U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Michael Bennet
(D) Phil Weiser
60%↑
50%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Jena Griswold
60%↑
40%↑
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez
(D) J. Danielson
(R) Sheri Davis
50%
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(D) Jeff Bridges
(R) Kevin Grantham
40%
40%
30%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(D) Somebody
80%
40%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Somebody
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Manny Rutinel
(D) Yadira Caraveo
45%↓
40%↑
30%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
February 10, 2009 07:44 AM UTC
26 Comments
Is he was asked a question and he gave a complete answer that should a clear grasp of the issues. And he treated us all as grown-ups in talking straight about what we face and why it is so critical.
I also appreciated that he did not try to split the middle on everything and was direct about the fact that some disagreed with him, that FDR’s actions helped, and that we are not going to continue the ideas that got us in this mess.
Excellent!
…if you take 20 minutes to answer each question.
Here’s something really fun:
Dems in open warfare over stimulus…
The reply from Reid’s office:
Man, this is awesome. H/T RedState.
See you in 2010.
The Republicans in Congress have mostly played Dr. No by just refusing to consider anything other than doing it their way – which is what got us in this mess.
That’s all they’ve done.
Not.
http://www.dcexaminer.com/opin…
This package actually looks much more kosher than what Pelosi wants rammed down our throats.
This is why the Public is solidly behind Obama and the Democrats. But if you Cons want to keep posturing during one of our country’s greatest economic crisis to solidify your ever shrinking base, go ahead.
If you consider that solidly behind Democrats, you are of course welcome to your opinion, but I would prefer higher approval numbers if it were me. Maybe Rep. Minnick feels the same way
Most Americans want changes to this bill, http://www.rasmussenreports.co…
And the President’s popularity may not be as high as you want to portray it. http://www.rasmussenreports.co…
His popularity is still up there, but he is betting a lot on this package. If it turns out that the pork package leads to inflation, or doesn’t result in any improvements but just an increase in debt, his numbers will drop like a rock.
Dems in Congress have 38% approval (which is high for Congress, which is generally disliked), Republicans have 21% approval, 68% disapproval.
Face it, everybody hates Republicans.
but saw a poll several times on the tube yesterday that put approval of Dems in congress at 48%(and greater than disapproval rating, maybe it was 41%) and approval of Rs in the 30s range.
That and poll showing 67% approval of the way Obama is handling stimulus and 51% approval of the stimulus would seem to show that, if anything, the message from the public isn’t that they don’t want Obama’s plan but that congress should get with Obama on this thing and even restore some of the cuts that Obama doesn’t like.
My recollection:
Dems in Congress: 48% approval
Reps in Congress: 31% approval
You mean utterly ineffective. There is a real risk of making the stimulus package too small (likely anything under 1 trillion). There is not particularly a risk of making it too big. The cost of doing too much stimulus is not very great because right now it doesn’t cost a lot to borrow money. Just because people are concerned about the debt implications doesn’t mean they should be.
The key is to have a fairly large stimulus focused on effective means, which is to say infrastructure, aid to states, and tax cuts for the bottom 60% of the income distribution.
and your response is to the point, “See you in 2010.” Who would have thought the Cons would continue to put their party before country; as Limbaugh has lead them to do.
It’s not even the party. As individuals in Limbaugh loving districts they are putting their own personal careers ahead of the good of either the American people or their party, which continues to shrink and is well on the way to becoming a quaint regional anachronism.
They are afraid, not of losing future elections, but of being primaried out in safe R districts if they dare to go against the hard core righties.
Honestly. You don’t need a single one of their votes.
I’m truly not being snarky. What’s the big deal about not having the R’s fall in with something they don’t believe in?
When the time came to vote for billions and billions in infrastructure and social programs for Iraq, the GOP couldn’t vote for it fast enough. Your party OK’d spending bill after spending bill, billions and billions, and all in the name of “extending democracy”.
Why is it that spending is ok as long as a Republican thinks it up, but as soon as the Democrats come up with investing some of our own money here at home, it’s against their “principles”?
And you all know it. Even some Democrats think so.
The R’s just don’t want to be complicit. You don’t need them, why the fuss?
It’s not a question of who’s behind it, it’s the purpose.
Most R’s have no problem funding troops in the field for a war they agree with, and don’t philosophically agree with government spending as an effective manipulation of the economy in a recession.
Better?
Are very useful and effective expenses. The Bridge to nowhere is rather the exception, not the rule. Just because you don’t understand why something is a good use of money doesn’t mean it isn’t a good use of money.
I just don’t “understand” how something can be considered stimulus.
Many of the programs in this bill are in fact good programs, but they don’t belong in this bill.
I’m not even talking about the stimulus…considering as much as McCain talked about pork spending during the campaign, if you weren’t complaining about pork in the stimulus, you’d just be complaining about pork in the appropriation bills.
The Republican crusade against pork baffles me since we don’t spend a particularly large amount of money on such projects (even those groups that have the biggest problem with it only identify something like $20 billion) and because many of the projects that people like McCain identify SOUND like odd ways to spend money, but are perfectly justifiable.
An obsession with pork spending is a heuristic for identifying an unserious Republican.
But this bill is loaded with spending completely unrelated to economic stimulus.
if they didn’t threaten to filibuster just to screw Dems, knowing they can’t get any of their silly alternatives passed. A McCain plan? They must be joking. Even McCain doesn’t think McCain knows jack about the economy.
I can see not pushing the stimulus to filibuster because of the concern to get it done quickly. That’s the priority here. In the future I would like to see the Dems say fine… you want to filibuster have fun, then make them get off their sorry butts and do it. And if that doesn’t work, the nuclear option.
You’re right. We don’t need them or the blue dogs for a straight up and down, especially after Franken joins the Senate.
Shuler really was a shitty quarterback.
I agree, the bill could have been much more simplistic and been at least as effective if it went something like:
$100B FMAP increase (Medicaid)
$100B State aid
$100B Infrastructure
$100B effective tax cuts
$100B Energy Efficiency/Green Jobs
I am actually fairly opposed to omnibus bills. I think bills should stick to a concrete topic. But that almost never happens. Our Congress finds a way to add random crap to virtually every bill. This is part of the logrolling process that ultimately gets things done. Much of it may be good crap, but not relevant all the same. But while arguing against the principle of combining bill topics is legitimate, using that argument as a strike against this particular bill seems less so.
Ugh, occasionally I hit the post a comment rather than the reply button and it gets all out of the thread alignment. This was in response to Laughing Boy’s “Agreed”