U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

(D) Joe Neguse

(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Jena Griswold

60%

60%

40%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Alexis King

(D) Brian Mason

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line

(D) George Stern

(D) A. Gonzalez

(R) Sheri Davis

40%

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%

30%

20%

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) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Joe Salazar

50%

40%

40%

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
September 28, 2018 07:02 AM UTC

Friday Open Thread

  • 15 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“Once a word has been allowed to escape, it cannot be recalled.”

–Horace

Comments

15 thoughts on “Friday Open Thread

  1. Question:  why aren't the folks who organized the women's march in DC after Trump was inaugurated doing the same over this nomination? They did a great job turning people out to protest then. Why not now? 

     

  2. I certainly do not like what their goal is but I have to admit, I admire their ability to stay focused and impose discipline on their members in bringing this guy across the finish line. People who basically hate one another can pull together to achieve a common objective.

    For Democrats, process is its own reward. For Republicans, the end justifies the means.

      1. Independent voters might be more persuaded by the ABA than the Federalist Society.  

        The full ABA selection committee should support the ABA President's call for an FBI investigation.  If this is done and the full Senate still votes without the investigation, then we might lose on Kavanagh, but gain the Senate majority in a few weeks.

  3. Timothy Egan of the New York Times explains the bargain today's GOP has made with the Devil Trump:

    Bonfire of Republican Vanities

    Their bargain with Trump was simple: They would get tax cuts for the well-connected and a right-wing majority on the Supreme Court. Oh, but the price has gone up.

    The bargain was simple: Republicans would get tax cuts for the well-connected and a right-wing majority on the Supreme Court, and in turn would overlook every assault on decency, truth, our oldest allies and most venerable principles. They expected Trump to govern by grudges, lie eight times a day, call women dogs, act as a useful idiot for foreign adversaries, make himself a laughingstock to the world.

    “I knew he was a shallow, lazy ignoramus,” as Ann Coulter said, “but I didn’t care.”

    Kavanaugh says he’s appalled that sordid details of one’s past are being used to destroy reputation. Is this the same Kavanaugh who once demanded that the most graphic details of another man’s private life, Bill Clinton, be made public “piece by painful piece”?

    When Republicans made this pact with Trump, they did not expect that the lab for long-term governance — elite prep school, Ivy League college and law school, the right mentors, think tank promoters, lawyers and judges — would be shown as an incubator of social pathologies.

  4. Oh, Mr. Gardner…

    Marijuana businesses in compliance with Colorado law could face federal charges under new enforcement strategy

    This new approach also could lead to federal charges being brought against marijuana businesses that are in full compliance with Colorado law and not selling pot on the black market, U.S. Attorney Bob Troyer acknowledged in an interview with The Denver Post this week.

    “We could,” Troyer said when asked whether his office might prosecute marijuana businesses operating legally under Colorado law. “We make decisions based on safety. Sometimes compliance with state law is relevant to that, and sometimes it’s not. We do not make decisions based on labels like ‘compliance with state law.’ Labels are not relevant to us — people’s safety is.”

    Troyer offered no further explanation of the circumstances under which he would pursue federal charges against marijuana businesses in full compliance with Colorado laws.

    But very soon, he said, his office — working with Colorado drug task forces — will take enforcement action against an unnamed chain of licensed marijuana dispensaries in the Denver metro area that he alleges is an illegal drug-trafficking organization disguised as a legitimate pot business. The action will come within two weeks, he said.

    1. Well, if what he's talking about here are the dispensaries that sell several pounds of pot to a single customer one ounce at a time over the course of a couple of hours, then I'm actually not opposed to some federal intervention.

      The only reason to do that is to either sell it to kids or take it out-of-state.  All that does is provide ammo to the anti-pot crowd.

      1. I agree, ajb. That's no different than selling the stuff out the back door to street dealers. Anyone who buys that way is up to no good and the clerks must know it. I do feel kinda sorry for the poor saps buying the stuff at mark-up after the dealers pay retail.

  5. Thoughtful analysis of Kavanaugh's testimony:

    As a lawyer, I listened carefully to the claims made that “all the alleged witnesses deny knowledge of the party.” These witnesses were not available for cross examination. If they were, we could clarify whether “have no knowledge,” is the same as “it is not possible I was ever at a gathering of this type.” Given the amount of drinking that reportedly went on in the prep school culture of this time and place, it is believable that the other witnesses have no active memory of this informal gathering. This does not mean it didn’t happen.

    Finally, I put together all the bits of fibbing Kavanaugh has engaged in, all the way back to stating that he had no knowledge of the pornography-sharing, harassing habits of Judge Alex Kozinsky, a mentor he was close to, even though Kozinsky’s habits were common knowledge. Then there is the “I like beer, I did sometimes drink too much, but I never had a memory lapse from drinking” line, repeated like rote in the testimony, along with the rewriting of sex/drinking references he has made in the past, to make them laughably innocent. A sexual slur becomes a drinking reference, a sloppy drunk reference becomes fibbing braggadocio, throwing up jokes were not about drinking—he has stomach issues, the “alumnius” slur against a woman was a mere gesture of admiration and friendship. This effort to repaint the past is not consistent with Kavanaugh’s known association, not just in high school, but in college, with groups that favored copious amounts of liquor and demeaning treatment of women. His fraternity was notorious for this at Yale. We never got an honest answer about the drinking. Is that, I wonder, because it leads to the next question: “Is it possible this happened and you just don’t remember?”

    Kavanaugh spent his entire career deeply immersed in the right wing of his party. To complain now that the process is “politicized,” raises the question “by whom”?

  6. Looks like they may need an APB out for Mark Judge:

    President Trump, ceding to a request from Senate Republican leaders facing an insurrection in their ranks, ordered the F.B.I. on Friday to open an investigation into accusations of sexual assault leveled against Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh, his nominee to the Supreme Court.

    1. There is some controversy about what the White House instructed the FBI to do. No doubt there will be continuing obfuscation and challenges.

      What I did not realize is the report will be generated and given back to the White House, who will determine what to release to the Senate committee, who will work within the White House boundaries and determine what, if anything, they want to be public.

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

163 readers online now

Newsletter

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