CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

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*

90%

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

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

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

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

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

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg

50%↑

15%

10%↓

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

50%↓

50%↑

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

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

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

35%↓

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 02, 2016 06:40 AM UTC

Tuesday Open Thread

  • 20 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“Blame is just a lazy person’s way of making sense of chaos.”

–Douglas Coupland

Comments

20 thoughts on “Tuesday Open Thread

      1. Americans, via Iowa Caucus participants, with the hippest Democratic Socialist Jew around, Mr. Bernie Sanders, have delivered a serious and unmistakable (well, unless you’re a you-know-what, mostly found in Washington, DC and Op-Ed rooms around the nation) message to the nation, and I dare say, the world with last night’s credible caucus outcome.

        The NY Times headline is a misdirected attempt at misdirection: 

        Little Separates Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton in Tight Race in Iowa

        The true headline should be the message those dedicated Americans in Iowa sent to the Billionaire Class so clearly identified by Bernie:

        “So you guys ready for a radical idea?”

        Cheers!

        ”Well, so is America. And that radical idea is we are going to create an economy that works for Working Families, not just the Billionaire Class.

         

        Find the vid wherever you may, and know that America’s Billionaire Class has been put on notice by a little ol’ presidential candidate from Vermont.

        Look out Billionaire Class. And, whoa boy, if all my $100 investments were as smart as the one I made in Bernie about 6 months ago, I'd be having lunch with David Koch today.

        1. Poor Bernie. He's nothing more than a bunch of sound-bite ideas for which he has no clue how to pay for. He says tax the rich, but it’s more like get the middle class. Maybe we should compare Bernie's ego to that of Ralph Nader. Nader wasn't a candidate for president in 2000, but his ego was a candidate. Thanks to the Ralphster, the country got G. W. Bush as president, for all that entailed (John McCain was my choice in the 2000 Republican race). 16 years later, here we go again. Got to get H.R.C. out so the Dems can have a socialist as their candidate. 

          1. Highly disagree there.

            Sanders has had bipartisan support for some pretty serious bills. He's a serious policy-maker with a lot of experience.

            I don't necessarily agree with how he proposes things. For example, I wouldn't tie college education to a specific tax. Rather, I would say: here are the things that I would like to do to improve the lives of people, and here are some things that I'd like to do to raise the revenue to support my goals. List them off in two columns.

            Republicans have us too much in the mode of "you must get an offset for that". Pass some revenue generating measures that happen to tighten up our tax code. We're still in debt, and the reasons are largely unpaid-for wars and unwise tax cuts. Then take some money to fund the things we want to do. Pass a few new tax measures that are wise. Do some more…

            I support removing most corporate tax breaks, ending lower capital gains rates (except for a single primary home to a certain gains value, and possibly some retirement investment gains), working out a strong preventative to off-shoring, adding a micro-transaction tax to trading, fixing corporate exec salary+benefits calculations, and lowering the floor of the top tax bracket to the top 1% or even 5% (it's currently the top 0.5%) while raising the rate somewhat. I'd like to see an end to the cap on Social Security taxes, which would shore up that system entirely through the Baby Boomer retirement years (and at the same time, bring in the lock box and make sure it's full of all the things it should have in it). And then when we're talking about revenue and debt, let's talk about repaying our war debt and all of the interest that's accruing on it.

            The one tie-together: universal health care. If it's going to work, it has to be sold as a package that transparently moves employee health care benefit pay and co-pays into the new tax structure needed to support the system.

            Oh, and there are some freebies, too. One of them that Bernie has proposed: let USPS run a bank for a limited selection of services. It would fry the predatory payday loan industry and the likewise predatory debit card payroll industry while providing USPS more than enough revenue to get past even the egregious advance pension/health benefits pay-in Republicans foisted on them. No money needed – just pass the law.

            1. Second snow day in a row, so y'all get to put up with me over-posting on Pols again.

              Excellent financial advice and defense for Bernie, PR. I especially like the USPS bank services proposal, new resident of a small town as I am.

              We are doing fine without payday lenders, relying instead on grocery store check cashing and credit unions. The Post office is at the center of more than one community service; all of the available recycling and used clothing drop off in town is at the USPS site.

              And you're right about Sanders – his appeal lies in being a truth teller who makes sense. He is telling the truth about the causes and effects of our economic malaise, and he proposes solutions which make sense, once voters can get past the fear factor of the dreaded Socialist label.

              Another thing – every time Hillary criticizes Sanders for not being tough enough on gun control, she drives a few more people from the Trump camp into the Bernie camp. He is a lot more credible populist than Trump; that's why he beats Trump in Colorado. According to RCP  polls, Sanders stands a better chance against Trump, losing by only 2 points to Hillary's 11. 

              538 points out that Trump is the most universally unpopular candidate with general election voters,  and Sanders the most favorably regarded, although one would never know this from watching the mainstream media channels.

               

               

    1. Rubio's still a long shot. Cruz walked away with a big win last night – one he needed. Trump is still in second, though not as dominant as he wants to be – and he's still got a big lead in New Hampshire.

      After Rubio, Carson took the largest portion of votes at 9.3%; those voters will devolve to Cruz or Trump for the most part. Then comes Paul at 4.5%- again, votes that will largely move to anti-establishment candidates in the end. After that it's JEB! with 2.2% – votes that Rubio can pick up. Then Fiorina at 1.9% – probably Trump votes.

      There's just nowhere for Rubio to pick up votes. Cruz and Trump, scary as it sounds, have read the party base…

  1. A note for the Clinton campaign that they'll never hear and would probably ignore anyway.

    I'd rather see Bernie nominated.  You want to say that's because I'm "pure" rather than "practical."  Bernie is not a purist choice for me– I feel differently about several issues than he seems to– but his vision of the country is much closer to mine than Hillary's.  My opposition to Hillary, and many Democrats' as well, is less about policies I disagree with than her as a person.  It cannot be doubted that she has the experience and intellect necessary for the job.  It's her character that many of us question.

    In fact, one need look no farther than this post to know that I was, at least implicitly, perfectly willing to support a candidate that I don't believe has particularly different views from Mrs. Clinton.  I would have worked, for the first time, to get that man elected (I had already decided to join up if he ran).  Not because I believe he would fight for single payer healthcare, a guaranteed minimum income, or the unicorn park I so desperately dream of, but because I see him as a fundamentally decent man, who wants to be president to make this country better for the folks in it, and who says what's on his mind– for better or worse.  I support Bernie for the same reason.

    When friends and I (Bernie supporters, O'Malley folks, and even Clintonistas) talk, there's nobody that doesn't at least nod and say, "yeah, I see that," when I use the word "entitlement" about Hillary.  It's this sense of entitlement that leads her camp to declare victory with 10% of Iowa still out and a margin tighter than a bull's ass in fly time.  It's this sense of entitlement that leads her camp to send out folks with dossiers on Bernie claiming he's a commie because he visited a sister city in the USSR while he was mayor in Burlington, and this sense of entitlement that allows her folks to bemoan how Bernie has gone negative at the same time.  And, it's this sense of entitlement that's going to cause her campaign to ratchet up the nastiness heading into the next debate and into the next few months.

    I say that to say this– just don't.  Don't rely on your baser instincts.  Don't stoop to the levels so many of us associate with the Clinton "machine."  Just keep on debating him, keep on pushing back on ideas that you think are too radical (on most, I expect at least a plurality of the country agrees with you), keep on saying how important and valuable your experience and skills are, and, really, really, tell us not what you'll do, but how you see America.  Worry less about Bernie.  If he wins, it won't be because you didn't ratfuck him hard enough.  Dazzle us with your brilliance rather than throwing your shade.

    The alternative is that you push away so many of us.  Those who are concerned you're not genuine and the presidency is an uber-bucket-list kind of thing.  The young folks who hear someone talking about them and their lives and won't come out for a soul crusher.  The folks that struggle every day that your policies can't lift out, but can at least lift up.  Enough that, come November, you, or other Democrats, can't get elected because you can't get folks to the polls.

  2. No doubt about it.  The way to radical change is to elect an old white guy as president.  That has only been done 43 times before.  As Mao said, women hold up half the sky.  Hillary survived in a caucus state tailor made for Sanders and remains the only candidate witha hope of actually making serious reforms. A Latino led GOP would beat a self styled socialist in 49 states.   That would lock in a far right Supreme Court for a generation.  Hillary gives hope to my daughter and granddaughter that the promise of true equality can yet be kept.

      1. I"m with V. Clinton can win. Sanders can't, no way, no how.

        The Supreme Court is vital. We simply cannot have any Republican making the next several appointments.

         

  3. Klingenschmitt goes Sandy Hook Truther? Klingenschmitt allowed a post on his Facebook page which links to a  conspiracy site. The page says:

    “After exhaustive research, the good news is that overwhelming evidence reveals that no children or teachers died at Sandy Hook two years ago. For relief, I have filed lawsuits against the media in US District Court in New Haven for Fraud and Terrorism. Here is an example of our abundant evidence, Exhibit D: The Connecticut State Police dash cams record no evacuation of children from school at critical moments: YouTube video — Smoking Gun evidence no children died at Sandy Hook.”

    Here's a screen shot:

    Are EL Paso voters so inured to outrageous behavior from their House representative and Senatorial candidate that they will put up with not only hucksterish shenanigans with money, and alleged tax fraud, but unapologetic, insane hate speech and fear-mongering? Will they now put up with Klingenschmitt's promoting denial that 26 children and adults died in Sandy Hook elementary school?

    Promoting the lie that the Sandy Hook massacre never happened was the kiss of death for Pueblo Commissioner candidate Tom Ready. Will Klingenschmitt never pay a political price for his calculated insanity?

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

49 readers online now

Newsletter

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