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%
February 19, 2010 05:26 PM UTC
26 Comments
Clearly
Clearly
continues to model that high road you claim to have taken. It’s hard to find one that doesn’t do so in exactly the same way that this one does. Thanks again. We need more people like you on Pols, and in the world. Keep up the good work. I’m ashamed to have ever misjudged you.
will have any better result than mine did, Steve. But if nothing else, my little sally — Don’t you mean “Whom do you serve, Sharon?’ ” seems to have improved her grammar! 😉
I made a grammatical error during a difficult time in my life but then again I’m not a professional writer either that writes for free on BennetPols. Are you one of the casualties of the newspaper industry and can’t find meaningful work? Or are you just about wishing to put contracts out on someone mourning the loss of her sister? And by the way why do you give a free pass to someone like MOTR and yet go after someone that has so little power on this website? Could it be you need MOTR to promote your no-longer-paid-for reporting?
The who-whom thing is a joke.
And you too. 😉
The who-whom error is made so consistently that experts such as William Safire, for whom “usage is king,” have given up on it. I was just jocularly posing the notion that such a grammarian’s response to your question to MOTR was pedantically funny. Anyway, sorry to hear about your sister. Grief is no fun, been there myself. Best wishes.
See below. Troll-hide is easy to get under, but impossible to get through. Amazing stuff.
I’m not interested in you and don’t wish to engage in your petty taunts.
Under it, but not through it.
someone who claims to be uninterested in engaging in petty taunts does little else:
your most recent comment, as of this posting
another comment of yours from yesterday
another comment of yours from yesterday, in which you try to goad someone for being out of work (classy)
and this one, in which you took two tries to call someone an “asshole”
And all of that was just one portion of your comments in one day! We could go back, finding you complaining about someone’s blogging for being too old, and accusing everyone who ever disagrees with you (which is pretty much everyone) of being stupid and evil. And then there’s all of your shrill posts in which you express your shallow and untempered certainties as obnoxiously as possible….
And, despite being the most belligerent and obnoxious poster on this site (beating out some very stiff competition), you simultanesouly complain the most about others!!!
You don’t get it, and you never will, because you are so perfectly insulated within your own self-contained reality, that none of it can ever get through to you. That’s the definition of “insanity”.
Now, as i’ve said before, I’m perfectly willing to go back to ignoring your droning, meaningless, empty noise. Knock yourself out. You’re absurd, but who cares?
But if you keep buzzing in my ear, I’ll keep swatting you away, with a certain guilty pleasure. It’s totally your choice.
You have your own hate club so I’m satisfied that you are totally irrelevant on this site. There’s no need for me to add to your reputation of a blathering idiot who doesn’t know when to shut up or when to stop hitting on the keyboard. Run along now.
all you have to do to stop engaging with me is to stop engaging with me. All you have to do to get me to “run along” is to stop responding to any of my posts. That’s what I told you after my one and only quick exchange with you, and that’s what I told you again above. But you keep declining my generous offer.
Strange, isn’t it, how my “hate club” seems to consist of every other poster on this site? You insult people for typos, you insult them for supporting someone other than you in a primary, you insult them for any disagreement they might have with any arbitrary certainty you might hold, you insult them for being out of work, you insult them for being old, you insult them for using language that you yourself routinely use in greater abundance, you insult them for being a tiny fraction as belligerent as you, you insult them for everything and anything, and you keep on going, a little energizer bunny of anger and ignorance all wound up and clattering away.
I’d say that you and reality need to get in touch some day, but I don’t really care, nor, I would guess, does anyone else. You can keep trying to turn the world around you on its head, “proving” that everybody else is wrong and you alone are right, that everybody else is “a blathering idiot” and you alone are the one decent and reasonable person on Earth. But the only person you’ll ever convince is yourself.
So, you can either keep swimming around in that barrel of yours, sticking your tongue out at all of the cognitive rifles pointed your way, or you can just stop sniping stupidly at people against whom, in a battle of wits or words, you are utterly unarmed (which includes everybody). It’s completely up to you.
If you stop addressing me with your blathering nonsense, I will gladly leave you alone to mutter to yourself incessantly. Otherwise, I’ll keep shining an unflattering spotlight on you and your superlative folly. Your choice.
And I’ll even throw in a special accommodation: Feel free to get your last punctuation-challenged spittle-spewing retort in here. The last word is all yours. Your normal background noise is really fairly harmless: If it makes you feel good, who cares? But if you keep up your little sniping at my heels, I’ll keep stepping on you and grinding my foot in return.
By “hate club,” I thought you were referring to the club of people who “hate” you. I see now that you were trying to discredit me by referring to those who have expressed anomisity toward me, almost all of whom no longer do. Two explicitly apologized and ended it (one here and one privately), one has implicitly slipped back into a friendly interaction with me, and most of the rest have simply stopped interacting belligerantly. As far as I can tell, only one “nemesis” is left. Not much of a club, after all….
You see, Sharon, some people can have altercations with others, and then get past them. Others can’t. You’re at war with everyone here, and always have been. And that’s fine: Knock yourself out. For my part, I’d be happy to get past this altercation with you, though you’ve made it pretty clear in all of your posts, on all topics, with all people, that it will never be the result of anything resembling reason or good will on your part. Still, sometimes mutual indifference is the best that can be attained, and I’d be happy to recover that state with you (which we had enjoyed for so long). I’m being completely sincere when I say that I feel no ill-will toward you, but rather only contempt that I can either express or not express as the situation requires.
So, you can keep lashing out, or you can (after, as I said, one more free shot, if you wish) settle back into what for me was a state of being harmlessly irrelevant. I’m really hoping for the latter, because dismantling you is neither productive, nor even much fun any more.
I don’t think Bennet has a chance to win in the general unless he takes credit for getting a public option through reconciliation.
I gave you the last word to tell me how horrible I am, not to put words in my mouth about one of our U.S. Senators.
Obviously, my responses to you have all been directed at your “communication style,” and never at the thin little scum of content floating on it. I have never considered that content to be compelling or interesting, and, in fact, have been more offended by how it has been expressed for Andrew’s sake than for Michael’s.
I have always expressed my immense respect and admiration for both Andrew and Michael, and will have no problem working hard to get either one of them elected in the general election. Until very recently, I had never stated which one I prefered.
My personal opinion, which I have generally refrained from expressing, is that Michael not only is the better-qualified U.S. Senator on the basis of his words and actions, but also that he has a far better chance of winning the general than Andrew does, regardless of whether he receives credit for getting a public option through reconciliation. There are many reasons for that opinion, and, being reasons, there is no point in reiterating them here (in an exchange with someone devoid of reason).
You are giving me too much power. I don’t deserve it.
First, here’s what they don’t look like: “Honestly, I hate to see anyone this upset,” and “I hope you’ll lighten up because it’s sad to see anyone so upset.”
No, you don’t, and no, it isn’t. The whole purpose of your posts, from the moment I chose to take a chance on gently challenging you on your “holier than thou” comment several days or a week ago, has been to upset me, and, in fairness, mine has been to upset you, on the way to getting rid of you. The reason why you think I’m “a narcisisstic bore,” whether true or not, is because you’re really, really, blindingly pissed off at me, and humiliated by me. But, in reality, your anger and humiliation doesn’t define who I am (whether you’re correct or not in your assertions), it only defines how you try to portray me.
You see? That’s truth. Everyone, absolutely everyone, recognizes it, and yet you try to pretend that you can create an alternate reality more conducive to your rhetorical (and psychological) needs. Get over it. You can’t. You’re not that talented; not by a long, long way. In fact, you are always, painfully, agonizing transparent. To everyone.
The sooner you stop trying, and the sooner you ignore me and let me ignore you, the less humiliated you’ll be. And, as loathesome as I find you, I honestly want you to stop humiliating yourself. It just doesn’t serve any purpose at all. As I’ve said all along, I was happy to ignore you before I made that passing (and rather gentle) comment about your mindbogglingly blatant hypocricy, and I would be happy to go back to ignoring you. Unfortunately, you made it clear that you were not willing to ignore me. Hopefully, I’ve managed to change your mind.
Now, I’m not going to respond to you for awhile, unless you try to put false words in my mouth or try to continue sniping at me on threads unrelated to you. Go ahead and get the last of your piss and vinegar out. Get it all out. Then, please, get over it.
You will, presumably, continue to be a pathetic buffoon. But I do not need to keep pointing it out. That’s a truce I think we can both live with.
The Political Mind
I cling to the bias that facts actually do matter more than Westen claims. But his work on the role of feelings and their primacy in poltiical decisions and opinions are formed is compelling.
According to Westen when engaging those with strong feelings, it is helpful to know that those feelings are the point, and that we have them too, no matter how rational we prefer to think we are. Just sayin’
I don’t want to respond to you here, because I promised to allow a final venting without saying anything else incendiary. But I think there are factors involved not identified in what you posted above. I had happily ignored SH until recently, and would be happy to do so again, but I wanted to ensure that it would be a mutual arrangement first. There were indications that that was not going to happen without some frontloading. Email me at steve.harvey.hd28@gmail.com if you want a less cryptic, and more comprehensive explanation.
Again, this is priceless:
Project much?
n/t.:)
Sharon Hanson would claim that he did so as part of his nefarious plan to … well I’m not sure what exactly Sharon thinks Bennet’s goal is. But it is evil!
And he pursues it while stroking a large white cat.
n/t.