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) Jeff Crank

(R) Dave Williams

55%↑

45%↓

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%↑

40%↑

20%↓

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
August 13, 2016 07:27 AM UTC

Weekend Open Thread

  • 72 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“It is the still, small voice that the soul heeds, not the deafening blasts of doom.”

–William Dean Howells

Comments

72 thoughts on “Weekend Open Thread

  1. Hillary and Bernie are against TPP. The President is for it. Michael Bennet lied about his intentions and his actions and everyone here was OK with that. 

    Now push is coming to shove:

    The White House put Congress on notice Friday morning that it will be sending lawmakers a bill to implement President Barack Obama’s landmark Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement — a move intended to infuse new energy into efforts to ratify the flatlining trade pact.

    Bernie Sanders is going to work against lame duck passage of the trade treaty that treats corporations as king and workers as serfs:

    "It is now time for the leadership of the Democratic Party​ in the Senate and the House to join Secretary Clinton and​ go on the record in opposition to holding a vote on this job-killing trade deal during the lame-duck session of Congress and beyond," Sanders, a former White House contender, said in a statement Friday.

    And despite the new lens through which we are seeing these kinds of deals, I predict Bennet will go against the woman he endorsed for president, go against his colleague in the senate, and do what's best for the big business and big money interests who are still some of his bestest pals. 

    Oh, yeah, Republicans are dummies and Democrats are smarties! Nyah!

    Oh, yeah 2: this is a political issue, something that CPols declares it is dedicated to discuss, but something that brings heartburn to Democrats is really not their style, so I do not expect them to take this issue up. If it were happening on the other side, they'd be licking their chops.

    1. Must stop trade.  Trade bad.   Smoot Hawley Good. Trump right on trade. Obama bad.   Buy only Colorado coffee and paonia pineapples.  Must stop trade.  Must get new Stop Trade bumper sticker for the Subaru.  

            1. What V. assiduously ignores in his habit of connecting trade policy to the rise of fascism

              Probably 80 million people died because politicians were  too stupid to understand that the vengeful protectionist scheme imposed by Versailles could never work. 

              is that this is 2016, not 1936. There were no multinational corporations then…only multinational nations, so to speak. When corporate sovereignty supercedes national sovereignty, nations are at risk.

              …including ours.

               

                1. I just heard a great metaphor that applies to this site. In a conversation going on right now on "Face the Nation", a former governor of Utah, in talking about balancing opinions and making decisions, said, " It doesn't matter how thin the pancake is, it still has two sides."

                  Right….

            2. Theu.s. has never lost a trade suit duke.  But you seem to be saying that nobody has a right to sue.  So justice stops when businesses are screwed?  Or only people that duke agrees with are allowed to seek justice?

              Hope I stay on your good side if I ever need to go to court.

    2. The insidious nature of the agreements in TPP to give increasing autonomy over world politics to the mega-corporations that feed on nations, is one of our greatest enemies as workers. No one can convince me that corporations will suddenly turn altruistic when/if this document gets signed.

      Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone …   John Maynard Keynes 

      The hyperbolic Zap-baiting tossed out by our beloved Free Market maven, notwithstanding, there are very real concerns about this deal and it needs to be stopped until we have a congress and a president who will oppose it until it protects American workers….not multinational corporations.

       

      1. If you are looking for an economist to support Zapatero style begger thy neighbor protectionism, Duke, you could't have picked a worse example.   Keynes opposed protectionist schemes,knowing they to lead to poverty and even war.  His classic "The Economic Consequences of the Peace" proved how the Mercantilist strait jacket imposed on Weimar Germanywould destroy Germany's economy and ultimately lead to a world economic depression.   He was absolutely accurate.  Germany was forbidden to export but forced to pay nmassive reparations which could only be paid by exports.  In a desperate effort to do the impossible it printed money and the resulting hyperinflation destroyed the German Middle Class, paying the way for Hitler.   Probably 80 million people died because politicians were  too stupid to understand that the vengeful protectionist scheme imposed by Versailles could never work.

        We both driveFord f-250s, if I recall correctly, Duke.   But I make you asidenbet that ultraprotectionist Zappy drives a foreign car!  Do we have a bet?

        1. Sorry V. Its a different world now. I will echo BC and say the decision is for higher pay scales than mine…take it up with Hils, but so far, I'm against it….. 

          1. Hillary isn't president, Obama is.   He's going to try to do the right thing after the election.   But the problem is that Trump has so terrified the Republicans that they may not go along.   On this issue, Republicans are usually more responsible than Democrats.  Bernie actually bragged about voting against the export import bank because it might help Boeing!  Boeingnhas thousands of union jobs and pays $37 an hour.   Radical socialist hatred of big business threatens millions well paying jobs.   But that's OK.   After they lose their $37 an hour jobs, Bernie will make sure McDonalds hires them at $15.   

            Are you beginning to see why I don't share Socialist anti–business views?

            We will probably lose this trade fight and consumers will suffer.   It happens, the bad folks win sometimes.  But blame Trump and Bernie for the hysteria, not Hillary, who only bowed to the inevitable.

            1. Watch it there, V.  You're pretty much saying HRC doesn't mean a thing she just said about TPP.  That's not going to win her any trustworthy points or character points and she's already on her way to being elected with historically low approval ratings.  

              A devoted HRC fan like you might want to ix-nay the Trump and Bernie and the Devil made her lie though her teeth narrative. Just sayin'.

              I think she meant what she said. 

              1. Don't be silly, bc.  Hrc is a politician.  She is not going to fight a losing cause.  Of course she is too intelligent to buy the anti-tpp crap.  But what good can she do if Trump wins, or for that matter Bernie's Luddites.  You have to pick your fights in politics.  On a blog, you can just tell the truth as you see it.  David Ricardo settled this argument with the law of comparative advantage.  Protectionism benefits only special interests at the expense of the public at large.

                1. Like Trump, you're doubling down I see.   Do you really wish to support the contention that HRC is not to be trusted, will say anything to get elected? Because that's what you're doing.

                  I believe that HRC has a more nuanced view than you do of TPP… pretty easy since yours is decidedly black and white… and really does feel that there should be more safeguards for workers. I don't think she's lying about that.

                  But all the HRC loathers will be happy to see that even an enthusiastic supporter such as yourself agrees with them that HRC is not trustworthy. I'm sure your dream candidate would appreciate your "help" in that area and your contention that if she isn't just saying something she believes is bull to get elected she must be stupid.

                  Way to support your idol there, V.

                  And you complain about my support being too lukewarm.

                  1. Uhh, bc, are you sayng hrc was lying when she supported tpp?  That sure builds trust.  So she just happened to have a change of heart when bernie's socialist hordes were sacking the city?

                    Thats your story and you're sticking with it? 

                    Do you also believe in Santa Claus?

                    1. I'm saying she's listened to people's concerns since then, including to the overwhelming popularity of Bernie Sander's position on TPP and other issues, and she's been won over, not to your ridiculous "must stop all trade" but to a real commitment to achieve a better agreement more in line with those concerns.

                      I'm also saying, and you might want to brush up on your reading between the lines skills here, I know that she's a politician and, fan though you are, I'm pretty sure you won't be finding yourself on any HRC short list for potential surrogate spokespersons any time soon.

                      It's  been hard enough winning Sanders supporters without "help" in the form of assurances that she's just manipulating them and will return to true form, the one Sanders supporters don't like at all, after election. Yeah, she'd really appreciate that.

                      I also don't happen to believe that will be the case for all sorts of reasons.

                      For the record I never believed in Santa or the Easter Bunny either. I never had to have those little dreams shattered because I was never taught that they existed in the first place. One of the perks of being a Jew. wink  

                       

            2. Are you beginning to see why I don't share Socialist anti–business views? 

              No. Your arguments are unconvincing. 

              After they lose their $37 an hour jobs, Bernie will make sure McDonalds hires them at $15.  

              That's just silly…

                1. It is a fact that bernnie repeatedlly bragged about voting against the export  import bank specifically because it helped boeing .  Boeing exports billions of dollars worth of planes made with union labor averaging $37 an hour

                  .  Go ahead, duke and bc, tell me how destroying boeing and putting those workers out of a job benefits this country.  Trump, stupid as he is, only hates imports.  Bernie, zappy amnd other antitrade demagogues actually hate exports.  Did you also oppose the auto bailout because that benefitted business. Bernie did, I sure as hell did not.  This hate business thing ends up destroying lots of lives.

              1. Don't be silly, bc.  Hrc is a politician.  She is not going to fight a losing cause.  Of course she is too intelligent to buy the anti-tpp crap.  But what good can she do if Trump wins, or for that matter Bernie's Luddites.  You have to pick your fights in politics.  On a blog, you can just tell the truth as you see it.  David Ricardo settled this argument with the law of comparative advantage.  Protectionism benefits only special interests at the expense of the public at large.

                1.  Ricardo's law of comparative advantage is an application of the principle of the division of labor to international trade. Individuals enrich themselves and their societies by specializing in those endeavors that they perform best. Ricardo's insight was to show that this is also true of groups of people. Although he did not presume here that business decisions are or should be made independently by entrepreneurs on the basis of viability or profit, he knew that merchants engage only if it is profitable for them to do so. 

                  Ricardo proved, using mathematics, that international trade is always beneficial. 

                  No one is arguing for a cessation of international trade, V. and you know it. Of course it is beneficial…but, trade deals like NAFTA are not generally made with a benefit to consumers in mind. If you are trying to sell that notion, you need to market it elsewhere.

                  1. Actually, duke, zappy and to a lesser extent you, are inded arguing for at least radical cutbacks in trade.  And if imported goods weren't cheaper, why would consumers buy them.  You're being silly again. 

                    1. Just wondering why you habitually choose to argue with Zap (who has to often be considered an outlier of opinion, even by himself) in your replies to Duke, BC, and others?  Softer straw targeting???

                    2. Actually, Dio, if you track it, the sequence there, as usual. is Zappy posts:  Must stop trade  Trade evil.   Bennet bad because Bennet not stop trade.   Must get new Stop Trade sticker for the subaru.

                      I reply by bashing Zappy.

                      BC then bashes me for bashing Zappy, and accuses me of overstating Zappy's position, which isn't possible.

                      Duke bashes me for bashing Zappy because he hates trade too.

                      BC bashes me for not bashing Hillary because we both know Hillary supported TPP before the political cost got too high but BC really, truly, hopes HRC was sincerely converted to BC's own trade-bashing position , which she wasn't.

                      I say Hillary bowed to the wind on trade, and I'm, happy to support her because she's with me on 90 percent of the stuff.

                      BC accuses me of supporting "trickle down economics," rooting for the Oakland Raiders and failure to floss my teeth because she won't accept that Hillary isn't really anti-trade and that I support Hillary .

                      I give up.

                      Duke bashes me for giving up.

                      BC bashes me for giving up and not hating Hillary because we disagree on one thing.

                      I get very confused.

                      BC bashes me for being very confused and claims not to hate trade though there is not one post from her, at any time, supporting expanded trade.

                      I go read a book.

                      Dio asks me why I replied to BC and Duke when they bashed me for bashing  Zappy. 

                      Zappy is confused because after his initial post he is out enjoying this lovely day and has no idea what Dio is talking about.

                      Moddy assumes this somehow proves that Trump would be a great president.

                      We all give up.

                       

                       

                       

                    3. Gee, V… poor you!  

                      Here's a thought.

                      Maybe HRC does support trade but has come round to the idea that there are deficiencies in TPP as written that need to be addressed.

                      Maybe she isn't the type to run around bellowing about the only choice being TPP exactly as is or Must Stop Trade!

                      I'll tell you one thing. She's not going to appreciate your insistence that she's a complete phony and anybody who can't see that is an idiot.

                      And yes… you are pretty confused about all this.

                    4. Thanks for clearing that up . . . 

                      [eyes roooooolling]

                      So, at least we are all unanimous in our civil agreement, then . . . 

                      . . . that this WordPress platform sucks sweaty earthworm balls!!!

                2. I will repeat my reply to your first don't be silly.

                  Like Trump, you're doubling down I see.   Do you really wish to support the contention that HRC is not to be trusted, will say anything to get elected? Because that's what you're doing.

                  I believe that HRC has a more nuanced view than you do of TPP… pretty easy since yours is decidedly black and white… and really does feel that there should be more safeguards for workers. I don't think she's lying about that.

                  But all the HRC loathers will be happy to see that even an enthusiastic supporter such as yourself agrees with them that HRC is not trustworthy. I'm sure your dream candidate would appreciate your "help" in that area and your contention that if she isn't just saying something she believes is bull to get elected she must be stupid.

                  Way to support your idol there, V.

                  And you complain about my support being too lukewarm.

                  – See more at: http://coloradopols.com/diary/86403/weekend-open-thread-170#comment-614056

        2. Keynes' views on trade protectionism are far more fluid than you recall.  From his later stances:

          Neither free trade nor protection can present a theoretical case which entitled it to claim superiority in practice. Protection is a dangerous and expensive method of redressing a want of balance and security in a nation's economic life. But there are times when we cannot safely trust ourselves to the blindness of economic forces; and when no alternative weapons as efficacious as tariffs lie ready to hand.

          1. V tends to back his stands with black or white rhetoric for emphasis. Of course it's not must stop trade v any particular agreement.  

            Like everything else, free trade is not an absolute so any useful discussion isn't 100% free versus stop 100% of trade. It's about the nature of the specifics in any given regulating agreement, degree and kind, whether worker prosperity, the bedrock of a prosperous middle class majority economy and society, should or should not be given a high priority, etc.

            Any argument about trade agreements based on the concept of an absolute is just as silly as gun rights extremists arguing that the choice is between no regulation and taking away everybody's guns with no recognition that there are and always have been limits and even they don't seem to be advocating for shoulder mounted rocket launchers at the mall.

            I take V's more extreme rants with a grain of salt. For instance, I'm pretty sure he didn't  really mean to say that HRC is lying and not to be trusted on TPP. He just got carried away V style.

            1. Bc, you didn't answer.  Do you think HRC lied when she praised the treaty she helped draft and then told the truth when she opposed it at a time when opposition seemed expedient?  You can't have it both ways.

              I think you know the answer, but it is gall and wormwood to you.

  2. http://www.infoplease.com/us/census/data/colorado/demographic.html

    Here is a link showing Colorado is indeed 82,8 percent white.   Your mistake was in overlooking the fact that many Hispanics are classified as white.  Progress Now flagellates "whites" not "non-Hispanic whites" so thats the term I searched.

    So, yes. a state with 82.8 percent white population has 85 percent of its "pundits" white.

    The horror, the horror.

    But why should I argue with you?   You are over 40 and have a college degree, which makes you almost as evil as me.   Okay, you are spared the ultimate shame of being male — but two out of three is bad!

    The next time I need to interview an expert on international monetary policy, I'll try to find a 16 year-old dope dealer in juvenile hall.  The diversity police will be so happy.

    Have a great day in Brush, rural folks are still the best.

  3. I have an election problem that I'd be interested in getting feedback from the experts around here.

    I've been living in CD-6 for the last several years.  But I am buying a home in CD-1.  Unfortunately, I can't delay the closing, and my current lease is up near the end of October, so definitely moving before the election.

    If I receive my mail ballot in Aurora and return it before I move, will it still count?  I know my individual vote doesn't amount to a hill of beans, but I really want the satisfaction of personally delivering a swift kick in the kiester to a couple of deserving Republicans in my district!  I'm sure Diana wouldn't know or care if I didn't vote for her in CD-1

    But I don't want to pull a Caldara or give Wayne Williams an excuse to cancel my vote.

    What say ye?

    1. I think you are fine as long as you are properly registered when you mail it.  You would not be in the new district long enough to register, so I would mail it in early, then sometime after the election change your residency.   If really worried, talk to your county clerk, but your old registration should be fine.

      1. Wait a minute Dave. Trump says I have at least 10 or 15 votes available (being a Democrat apparently has it's privileges!).  I wouldn't want to look like some kind of loser to The Donald by not exercising all my votes, right?

  4. My mom won her primary. 70% of the vote!

    Her challenger was the same religious fundamentalist that ran against her last time. They're (her husband seems to run everything) is still mad at my mom's critical vote in favor of gay marriage.

    No opponent in the general election (half the dems have given up trying to defeat her and the other half love her so they tend not to put anyone up). So she's in for another 2 years!!!

    1. Congrats to your Mom, David. Perhaps,someday, I will have the honor of meeting her. Until then, pass along my sincere thanks for her service to government and props for her win!

       

      1. It is desperately importantant to rebuild a true two party system.  But moderate republicans are few and far between. Your mom is a pearl at any price.

  5. Nuff said:

    The Perfect G.O.P. Nominee – NYT Sunday Review

    SPEAKING of crazy …

    All these woebegone Republicans whining that they can’t rally behind their flawed candidate is crazy. The G.O.P. angst, the gnashing and wailing and searching for last-minute substitutes and exit strategies, is getting old.

    They already have a 1-percenter who will be totally fine in the Oval Office, someone they can trust to help Wall Street, boost the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, cuddle with hedge funds, secure the trade deals beloved by corporate America, seek guidance from Henry Kissinger and hawk it up — unleashing hell on Syria and heaven knows where else.

    The Republicans have their candidate: It’s Hillary.

    1. That is her Dowdiness speaking.   She hates all things Clinton with the fury that only a bypassed queen bee can muster.   How you doing with that "I really, really, want to vote for Jill Stein but I know it only helps Trump " thing, James?  Can we expect your endorsement of Jill soon a=or will you pretend to be on the fence a little longer?

      #usefulidiotsfortrump

      1. So if James is female, i.e., "Her Dowdiness", is that an insult? Can this really be the Feministo Manifisto, he by whom all lesser and aspiring feminists must be judged, relegating a fellow guy to (gasp) female status?

  6. This is really interesting. It makes sense that with the wide cultural diversity between states that some are world class educationally. What's really interesting is that Colorado is in the top 10.

    We're definitely doing some things right. In addition, it doesn't look like our funding corelates to better or worse schools. D.C. and Hawaii spend a ton and are in the bottom 10.

    Some of the differences are certainly due to poverty levels. But some may be due to cultural differences too, such as education not being valued vs. placing a premium on it.

    1. I agree that the Free Enterprise / Chamber of Commerce chart of top 10 performing states in education is interesting.

      There aren't many surprises in it for me; I know that our top performing kids, who are taking AP and college classes in high school, are going to do better on the SAT. This is across every district and every demographic. Colorado does a pretty good job with its concurrent enrollment classes in local community colleges. I, and most of my colleagues, spend plenty of time preparing students to handle literary analysis and rigorous exams.

      Yet what the chart doesn't show is even more "interesting". The data the Chamber cherry-picked was from only those top students who have survived high school until their junior or senior years; so it doesn't show dropout rates, literacy rates, remediation rates, the whole battery of non-SAT scores and measures. Yes, poverty and access to early childhood education makes a difference, as does small class sizes, paraprofessionals, rigor and relationships, etc.

      I couldn't disagree with you more on "cultural differences" not valuing education. All of the cultures I've come in contact with in my decades as an educator value education; not all believe in or expect their students to do well. Unless you think that poverty is a culture – poor kids of all ethnic backgrounds tend to need extra help and support in school.

      I suspect that the Chamber put this out to show that Colorado does not need to get rid of TABOR or fund schools better than we are, that charter school businesses are worth investing in, and that the teacher's unions are still The Enemy for suggesting otherwise.

       

      1. I wouldn't say poverty by itself is a culture. But you do have cultures here based on economic level as well regions of the country. And it's not just poverty, for a long time kids raised in blue collar families tended to not go to college. Again cultural.

        But it's more than economics. Look at how Japan, Korea, & Taiwan have grown since WWII. There's an immense focus on education in those cultures. It's led to an amazing increase in the standard of living in them.

        I also don't think the chamber was using this to say low taxes here are fine. The #1 state is Massachusetts and they're high tax. I think it was more to point out that we have a wide range of outcomes. Why, that's a giant question. But I think a large part of it is likely cultural. 

        Are you not surprised that Mississippi & Alabama are among the worst? And if you aren't – why? Cultural differences?

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

43 readers online now

Newsletter

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