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%
September 12, 2016 04:47 AM UTC
19 Comments
In case you missed this gem over the weekend, here is Joy Reid shutting down Trump spokesman Boris Epshteyn, with the aid of security expert Malcolm Nance. Nance wonders aloud whether Trump is actually an unwitting "asset" to Russia's propaganda arm.
Joy is so great!
How can anyone listen to the kind of crap routinely spewed by these clowns and take any of it seriously?
Interviews provided by:
Liars, Inc., a division of Trump Industries.
But there some who take their crap seriously.
And there is also the damn media, with some notable exceptions like Joy Reid, still constantly grading Trump on a curve. If he simply gets through a speech without saying anything totally crazy, totally false, totally ignorant, he's graded as having succeeded.
It's long past time for that, media. He is the GOP candidate for President of the United States now, not one joke primary candidate among many anymore, and everything he says and does should be judged by the same standards applied to any serious major party presidential nominee past or present. HRC certainly is.
Enough lowering the bar for him. The world and its leaders, neither our allies nor our opponents nor our sworn enemies, will be lowering the bar for him and grading him on a curve if he's elected.
Exactamundo, BC.
Nice – but long – article on the "false equivalence" aka "both sides do it" reporting that runs throughout much of our media – "Blind leading the blind at the New York Times. Equating a "pay for play" issue where the Florida AG dropped an investigation of Trump University to an instance of a Clinton Foundation donor who was not given a diplomatic passport is just one example.
Add some of Chris Cillizza's DC CW Superficial coverage and this is how Al Gore gets beat by Shrub, and Hillary loses to a Neo-Fascist Racist.
Trouble is it has become an issue because of the same old Clinton instinct for secrecy first which only leads to drip drip and suspicion later. Had she immediately disclosed the Friday diagnosis with assurances that a couple of days and some antibiotics would have her back in fighting form in no time, it wouldn't be anywhere near as big an issue.
What's unfair is the media not pointing out that while HRC was mistaken in trying to keep this easily treated illness secret, Trump is the one who is keeping everything…. his health records, his tax returns, his super plans that are going to make America great again, defeat ISIS, all of it, secret.
But Cillizza is quite right that HRC has been her own worst enemy again and blown up a very manageable issue into a more potentially damaging one. That's pretty much her MO. To be as secretive as possible until forced to be forthcoming. If she'd quit doing that she'd be in a much better position to point out Trump's truly extraordinary level of secrecy on just about every front.
Now when she does try to point that out she's made it easier for people to see it as the pot calling the kettle black and the media to treat it as an equivalency. Not that they should, not that that's fair or correct, but she's making it easier. And she never learns.
Like I've said many times… without a Trump to run against she wouldn't have a snowball's chance in hell. Even with this stunningly bad opponent she's probably going to just pull it out.
She's just not good at this running for stuff thing. It's not entirely the fault of the media by any means.
The primary problem is that she hasn't agreed to a "protective pool"– essentially a group of reporters embedded so far up her keister that information has to come out.
If they had been there, the pneumonia thing would have come out, been a minor story framed in the "tough to campaign" context, and becoming dehydrated wouldn't be a thing.
TRUMP™ should have one too, of course.
But since Trump has no intention of coming clean about anything she's the one who would most benefit from transparency and the comparison between that transparency and Trump's "believe me", "trust me" secrecy.
Instead her behavior helps inoculate him on his and gives the lazy media plenty of easy pickings from both of them.
The days of being able to keep large secrets like FDR's polio and inability to walk, JFK's terrible health issues (he probably wouldn't have lived out a second term in any case) and compulsive womanizing, Reagan's in office dementia are long gone.
Use that to your advantage. Be the transparent one. Put it all out there yourself and the media will have no one to hunt and expose but the other one.
Don't be scoop bate if you can help it.
Most minor illnesses treatable with antibiotics are largely better after two days – the amount of time it took between her diagnosis and her stumble.
FFS, folks, let's just admit this: if Clinton were to get a headache bad enough that affected her performance, the media would call it a major health scandal. If she'd announced her pneumonia diagnosis, the media would have said her overall health must be weak (as some Trump surrogates have been insinuating).
Clinton could single-handedly save this country by travelling to Syria, shooting Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi as he prepared to launch a deadly biological assault on Washington, DC; she could do it with a parade of US flag-bearers behind her, using one of those fine military-issue rifles with the Biblical slogans engraved on the barrel, and shouting "God favors the United States!" – just like the vast majority of Republican sofa generals dream of doing. And she'd still be a cowardly, America-hating, Communist (and therefore Atheist) bitch who BTW can't hold her weapon properly. And it would be worthy of two or three media scandals and only a modicum of actual credit for the act.
Full recovery from something like this is on the order of a few weeks rather than a few days, but she'll likely be out doing her thing in short order.
As for the rest of what you wrote, I think it largely concurs with the Clinton campaign's view of the world and has guided her approach through the election generally, as well as with this illness. How well that acts in service of her candidacy is for her and her team to judge, I guess. In this case, I think the math came out against it by their own accounting.
If their math were the same as mine, they'd say some of what I said. The time is long past for Clinton to say "go find a real scandal – I hear there's one or two in the other camp".
Lauer's e-mail questions should have been met with "Have you missed the news and commentary programs over the past few months? How about we talk about national security policy? I was led to believe that's why I was invited here…"
They didn't need an "I'm sorry for the way we handled this" for her walking pneumonia, either. It doesn't matter how she handles it, it will be "wrong" or "weak" to someone.
Here are the best responses to the "Hillary Health Scandal"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/12-perfect-responses-to-hillary-clinton-being-a-human-and-getting-sick_us_57d6b298e4b00642712e5a65?section=&
Very nice but doesn't change the fact that this wouldn't be a big deal if her campaign had made it public on Friday on their own terms instead of days later on defense.
Clinton isn't just any working woman powering through illness. She's a candidate with a rep for keeping everything she possibly can secret until she's cornered, then begrudgingly offering a drip here, a drip there in defensive explanation until it's all pried out.
If you want HRC to win and you think this helps…. fine. I want her to win and I don't think her campaign's handling of this helped.
Replying to you BC via myself because this subthread is fresh out of reply buttons.
I absolutely agree HRC's campaign mishandled this as they are wont to do. I just want those 12 tweets to get maximum exposure and maybe, just maybe, folks will identify with them, and the HRC campaign learns a useful lesson.
Replying to you, Davie, and completely agree. It's unfortunate she handed this to her enemies on a silver platter, an apparently irreversible (if they haven't learned by now I doubt they ever will) Clinton habit, but since she has it's great that there's so much push back. She can use all the push back from folks outside her bubble that she can get. And those tweets are all over the intertubes and social media.
How can one tell when Donald Trump is lying? His lips are moving.
Did you hear the one about how Melania took other people's money from their foundation to pay another foundation via a charity event 20K for a 6 foot speed portrait of Trump? Yeah, the money went to a legit charity but they got that portrait for free and no doubt bragged about how they gave the charity 20K for it. They gave nothing. out of their own pocket. As with the rest of his "empire" and the rest of his “charity” they just moved other people's money around and called it their own while figuring out ways to get something for nothing out of it. The entire family is "unbelievable" and not in the triumphant Trumpian sense of the word.
Actually:
How can you tell if Donald Trump is lying? He's breathing.