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
October 29, 2008 03:41 PM UTC

Wednesday Open Thread

  • 64 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“If only. Those must be the two saddest words in the world.”

–Mercedes Lackey

Tweet
Share

Comments

64 thoughts on “Wednesday Open Thread”

  1. From the latest New Yorker:

    http://www.newyorker.com/talk/…

    For her part, Sarah Palin, who has lately taken to calling Obama “Barack the Wealth Spreader,” seems to be something of a suspect character herself. She is, at the very least, a fellow-traveller of what might be called socialism with an Alaskan face. The state that she governs has no income or sales tax. Instead, it imposes huge levies on the oil companies that lease its oil fields. The proceeds finance the government’s activities and enable it to issue a four-figure annual check to every man, woman, and child in the state. One of the reasons Palin has been a popular governor is that she added an extra twelve hundred dollars to this year’s check, bringing the per-person total to $3,269. A few weeks before she was nominated for Vice-President, she told a visiting journalist-Philip Gourevitch, of this magazine-that “we’re set up, unlike other states in the union, where it’s collectively Alaskans own the resources. So we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs.” Perhaps there is some meaningful distinction between spreading the wealth and sharing it (“collectively,” no less), but finding it would require the analytic skills of Karl the Marxist.

    1. Oh, they are homonyms?  

      Sort of like Nixon’s guarenteed annual income, I guess.

      And yet in the lower 48 the battles over a few bucks a barrel of extraction are legendary.  

      2. If this were an accurate analogy to what Obama proposes it would be putting more of a tax on the $150 million that Obama has raised so that a tax could be taken off of what the Libertarian, Prohibition, and other poor candidates are raising. McCain wouldn’t actually get anything because he’s not in the bottom 80% of presidential candidates in fund raising. He’s more like one of those upper middle class people who neither get a cut or a tax increase.

        And it isn’t funny. Not because it is against my guy, but because it doesn’t do a good job of poking fun at Obama. It isn’t even a good caricature, he doesn’t seem like the sort of person who would yell in that fashion. The cartoonist should have gone with a blank look and “It hardly seems equitable to take the money and give it to McCain,” or something of that nature. That would be a twofer as well since that’s the sort of elevated language that conservatives love to mock. And he should learn how to draw.

  2. Will it be a category five or just a lot of hot wind???

    I don’t like all this crap about the Obama birth certficate….however, the lawyer challenging Obama’s “born in the USA” is pursuing a legal strategy which could get the Supreme Court involved.  He sued in federal court challenging Obama’s qualification for running for the Presidency…The judge threw it out on the grounds that the lawyer did not have “standing” to bring suit.  That could well be a constitutional issue, independent of the merits of the case.  It is on those grounds that the lawyer is appealing directly to the Supreme Court..you only need three justices to decide to hear the case,

    The first thing such a decision to even hear the case would do is stop the Obama momentum.  the second thing would be  to create doubt…the third thing is it could give the Supremes…stronger on the right than in 2000…. a way to throw the election to the repubs…

    These are bizarre times we are living through…

    So, Phoenix Rising,…no soothing words.   This is just my observation….putting it on the map now….let  us watch what happens….

    Sadly, I do think the issue of who has standing to sue is a legitimate constiutional question.

    1. It would open up the whole McCain citizenship thing.  I’m rusty on the rationale, but it has to do with the laws in effect when he was born.

    2. My own, non-legal analysis: Obama hasn’t been elected yet; he won’t technically be elected until the EC meets.  Any lawsuit challenging his eligibility would be thrown out until his future swearing-in was relatively beyond doubt.  Call it “not ripe” or “lack of standing”, as the judge did, it’s a pretty standard ruling and not likely to be heard before the Supreme Court.

      Having the SCOTUS step in on this one could lead to long-term chaos.  Alito and Thomas might step up to support this, but I give Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Scalia credit for enough brains to say no.

      1.    I agree with you that Roberts would probably not go along with such a stunt (unlike his predecessor in 2000), but Scalia would probably be the brains and provide most of the energy behind such a maneuver.

    3. But more importantly, even if the standing issue made it to the Court, they would rule on the standing issue and send it back without ruling on the underlying challenge to senator Obama’s citizenship.  Even if the Supreme Court found standing, the lower court would then throw it out on the merits, and you can bet what’s left of your life savings that the Supreme Court is never going to take up a case of someone seeking to eject a sitting president.

      1. If the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case on the “standing issue,” that would stop the Obama momentum…it would throw a wrench into the last days of the election….that is all it would take to perhaps convince independents to vote McCain…It SLOWS DOWN the Obama train…..that could be significant.

        I remember 2000.  Don’t anyone tell me what the gd Supreme Court will or will not do. And, for god’s sakes, don’t tell anyone to bet their life’s savings…

        As an aside, if there were  a Fairness Doctrine governing public airwaves, then the repubs would have to grant equal time on the same venue to refute  what is being said….for example, this lawyer said that Obama is a fraud.  He also said that states will issue copies of original birth certificates…which is not always true.  However, he can repeat this false statement forever without fear of being contradicted by the other side on the same station at the same time to reach the same audience.  In the closing days of this close election, the repubs control the majority of the public airwaves…that is not freedom of speech…that is government control of the media…

        1. they took the case, it would cut the other way.  The story would be a 2000 repeat and an attempt by Republican appointees to stop a popular Democratic candidate.  I think that would lead to more, not fewer, moderate votes for senator Obama.  

          I understand why you don’t trust the Court.  I’m just saying if I ran a book I’d take bets at 100,000 to 1 the Court doesn’t take up this issue in the next 6 days and 10,000,000 to 1 they wouldn’t, somewhere down the road, issue a ruling that attempted to remove the President of the United States from power based on this issue.

          1. But remember, the important thing is who wins….not the overall issues.

            Bush won with less than 600 votes in 2000……and kept the power for eight years…

            It is about power; not about law or impressions or anything else.

            A dirty win is still a  win. If McCain wins, the Roberts court will rewrite federalism….that is a tremendous incentative….

    4.    I’m not sure that would happen.  Wouldn’t Biden then become the Dem candidate, or at least the guy who the Dem electors would be most likely to vote for in Dec. when the electors meet to actually elect the president?

        As someone else posted, such a stunt would re-open the whole issue of whether someone born in Panama (albeit, when it was the Canal Zone) is qualified to serve as president.

        I wouldn’t lose any sleep over this.  I’m more worried about the Shrub precipitating a “Wag the Dog” moment this weekend to scare the shit out of voters, and to help McCain.

        Oh, and we haven’t seen O.B.L.’s traditional pre-election video, and who he wants to see win.  

  3. Sorry, I don’t know how to embed a Youtube.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…

    I have really, really gotten to disrespect these typical Republican voters.  I don’t recall Obama ever saying anything about gun control in its many forms.  Yet, there they are as if he said he was going to repeal the second amendment.  I think generally, Dems have dropped gun control as a rallying cry for 15 years. A few pockets of social experimenting like DC, but generally not caring.  It’s like Civil Rights, the battle has 98% been fought.

    The other factor of my disrespect is the Joe The Plumber Syndrome.  Obama wants to DECREASE taxes on those making less than $250,000 a year yet these morons (the gun buys, no doubt) think he will increase their taxes.  Well, like our own Gecko.  Is there anything in the book for people who make $50K but think that they make $500K, or soon will.

    Retards.  (Apologies to folks with a lower IQ.)

    2. The tax cut would be for those making $150,000 or less.

      Those making between $150,000 and $250,000 would not get a tax cut, but would see no tax increase.

      Those who make over $250,000 would see a modest increase.

      I think that has been slightly muddied by the ads, the media, and by the Obama-Biden campaign itself. Biden clarified the plan the other day, and McCain used it against them–as if seeing no tax increase (but not receiving a cut) is something horribly evil.

      I’m sorry, but if you’re making over $150,000 a year, not getting that tax cut is not going to ruin you. Basically, the Bush tax cuts would roll over for that bracket.

        1. But if that Tax Policy Center chart is right, then it looks like they’ll see no increase at all. The first actual increase occurs at $600,000+.

          1. The first of the — arbitrarily chosen — ranges on that chart that averages an increase is 600K+.  But in the range just below that one, some people are seeing increases and some people seeing decreases.  People just above 250K are seeing increases, though slight ones.

    3. One of the foundations Obama served on was radically anti-gun, among their other efforts.  However, Obama’s concentration while on the board was in other areas.  Also, Obama was pretty anti-gun in his earlier years, but now supports “reasonable controls”.

      However, I don’t think gun lovers have much to worry about.  First, the recent Supreme Court ruling has finally nailed down the basic right to own a gun beyond doubt, and second, Obama and the next Congress will be too busy with “real work” to try and take away people’s 2nd Amendment rights.

  4. but McCain has caught up with Obama in their daily tracking poll. He now leads by three, and the race hasn’t been this close by that poll since the RNC.

    Obama is still leading or tied in almost every battleground state though.

    1. What’s happening in the national polls appears to be similar to what happened just after the Republican Convention – undecided Republican voters coming home to Republican-land, and most prominently in already Republican states.

      The battleground polling is closing only slightly if at all, leaving McCain way behind where he needs to be right now.

    2. ….overlook the fact that we have 50 elections, not one.

      In terms of the EC, barring something like martial law, Obama has it by a huge margin.

      Drudge keeps this topic going for the last week.  Drudge apparently wants to forget the EC. Or doesn’t know about it.  

      1. be a regular Drudge reader purely because that’s where so many others get their news, but I’ve gotten so sick of him. I’ve completely stopped visiting.

        By the way, I was referring to the Rassmussen tracking poll in my first post. I didn’t make that clear.

        1. Drudge ain’t no statistician, unlike the folks over at fivethirtyeight.com.

          I like Drudge just because of the quick to scan “headlines” that cover so many topics, even funny ones.  I expect him to be less partisan again after the election.  He does have a way of spinning, but I’m too damned smart for that!  🙂

  5. Is my logic flawed?

    Thinking about this here is my speculation.

    There are approximately 294K active registered voters in Denver (411K total registration including inactives).

    For the sake of arguement let’s assume that the universe of voters likely to vote is no more than 294k.

    To date approximately 197K voters have applied for a mail ballot.  By the time early voting ends in Denver something like 30K+ will have voted early.  That means that out of the 294K active registered voters, somewhere between 120K and 130K will not vote on election day (though many may turn in mail ballots on Nov. 4).

    That means that less than 100K voters may show up to vote on election day.

    There are 185 polling sites in Denver.  Some with as many as 5 precincts and some with as few as 1.  The apportioning of precincts to polling sites is determined by a variety of factors, but the size of the potential voter universe at each of the sites is one of the factors.  Also, resources (voting equipment, judges, etc.) are being apportioned based on factors of vote history, number of persons who have voted early or by mail ballot.  The point is to ease the load across all the polling sites.

    But taking a simplistic approach (while recognizing that voter turnout at each polling site will not be uniform) and for the sake of arguement/demonstration:

    100K voters on election day, spread over 185 polling sites equals 540 voters per site on that day.

    No lines?

  6. Could you get a Recent Reply button added to our personal menu? It would make life so much easier and cut down on the amount of replies some of us miss. I know it’s doable because I blog on another Soapblox run blog and it was recently added, making life oh so much more simple.

    Pretty please? I promise not to swear once for the rest of the day if you make it happen. 🙂

    1. You have to navigate to get to it, though. Click on “your comments” and you’ll see “recent replies” on that page. So it’s kind of a pain since you have to click twice…

      If you knew that already, sorry…

    2. new comments have [new], so I just search for that when I reload a thread.  I know Internet Exploder is annoying with this, but firefox and Safari both have nice tool bar text search functions

        1. you have to go back further and further to see if someone replied and I’ve been missing quite a few. Now that I’ve had the Recent Replies pointed out to me, my life has suddenly become much easier. 🙂

  7. I love this story. Just reminds me of how far we have come.

    109 year old daughter of slave casts vote for Obama.

    Amanda Jones, 109, the daughter of a man born into slavery, has lived a life long enough to touch three centuries. And after voting consistently as a Democrat for 70 years, she has voted early for the country’s first black presidential nominee.

    The middle child of 13, Jones, who is African American, is part of a family that has lived in Republican-leaning Bastrop County for five generations. The family has remained a fixture in Cedar Creek and other parts of the county, even when its members had to eat at segregated barbecue dives and walk through the back door while white customers walked through the front, said Amanda Jones’ 68-year-old daughter, Joyce Jones.

    For at least a decade, Amanda Jones worked as a maid for $20 a month, Joyce Jones said. She was a housewife for 72 years and helped her now-deceased husband, C.L. Jones, manage a store.

    Jones’ father herded sheep as a slave until he was 12, according to the family, and once he was freed, he was a farmer who raised cows, hogs and turkeys on land he owned. Her mother was born right after the Emancipation Proclamation was signed, Joyce Jones said. The family owned more than 100 acres of land in Cedar Creek at one point, she said.

    Amanda Jones’ father urged her to exercise her right to vote, despite discriminatory practices at the polls and poll taxes meant to keep black and poor people from voting. Those practices were outlawed for federal elections with the 24th Amendment in 1964, but not for state and local races in Texas until 1966.

    Amanda Jones says she cast her first presidential vote for Franklin Roosevelt, but she doesn’t recall which of his four terms that was. When she did vote, she paid a poll tax, her daughters said. That she is able, for the first time, to vote for a black presidential nominee for free fills her with joy, Jones said.

    Amanda will be celebrating her 110th birthday in December.

  8. Obama/Biden vs McCain/Palin,

    What if things were switched

    around?…..think about it. Would the country’s

    collective point of view be different? Could racism be the

    culprit? Ponder the following:

    What if the Obamas had paraded five children across the

    stage, including a three month old infant and an unwed,

    pregnant teenage daughter?

    What if John McCain was a former president of the Harvard

    Law Review?

    What if Barack Obama finished fifth from the bottom of his

    graduating class?

    What if McCain had only married once, and Obama was a

    divorcee?

    What if Obama was the candidate who left his first wife

    after a severe disfiguring car accident, when she no longer

    measured up to his standards?

    What if Obama had met his second wife in a bar and had a

    long affair while he was still married?

    What if Michelle Obama was the wife who not only became

    addicted to painkillers but also acquired them illegally

    through her charitable organization?

    What if Cindy McCain graduated from Harvard?

    What if Obama had been a member of the Keating Five?

    (Five US Senators accused of corruption in 1989,

    igniting a major political scandal as

    part of the larger Savings and Loan crisis of the late 1980s

    and early 1990s.)

    What if McCain was a charismatic, eloquent speaker?

    What if Obama couldn’t read from a teleprompter?

    What if Obama was the one who had military experience that

    included discipline problems and a record of crashing seven

    planes? What if his fellow prisoners called him ‘songbird’?

    What if Obama was the one who was known to display

    publicly, on many occasions, a serious anger management

    problem?

    What if Michelle Obama’s family had made their money

    from beer distribution?

    What if Obama hired illegals for some of his many properties?

    What if the Obamas had adopted a white child?

    You could easily add to this list. If these questions

    reflected reality, do you really believe the election

    numbers would be as close as they are?

    This is what racism does. It covers up, rationalizes and minimizespositive

    qualities in one candidate and emphasizes negative qualities

    in another when there is a color difference.

    Educational Background:

    Barack Obama:

    Columbia University – B.A. PoliticalScience with a

    Specialization in International Relations.

    Harvard – Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude

    JosephBiden:

    University of Delaware – B.A. inHistory and B.A. in

    Political Science.

    Syracuse University College of Law – Juris Doctor (J.D.)

    versus:

    John McCain:

    United States Naval Academy – Class rank: 894 of 899

    Sarah Palin:

    Hawaii Pacific University – 1 semester

    North Idaho College – 2 semesters – general study

    University of Idaho – 2 semesters – journalism

    Matanuska-Susitna College – 1 semester

    University of Idaho – 3 semesters – B.A. in Journalism

    from an email Mrs. Blog got from a friend who got it from ???

  9. From Colorado Springs, the Irish Times reports on American evangelicals:

    http://www.irishtimes.com/news…

    QUIETLY SPOKEN, religiously and politically conservative, and living in the heartland of evangelical Christianity in the US, Daniel Lopez pondered the end of time that could come if Barack Obama becomes president.

    “When I think of it, it brings to mind the prophecies that the Bible tells us about,” said Lopez, sitting in the shade outside Focus on the Family’s headquarters in Colorado Springs, Colorado.

    “On the one hand, it is exciting for us as conservatives because we can actually see what God prophesied coming about; but on the other hand, it is frustrating to see somebody become president who is a blatant liar.”

    Lopez and his family moved three years ago from California to Colorado Springs, which has over the past couple of decades become home to thousands of evangelical Christians, and more than 100 of their churches.

    1. .

      we can actually see what God prophesied coming [to pass]

      “Prophesy” has 2 meanings that I’m aware of:

      —to speak for God; or

      —to foretell the future.  

      Some folks apparently are mixing up the Koran with the Bible.  

      Only one of those was reputed to have been dictated, word for word, by God to a Prophet.  

      The other one was inspired by God, but written by men.  

      This is fundamental.  To us Christian fundamentalists, its pretty important to get the basics right.  

      .

  10. I really can’t add much to this…

       Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), who is also under investigation by federal officials, offered a whole-hearted, but odd endorsement of Stevens, equating his pursuit of justice with that of disgraced former President Richard Nixon.

       “I can remember Richard Nixon, you know, his years of service, what he’s done, and everybody [was] ridiculing him, and he ended up being the greatest president in the history of our century. … The Senator will be re-elected. He will appeal it. When he does go, he will win it because there’s no way this is a jury of his peers,” Young told the Anchorage Daily News.

    How is The Onion supposed to do its job when we have people like Don Young out there proving that truth is stranger than fiction?

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

110 readers online now

Newsletter

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