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

30%↑

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
June 08, 2016 07:24 AM UTC

Wednesday Open Thread

  • 78 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“We are not makers of history. We are made by history.”

–Martin Luther King, Jr.

Tweet
Share

Comments

78 thoughts on “Wednesday Open Thread”

    1. Yeah that was always expected, but they almost had there chance (Sanchez underperformed, Harris cleaned up). Guess they'll have to wait another two years before they try to get a statewide candidate on the ballot. 

    2. they're crashing and burning here, too. Thanks to the fact that they have such a media presence and an ever-outraged set of hate radio guys who can get their listeners' blood boiling in 3 syllables (Banghazi, Death Tax, EPA, Free Market, Monica, Obamacare [4], etc…) or less we get to watch it in super slo motion.

  2. Last night's primary results were disappointing. I thought Bernie would do better in California. There was voter suppression in California, in that voters needed to vote on Democratic, not provisional, ballots, and many clerks ran out of Democratic ballots due to the high turnout, or just automatically gave every newly registered voter a provisional ballot. This practice was documented. *  I'm not claiming that Bernie would have won without this practice. But it happened – as voters were suppressed  in Arizona, New York, and the Carolinas.

    And if you want to keep voters from voting, I'll take you on, whether your name is Scott Gessler, Marilyn Marks, or Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

    So on to the Democratic convention, where those annoying, persistent Sanders supporters and our curmudgeonly candidate will fight for an end to superdelegates, lobbyist control of the DNC agenda, a platform which gives at least lip service to progressive ideas, automatic voter registration, and implementation of ethical rules and ethical practices.

    For those of you who wish we all would just STFU, count to ten and remember we're all registered voters. As for me, I put up a new diary, have several more in queue, but rather than tolerate the relentless condescension, ball spiking, and snark, I'll find other sites to post on. Sometimes the only way to play nice is to stay the f***away.

    I'll leave you with this:

     

     

    * I really don’t need this to be mansplained. I get it.

    3. Sad to read "but rather than tolerate the relentless condescension, ball spiking, and snark, I'll find other sites to post on."  The site will be the poorer for the loss of your posts.

       

       

      1. I am hoping that the coronation will quiet the chorus of derision mama has endured and she will remember that some of her mostest, biggest, fans are regulars here, and would miss her input dearly. That knowledge, I am figuring, might entice her to occasionally pay us heed. Mama has a gentle soul, and though she can give as good as she gets, the relentlessness of it gets to you over time. To me, she is a hero and a true warrior .

        4. Thanks, James, and congratulations on a race well run.  Nobody likes a silver medal, but it's like losing the Super Bowl — you had win a helluva lot of games to get there.

      1. I'll still scan the blog a couple times a day, and if I feel like chiming in, I will. I'm just not going to hang out here as much, or engage over trivialities.

        BTW, Kos has you beat for censorship – the new policy is no one actually gets to criticize Hillary Clinton unless they back up every detail, in proper journalistic objective-ass prose, from reputable mainstream sites. Fortunately, that's right up my alley. I still think I'll be banned within a week. We'll see.

         

        1. It's not "censorship"  to call bullshit when warrented.  That's just what Molly Ivens meant when she said "The answer to free speech is more free speech."

          1. Yeah, but it is censorship if you get banned for posting factual information which makes some folks uncomfortable. That's the policy of Kos now. So we'll see how long that lasts.

            I never have a problem with calling bullshit, and I do it myself, often.  But instead of researching and countering fact with fact, you tend to blow things up by exaggerating, projecting, knocking down straw men, and whatever else you feel like doing. I choose not to engage with you on that level – so I won't.

            2. This is total bullshit.  Total bullshit.  Sander's Kool Aid drinkers went way beyond criticism and into loony diatribes on Mrs. Clinton.  In the rest of the civilized world, we call it being responsible towards others.  Obviously you are so fucked up that you can't tell the difference but to people who frequent DailyKos know that Trump Troll hit pieces by Sanders supporters shouldn't be tolerated.  Did I mention good riddance to dishonesty.  You are made in the same mold as the Modster.  What a jerk.

              1. Thank you for aptly demonstrating my point, GG.

                Yes, there are "loons" on both sides. I'm not one of those. Some can't tell the difference between fact-based journalism and rumor – all they see is if it's not 100% pro-their candidate, it must be false, and the author of it must be ridiculed and dismissed.

                At any rate, I was answering a question MADCO addressed (I think) to me. I don’t know if you always jump in to other people’s conversations and start randomly insulting them, but it’s rude.

                I do desire that we may be better strangers- As You Like It, Act 3, Sc2

                2. You might cut GG a little slack, MJ,  Remember he posted a few months back about some problems he was having.   Think he has trouble communicating times and I urge you not to take it personally.

                  1. Many people carry heavy burdens, are physically, mentally, or emotionally disabled, yet manage to not be complete jerks to others.

                    Then there are those who use their online personas as a way to vent all of the internal rage and hostility they feel, but at anonymous strangers who they happen to disagree with about somthing. It's a sport, of sorts, but a pretty sick one, IMHO. 

                    Anyhoo, I don't need to be here for it. I'll usually answer responses which call me out by name, or comments on diaries I post. That's about it.

                     

                    1. Sometimes, the quality of mercy is called for.  Some burdens, dementia, others, attack the mind and responding to such situations with full fury doesn't become you.  Think how you would treat an outburst from one of your students who had been diagnosed with a serious disorder.   I don't want to embarrass the person in question, but this is just such a case.

                3. You are a whacko who has these delusions that Clinton won because she corrupted the primary process and stole the election from Sanders.  Your willful belief that Mrs. Clinton's nomination is illegitimate is beyond disgusting.  What a filthy piece of shit you are to try and tar Mrs. Clinton as this evil mastermind who coordinated election fraud in only the states that Sanders lost but never in the states he won.  After all the birther bullshit by Republicans about the illegitimacy of Obama to have a piece of shit like you spew the same nonsense about Mrs. Clinton is some of your worst writing ever and you've written a bunch of shit in your time.  Fuck you and your corruption conspiracy bullshit.  You are one evil human being to promote this kind of crap to discourage Democrats and embolden Republicans.  Change your registration to an Independent.  You are not worthy to call yourself a Democrat.  Leave and never come back and nobody will miss your insulting lies.

                  2. Leave and never come back and nobody will miss your insulting lies. 

                    Of course, that is not true. I, among many others would miss mamas' input here. On the other hand, you could go back to whatever you were doing until you get a grip.

                  3. Gilpin Guy: I’m spending less time on here these days, but couldn’t avoid your grotesque flamethrowing attack on me. So here’s what I’d ask you to do:. First, take a breath. Second, find where in the world I wrote any of these things you accuse me of writing. Not here. Not on Kos. Not on the reddit sites. Never wrote “Clinton’s nomination is illegitimate”, or that she’s an “evil mastermind”.

                    I did write a diary on Kos, based on a comment I started here, speculating that AP calling the election for HRC early , and NBC and CNN echoing it, with few cable newsheads questioning the legitimacy of the call, reflected the cozy donor relationship of Comcast with the Clinton campaign and the telecom industry in general.

                    I proved that there are financial links between HRC and Comcast in the diary I wrote. I also pointed out that AP has consistently made math errors in delegate counts, which coincidentally all are in HRC’s favor. I suggested that there may be a relationship, but leave it to the reader to “connect the dots”.

                    Now, you have a perfect right not to like that diary. (I’ve revised it since, but you probably won’t like the new one any better, or the next one in the queue.) I post pro-Bernie diaries on pro-Bernie sites, because it’s actually not that fun to get 60 outraged mocking comments, and I’ll respect the general pro-Hillary bias on this site. Unless I want to get 50 hyperventilating comments from V alone, I’ll leave the Bernie diaries on the Bernie sites.

                    Nobody ever actually questions the facts I present – like you, they just question that I had the nerve to present  them, and to speculate about their implications for policy.  Apparently, I’m supposed to be completely, unquestioningly loyal to the presumptive nominee.

                    But, in objective reality, Hillary has strong corporate connections. Voters have a right to know how much that will influence her policies as President.  How much will she be for her buddies at Comcast and other telecoms, vs how much for the consumers who pay cable bills?  One of them paid her $442,000 and raised 330,000 in campaign funds. The other one pays $250 /month for basic cable ,internet, and a phone, and the rates keep rising and the accountability disappearing as we move towards one gigantic communications / media conglomerate.

                    I know where Bernie Sanders loyalties lie in that conflict; not sure about HRC’s.

                    Apparently, that diary pissed you off. It pissed quite a few people off, but I haven’t been banned on Kos, because I always keep my facts straight. When I say something happened, it happened.  When I say I’m speculating or don’t know, or asking the reader to infer or connect the dots, I write that clearly.  

                    I have some ethical standards. I don’t use sexist language to characterize Hillary, and I’ve called out people on my Facebook feed who do. You won’t find me calling any woman a whore. Period.

                    People on here who actually read my comments know that I am a strong Bernie supporter, but one who will vote for Hillary to block Trump in the general. (That alone makes me the moderate in the room on the reddit sites. You should be glad I’m there).  I’ve also been open about wanting Bernistas to come in strong to the convention and work to reform the party, ending superdelegates and the influence of corporate lobbyists, forming some kind of consistent guidelines for states to follow so that there is uniformity and transparency in the primary process. I’m for open primaries. I’m for automatic voter registration. I’m for all-mail-ballot voting.  I want to see the Democratic party accepting and welcome to new ideas, new procedures, new people. “Change or die” is the choice national parties have now.

                    Good luck with that “GG gets to decide who is and who is not a legit Democrat” thing.  I don’t have any plans to change my Democratic registration, and intend to fulfill my duties as a PCP and walk my neighborhood to register voters.

                    Third and finally, GG, check yourself. Check your tone. You just uglied up the thread. I don’t flame back, not because I can’t, but because I prefer not to, and because your friend V indicated that we should have compassion for you and your struggles.  Well, fine, but I don’t have to roll over and take shit from you either. As Daft Punk pointed out in another context, women are not responsible for maintaining men’s emotional stability at the cost of their own.

                    You may not like my writing, or my opinions, or the fact that I post on Bernie sites,  and still support Sanders’ policies, and criticize HRC’s corporate connections, but your flaming of me is completely out of line and inappropriate. I’m sure that if we met in person, you’d be much more courteous.  Just pretend that I’m your grandkid’s weirdo hippie teacher that you happened to run into at the market. Would you really call me an “evil human being and a piece of shit” because we disagree?

                    What would Hillary Clinton do?

                    1. I'm not GG's "friend," MJ, we've never met.  But a couple of months ago he posted a farewell that convinced me something awful is going on with his life.  The extreme and basically unprovoked nature of his last two posts confirms that diagnosis.  Thanks for at least attenuating your remarks.

      1. MADCO, if that's addressed to me, I blog on Daily Kos as mj55 (at least until I piss off someone by not being sufficiently HRC supportive – I've already been called a troll and a troublemaker, and people labeled as such tend to get their posts hidden and banned under the present "post-election happy talk" restrictions.)

        Most of the avid Bernistas get their posts hidden, or they have left the site, voluntarily or not. Not a good predictor for being one big happy Dem family come November.

        ColoradoPols really is an exception in allowing posters quite a bit of rope to hang themselves – you have to work really hard at it to get banned. Just being an ass isn't enough.

        3 other sites I just started on would be

        caucus99percent.com as mj55, and 2 reddit subgroups (bothBernie friendly)

         https://www.reddit.com/r/Colorado4Sanders/             I'm   nocoteacher

         https://www.reddit.com/r/Kossacks_for_Sanders/       I'm       nocoteacher

         

    7. GOOD BYE CRUEL WORLD (GBCW) posts by Sanders supporters are kind of the fad right now.  There has never been a victim in the history of the world like a Sander's supporter.  They have taken victimization to a whole new level beyond Republicans.  Don't let the door hit you, you petty crybaby.  Go drink your fucking Kool Aid and pretend that Sanders was the better candidate and the all the joy in the world will be forever snuffed out now that he won't be the nominee.

      You know what?  People don't care.  People don't give a shit how hurt your feelings are or how fucking stupid you are to believe that every primary that Sanders lost was rigged.  Go over to 99% Bernie bullshit and wallow in how cruel the world is to you and your fellow conspiracy theorists.  The truth is that the only way Sanders could win would have been if they didn't allow the coloreds to vote and how Democratic would that have been?  He lost and not by a little.  That's politics.  

      1. Actually all Dems who want a great election result do care. Give them time and space. 40% of HRC supporters in 2008 swore they wouldn't vote for Obama. Obviously most of that 40% did. Name calling isn't going to help anyone get anywhere and we do need them.

        A lot of them are new to politics, passionate and emotional, not all that aware of the rules of the road where party matters, like choosing the nominee, are concerned and  and can't quite accept that HRC was the choice over Bernie of the  clear and sizable majority.  Bernie can't just hand them over to us. We have to to do our bit to welcome them. 

        1. Wellsaid, BC.  Yes, it isn't always easy being the adult.  But it is neccessary.  25 million people voted in the Democratic nominating process.  Bernie got a bigger share of the delegates than his vote warranted, because of the undemocratic caucus process.  But those were the rules.  We played by them and won.  We don't have to bow to the rage of sore losers.  But we do need to give them time to heal and then give them an honored role in shaping the better world which both factions seek to create.

  3. Dump the G.O.P. for a Grand New Party

    But this Republican Party is none of those things. Today’s G.O.P. is to governing what Trump University is to education — an ethically challenged enterprise that enriches and perpetuates itself by shedding all pretense of standing for real principles, or a truly relevant value proposition, and instead plays on the ignorance and fears of the public.

    It is just an empty shell, selling pieces of itself to the highest bidders, — policy by policy — a little to the Tea Party over here, a little to Big Oil over there, a little to the gun lobby, to antitax zealots, to climate-change deniers. And before you know it, the party stands for an incoherent mess of ideas unrelated to any theory of where the world is going or how America actually becomes great again in the 21st century.

    3. I agree with Krugman on the need for a new party.  I would argue, however, that that center-right party he's hoping for is doing just fine, thank you very much.  It's the party of Nixon, Clinton, Bennet, Frackenlooper, et al . . . 

      What this country needs now, in the 21st Century, is a center-left party to balance the power of the corporatists and the civil war reenactors.  Not crazy left, but a new LBJ-Humphrey left for a new century. 

        1. Agree. For a couple of decades we've had the far right GORP and the center right Democratic Party. I don't think we need a new one for Dems. We just need to move this one back to center left and it appears be getting a good hard shove in that direction.

  4. Congrats to HRC, who will officially become the first female major party candidate for President of the United States at the convention.  Her Calfornia win was big. Her popular vote win was big. Her pledged delegate win was big. She had no need of using the super delegate system to win. The people had a binary choice, for better or for worse, between just these two candidates and they made their choice and made history in the process. 

    Congrats to Bernie Sanders who became the most unlikely political rock star of all time, a relatively unknown little old Jewish socialist indie from a tiny state, who galvanized millions, radically changed the political landscape, gave voice to the previously dismissed. When the hurt wears off may he and his troops stick around, stick together and use their numbers, joined with all like minded Dems, to change the party, the country and the world.

    The United States of America will not be Trumped.

      1. heartkiss heartIs that the first faint whiff of reconciliation I smell in the air? It would be a shame for mama to miss it or Voyageur to stomp on it.

        Never thought I'd say this but….. Be like Zap!

          1. yes However, I did not include her for two reasons: 1) I was unable to establish that she was on any general election ballot, and 2) she may have been too young to assume office. To paraphrase BC, I did stipulate “on a general election ballot.”

            1. There were others after victoria, including the Socialist Workers Party IIRC circa 1980.  But while Jill may be on a "general election ballot" I don't think they are on all 50 states.   Among "minor parties" only the libertarians have done that.  Whether victoria was old enough to assume office issortof moot, because she couldn't vote in any case in any state.   Helluva woman though.   For another gilded age fireball, try Belva Ann Lockwood.  Hillary is only the latest in a long line of uppity women.   But I hope she will bet the first to actually win the presidency.
              Among other things Lockwood was the first woman to practice before theSupreme Court. It literally took an act of Congress to force the Court to let her appear before it.

  5. oh, and by the way, and you knew this was coming: Bennet's campaign is a near-substance-free joke. When you've spent 6 years in the senate and all you have to show for it is unrequited bipartisanship, then you run on student loan refis and fine-tuning ethics laws.

    Maybe he'll get some guts with Hillary's coattails.

    2. Well, vacations over.   I signed up for my first shift with Michael's phone bank.   As patriarch of a family groaning under a burden of $300,000 in student loans, I can't be as blasé about that issue as Zappy is.  And if we can elect Hillary, we could fill as many as four SCOTUS seats if we have a Democratic Senate.   Don't worry, Zappy, I won't waste my time trying to convince you.   Successful campaigns follow the tactics gen. Oskar von Hutier pioneered at the battle of Riga in WWI.   When you encounter resistance, bypass it and move on to softer targets.  I can turn out 100 mainstream Democrats in less time that it would take to convince Zappy and if I get them to vote for Michael and Hillary, it will help the ticket across the board.

      1. My son is in the Army to get his $300 k worth of loans forgiven and his wife will only owe $200 k when she graduates.  I think Bennett has picked a good place to start.  I guess it's all in the point of view.

    3. "spent 6 years in the senate and all you have to show for it is unrequited bipartisanship……"     Another empty headed statement from someone who can't be bothered with actually researching some facts. Let's start with the Hermosa Conservation Area; special recreation management area; and wilderness north of Durango. Gee, bipartisanship between Senator Bennet and Rep. Tipton; the capital crime according to Zappatero. But such a great accomplishment. Then there is Bennet taking a major lead in getting the President to designate Chimney Rock and Browns Canyon as national monuments.

      Then there is Bennet's leadership in protecting the Antiquities Act and re-authorizing the Land & Water Conservation Fund. Hey, more bipartisanship; particularly with Cory Gardner; and more great accomplishments. I think I'll rest my case. Win or lose in November, Bennet will be remembered for the solid accomplishments of his first term while Zappatero's opinions get consigned to the dustbin of Colorado history.

      1. surprise and yes for saving the Antiquities Act! I know it was on shaky ground (pun intended) for a while there. I guess maybe ol' Cory's not completely useless.

        1. And of course absolutely refusing to work with anyone from the other side means never getting anything done. Kind of unfair to complain that Bennet's completely ineffective and to also blame him for getting something done the only way possible. And if it's a good thing shouldn't it be OK even if a someone you don't like or agree with on most things helped? Just how is Bennet supposed to be an effective Senator? It's not like we have 60+ Dems in the Senate, all of them on the same page.

    1. Heck, Maddow was already paging through it last night. However, everyone in the panel who had been involved in a campaign before did say to take a lot of it with grain of salt, that this always happens when a campaign is collapsing, that the operatives (and this from former operatives) are anxious to place blame somewhere else as they anticipate their next career move. They did say it’s more usual to blame one another than the candidate. And Rachel expressed concern that Bernie doesn’t seem to be laying the groundwork for a vehicle to continue his movement in a post primary form but still really is just focusing on the nomination. Why?

      All, however, agreed that it takes a little time to absorb the disappointment and switch from primary mode after a hard fought loss so we should all give the man some space before we decide whether he’s screwing things up or not.

      1. I saw the discussion.   There is a litany of "I saw the debacle coming but my dumb candidate ignored my advice" literature from every losing campaign.   After November, I expect the Trump campaign to become the mother lode of such tattle tales.

        Victory has a thousand parents.   Defeat is always an orphan.

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

84 readers online now

Newsletter

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