President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Kamala Harris
(R) Donald Trump
80%↑
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) V. Archuleta
98%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Marshall Dawson
95%
5%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd
(D) Adam Frisch
50%
50%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(D) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank
(D) River Gassen
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) John Fabbricatore
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen
(R) Sergei Matveyuk
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
52%↑
48%↓
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
April 09, 2013 04:20 PM UTC
18 Comments
Exactly.
Emily's List practices gender descrimination in their efforts, and I cannot support them for this reason. Chuck Schumer is better on women's rights than Kelly Ayotte, regardless of their reproductive organs.
They must know something.
Yeah, you know who else practices "gender discrimination?"
THE WORLD.
Go Emily's List, Go Gail Schwartz!
So you'd support a group which expressly advocates electing white people?
Well, if we lived in some nonexistent devil's advocate society in which white people had been regarded as second class citizens for centuries, and only in the last hundred years or so have achieved anything close to equality, though still nowhere near parity in representation at any level of government, I guess I would.
But since we don't live in that fantasy world, I'm down with Emily's List.
I'm with you JeffcoBlue. Women have been discriminated against for centuries. If an organization is working to get more pro-choice Democratic women into office, I'm all for that. But then I'm a woman who got their endorsement when I ran for office.
Good grief, Daft. Emily's List is merely an issue advocacy group. They're not trying to turn good old (male dominated) U.S. of A. into the Democratic Republic of New Amazonia, are they?
They're a group that saw a serious problem in American politics: Women, at over 50% of our population, are seriously under-represented in our elected offices. Women who might aspire to office face real barriers that men, in general, haven't. Those barriers stretch from country club locker rooms to corporate board rooms and every where in between where money, aquaintanceship and influence–all prerequisites for political access–have traditionally been dominated by men. Therefore, men have controlled our political scene to an extent that's causing problems for all of us. At least, I don't consider the obvious mysogyny of Heck, Kline, Latham, Reed, Tipton, and Valadao to be in my best interests. Whoever supported their access to office were doing none of us a favor.
Emily's List is an attempt to maneuver around the barriers for women in election politics, to encourage progressive Democratic women in races against regressieve men and women, then rally support and raise money for them. I've not known them to challenge progressive Democrats, male or female.
When affirmative action is needed to correct an imbalance, I'm in favor of it..
Then be a gender promotion organization or an issue advocacy organization. Saying only one gender is worthy of support on that issue ignores the sacrifices in blood men have made for the pro-choice movement, and sometimes backfires (see Coakley, Martha.)
Er, umm, Daft, I know you're a doctor. White people come in both genders.
In other words, not equivalent. Representation by women in Congress is significantly less than representation by old white men. Go Emily! I need to send another donation.
If your issue is to elect women, no problem. If your issue is pro-choice, telling men their candidacy is not wanted is.
Would an organization designed to exclusively elect men be cool?
It might be if it supported <a href="http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/04/05/qa-new-beard-pac-supports-only-bearded-candidates-mustaches-need-not-apply/">bearded candidates</a>, because in some ways the story of the last hundred years has been the story of the decline of elected officials with beards. Among other stories.
Hey RG…haven't come across your handle here of late. I admit my own presence was hit or miss for awhile, but I am getting to know the good wifi links at the mall here and I will be here for at least six more weeks. You should visit more often. I miss your input.
Good to catch your user name…..
See my comment above and substitute "men" for "white people." Same diff.
Here's my deal:
Who has been assasinated by anti-choice extremists? Female clinic workers have been collateral damage of anti-choice assasinations, but the doctors killled have been men.
If David Gunn, George Tiller or Barnett Slepian were still alive and wanted to run for office, they wouldn't merit Emily's List's support, merely because of their gender. There is a woman organizing the re-opening of TIller's clinic (not a doctor or abortion provider, those names are still secret), but the names with any national resonance of the providers known for doing late procedures, writing Op-eds, being plaintiffs on lawsuits, and targeted by the antis are Warren Hearn, Leroy Carhart, and Steve Chasen. I'm sure my anecdotal experience is not an exhaustive census and I apologize for any lightning-rod female abortion provider I missed.
Still, if men, who provide the services without which abortion rights would be only theoretical, can die in service of the pro-choice movement, then men can be elected to do the same. I might support the same candidates as EL, and I might give them money, but I won't do it through an organization that categorically treats men as unqualified on this issue.
Hmm. I just don't get the sense from EL that they are judgmental like that. They simply support women candidates. JB is correct about the historical fact of discrimination against women, and that's the bottom line for me. None of us disagree with you on choice, and I would ask for specifics to back your suggestion that EL treats men as "unqualified."
To be qualified to receive support from them one must be female. Res ipsa loquitor.
I have been a feminist since I was old enough to understand the meaning of the word. On the other hand, I am not a big fan of zero tolerance anything…an interesting dilemma in this discussion.
I also believe it is true that women would not have come so far without the help of enlightened men. Perhaps, someday, a member of the Emilys' List board will suggest a change in policy. Until then, I guess I will just have to remain conflicted…
I hear the White House wants Garcia. A little palace intrigue brewing?
ArapG, Please shut up until you've told us all what you think of that violent, vile e-mail from Mr. Crazy Eyes to Hudak. Do you condemn it unequivocally, no excuses? One thing at a time, please