President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump



CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta



CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson



CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd



CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese



CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen



CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore



CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk



CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans



State Senate Majority See Full Big Line





State House Majority See Full Big Line





Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
April 27, 2015 06:45 AM UTC

Monday Open Thread

  • by: Colorado Pols

“There is no fool like a careless gambler who starts taking victory for granted.”

–Hunter S. Thompson


30 thoughts on “Monday Open Thread

  1. Please note, the WYSIWYG editor remains disabled until we figure out the conflict with our recent WordPress upgrade that is breaking it. We apologize for the inconvenience and hope to have the situation corrected shortly.

    1. I can’t say what it is, but I have a guess (which, along with $5 will get you a cup of coffee).

      The behavior I see in Firefox is the same as when a required field exists in the form but is not filled out. That the message appears “hung in the air” would lead me to wonder if there’s a hidden field with the attribute.

      Having just posted a comment with nothing in and gotten the same message (“please fill out this field”) attached to this comment box, I’m wondering if the WYSIWYG editor replaces this comment box by hiding it, but not unsetting the required property from the textarea .

  2. According to today’s NY Times, Ian Reisner, one of two openly-Republcian gay businessmen who hosted a dinner meet & greet for Ted Cruz (Tea :Party-Calgary) last week issued a profound apology for doing so. He claimed that he didn’t know about some of what Cruz had aid about gay marriage and LGBT rights in general.
    Not so coincidentally, Reisner’s hotels and nightclubs had been subjected to boycotts and event cancellations since last week’s meet & greet.
    As Moderatus would say, “Praise the market!”

  3. Spent the last 6 days driving 2400 miles in eastern Colorado, Kansas, and central Missouri. Lots of radio time. Apparently, parts of Oklahoma average three earthquakes per day now, compared to 3 per year within living memory. I didn’t fully understand the difference between the frack injection, and the deep injection of “waste” fluid, and I definitely could not follow the insurance argument brewing (something about a naturally occurring seismic event vs. a not naturally occurring seismic event).

    Maybe I heard too much radio, but why is God punishing Oklahoma with all those earthquakes?

    As for actual solution, why doesn’t Oklahoma follow Florida’s lead and just ban the use of the word “earthquake” or at least the non naturally occurring seismic event kind?

    1. The USGS is publishing new maps showing seismic activity which will no doubt be used by the insurance industry – to set rates? to turn down properties? I don’t know. So property owners will pay even more of the costs of the oil/gas industry’s externalities.

      1. Interesting letter in the Post. He checked out insurance to protect from fracking caused earthquakes. Either companies didn’t offer it or, in one case , a company offered earthquake insurance for a 50K deductible! Why should home owners foot the bill for damage caused by fracking? It seems to me that, in the absence of a ban, we should at least have legislation mandating that the companies that conduct fracking establish a fund at their own expense to cover any damages caused by fracking, including fracking induced earthquakes.

  4. Getting caught up, I realize my comment never showed up on :
    “Hook or by Crook: Colorado GOP’s Attempt to “Seize” U.S. Public Lands”.

    No way mine was written anywhere near so elegantly and eloquently as the post. But it was solid political analysis (well, brief and about as solid as I ever get- more about the optics and messaging than, ya know, anything substantively lefty.).

    If I rewrite it and post again (when I have an actual keyboard instead of my mobile device) will anyone read it? Whatever happened to the days when Polsters could vote (freep) and force one of us to read every post to see if anything was worth fronting or re-fronting? Boy, those were the days. Jo? Joe? Well whomever he/she was – totally sucked. Write some inane, deceptive diary, generate awesome replies that killed the post- and then remove the diary, losing the replies forever. Taught me the real value of C&P. But now I’m on this stupid mobile device most of the time, and have no time because Obamacare the jobs program has filled up all my free hours. Thanks Obama.

  5. Am posting now on google chrome with just the basic comment box. Never got that pop up message about the field here. Only got that when I tried through Firefox. Here on google chrome the button just didn’t work with no message.

  6. Ps
    The Big Line is way off.
    If the 2016 election were held today, Bennet’s only chance to win would be the lack of aGOTP opponent. (Because they are all thinking election will be held in the fall of 2016.)
    He has tepid support on the left, is unfairly hated by the right and the middle don’t win. Did we learn nothing from Senator Gardner’s win? Oh, that’s right, none of the “bad stuff” people said would happen is actually going to happen.
    Same for HRC. I’m not saying The Canadien/Cuban has a chance, nor that any other D has any name recognition, just that if J. E. B. Is the nominees- he wins. (To quote Barbie “Math is hard. Let’s go shopping.)

  7. Agree big line is insanely optimistic on Bennet. 80/20 against Coffman? I think he’d be lucky to pull out a victory in that scenario much less a stupefying landslide like that. Not necessarily a loss of the degree or for the reasons sited by Madco. I think it’s both much simpler and less rational.

    Bennet has next to no name rec among average voters while Coffman has both name rec , the undeserved rep of being not too extreme, and appears as a vet taking on VA incompetence across all media platforms pretty much on a daily basis.

    This is exactly the kind of guy low info, presidential year only, indie voters love to vote for, especially if they’re voting for a D president and their district’s D congress person and are looking for a “nice” R to vote for so as not to vote a straight ticket, something many indies are loath to do. It’s how we wind up with Rs in offices like SOS, Treasurer and AG, voted in by the same people who voted for Ds in the high profile slots. I’m an indie. I don’t know much about any of these candidates but I don’t vote straight ticket is an extremely common and extremely overlooked attitude here in indie heavy Colorado. The assumption that nobody who would vote for a center left President is going to vote for hard righties in other slots is a very shaky one, especially with voters so low info they often vote for candidates who oppose the very things the polls say the voters support out of sheer ignorance.

    PS: I’m getting spell checking.

    1. I’m resigned to the fact that Coffman will probably be our next senator. (I’m still having trouble understanding how someone could be our incumbent senator for the past 7 years and have such crappy name recognition. )

      Since Coffman is trying to reposition himself as a moderate (speaks Spanish, co-sponsored ENDA, stopped making Tea Party-Birther speeches in Elbert County about Obama’s patriotism) who can build a VA hospital and do push-ups, here’s hoping he tries to maintain his quasi-moderate positions. But I’m not counting on that.

      1. I think the answer to the name rec issue is that Bennet is not from Colorado and is not a product of Colorado politics. He’s pretty much been an inside the beltway, inside the national party kind of guy ever since he took office, never having served in Colorado in elected office of any kind as a prelude and doing little back in Colorado, which was only his home for a very short time, besides fund raising at parties for affluent donors. Contrast that with Coffman who, if he runs for Senate, will do so having come from Aurora with a history of elected positions here in the state and in Congress.

        Bennet is the epitome of a DC guy, not a Colorado guy, not even a western or midwestern guy. And for those Dems who do pay attention and know exactly who he is, he seems to have gone out of his way to piss us off. Either that or he’s so unconcerned with the Colorado grasss roots, our concerns are meaningless to him. We aren’t a blip on his screen. We aren’t players in his world.

        Very discouraging. If we could lose this seat and be assured of taking back the Senate without it, I probably would go ahead and vote write in just to vent. But we still need every Dem we can get in 2016 for the headcount just like we need any Dem for the WH to block an even more conservative dominated Supreme Court. So I’ll be voting for HRC, entitled, arrogant, pro-corporate, center rightie no matter what her advisers tell her to say about her deep concern for ordinary people, and for Bennet, too. Elizabeth Warren’s right about that. It looks like HRC or bust.

        The Supreme Court simply cannot be allowed to grow its reactionary rightie, back to the future, corporations are people majority. That’s the single most important thing to bear in mind in 2016. And, to me, that means voting for a piece of toast, if need be, if that piece of toast comes with a D. Bennet falls under that piece of toast category for me right now.

        This is not going to be a joyous election. It’s not going to feel like it felt in 2008. But we’d damn well better keep the GOTP from winning it and we can’t afford to be overly fussy about who we elect to block them. Not this time around.

        1. I’m with you, B.C. I always vote for POTUS and Senators with SCOTUS in mind. Those nominations are a president’s true legacy and a bad one (or two or three) can plague us for a a generation or more. I still haven’t forgiven George the Elder for replacing Marshall with that worthless bump-on-a-log, Thomas.

  8. Michael Bennet votes to expedite a controversial trade agreement that few have seen:

    The Senate Finance Committee on Wednesday approved a bill on a 20-6 vote to streamline global trade bills via a trade promotion authority (TPA) measure. The bill passed with the support of seven Democrats, sending the measure to the Senate floor, where it will face another tough test in the coming weeks.

    The Democrats who voted to approve were Sens. Ron Wyden (Ore.), Maria Cantwell (Wash.), Ben Cardin (Md.), Bill Nelson (Fla.), Tom Carper (Del.), Mark Warner (Va.) and Michael Bennet (Colo.).

    In the most contentious vote of the day, Sens. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) lost their bid — on an 11-15 vote — to include an amendment in the legislation that would have required the White House to include enforceable currency manipulation provisions in international trade agreements.

    Five Democrats — Cantwell, Nelson, Carper, Bennet and Warner — and 10 Republicans opposed the amendment.

    We know the regard Bennet has for workers: very little. One of his first substantive acts as a senator was harmful to unions and helped kill a pro-worker “card check” bill at the start of Obama’s presidency.

    Elizabeth Warren laid out a few good reasons that we should all be concerned with this trade agreement:

    For more than two years now, giant corporations have had an enormous amount of access to see the parts of the deal that might affect them and to give their views as negotiations progressed. But the doors stayed locked for the regular people whose jobs are on the line. If most of the trade deal is good for the American economy, but there’s a provision hidden in the fine print that could help multinational corporations ship American jobs overseas or allow for watering down of environmental or labor rules, fast track would mean that Congress couldn’t write an amendment to fix it. It’s all or nothing.

    Before we sign on to rush through a deal like that – no amendments, no delays, no ability to block a bad bill – the American people should get to see what’s in it.

    Bernie Sanders wants to slow down the process that Bennet voted to speed up.

    What’s best for Coloradans (and would Bennet vote for it)?

    What’s best for big business?

    And oh, Michael, whatever did they see in you to hand you a seat in the United States Senate, the self-proclaimed “greatest deliberative body on earth”, where you would vote to stifle debate on another trade of dubious origins?

    1. “There is no fool like a careless gambler who starts taking victory for granted.” Hunter S Thompson
      Six yrs ago, held my nose once for Thurston, recently sent a form e-mail to both Senators & rep Mike, only the Melon farmer( form letter) responded back, this was in Ref to Fast track trade,. Judging by the timing he had already cut a deal to vote. Mike B & Mike Coffman didn’t even robo email back.. US Chamber of Commerce Tom Donahue wants this for his Constituents. Reason enough to oppose it, along with the remainder of the labor movement.
      Here’s a memo to big Mike B , ” Fuk U & the horse U rode in on”. I will call his office to query further his intent on trade. Otherwise, there are two senators I will never vote for.

  9. Michael Bennet is smart, but he was a disaster as Superintendent of DPS-rude, arrogant, condescending, and dismissive of anyone who disagreed with him. He has not been much better as a Senator. I will hold my nose and vote for him, because I want the Dems stop retake the Senate. I just wish he would resign to become a cabinet officer or some such so we can have a real democratic senator.

  10. I finally ended up voting for Udall…….but Bennet has been quite mediocre and I’ll be damned if I can figure out just what he gives a crap about. If he’s going to cash in, he should just leave now before doing much more harm. And politically, when are D’s going to buy a clue about what voters really expect. Bennet just ushered in the loss of his best pal and direct peer, and he pretends he had nothing to do with it. The DLC is DEAD. Blue Dogs are DEAD. If he changes his mind, for good reason, with good communications to voters, he could change his fate.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments

Posts about

Donald Trump

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo

Posts about

Colorado House

Posts about

Colorado Senate

39 readers online now


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