U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(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%
July 14, 2011 09:14 PM UTC
78 Comments
Keep filling that echo chamber, Pols…
not.
You dumb fucking asshole.
You’ve clearly lost the public perception on this spending and debt issue.
Even Obama admitted that killing the Bush era tax cuts would have killed 1million jobs, so don’t try to change the subject to tax increases ….
I guess polls mean nothing to you, unless they’re Rassy polls, eh?
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x129…
H/T to WestSloper. Don’t count your Republican victories in 2012 just yet.
I don’t want the debt ceiling to be raised either, but that doesn’t mean that isn’t the right thing to do right now. So don’t read too much into those numbers.
The Republican’t Party kept raising the Federal Credit Card limit FIVE TIMES under his watch….and nay a peep from the Red-Blooded faithful.
… b/c the only thing that matters is that it’s TERRIBLE that Obama is doing it, so stop changing the subject by asking why they didn’t freak out when Bush did the same…
…I looked it up on Wikipedia and found out the truth according to Frank Luntz.
January 20, 2009, 11:59:30AM – America was at peace around the world. We had a budget surplus, a trade surplus and the deficit was just a distant memory. Anyone that wanted a high paying job had one. Congress was on the verge of passing a constitutional amendment banning all taxes.
30 seconds later, Obama was inaugurated…
http://politicalticker.blogs.c…
this is silly to have dueling polls. What possible proposal out there for not raising the debt can possibly be successful? Pay China first? Bachmann’s on that one. Cut the budget to cover the deficit? Go back to Econ 101, cutting government spending will have a negative multiplier effect on GDP. How are the austerity budgets working out in Europe, such as the UK?
1)Comment first on any diary
2)Leave such a ridiculous comment that polsters are forced to confront it, ensuring vitriolic commenting.
I’ve made note of Liberturd’s M.O. and AGop does the same.
Another spurious “fact” spouting RW troll marching in lockstep with the PPC directive to dump & run. They beget no discourse but rather disdain & contempt.
So here are some poll results I posted in another thread (you must have missed them, huh?) just in case you have any interest in anything that doesn’t come straight from the Borg:
on Quinnipac poll:
So who’s living in an echo chamber?
Not to mention that “handling of the economy” will flip overnight if the Republicans actually force a doomsday scenario.
Just asking whether Americans want to raise the debt ceiling and acting as if thats proof that we shouldn’t is disingenuous. Its the difference between asking “do you want to pay your mortgage and credit card bills” and “will you pay your mortgage and credit card bills”.
…what I think, as an independent, is truly worrisome for the GOP is that the leadership is all over the place on this issue. It does not inspire much confidence to see these petty inner-party power struggles whilst the rest of us are sitting anxiously on the edge of our seats, praying for a rational solution.
If we don’t raise the debt ceiling, we could have catastrophic economic effects later. This is no exaggeration. Call your member of Congress and urge them to “raise the debt ceiling”. Here are some phone numbers: http://www.contactingthecongre…
If a default is such an end-of-the-world event, why doesn’t Obama agree to a short-term extension to avoid it so they have more time to negotiate it? Why is he insisting on a minimum period of time being after the election?
After all, all the GOP seems to want is to avoid any compromise on anything they value and no responsibility for any consequences. They’re the ones who turned down a deal for almost everything they asked for. You don’t seem to be very interested in asking them why.
Almost everything they demanded?
Can you be more specific?
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.n…
But he hasn’t been specific about those cuts, only in what’s off the table, and the R’s don’t trust him to make ambiguous, down-the-road cuts.
Anything that would constitute real compromise. Ever since the days when the Rs had the trifecta or or most of it with Bush, their idea of reaching out in a bi-partisan way has been to tell Dems that if they care to support whatever the Rs want, the Rs will let them. With all their signed in blood pledges to various crazies on various issues, that’s the best they can do.
Politics.
The cynical debate going on in DC and in the media about the debt ceiling would ebe 100x louder in ’12.
Settle the debt ceiling question and then have substantive debates about spending and revenue when debating the budget.
Our future is being gambled over Presidential politics?
I’m SHOCKED, I tell you!
Why do you think some R’s want to give away their authority to the President? They don’t want face the political heat that would come from a) supporting a debt increase compromise, or b) taking the fall for making the economy worse.
Either way, this whole conversation is about politics, not about the economy.
I still disagree with other polsters about this particular nuke…yes, it could be eventually overturned on appeals, but that’s not the point.
Obama would use it as another club to beat the GOP senseless – he would be the adult that gets things done to save the economy, while the Repubs hooted and screeched away while the markets tanked.
That would be Christmas to the Republicans. Please, oh please, do this.
n/t
Let’s just leave each other alone, ok?
Because thats the impression I’m left with
it’s more than obsession. It’s good old fashioned, passive/aggressive bullying.
is merely Prom Queen, not Thought Police.
of bullying perfectly describes Nancy’s behavior…to a tee.
I’m just commenting on actual powers versus perceived powers.
Time to dust out the hoosegow, we’re about to witness Pols first ever instance of recidivism.
. . . munch, munch . . . I gotta tell you . . . munch, munch . . . that Knorr Caldo con sabor de Pollo (bouillon powder) along with a little chipoltle powder and some fresh, finely grated sharp cheddar . . . munch, munch . . . best bowl of popcorn ever . . .
McConnell could get his troops in line. He wants to hand Obama the op to raise it against the wishes of the GOP three times. Sounds kind of magical, three times, like in a Fairy Tale, doesn’t it?.
Unfortunately Tea Party types refuse to see this as just politics. They actually believe in stuff, wrong as most of that stuff is. McConnell’s having trouble wrapping his head around the fact that they don’t see the beauty of his solution of letting the Pres do whatever he wants with the debt ceiling in exchange for what he thinks will be a political point scoring op for the GOP, though polls would tend to disagree.
I think this is at the bottom of the GOP establishment leaders’ loss of control. The Tea Party cares about more than just making sure the other guy suffers political losses. They really want what they say they want.
It is making it hard to craft a compromise and what the tea party types believe is in some respects totally wrong. But rather than being craven political animals, they are standing on their beliefs.
The problem the GOP has is they have a large number of true believes who are sticking to their core beliefs. But a big chunk of those beliefs run counter to reality.
those of us who have to live with…you know…reality.
This is no surprise for anyone in congress. We’ve all known for months, and months, and months, and months that this day was coming. There has been plenty of time to negotiate. That statement is a huge cop-out.
I’d like to read your response to this one.
I think in the one area where they were able to put something forth, the House, they did. Not a perfect bill, certainly, but at least it has ideas that move us toward solvency.
We can’t bring anything forward in the Senate without Reid’s blessing, and I think it’s a great big game of chicken at this point and both sides are pretty ready to roll the dice and see who takes the blame. Although I will say that I think the R base is more dead-set on their Sens and Reps not raising tax rates AT ALL than is the Dem base on trying to expire the Bush tax cuts and soak the ‘corporate jet owners’ or whoever that is.
and so do you. But here’s what I’d like to know. The same Rs who’ve been screaming the loudest about how we absolutely must make draconian cuts because we can’t keep spending money we don’t have or terrible awful things will happen to us and our children and grandchildren and dogs and cats, etc. are simultaneously claiming that the fuss over dire consequences if the debt ceiling isn’t raised is just a scare tactic because we really do have plenty of money to all the bills. You can’t turn on cable anymore without hearing a rightie proclaiming that there’s plenty of money. WTF?
Let’s not blame Obama for not accepting any short term deals on the basis that there hasn’t been enough time.
There has been.
If more of our legislators exercised rational decision making and not arrogant partisanship we’d have finished this conversation a long time ago.
Since January, the GOP has opposed any long-term deals and only supports short-term deals. We saw this play out with the continuing resolutions and the refusal to negotiate a budget.
The GOP would rather have many short term deals so they can attach smaller spending cuts to each one without having to give up anything in return. A major agreement will force the GOP to accept larger concessions like tax increases. So, the President is calling them on it.
The point of requiring it to last until after the election is because he knows the campaign will prevent any substantive policy from being passed. Didn’t the GOP campaign on radically reducing government spending? Why do they insist on a short-term deal?
if they can have Obama raise the ceiling multiple times and give them multiple ops to complain about it. That way the GOP grownups hope to please their corporate overlords, who really want to see this thing resolved, while fooling the wacky ignorant base into believing that they fought the good fight but what could they do? Obama is to blame.
Trouble is, McConnell forgot that when you want to do something this nakedly cynical you’re not supposed to run around explaining to everybody, in detail, exactly how it’s just a nakedly cynical political ploy. Once you say it all out loud it kind of ruins it as a devious plot. Of course in this case it was pretty weak as a devious plot to begin with. McConnell and Boehner are both just losing it.
I think he’s being fairly up front. He’s saying he knows we need to raise the debt ceiling, and that Obama is willing to crash the economy rather than actually reform entitlements or shrink government, so let’s let him have all the credit (blame), and let’s remind voters of it three times before the election.
…it was fine that the Republican’t President raised the Debt Ceiling (4 times with a Repub Congress, once with the Dems) and that was Fuck-all no problem with “fiscal conservatives.”
Nary a peep from the same jackholes who are now hooting endlessly how dangerous to liberty and civilization it is to do it now.
What changed? And I mean, using that “mathy-facty” thing….
According to all your little rightie pol friends there is really no need for all the debt ceiling fuss because we have plenty of money to pay all of our bills. It’s just a Dem scare tactic that somehow coexists with the other thing they’re all saying: Everybody run! Without draconian cuts right this instant to end all this spending of money we don’t have we’re all gonna die!
If you claim to believe both those things, it’s pretty obvious you don’t really believe anything except that the rich should pay as close to nothing as possible. To hell with the middle class. All the little people are good for is cheap labor.
I expect you to have well-reasoned arguments, not this ‘tad-like simpleton system of posting pretty pictures. ESPECIALLY when you don’t source or link it…from the fucking HERITAGE FOUNDATION. You might has well start adding Grover Norquist quotes as your sig line.
I’ll do this again:
Why is raising the debt ceiling such a monstrously bad thing now, but was fucking A-ok under Bush? The fiscal situation was not that much different – in fact, it was worse then because we were putting two ginourmous wars on the taxpayer’s credit card.
If anything, this graph shows the Federal government desperately NEEDS to raise more revenues to balance the fucking mess that Bush got us in. Your hero Reagan had no qualms about doing it REPEATEDLY – why isn’t it the right move now?
Oh, right. “Job-killing taxes.” In advance – BULLSHIT. The 10 years of the Millionaire Tax Cut created no new jobs. PERIOD. I can even source ‘tad’s serious of annoying posts throughout the entire 08 election as proof.
What it really was the “Deficit-Busting Tax Cuts.” Y’know, the one Bush promised would balance the budget in 10 years.
Where’s the balanced budget? Got any other repub sunshine to try and blow up my ass?
A-O-fucking-K? Live and learn . . .
To avoid the blatantly obvious fact that the tax cuts have not resulted in the “job creating class” stimulating the economy thereby creating great jobs thereby increasing revenue.
They will simply refuse to answer when confronted with the fact that if lowering taxes on the rich and corporations is the answer, why is the job situation so abysmal with the lowest tax rates of the modern era and corporations sitting on historically high profits? According to their theory of economics, everything should already be better than ever.
Sometimes they’ll say lower taxes for “job creators” (it’s already established they are not job creators) increases revenue. Classic trickle down. Other times they’ll say we don’t need more revenue. That it’s a spending problem not a tax problem. We don’t need no stinkin’ revenue.
They will say that, for the first time in history, we can’t raise the debt ceiling without draconian cuts to be born entirely by the middle class and poor because we have to stop spending money we don’t have. But they will also say that there is no need to raise the debt ceiling to avoid default because we have plenty of money to pay for everything as it is.
They will just keep tap dancing as fast as they can because they know perfectly well their contradictory positions make no sense and that if people stopped to think about them they would realize that the GOP works only for the interests of a tiny wealth and power elite and wants to continue to cut and outsource jobs for the greater profit of that tiny minority. The rest of the blargle is just to get the majority they need to vote for them to do so in spite of being royally screwed.
Do you guys think the scope and size of government hasn’t expanded under Obama?
I find the fact that you never address criticism of GOP pols and their policies by arguing their merits to be very telling.
What it tells me is that, in light of a total absence of reality based evidence to support demonstrably bankrupt GOP economic policies, the best you can do is say… Don’t look at them. Look at Obama. Look at liberals. Look at the lack of leadership.
All of your responses to criticism of those pols and their policies are really nothing more than versions of “these are not the droids you’re looking for”. All things considered, it’s no wonder you’re finding misdirection to be the only serviceable response.
I disagree with government not living within its means, especially when its because of welfare or entitlement spending.
War spending doesn’t bother me so much.
So my position is actually consistent, unlike the President’s.
I mean, is it because
war spending can always be repaid with
oil revenuesunicorn dust?Because war is sometimes necessary. Brand new, huge entitlements and payoffs to public union groups that got you elected are not, IMO.
you have yet to offer any evidence of the efficacy of GOP economic policy. Since what they are calling for is more of the same that has been in place since the Bush tax cuts, don’t you think you ought to demonstrate how successful they’ve been to date and how, because of that success, more of the same is what we need for even more success?
So far you’ve steadfastly declined, platitudes about living within our means, except for off the books spending on wars to enrich Halliburton and friends, notwithstanding. You’ve still got nothing. And Sir Alec may have gotten away with that droid stuff but you, sir, are no Sir Alec.
And may I say that I agree that there has been a regrettable lack of leadership on the part of the President and the Democrats the we elected to support him but only in so far as they have failed to stand up to the horrendously awful policies of the GOP. The fact that they should have much more energetically quashed those lousy policies starting the day after Obama and the new two house Dem majority congress took office in January 2009 is hardly an argument in favor of those disastrous policies and the sorry state to which they’ve brought us.
Do agree Obama and our elected Dems must bear a good sized portion of the blame for failing to rescue our economy from the right when they had their best chance to do so. As the so many buyers remorse ridden voters now realize, responding to that failure by handing the House, numerous governorships and state legislatures back to the Rs, whose policies Dems largely allowed to remain in place, was a really, really boneheaded idea.
It’s cool, we just have completely different ideas and motivations as to what role we think the government should play, and what and how much money we should spend.
I respect that.
Have a great weekend.
Cool. I understand it can’t be done. Can’t really blame you for taking a permanent pass. Kind of like trying to prove the earth is flat. Have a nice weekend yourself.
Can you be more specific? Which part or “gop economics” would you like me to try to defend?
facty stuff all along. You’ve consistently chose not to address any of it in your past responses to my comments. At this point, if you care to respond with anything other than “But Mom-mmm. Look what Obama did”, it would now be your job to go through the threads. Alternately, you could just share which GOP economic policies you support and why, no need to refer back to my comments at all. But I’d recommend just going ahead and having a nice weekend. Hey, it’s not even raining yet.
Low taxes, as little regulation as possible, as little government as possible, strong military, no public employee unions other than emergency services…
How’s that?
What do you mean by low taxes? Do you think the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest just weren’t deep enough to create the jobs we still aren’t seeing? Do you think even lower taxes will create jobs? If so, do you have data to back that up? Show it, please.
Do you think that, with corporations sitting on historic piles of profit, the reason we aren’t seeing more job creation is because it’s still not enough? If so, once again, back it up.
Do you think eliminating public sector jobs is helpful in a recession? Do you think eliminating public sector jobs leads to more jobs in the private sector? If so show why.
Do you think insurers will be willing to provide affordable coverage to seniors if we go with the Ryan plan and send seniors into the market with vouchers? If so demonstrate how past experience supports that notion.
Just saying that you like low taxes and small government says nothing practical in terms of how you think we can rescue this economy, make decent livings, provide ourselves and our descendents with safe air, water and food supplies, quality health care, and quality education to make sure we can meet future challenges, with or without government involvement.
For example, if you think progressives are wrong when we assert that the tax cuts for the wealthiest and subsidies and breaks for highly profitable corporations have not created the promised jobs and therefore more of the same is unlikely to create them, you need to show us your evidence. These threads are full of statistics backing up our assertions on that subject. If you won’t address them and provide counter evidence then your opinion that we’re wrong must be said to be based on nothing concrete.
spending on those “sometimes necessary” wars has to occur (I mean, no such thing as
oil revenuesunicorn dust, right?) — so, you haven’t any objections to now increasing revenues sufficent to pay for those “sometimes necessary” wars and their debt servcing (kind of like the way that it should have been done in the first place)?to wage war without raising taxes to fund it? Elbee must be aware that, throughout history, when countries go to war they raise taxes. But that was before the theory, so far undemonstrated to actually work outside of the minds of conservatives, whereby you magically increase revenue by lowering taxes, even while spending billions a week off the books on a war, thus increasing prosperity to the point where the lower rates bring in more money, came to be the accepted dogma. Like all dogma, it’s crap, of course..
That’s a mighty fine strawman.
It’s actually the Republican position: hold the economy hostage to Republican demands: Fuck granny, or everyone gets fucked.
It would be a political decision to prioritize SS payments to be the first to go. That’s why he’s threatening it.
He’s already expanded government to unsustainability (beyond the already-existant unsustainability of SS and Medicare/Medicaid) and he’s totally unwilling to back off of it or make cuts.
He’s unwilling to even be specific. Did you see him waffle when Tapper asked him to list what he’d allow., specifically, to be cut?
You and other Republicans continue to crow about the size and scope of government, and how important it is to cut government.
Here’s something from the Dept of Labor (which is government – I know – but they track this kind of stuff while others don’t):
Seems like government is cutting jobs and continues to cut jobs. I know federal, state and local government employees who got laid off.
IMHO, y’all aren’t bitching about the number of people working for the government, you’re bitching about the scope of power of the government. Fine. Let’s have that debate.
But, the debt ceiling isn’t about the scope of the federal government. It is about our ability to pay our debts and if we don’t we incur more debt.
Republicans look like monkeys throwing their shit when they argue the country should decrease debt while threatening default which increases the debt for the country and the citizens.
Like watching a bunch of fucking selfish three year olds.
Jesus.
Fuck Tapper and his specific question.
Obama shouldn’t cut shit. Raise the debt limit or don’t and suffer the consequences.
Want to talk about cuts? We’ll do that during the budget process, not when we’re deciding whether or not to pay our creditors/seniors/soldiers.
Gimme a break. Maybe that’s, y’know, a point of negotiation? No point in showing all your cards.
To quote Mitch Daniels during the Bush administration, “this is just a housekeeping matter” to increase the debt ceiling. It’s the moronic tea baggers who have made this a “crisis”.
Just like Cleavon Little in “Blazing Saddles” who pulls a gun on himself. (I hope a tech savvy pollster could find a picture from that scene.)
Pass the extension and then pass a jobs bill!
What kind of “jobs bill” are you talking about? How do you want to pay for it?
..now, just find the Bloom County Cartoon where two economists come out of Binkley’s anxiety closet and start arguing about the economy…
How about jobs for infrastructure projects, eg improving Internet access, and power grid and highways and teachers and police and and ,,, just for starters.
Pay for it by eliminating loopholes like the S Corp loophole I use everyday to the tune of 25 billion per year (see earlier posts), And raising taxes………on the wealthy (horrors!). And even by deficit spending. We need to generate demand to stimulate the economy, I was a deficit hawk back to the Reagan years. Unfortunately, now is not the time to balance the budget. Let’s do it with a vengeance once we get jobs recovery,
without falling to my death as they collapse under me. That’s kind of more important to me than making sure the ultra rich have the opportunity to become hyper-mega-rich and get taxed at such a low rate it’s hardly worth the bother they go through to avoid paying at all if they can help it. Does my reluctance to die so they can spend on everything but job creation make me a no good class warrior?