, like everything he does, will be attacked by Republicans. He’s also, however, sure to face criticism from self-proclaimed centrists accusing him of irresponsibly abandoning the fight against long-term budget deficits.

    So it’s important to understand who’s really irresponsible here. In today’s economic and political environment, long-termism is a cop-out, a dodge, a way to avoid sticking your neck out. And it’s refreshing to see signs that Mr. Obama is willing to break with the long-termers and focus on the here and now.

    There's a lesson here, imho, from the Pulitzer Prize winning economist to both our current and our recently retired (D) senators. It's too late for Udall to apply Krugman's wisdom. It's not too late for the other guy, but I'm not sure he'd recognize the lesson, and I am sure he'd be hesitant to agree with anything Paul Krugman says about the best way to improve our economy right now.

    1. If they're really so concerned, why not just eliminate the cap and grant legal status and a path to citizenship to the  millions of immigrants without papers who are already here and not going anywhere so this young skewing army of workers can pay in? The rich pay the same percentage as everyone else, even if loop holes still allow many of the wealthiest to join the ranks of the 47% takers who pay no federal income tax. Even so, not a single multi-millionaire or billionaire will have to suffer the slightest depravation and we get a fresh injection of young workers paying in.

      In fact, regular infusions of young immigrants solve all kinds of problems for a society with too high a proportion of aging boomers. Fresh immigrants have always been America's lifeblood.  Lose the cap. Welcome young energetic hard working immigrants.

    2. During the 2010 election, I had the opportunity to meet in a relatively small group with candidate Michael Bennet for about 40 minutes. At that point, we was running late for his next appointment and his staff was trying to get him out the door, but called on me for the last question. I noted that there were a number of economists–such as Paul Krugman, Joseph Stiglitz, Robert Shiller–who had been largely right about the economy,and many who had been wrong. I noted that the economic positions on Bennet's campaign website were contrary to Krugman, et.al.–contrary to those economists who had been correct. So I asked, "Why are you right and why is Kurgman wrong?"

      Bennet responded, "Krugman is not wrong." He went on the say that Democrats needed to do a good job of articulating their economic message. I interrupted that Democrats were currently doing a lousy job of that messaging. He agreed. But before I could follow up with pushing again on, if Krugman was not wrong, why Bennet's economic positions were contrary to Krugman, his staff insisted he had to go.

      President Obama seems to finally have gotten the message. I don't think Senator Bennet has. It will be his downfall in 2016.

  6. Yeah…we all knew this already anyway, didn't we…?

    'Missing Oil' from 2010 BP Spill Found on Gulf Seafloor

     

    Up to 10 million gallons (38 million liters) of crude oil from the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill has settled at the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico, where it is threatening wildlife and marine ecosystems, according to a new study.

     

    The finding helps solve the mystery of where the "missing" oil from the spill landed. Its location had eluded both the U.S. government and BP cleanup crews after the April 2010 disaster that caused about 200 million gallons (757 million liters) of crude oil to leak into the Gulf.

    "This is going to affect the Gulf for years to come," Jeff Chanton, the study's lead researcher and a professor of chemical oceanography at Florida State University, said in a statement. "Fish will likely ingest contaminants because worms ingest the sediment, and fish eat the worms. It's a conduit for contamination into the food web." [Deepwater Horizon: Images of an Impact]

     

    http://news.yahoo.com/missing-oil-2010-bp-spill-found-gulf-seafloor-141528067.html

     

    out of sight…out of mind…

    1. Jeez, and here we were told that thousands of unicorns had already magically transformed it into pristine coral reefs . . . ?!?

      Pottery Barn rule — what we all learned in kindergarten — make the oily fuckers suck up every last tiny tar ball of that mess they made!!

  7. So remind me why spending money subsidizing fossil fuel extraction just because we still have some is a better idea than spending money moving to a new green energy economy? Like Michael B recently reminded us, the stone age didn't end because we ran out of stones.  

      2. And don't ignore that giant oily pachyderm in the corner of the room . . .

        . . . fossil fuel companies provide mountains of the oily cash to politicians running for, and in, office!!! 

  8. Just in case you were wondering what would happen if the Supreme Court guts the ACA:

    "Because of the interrelationship between insurance coverage, health care access, and population health, a decision striking down the IRS rule can be expected to lead to a loss of improvements in access to care, worsening health and more preventable deaths. Applying the result of a prior study estimating mortality declines linked to the first four years of health reform in Massachusetts, a loss of health insurance by estimated 8.2 million persons can be expected to translate into over 9,800 additional deaths annually."

    (In other words, about 1/1000 of those who lose insurance will die a preventable death.) 

    AMICI CURIAE BRIEF OF PUBLIC HEALTH DEANS, CHAIRS, AND FACULTY AND THE AMERICAN PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION
    http://tinyurl.com/l278lxr

  9. a good read….

     

    The GOP Elite Puts Its Foot Down

     

    Shots have been fired. The GOP herd is beginning to be culled. In less than a week, the establishment hounded Mitt Romney out, and the conservative movement wrote Sarah Palin out. The message from Republican insiders is clear: We cannot let our primary become another clown show.

     

    Meanwhile, the nascent Hillary Clinton campaign has signaled it wants to push back its planned entry from the spring to the summer. “If you have the luxury of time, you take it,” one Democratic insider told POLITICO. But these Republican moves indicate that she may not have that luxury. Here’s why.

    We already knew the Republican National Committee, led by Chairman Reince Priebus, was trying to exert some adult supervision over the primary process.

    Priebus and every other leading Republican strategist knows that recent GOP nominees have been weakened by a primary debate stage dominated by fringe characters—along with front-runners doing too little to distinguish themselves from the extremes. The resulting spectacle presents a horrible image of the party to general-election voters, weighing down the eventual winner.

    Priebus’ recent declaration that candidates will have to perform above a certain threshold in polls to warrant inclusion in debates, a threshold that will get stiffer later in the campaign, suggests he is aware that he needs to get as many fringe characters off the stage as possible. But he can’t be confident that the poll respondents will oblige and elevate only mature candidates above the bar.

    However, if Republican insiders have the wherewithal to contain the support and attention given to their circus acts, then that could greatly aid Priebus’ project. The twin falls of Romney and Palin last week are solid evidence that the party wants to shape up and jettison any distractions. That’s a warning for Democrats to stop laughing at the prospect of another GOP clown show a la 2012 and start preparing to grapple with a more serious opposition.

    Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/02/gop-establishment-114806.html#ixzz3QhgJNA7s

    only a fool allows complacency a seat at their table….

     

     

    1. Hillary will be a target regardless of her decision, but she's not as much a news figure so long as she doesn't actually announce her candidacy. I think her decision to delay is wise for as long as the GOP field continues to be contentious and its various contenders focused on each other as much as anything else.

      But Clinton will need to declare if the GOP does unify behind a candidate or two; at that point she'll want the media attention.

      1. She'll also have to come up with a "vision thing" message beyond….. It was my turn in 2008. That was the deal for putting up with Bill all these years.  I got screwed by that little smooth talking, history making upstart the way anything that moved got screwed by Bill. Now it's really my turn. I will be the first woman President of the US .

    2. My money's on Rand Paul. He's moderate on social issues, liberal to progressive on foreign policy, and corporation-friendly

      He is young, moderate on marijuana and same-sex marriage (appears to be "evolving), against foreign adventures in the Middle East,appeals to the non-interventionists and the marijuana legalizers, pro-gun, pro-life, pro-tax reform.

      He's not going to get many female votes because of his stances against abortion, (contrary to his libertarian hero, Ayn Rand), and his general condescension towards women (if you didn't get to see Rand Paul "shushing" a female news anchor yesterday, it's on Maddow)..

      But he's going to get the young, pro-gun, pro-pot, anti-war crowd. He's a contender.

  10. From Daily Kos, an eighth grade student in Vermont suggested to the legislature that the state adopt a Latin phrase as the state motto.  The bill's sponsor got scathing responses from Tea Partiers telling him that this is America where we speak English and it is not a Latino country!  

    Tancredo for a Secure America

  12. On the day after Groundhog Day, the U.S. House voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act……again. Details on this breaking story as they become available.

  13. The Republican Party is the gift that just keeps giving. On the same day as the House vote to repeal Obamacare, Sen. Thom Tillis from N.C. raises the question:  has government gone too far in telling people to wash their hands after using the toilet.

    Measles, polio, giardia, and amoebiosis……..all brought to you by the GOP.

    1. Who was the xenophobic Republican who ranted about Mexican immigrants bringing Third World diseases into our country?  At least the Latinos know enough to lavar sus manos cuando usando el bano.  Thom Tillis, not so much.

      1. Too many xenophobic Republicans exploiting Ebola and other diseases  to even keep track of.

        Start with Rand Paul, Ron Johnson, on down to Cory Gardner, Vicki Marble (she's probably the one you're thinking of, Frank), and the Chapster. To which you can add all the rightie talkers like Laura Ingraham, Glenn Beck, etc.

        As our very own rightie commenter Andrew Carnegie cynicallycommented, Ebola was a "great campaign issue" for Republicans in the 2014 elections. Never mind the thousands of people suffering and dying in western African nations. 

      2. Mexico has better vaccination rates than the US.  Colorado's is awful compared to the US average. If anything, Mexico should be worried about visits from people from Colorado.

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

124 readers online now

Newsletter

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

Colorado Pols