CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese



President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump



CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*


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

(D) Joe Neguse*


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

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks




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

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg




CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank



CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*


CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen



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

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi




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 04, 2016 12:37 PM UTC

Get More Smarter on Monday (April 4)

  • by: Colorado Pols

Get More SmarterToday is the deadline to submit petition signatures for access to the 2016 Primary ballot. It’s time to Get More Smarter with Colorado Pols! If you think we missed something important, please include the link in the comments below (here’s a good example).


► The Supreme Court dealt a significant blow to conservative challenges intended to make it easier for more Republican voters to be corralled into a single legislative or congressional district. From the Washington Post:

The Supreme Court unanimously ruled Monday that states may satisfy “one person, one vote” rules by drawing legislative districts based on total population of a place, a defeat for conservative interests who wanted the districts based only on voting-age populations.

The case, Evenwel v. Abbott, was considered to be one of biggest on voting rights this term, and a decision the other way would have shifted political power away from urban areas, where Democrats usually dominate, and toward more Republican-friendly rural areas.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote the majority decision.


► Republican State Sen. Tim Neville, the favorite to win the GOP nomination for U.S. Senate, is not particularly happy that the Colorado Springs Gazette called him out in a weekend editorial. Neville reacted to the editorial in a manner in which most few of us can relate — he used an assault rifle to shoot holes in a piece of paper with the Gazette‘s name printed on the front. Seems reasonable.


► Colorado Republicans are preparing for Saturday’s State Convention in Colorado Springs, which seems likely to include appearances from GOP Presidential candidates Ted Cruz and Donald TrumpJohn Kasich, however, will not be coming to Colorado; the Ohio Governor will instead send former New Hampshire Sen. John Sununu to Colorado Springs as a surrogate).

Meanwhile, Cruz supporters were successful in filling delegate seats being decided at district assemblies over the weekend. Sadly, this group includes former Secretary of State Scott Gessler, whom we had almost forgotten about altogether.


Get even more smarter after the jump…


► Republicans appear to be backing David O. Williams to represent them in HD-15, where Rep. Gordon “Dr. Chaps” Klingenschmitt is not running for re-election in order to seek the SD-12 State Senate seat. Williams may not be in the same “class” as Dr. Chaps, but he’s equally problematic for the GOP.


► Today is the deadline for candidates in Colorado to submit petition signatures in order to gain access to the June 28th Primary. This is big news for Republicans, who have numerous candidates seeking to bypass the caucus process (Jack Graham, Jon Keyser, Robert Blaha, and Ryan Frazier among them). Many of the GOP candidates got together last week for a couple of debates; we graded the candidate performances at a debate in Weld County.


► Republican Presidential frontrunner Donald Trump apparently has a pretty bleak view of the current state of our country.


► Republican Senator have thus far refused to do anything that would allow for confirmation hearings of a new Supreme Court justice, prompting opponents to start beating the drums of a “Do Your Job” campaign. As Politico reports, it seems to be working:

Chuck Grassley flashed frustration as a constituent pressed him on why he’s refusing confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland.

“When somebody says I’m not doing my job, I kind of resent it,” the Senate Judiciary chairman shot back at a town hall meeting, explaining that he arrives at work at 6:15 a.m. sharp and hasn’t missed a floor vote in 22 years. “I think I do my job.”

For Democrats, Grassley’s irritation over the Easter recess was one small sign that their “Do your job” campaign to get Garland confirmed is moving the needle, if only slightly. Top party aides say more than 400 editorials have been written in their favor, that 2,500 liberal activists turned out over the two-week break and that hundreds of thousands of messages have been delivered to GOP senators demanding they change their position.


► House Speaker Paul “DJ Paulie D” Ryan continues to be mentioned as a potential Presidential choice for Republicans in a brokered-convention scenario. For his part, Ryan continues to insist that his name should not be mentioned in a conversation about 2016.


► Senator Michael Bennet (D-Denver) was traveling around Colorado over the weekend to promote wind energy.


► You can pull those dusty rain barrels out of your shed pretty soon.


► Good news for next winter: Adjustments to Colorado’s “puffer” law will allow people who can remotely start their car engines to do so without facing a potential penalty.



► The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel previews the upcoming week in the Colorado legislature.


► Democratic Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the current chair of the Democratic National Committee, has been endorsed by President Obama for re-election. This might not have been the result Schultz’s campaign was expecting.


► Republican Bob Beauprez is not running for office in 2016. As far as we know, anyway.


Get More Smarter by liking Colorado Pols on Facebook!Get 


3 thoughts on “Get More Smarter on Monday (April 4)

  1. Establishment Democrats  – should know this popular rebellion will not go away. Yet they are almost by definition locked into the path of least resistance by a formula that is as dead and obsolete – maybe moreso – as that of Republicans' old reliable God/Guns/Gays. 

    The Sanders- and Trump-led (for now) political rebellion is not going to go away. There are only two questions going forward:

    Will it remain a political rebellion, one that expresses itself through the electoral process, or will it abandon the electoral process as useless after 2016? 

    Will it be led by humanitarian populism from the left, or authoritarian populism from the right?

    Why is this rebellion permanent, at least until conditions improve? Because life in the U.S. is getting worse in a way that can be felt by a critical mass of people, by enough people to disrupt the Establishment machine with their anger. And because that worsening is seen to be permanent.

    Both sides have truly had a hand in strangling the Middle Class.

    Whichever anti-Establishment candidate runs, he wins. If both anti-Establishment candidates face off, Sanders wins. The message seems pretty clear. Dear Establishment Democrats, you can lose to Sanders or lose to Trump. Those are your choices, and I'm more than happy to wait until November 9 to find out what you chose and how it turned out. Not pleased to wait, if you choose wrongly, but willing to wait, just so we're both aware of what happened.

    The Rebellion Is Not Going Away

    I won't be happy with you though, Establishment Democrats, if you choose badly. And I won't be alone. Because even if you succeed with Clinton, Establishment Democrats, or succeed in giving us Trump in preference to giving us Sanders, the rebellion is not going away. If you look at the Trump side, it's easy to see why. Are wages rising with profits? No, and Trump supporters have had enough. (They don't quite know who to blame, but they're done with things as they are.) Will they tolerate another bank bailout, the one that's inevitable the way the banks are continuing to operate? They haven't begun to tolerate the last one. They already know they were screwed by NAFTA. What will their reaction be to the next trade deal, or the next, or the next? (Yes, it's not just TPP; there are three queued up and ready to be unleashed.) Trump supporters, the core of them, are dying of drugs and despair, and they're not going to go quietly into that dark night. The Trump phenomenon is proof of that.

    On the Sanders side, the rebellion is even clearer. Sanders has energized a great many voters across the Democratic-independent spectrum with his call for a "political revolution." But it's among the young, the future of America, that the message is especially resonant. For the first time in a long time, the current generation of youth in America sees itself as sinking below the achievements of their parents. 

    Blue Dog Dems have betrayed their base. And that base may not be there again for them to betray.

    Will the Very Very Rich Stand Down?

    The squeeze is on, and unless the rich who run the game for their benefit alone decide to stand down and let the rest of us catch our breath and a break, there will be no letting up on the reaction. What we're watching is just the beginning. Unless the rich and their Establishment enablers stand down, this won't be the end but a start, and just a start. I'll identify the three branches to this crossroad in another piece. It's not that hard to suss out those three paths, so long as you're willing to look a few years ahead, into the "middle distance" as it were. The ways this could play out are limited and kind of staring right at us. But let's just say for now, America faces its future in a way that hasn't happened since the Great Depression, another period in which the Constitution was rewritten in an orderly way (via the political process). Which means that for almost every living American, this is the most consequential electoral year of your life. 

    I don't believe the 1%-ers on either side are satisfied. They won't stand down when the Dow urges them on. There's still money to be made! An estimate to beat! The only thing holding everyone else back is their laziness!

    Yet for all their genius they can't see what a thriving Middle Class did to make this country what it (was). It could be that way again, but it'll probably have to wait for another generation of "self-made" millionaires to prove they are their fathers' equal, who deserve so much more than a stifling equality.

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

41 readers online now


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