President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Kamala Harris
(R) Donald Trump
80%↑
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) V. Archuleta
98%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Marshall Dawson
95%
5%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd
(D) Adam Frisch
50%
50%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(D) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank
(D) River Gassen
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) John Fabbricatore
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen
(R) Sergei Matveyuk
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
52%↑
48%↓
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
September 30, 2016 10:48 AM UTC
14 Comments
Not only is there a lower level of ticket splitting: Republican Senators have, with VERY few exceptions, endorsed Trump and refused to criticize even his most egregious errors. Among Republicans running in this year's election, I do not recall any condemnation or withdrawal of support. There has been relatively little criticism. Even those who are not running in 2016, GOP Senators have been supportive. As best I can recall, only Graham, Lee and Sasse refused to endorse.
Didn't Captain Kirk in Illinois endorse and subsequently dis-endorse him?
The Flake from Arizona has been quite verbal about the TrumpstaDumpsta and not in a good way, I believe.
Flake is a decent guy.
Agreed. Drumpf also came out a few months ago and predicted Flake would lose in Nov. Which will be really difficult since he's not in the ballot this year.
He probably doesn't know a thing about the difference between a House and Senate term and that the Senate terms are staggered.
He must be because he's a very conservative loyal Republican but still won't join Cruz and Co. in rolling over after making a lot of noise about principles for months.
It will be interesting to see how far down the ballot Presidential race coat tails will extend. Colorado's U.S. Senate race is the safest race for an incumbent Democrat in the country, and a shift in control of the U.S. Senate would give a President' Clinton free reign over the nominations process for SCOTUS and other posts. But, there are U.S. House races that are in play like CD-6, and a single seat shifting to the Democrats in a close State Senate race could tip control of the Colorado General Assembly to the Democrats. If there are serious coat tails, Democrats could even have a safe majority in the General Assembly so they would not be beholden to their most conservative caucus members on particular issues.
A flip in control of the U.S. House seems like a long shot, but it would hardly be impossible for serious anti-Trump coat tails to deliver that as well (although few pundits are willing to put in the effort to even analyze House races this year), and even closing the margin of a GOP majority in the House could make it much easier for a natural centrist get to yes negotiator like HRC secure modest legislative accomplishments.
The problem is the GOP seats the.Dems pick off will be of moderate Republicans in swing districts. That will have the effect of leaving a more batshit crazy caucus for Paul Ryan or his teabagging replacement to control.
House flip would be worth it. The House can't filibuster. But they'll keep the House unless things change radically between now and the close of the election. And I don't think Colorado will be much help there for starters. I think triage now demands everything go into the race for Prez and taking back the Senate. Even the Senate will be harder than most thought but it's still realistically doable if just barely a this point. Could start looking better.
The CBS Morning Show on Tuesday had a "fact check" segment about the debate. The reporter stated that both candidates "stretched the truth". For Trump, they noted his lies about Iraq, Iran, revealing tax returns, etc., etc. For Clinton, they noted that she had previously supported TPP (without noting the distinction of supporting the concept of TPP before the final negotiated details were presented which she then opposed). The reporter then stated that Hillary had stretched the truth about her economic plan creating 10 million jobs. The reporter stated that this job growth could only occur with the complicity of Congress. Since that is unlikely with a GOP Congress, Hillary was deemed to have "stretched the truth". It is mainstream reporting like this that has resulted in the situation the country faces today.
As if there's a ghost of comparison between whatever stretching HRC, like all pols, does and the constant stream of lies from Trump. Disgusting.
Mike Littwin does his usual great job putting things in perspective. His latest column swings a mighty hammer:
Amen