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%
March 30, 2016 03:17 PM UTC
49 Comments
The pro-life movement has made clear that abortion is murder. If a woman hires someone to kill her husband, it's not just the hitman who goes to prison. How could anyone who believes that abortion is murder not support putting the person(s) who orchestrated and funded that murder behind bars?
It seems that pro-life folks need to worry less about Trump and more about people like Kasich who seem to think that murderers and their conspirators should get off scott-free.
Exactly. At least this is one thing Trump is being honest about. Other anti-choice pols don't want to admit that making abortion a crime would make women obtaining abortions criminals and, of couse,there would have to be some penalty.
Kasich, who is anti-choice and cut off funding for Planned Parenthood has said this is terrible. Of course he wouldn't want to punish women. Well what does he think "illegal" means? What does he think caling abortion murder means?
In this rare case, Trump isn't familiar with the tap dance but his common sense tells him that if it's illegal there has to be a penalty. Of course he's right.
Maybe they want it to be like Colorado's criminal adultery statute. A crime without a punishment. Basically a statement of disapproval.
Or the Oklahoma law that makes it illegal to have the hind legs of farm animals in your boots. Seriously, this was enough of a problem at one time in Oklahoma they had to make a law?
I can't stop laughing!
Oh, I thought the Pro-life position on the matter is that once abortion is illegal, the punishment for getting a back alley abortion would be permanent sterility or death due solely from the procedure.
I wonder if this entire abortion debate wouldn't all be ended just as soon as one of these "consistent conservative" goons announced that the man involved with the aborted pregnancy should also be charged as a criminal accessory …
… logical conclusions, eh boys??? Show us some real consistent conservatism why don'tcha ???
FYI; This is what NBC News is calling Trump's "full walk back of the statement". I'm not sure imprisoning doctors who perform abortions rather than the women should be considered a "full walk back".
Later in the day, his campaign released a statement refocusing who would be punished should abortion become illegal. "If Congress were to pass legislation making abortion illegal and the federal courts upheld this legislation, or any state were permitted to ban abortion under state and federal law, the doctor or any other person performing this illegal act upon a woman would be held legally responsible, not the woman," the statement said. "The woman is a victim in this case as is the life in her womb. My position has not changed — like Ronald Reagan, I am pro-life with exceptions."
How is the woman a victim? It's not as if docors are out there pressuring women to have abortions. Women request doctors to perform abortions because they want them and know exactly what they're doing, making them at the very least equally responsible if the act is illegal.
Or aren't women responsible because they're just silly creatures who don't know any better? After all, according to Kasich they're all home doing laundry while the menfolk do politics so maybe he thinks we should go back to the days when women were perpetual minors under the care of fathers, husbands, brothers or even adult sons and not considered capable of making heir own decisions.
It's extremely offensive to say that women who decide to have abortions are victims.
That's the essential piece of the necessary horseshit justification for all the current abortion restrictions …
… all of the right-wing's myriad favorite hurdles, obstacles, restrictions, and limitations are simply to "protect" women.
("No, no, no, these are not part of any anti-woman agenda. We love women. We're not punishing women. We're helping keep women from making terrible, dangerous choices.")
Because women are… you know… women, so obviously they can't be trusted to make important decisions. They are like little children. Or pets. Men must protect them from themselves. But if they really get of line a good smacking might be called for.
So ….not responsible for making their own reproductive decisions. Totally responsible for getting themselves raped by dressing the wrong way, sending the wrong signals, going out unchaperoned, etc. and driving husbands and boyfriends or candidate's body guards to roughing them up because they're mouthing off or asking questions a man doesn't like.
That's exactly what they say. Women are dupes of the billion dollar abortion industry; Victims of the slick marketing that makes them so desperate that they think abortion is their only choice.
Never mind millenia of evidence that women will seek any means to end an unintended pregnancy.
The silly little things can't be moral agents capable of making their own informed decisions about what's best for themselves and their families. They would never feel empowered or relieved by getting an abortion (actually most do,) they would more likely "come to regret their choice to abort the infant life they once created and sustained… Severe depression and loss of esteem can follow."
That such pablum flows from the pen of the lynchpin justice on the SCOTUS only goes to show the depths that this mysogynistic penetrates the right wing views of women's reproductive choices.
Marketing? Have I been missing all the… get your discount abortions now, before this offer expires advertising? Or maybe cold calls threatening dire consequences if you don't come in for your annual required abortion right now? Or maybe doctors are plotting to give patients phony birth control pills so they'll get pregnant and ask for abortions? Telling patients there's something terribly wrong when everything's really fine to convince them to have abortions? How exactly does this work?
Former Abortion Clinic Owner: We Pushed Sex Ed on Kids to Create a Market for Abortion
The Marketing Of Abortion
I'm sorry that you knew where to look for that.
According to the Susan B. Anthony List (or whatever it's called), women are victims in this case because the culture has made them so. It's what the early feminists (such as the organization's namesake) said. This was on NPR this morning.
Like I said…. really offensve to women.
Query. It seems those who want women to be victims and doctors to be the only ones punished must be assuming that the responsible doctors are men since only men can be trusted to know enough to take responsibity. So I guess if a woman doctor performs an abortion both the woman who chose the procedure and the woman doctor who performed it are victims who bear no responsibiity because, being women, nether one is equipped for those big boy decisions in the face of "the culture"?
Was Susan B. Anthony “Pro-Life?”
Not really, daft one. Anthony's journal did publish an article saying " we are opposed to child murder" but that article was opposed to a law criminalizing abortion . It was signed "A" and anthony usually signed her full name. Times and circumstances were very different and women didn't even consider themselves pregnant until " quickening" I.e. the baby moved. Overall, the question of where Anthony would be in today's abortion debate is akin to asking whether she would side with Apple or the FBI on the issue of encrypting cell phone data. All we know isthat shedid consistently oppose criminalizing abortion in her day.
Ge, it's almost liked you clicked on the link.
Gee, it's almost liked you clicked on the link.
Didn't realize that was a link andthought you were asking. So I googled it and apparently got same article you linked. Wasn't trying to upstage you, the Silk browswe on this amazon fire doesn't always link.
Yet another example of intrusive big government seeking to control private and personal parts of citizens' lives. But all should bear in mind that Trump often speaks what he is thinking, before thinking clearly. Cruz is the stealth candidate strongly opposed to choice for women (whenever he's not having affairs).
I don't think Cruz is terribly stealth. Like Kasich, he opposes abortion (although I don't know that he accepts Kasich's few, narrow exceptions). Of course, they both want to defund Planned Parenthood (although only Kasich had the chance to make that a reality).
if you're looking for daylight on the issue, about all you'll find in the Republican Party is if and how much jail time.
I'm old enough to remember 1988. Daddy Bush – who had been strutting his new-found pro-life position then for 8 years – was asked during a debate about whether the doctor, the pregnant woman, or both should be prosecuted and jailed. His response, "I haven't sorted out the penalties yet."
You know why? They don't really want Roe v Wade overturned. They may want to make it really hard for lower income women to access abortion services (affluent women always have been able to and always will) but Republican pols need Roe v Wade to raise funds and convince people to vote against their own economic interests.
So they haven't bothered to sort out the penalties because they never plan for it to get that far. That's why they feel free to call it murder for dramatic effect. Obviously if they really believed it to be murder the penalties would have to be exactly the same as for murder, accessory to murder, hiring someone to commit murder. etc. And BTW, they're mostly in favor of the death penalty.
This was one time that Matthews' combative, interrupting, aggressive interview style worked well for revealing the real ideas of the candidate.
Everyone else that has interviewed Trump has kept to the conventional civil journalistic norms- smile and nod while Trump spouts nonsense or stream-of-consciousness word salad, maybe ask one follow up question but back off when the question remains unanswered.
I think that Donald Trump might reveal himself to be a real American traditionalist when it comes to punishing women for sex-related crimes. The Puritans believed in the power of public shaming:
Dear Donald,
You are in trouble with your own base for leaving your dog whistle at home. You are in trouble for saying these things out loud. Your base would like you to go back to the dog whistle approach. Thanks.
I still think LaDonalda doesn't really want to be president, because it would be like actually having to work. I think he is desperately trying to figure out what he has to say to get out of being president. He's come up with some doozies, but he hasn't yet found his magic bullet.
Actually the Heidi Cruz tweet may have started to deflate his balloon. There's polling out (according to this morning's NY Times) showing Eduardo Rafael leading Herr Drumpf by 10% in Wisconsin.
Wisconsin is an open primary so this is going to be interesting to see where the indies go. Drumpf and Bernie both appeal to the same segment of voters. Sanders, of course, takes the high road and does so without the misogyny, racism and xenophobia.
The margin of Bernie's win in Wisconsin will probably be determined by how many indies abandon Drumpf and feel the Bern.
Gee, I think that's the nicest thing you've ever said about Sanders. Are you feeling OK, Frankly?
He has a bunch of good qualities and he's fine as a U.S. Senator.
Vee haf vays to deal with people who go soft on Bernie!
The problem is that until now, no news person has had the gall to ask the question. They just didn't believe what these people have been saying for years and the obvious consequence of what they say. Leave it to Donald Trump to spill the beans once again on what the Republican party stands for. Now, someone else needs to ask the other Republican candidates their stance. It is the same. Would someone please ask the knuckleheads in our legislature? They all feel the same way. And someone needs to ask the follow-up question, what is the punishment. Obviously, for first degree pre-meditated murder, it's death. They all believe this. No one on this site should be surprised by what Trump said. I've been telling you for years and years that this is exactly what they believe. Thanks Trump for standing up for what you believe in and being willing to give the answer when asked the question.
I don't think we're surprised.
Orange is the new baby color.
I'll believe it when I start seeing regular Cruz wins that actually put Drumpf out of the pole position.
I think he might get creamed in Wisconsin…polls don't look good for him in large part because Walker has an 84% approval rating. He (Walker) is one of Chuck and Daves' most useful tools.
84% approval rating?
http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/scott-walker-approval-rating-continues-to-hover-below-percent/article_840b4175-792b-55e5-b578-918abe5f01b5.html
A poll on CBS this AM…with Republicans only.. just repeating that….
Got it. The approval poll I linked to was a general one, not just Rs.
Yeah…apparently the R voters love the guy….ick.
Not enough to make him the president.
He'd be president of wisconsin if Rs had their way, as Kasich is pesident of Ohio. Hillary will have to settle for president of the United States. Bernie may end up quarterbacking the Broncos if the Sanchez thing goes South.
Does that mean Rafael Eduardo would be president of Texas or provincial premier of Alberta?
The Canadians have threatened war if we send Rafael back. Maybe the Broncos can use him as a trainer.
https://youtu.be/Uk6t_tdOkwo
https://youtu.be/Uk6t_tdOkwo
That's painful to watch.