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%
April 26, 2016 06:08 PM UTC
48 Comments
It is over for Bernie.
Hills would either:
1. have to die
2. be sent to prison
"Nothing is over, until we say it is!" …
"The Cult of Sore Losers"
And, hey, as you plan your beat-down replies, please keep in mind that I didn't write the damn article, I just posted it …
(I'm joining the Green Day Party — "Wake Me Up When September Ends".)
Good article. Have fun being Green.
Connecticut, Maryland , Delaware and PA all called for HRC, all of them by big margins except for Connecticut, a pretty close one. Bernie won big in RI. No need for Bernie to drop out . He says he'll stay in until the end and if HRC has more pledged delegates he'll go after super delegates, but everyone knows his chances of taking enough super delegates away from the pledged delegate and popular vote winner to win the nomination is a non-starter. Not to mention incredibly hypocritical to even suggest after all that early noise about how undemocratic it was going to be if the super delegates won it for HRC. So, yeah, it’s over on the Dem side. And OMG it looks like Trump is really going to be the GOP candidate absent bloodshed on the right.
Pretty incredible. What must the rest of the world think?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/
he'll go after super delegates, but everyone knows his chances of taking enough super delegates away
I agree, he has every right to stay in and he has a responsibility to his followers. (And no, I'm not being snarky or sarcastic about that. For a change.)
He also has the right to try to lobby super delegates because, well the rules allow them to switch loyalties and those were the rules put in place before the game started. I don't know how much success he'll have with winning many of them over, but what the hell, he's entitled to make his pitch to them.
True to previous form, Hillary won the big prizes by big margins, md and pa, and added a big win in little delaaware, plus a close one in conn just to keep her record intact of beating bernie in every closed primary. He did win the only open primary in r.I. when final votes are tallied she should be back to the nearly 300 delegate lead she had before he won all those caucuses in the white states in the west. Bernie can and should stay in, but he is now fighting to give a voice to his followers, not realistically to win
His own remarks show an understanding of that.
Hillary will want his list. I don't think that she'll get it. Bernie will use it and his money to support grassroots progressive candidates and causes. I expect him to do a pro forma endorsement of Hillary at the convention, and they'll all make nice, at least on the surface. The rhetoric that he was "never a real Democrat" will disappear from the Democratic front-runner's speeches, although Trump will continue to encourage Sanders to do a third party run. (duh!)
You all will still have plenty to complain about from the Sanders (progressive) wing for years to come. Enjoy your victory, and thanks for having some class about it.
and thanks for having some class about it.
you're welcome!
Has Bernie done a lot to support progressive candidates? Because it seems as if he has only done some minimal support for other progressive candidates beyond some lip service.
Too bad Bernie couldn't get poor people to come out and vote. Maybe if his legion of white college kids would get down into the gutters there would have been better results.
Wasn't Bernie in Colorado fundraising for Michael Bennet's primary opponent last month? You mean he wasn't?
Wong, your ignorance is showing. You can see the demographics of Sanders supporters here. In general, Sanders supporters are less well off than Hillary supporters. (incomes less than $50,000 a year), well educated, but span all ages. (59% over 40, 41% 40 or under).
Sanders supporters do tend to be well educated "very liberal" Democrats or Independents. But your claim that Sanders "couldn't get poor people to come out and vote" is demonstrably wrong.
Sanders actually has a great grassroots operation, evidenced in volunteer energy, and in 93 million dollars worth of low- dollar (average $27) contributions. Way to go, working stiffs!
I think Wong's comment about the poor was simply referenceing Bernie's.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/apr/24/bernie-sanders-poor-people-dont-vote-primary-losses
Once again, mama, saying Bernie has never been a Democrat, real or otherwise, is not an insult. It's a simple statement of fact. Bernie has been proudly independent, unaffiliated with the Democratic party, all of his political life.
I have no idea why you insist on finding any recognition of that simple and indisputable fact unfair, critical or insulting. Up until Bernie decided to run for President, I bet he would have corrected anyone who said he was a member of the Demcratic Party himself. Give it a rest.
Michael Bennet's primary opponent, Arn Menconi, didn't even surface until after Bennet came out against Coloradocare. So no, (if that was a serious question), Sanders did not campaign for Bennet's primary opponent.
Did I say anything about Bernie and Bennet and primary opponents? What are you replying to there?
This is the first I've heard of an opponent for Thurston. And I say good. Now the folks who whine about him will have somewhere to go!
According to the link, Mrenconi is no longer a Dem but a Green. So he is a general election, not primary, opponent.
I wasn't referring to you, BC, but to the Hillary Clinton campaign. My prediction is that they, not being fools, will kibosh the "Bernie's no true Democrat" rhetoric, since they do want to appeal to Independents. Time will tell if this prediction is true.
Peace and love is already in the air. You can feel some of it rght here. But no matter who says he's not a Democrat, real or otherwise, it's simple fact.
Jane Sanders today to an MSNBC Automaton:
Hey, Bennet's in favor of you being able to renegotiate your student loan terms, which I'm sure all the big banks will readily do. Not. That's something, but it's a DLC/Blue Dog/Neoliberal something.
I hope The Professional Left – i.e. this blog's proprietors, kos, etc., and, more importantly, Hillary supporters, understand this and don't miss the signals that Barack Obama so clearly missed or ignored in '08.
I'm ok with Hillary as president. She's obviously far better than
our Friendsthe Troglodytes on the right and the hate media millionaires who run interference for them. But she still has some DLC/Blue Dog/Neoliberal tendencies that go against her rhetoric and that have been shown to be politically obsolete and counter to the policies that will improve the status of regular people, not the bankers and not the CEO's.Hill People: don't gloat, get to work integrating the Bern message and energy into policies that focus on regular, middle class voters and citizens. That'll be a win-win-win and maybe a Hannity or Beck or Levin or Rush will take to the air and blow their brains out to get that last ratings bump before their contract expires.
Wise words, Zap. What Bernie started can't be ignored.
You must have seen the same intervu I parodied, Zappy. I'm no bernnista but everyttime jane tried to talk substance it was back to "when you gonna quit? When you gonn quirt?"" Pathetic
Wise words?? Perhaps. But Zap just couldn't resist another "dig" at Michael Bennet. With Tim Neville out of the race, who will Zap support on the R side?
As for Bernie, I'm reminded of the old folk song: "So long, it's been good to know ya…."
Thurston deserves every dig aimed at him. He is a wealthy aristocrat and repeatedly supports positions that do nothing to help anyone but his benefactors…why you would defend him I have yet to grasp. That said, I believe he will, no doubt, be re-elected.
His support of "renegotiating" loans is a joke. Banks love to "renegotiate". …though a payment amount may be reduced, it usually means the borrowers total debt is increased and extended.
Agree. The second thing I do every morning upon waking is bash Bennet — he needs and deserves it as much as anyone I know of …
… the first thing? Mail my obligatory daily remittance to some Wall Street banker, of course. They need and deserve that too, apparently.
Being a good American entails certain obligations …
What I don't understand Dio, is the passion with which some folks who really think the guy is a whizz-bang great legislator react so strongly to the sort of criticism often heaped upon him by malcontents like me. How do they figure that calling him a Republican lite is going to hurt him… except perhaps his feelings?
Besides..I don't know Michael personally and I am sure he is likeable off-camera, so to speak, and has many friends in his elite circle of same. But he doesn't frequent my neighborhood, let's say.
Michael Bennet, I believe, finds it easy to compartmentalize the lives of the people he appears to ignore into some vague category of things he just doesn't have time with which to deal. I am sure the good senator would cluck his tongue and find some way to be dismissive of the plight of my friend who is raising her grandson alone.
She is one of the millions of grandparents in this nation who are trying to clean up the wreckage left behind as the weight of struggling to survive in the bowels of our class based society has essentially removed opportunities to become self-reliant from her kids' generation. So many grandmas and grandpas are raising the children of their own offspring who have been snagged by the for-profit incarceration industry.
Down here in steerage, Senator, the view seldom changes. But then, it is hard to see that from the Lido deck.
I actually believe you, Duke, when you say you don't understand why peoplelike me like Michael Bennet. I don't mean to belittle you when I say that fact says more about our left being out of touch with the mainstream of our party than the oft stated claim that our mainstream, from hillary to bennet to obama, is out of touch with america.
If you don't see the tilt, V., it isn't for a lack of some of us trying to point it out. But that is OK. You see what you see…I see what I see. What are the chances that we will always see eye to eye…?
it's politics.
Actually he repeatedly supports positions taken by Obama and other Dem pols you don't attack upwards of 90% of the time.
Well, BC…If you look closely, I don't think you will have seen me, lately, heaping praise on the president, but I will repeat myself, happily…for you.
1. The president is a very lame duck. Many of his policies suck, yes, they do. Too many to elaborate..Sniping at him now is just sour grapes. Not worth the virtual ink.
2. I have heaped criticism aplenty on Secretary Clinton, for all the same reasons I challenge Senator Bennet.
3 Other legislators who occasionally come up here who fit the same mold (loosely defined as a DLCer) will get the same scorn..but, Michael Bennet is my senator. I have a right as a voter to expect him to listen to my opinion, whether I believe he will respond or whether I don't. My expectations of him are pretty low.
I am sorry BC, genuinely, that you believe my reasons are insufficient…but, there they are. If you would like to see me pick some other Democratic Party corporatist aristocrats to vilify, I will try to find some spare time to do so. Perhaps someone at Pols might create a diary or feature of the week where we can bash representatives of the money machine.
Until then, I hope you will trust my sincerity on this. I want him (Bennet) to start spending more of his time working to help my friend raise her grandson than he works to protect the interests of his associates at the highest levels of the financial food chain.
If there is evidence that he has voted to do such things, it would be great to see it posted here. It might change the dialogue.
I don't think you can show me examples of your heaping equivalent amounts of gut level disgust on President Obama.
I'm not saying you've always claimed Obama is perfect. It's the huge disparity of degree of villification you assign to each of the two virtual peas in a centrist policy pod that strikes me as irrational.
If Bennet is as bad as all that then surely all those whose policy stands and votes overlap with his to the tune of better than 90% should be similarly villified? And yet, in your perception the difference seems to be far greater than less than 10%.
That's what just refuses to compute for me. Sorry.
no worries…
I remain optimistic that Michael Bennet can live up to the obligations and legacy of his senate office.
Gee I don't know. Maybe because "Thurston's" percentage record of voting to support what you consider to be progressive legislation is pretty much identical to that of other Dem Senators? So singling him out seems a little, I don't know, wildly irrational? Yeah… maybe that's it.
Also simply declining to consider him especially evil compared to, say, President Obama, with whom he is almost always on the same page, is vastly different from passionately defending him, a distinction you resolutely ignore. It simply makes much more sense to view them in a similar light, each far from perfect, far from disgusting. You know. Since they support the same things and since the policies of one are supported almost all the time by the voting of other.
Facty stuff. I'm fond of it.
That reply was to CHB, madame. Are you saying the support of Conservative Headbanger supports your point about Bennets liberal chops?
No. trace it back through the boxes by following the first grey space tp the left of my reply back up and you'll see that I hit the correct reply and that my response is in your response box, though yours is nested in CHB's.
My reply was to CHB, I should say, not, “that reply”.. hence the incongruity Sorry for any confusion, ma'am.
And I replied to your reply. That's allowed, I'm pretty sure. At last it seems to happen all the time around here.
Only put But Zap just couldn't resist in quotes but it put whole thing in quote box.
I meant wise words about Bernie, CHB. I guess Zap’s Bennet obsession (he’s apparently much worse in Zap World than the other Dems he votes with well over 90% of the time and practically identical to Obama on well over 90% of the issues, yet uniquely reprehensible for some reason) has just become like background noise to me.
This was just a continuation of Hillary's coronation that has been played out all year. Congrats to her supporters. I backed Bernie and am disappointed. That said, I will plug my nose, and like Frackenlooper, pull the lever. Because as much as I dislike Hillary, she is a 100 times better than any of GOP clowns.
Indiana next week is the decisive primary. Mr. Cruz's campaign has said the Hoosier state is his fire wall. Its looking more like his Waterloo. I have a hunch the Cruz/Kasich alliance is backfiring and that Mr. Trump's overwhelming victories last night are due, in part, to the Republican primary voters negative reaction to it. I don't have any polling data to support that theory but if my hunch is correct, Mr. Cruz will be finished after the Indiana primary.
Mr. Kasich is already done. He's out of money and without financial resources, he simply can't continue, plus the voters know he has no chance so why support him at this point.
According to CNN this morning, Mr. Trump has 988 delegates. Last night he won 83% of the delegates awarded in the five primaries. He needs 249 more to win the nomination on the first ballot. There is little doubt he will do that.
I believe you are right. Resentment of party politics…particularly, but by no means exclusively in the Republican party is at fever pitch. The Democrats are up to their knees in turmoil…the Republicans are up to their necks…
The KASICH Cuz detente reminds me of Polish foreign minister Joseph Beck's efforts to build a "third Europe" with a Polish Romanian alliance to offset both Hitler Germany and Stalinist Russia. The disparity of forces was so great it made little difference whether the two were united or not.
I think you’re correct and here's another comparison. Cruz and Kasich form their alliance but Kasich said on Monday morning he still wants the voters who are for him in Indiana to vote for him and neither campaign suspended their attacks against each other. Based on the principles of the Cruz/Kasich alliance, let's rework our WW II alliance with Great Britain. If we apply those principles to that alliance, the United States would ship war material to Britain and the empty convoys would return to our shores to pick-up more but simultaneously the British fleet and the American Navy would dispatch ships into the Atlantic to sink the convoys. Sounds rationale to me!
Well, any day I get to put a reference on Polish interwar diplomacy on the blog is a good day in my book. Historians often are critical of Beck but I think he did a fairly good job of dealing with an unwinnable geopolitic situation. However, Poland's feud with Czechoslovakia led the poles to annex a heavily Polish part of Czechoslovakia during the Munich crisis. They would have been wiser to stand with the Czechs and the Soviets and provoke the war a year earlier, when Hitler was't really ready and the Soviets were eager to fight the Reich.
The very traditionally conservative Kasich or the perhaps slightly more moderate but still solid conservative Jeb! (remember him, the original alleged front runner?) would have been fine for the GOP of a decade or two ago. Apparently in today’s GOP you have to foam at the mouth to be considered “conservative” enough.
We used to be accused of hyperbole for calling the 21st century GOP the party of the crazies but with Trump as their rank and file's prohibitive front runner absent truly drastic machinations that can only further damage the GOP, I think we can rest our case. It's not hyperbole. Just the simple truth.