Of Miracles

Posted on by Sarah A. Hoyt

KEEP YOUR EYES ON

So I’m sitting here,looking at the reports, and so far it’s hard to tell if Colorado got its miracle or not.

Oh, sure, we got rid of Mark Uterus, but after O’Keefe exposed their scams in CO, it was hard to steal a national race and not be in trouble.  The local one, though…

Perhaps my readers will correct me.  Perhaps there IS somehow, reason for someone to vote for Cory Gardner but not for Beauprez.  I can’t find one. Last I checked Hickenloper, aka Bloombug’s love child, was slightly less popular than foot fungus locally, and running about neck and neck with psoriasis.

Unless you guys know of some counties where he’s loved because… I got nothing… I think we’ve found the margin of fraud in Colorado.  It’s the space between Gardner’s Victory and (so far at least) Hickenloper’s not losing.  Which is what?  5%?  Or exactly the number of people who “no longer remember voting for Obama.”

And there hinges the problem.  With Hickenloper in place the new “voting rules” stay, which means this victory is transitory.  (Again, correct me if my reasoning is wrong.)  It means that in 16 we’re back to being “Chicago of the West” or “New California” or something.

So, Sarah Dear, what do you propose to do about it?

A quixotic idea comes to mind: in Colorado we have the right to petition for the inclusion of amendments (that’s not precisely it, but it’s too early to look up the right terminology.)

I propose we start a petition to have the Colorado constitution amended with the Franchise and Anti-Fraud act.

It should stipulate the following: voting should take place in even-numbered years on the first Tuesday of November. Voting shall be in person unless individual can show just cause (impairment or hardship) why this can’t take place, for which purpose vote-by-mail and early voting (no more than a week early) may be used. For voting, citizen will present photo ID and proof of citizenship, be it passport, birth certificate or citizenship certificate. The DMV shall be directed to issue voting cards for those who wish for them, showing both citizenship and identity.  After voting the citizen’s index finger of the right hand shall be stained with wash-resistant ink which will take at least a week to fade.  If the citizen is missing that finger, the next one will be stained.  If all fingers in the right hand are missing, the corresponding fingers on the left shall be stained.

I know that’s not legal language, and I have no clue what the process is to do this, but I’m sure some of you do.  I’m sure the lawyers in this crowd can re-write that.  And I’m sure some of you (besides telling me its crazy) know how to go about collecting signatures to put it on the ballot.

Quixotic?  Surely.  Unless we can get a special election of some sort called for it (is that even possible) they will use the same machinery they’ll use to deliver CO to the Democrat machine in 16 to defeat it.

But at the very least it will call attention to what is going on and what is wrong.  And who knows?  Maybe like O’Keefe’s exploits it will make them scared of cheating on at least some races?  It’s a hope.

We can’t call it the “Clean up Colorado so Sarah doesn’t have to move” but that’s what it is.

And meanwhile, ladies and gentlemen, we have a mad duck president (a lame duck who is mad as h*ll at us. Neo-neocon coined the usage on her blog) and who, to be fair, never liked us overmuch, and we have elected a bunch of squishes whose feet have to be held to the fire.

Put down the champagne and hold on to the sides of the boat.  This is no time to get wobbly.

277 thoughts on “Of Miracles”

      1. How about we just black their eye? In cases of both eyes available, Heads we black the Left one, Tails we black the Right.

        1. What do you tell a low-information voter with two black eyes?

          Nothing. You’ve already told him twice!

    2. In the first and last One-man-one-vote-one-time election in Rhodesia/Zimbabwe, the Communists convinced many people that the purple finger could indeed tell the Government that they voted, but it could tell the smarter Communists WHOM they voted for. Something like that already seems to be taking place with the public records that tell if you voted or not in the last election, Whatever Acorn Is Now is vaguely threatening people who don’t vote, a number which includes several participants in that vomitous Rock The Vote video who were apparently too messed up on First Tuesday to cast a ballot.

      1. Charles, to be fair, it wasn’t just Leftist Pacs doing the “Shame to vote” trick. Grow Missouri, which is fiscal conservative, pro-business, sent “Voter Report Cards” throughout the state.

        I will tell you for nothing I was more than a little annoyed to see my ‘Grade’ on the sheet, along with all my ‘neighbors’ I do not know.

        So anyone looking for PACs to donate to, do freedom (and me) a favor and strike them from the list.

  3. If the person has no right index finger, the requirement for being stained is waived.

    I don’t see a problem with giving Democratic voters a perverse incentive to amputate their trigger fingers.

      1. Veer left, lean left, sure, but shoot left? Really seems unlikely. Most of them wouldn’t touch something that shoots with a ten foot pole.

        2. You’d be surprised. My cow-orker is a very to the left (or at least hates republicans because we just want to f*k the little guy. No, doesn’t make sense) and he’s got guns.

          1. Oh, that’s easy. Even Science. Jonathan Haidt has found in the lab that the further left you are, the less you understand your political opponents.

          2. Just look at Mark Kelly; it was perfectly okay for him to go out and buy an AR-15 at the same time as he was campaigning to outlaw them.

      2. …Is it really that hard for most people to switch?

        I was taught to shoot with my right hand, but any time I have a choice I shoot with my left– it’s the stronger eye. Never really saw much of a difference.

        1. Are you cross dominant? Strong left eye, dominant right hand?

          My dad is, and he shoots (firearms, bows) fairly equally with either hand. Other folks have to train a little more to get there. It’s not hard really, most people just don’t work on it. (reloads take more training, weak hand, than actual shooting)

          1. Pistols, right hand- both eyes; so I don’t know dominate. However, with a rifle, right hand, left eye dominate. Looks a little weird I guess. Navy boot camp, the instructor took the M-1 away from me while I was aiming and did the shooting for me. Annoyed me because I didn’t get to shoot and the guys around me were ticked because they thought he cheated for me. I think it was because, like me, he wanted to shoot and I gave him an excuse.

            1. I shoot with both eyes open, either hand, but I align the sights with my right eye. My dad can shoot aligning with either eye, but he shoots best when he aligns with the left. Which makes for an interesting head-cocking when he shoots right handed.

            1. Not sure if there’s any neurological basis for it (and it’s all anecdotal) or if it’s a matter of habit, but the people I’ve known who were cross dominant switch back and forth with more facility than those not.

              So, short answer for your question up there: In my experience, yep.

                  1. I was left, left dominant. After my stroke, My dominance moved to the right. It was kinda interesting relearning how to shoot a pistol.

                    Since in a lot of exercises, I had been effectively ambi-dextrous, {learned all of my sword and rapier work right handed, moved to the left when alone}, the dealing with the cross dominance wasn’t that tough. I practiced both right hand shooting, and left hand shooting, using the same eye as hand. Forcing it, if you will.

                    It worked, sorta. Shooting became part of my therapy.

                    1. Consonant with what I’ve seen, with the few people who trained hard enough/forced it.

                      From observation, knowing your dominant eye is important because you’ll default to it when not thinking. But undertaking the necessary training (and repetition) could reset the default, as it were.

                      Folks that are cross-dominant, but don’t realize it may have some difficulty with accuracy (particularly with the shorter sight radius on pistols) because their brain is unconsciously processing the image from the off eye and they’re holding the pistol on the wrong axis. (Closing the off eye rectifies this, but you’ve lost half your vision.)

                      I’ve known some people who’ve worked enough to become relatively proficient with a handgun, with good precision (tight groups) but their accuracy (distance to bull) is inconsistent. Work with them a little, and find out their sight picture is shifting because their warring with dominant/non-dominant eyes and don’t realize it. Get them to focus on the dominant eye, align head and firearm on the correct axis — precision and accuracy.

                      Dominant eye has fallen out of some of the training, for one reason or another. Instead they push for consistency: Get the right sight picture, and see it that way every time.

                      Works, of course. But they’re training cross-dominance out in some cases, and those folks may default to their norm under stress without realizing it.

                      I prefer people be aware of what their brain is trying to do behind the scenes and plan (and train) accordingly

                    2. I get where you’re coming from. But as bad as this may sound, I’m fairly happy being where I’m at. When I first came too and realized I’d had a stroke, and after my panic attack, I knew I was screwed. My entire left side not working.

                      Once I was able to walk again {within the first day}, I realized the real problem was upstairs. Couldn’t remember anything.

                      Cutting a long story {because its boring}, I can now center of mass at 25 ft with either hand and with either 1911. I’m better with the two Smiths {Model 19 revolvers.}

                      There was about a week, I didn’t think I’d ever shoot again. There was three years that I lived in a fog and was just waiting around for the light switch to be turned off.

                      So I’m not the best shot in the world, and have lost a lot since the stroke. But I’ll live with what I got, thank you.

                      I can still run that lathe, and still type.

                    3. Totally left side dominant. Left handed, left eyed, left footed. I can use and axe either left or right handed, because I taught myself to, and I taught myself to use a chainsaw right handed, because the sights on a saw are set up for use right handed and it is designed to be safer (chain held farther away from your body, guards, etc.) to use right handed, but I only do so when falling trees, bucking them up on the ground I switch and use it left handed, and I always pull start everything left handed. I can shoot right handed if I close the left eye, and even do so fairly accurately, but it feels totally unnatural and is much slower.

                      By the way, I was taught to shoot by closing one eye, and while I can fire a pistol with both eyes open, I am more comfortable, more accurate, and much faster and accurate shooting at moving targets with rifle or pistol with my right eye closed. The one exception to this is my Mini-14 with a scout scope on it, after a couple thousand rounds I have taught myself to shoot it with both eyes open, and do so as well as I do with one eye closed; it still doesn’t feel natural however, and if I don’t consciously think about it I still have the habit of closing my right eye with it when snap shooting.

                    4. Funny enough:
                      All swords including rapier and saber — left hand
                      Knives — right hand
                      Axe — either
                      Firearms — right only

                      I don’t know why the switch but I am cross dominant.
                      Go figure

        2. Yes. With caveats.
          Due to some surgical reconstruction, one of my arms is about 3″ longer than the other. I’m better off shooting non-dominant one handed than two. (But the unusual body mechanics that are a detriment in pistol are an advantage in shotgun. As long as I’ve got the stock cut down, anyway.)
          Since I’m tarting to go a bit near-sighted in my dominant eye, I’m playing with learning to shoot rifle backasswards. It’s not *quite* starting all over, but it’s not too far off, either.

        3. I practice with both sides, and transferring from one to the other. Of course I’m massively right-eye dominant. Pistols are trivial, rifles (especially with red-dots) are a bit more hassle.

    3. Can I do the amputating? I have a rusty bueerknife in the kitchen. Hmm.. I seem to be out of anesthetic though.

  4. Secret to life: Breath in, breath out. Repeat. In the mean time… Tea and snickerdoodles. (They may not provide any real world benifit but they always make ME feel better…)

  5. Not to cause you any discomfort, but if you made a move east and south (oh, say 3-4 hundred miles, give or take) then you likely won’t have to move again for many years – if ever. Texas would be glad to have you. And if you’re willing to make a few more miles, there are delightful, smaller communities with close major municipal amenities a little farther in. Wichita Falls is an Air Force Town, or go for Mineral Wells or even closer to Ft Worth. There’s a few Huns in that area to make you feel welcome. And you can even bring your cats.
    And if you still have a hankering for travel, major airport Hubs are just down the road.

    2. Allow me to suggest Lubbock. We have a major university (Texas Tech), an international airport, a few stores that still sell books, an active cultural life, and are only a few hours from mountains to the west and major metropolitan areas to the east.

      OT, I really enjoyed your story in Shattered Shields.

      2. I lived in Lubbock for a year a few decades ago… does that active cultural life still include the Tornado Jam in Buddy Holly Park?

        2. Not sure about that one. I’ve only lived here 5 years and haven’t heard of it. We do get some major concerts through here. Paul McCartney was a few months ago, Cher is Tuesday, and Alabama is next week. Plus we have a symphony and at least one art festival.

          1. I did a quick search on the Tornado Jam music festival, and it looks like Lubbock only had a couple… the first one was on the 10 year anniversary of the 1970 tornado. Too bad, if they’d kept it up it probably could have turned into a decent event for tourist dollars.

    3. You do understand that there are quiet a few of us who would love to have our near and dear a whole lot nearer.

      Still I know that if she were to move back towards my neck of the woods breathing and insect life would be a problem. Sigh, I accept the distance. 😦

    4. Credit Where It Is Due Department:
      Wendy Davis has done a great deal to turn Texas a darker red than it was. Perhaps she can now move to California and work her magic in that state, too.

              1. Ooooohh … bad idea. The density of her stupidity might cause the island to tip over and pour everybody into the ocean.

                2. I think the recent basaltic lava flows should balance her out. Although the last thing that state might need at the moment is more hot air.

                  1. That sounds like a match made in… err… anyways I think we should make sure she makes a personal acquaintance with them.

      2. Sandra Fluke tried…

        But even that won’t be enough. The problems in California are two-fold. First, the opposition (i.e. Republican Party) is in shambles. Second, the Bay Area has a lock on the state’s politics, and the Bay Area makes Ms. Davis look sane…

        1. There’s not enough people in the Bay Area to lock up the state’s politics. The problem is that the insanity starts just north of Camp Pendleton and goes up to Sonoma County, for about 50-100 miles inland.

    6. Utah is just on the other side of the mountains. Larry Corriea, conservative, but with a liberal twist in Salt Lake to keep life interesting…

  6. I was looking at governor races– people who are traditionally Ds have decided to have Rs for governors. Interesting– steepled fingers.

        1. Except the problem with one would be that while he stops the idiots from making any catastrophic mistakes, he also shields them so that they keep looking good to the voters.

          So, after all, maybe it is better when you don’t have one. 🙂

            1. The problem isn’t the tools, it’s the will to wield them.

              To quote again from that philosophical treatise “Boondock Saints”:

              Il Duce
              The question is not how far. The question is, do you possess the constitution, the depth of faith, to go as far as is needed?

              Generally these days the answer is no. Of course sometimes the answer is, in the words of Justin Sullivan (New Model Army):

              I have never learned to throw the first punch
              Perhaps the more you know the more you get scared

            2. You mean Laumer, right? He’s the guy who invented BOLOs (though John Ringo did write something in that universe, IIRC).

              1. John Ringo had the SheVAs, Laumer the BOLOs. Although he did cowrite ‘The Road to Damascus’.

            3. A DOZEN??!! ONE of Laumer’s Bolo’s would own the planet! (Do recall that some of the specialist units were called “Continental Siege Units.” And their main-turret firepower was measured in *megatons per second.”)

              Laumer was always writing about crippled Bolo’s in highly unusual situations. It was the only way he could make the story last longer than “and then the Combat Unit fired.”

      2. Is there anyway for them to do an analysis of ballots to determine the set of ballots where Hicky-baby got the vote but almost nothing else WAS voted for?

      3. The WSJ Graphic results only show 93.4% results in for CO. While not likely, that’s still enough to turn it around.

    2. I believe it depends on state, but they’re “required” to be certified by sometime early in December. (I know Washington has blown through that a couple of times, not sure about other states.)

      It’s usually certified by the state auditor much earlier than that, though.

      1. Okay.

        Well, let’s hope this means at least some actual change, not just a temporary detour on the way to hell. I keep thinking about the 80’s and Reagan. But I suppose that time depended on his presence, and when you found nobody else like him you just slipped back to the same groove you had been in before because nothing fundamental had changed, after all.

        1. Of course it’s highly unlikely there will be any sudden changes anyway. I suppose this is a cultural thing. You need to change the culture first, and that will mean decades of work.

          1. Yes — and a primary focus for the cultural change needed is the Mainstream Media. The predictable post hoc anaylses are already being launched (I think they had been loaded before Halloween.) This was an “anti-incumbent” election (tell that to Pat Roberts in Kansas.) This was a call for Bipartisanship & Cooperation (so sayeth Harry Reid; personally, I recall Dick Armey’s definitiion of bipartisanship: we’re to be bi, they’ll be partisan) and — especially from the GOP Olde Garde — this is a repudiation of the TEA Party.

            Before long the MSM will have this spun as an endorsement of Obama.

              1. Oh yes, Mia. I’m wating for heads to explode from trying to fit a female, black, conservative Mormon into the right victim/oppressor group. Maybe the latter two cancel out the former two, and they leave her alone? Nah, it’ll never happen.

                1. Keep on mind the Prog Mantra:
                  She’s not Black/Woman/Haitian, She’s Republican.

                  ALL authentic Blacks/Women/Hispanics/Whatever are Democrats (or Working Families Party or Democrat Farm Labor or Socialist Workers Party.)

                  Accept no substitutes.

                  1. They’ve already trotted that out. Neither Mia Love nor Tim Scott are “really” Black, because real Blacks are (D).

                    1. Yeah. I was explicitly called a racist yesterday on Facebook AFTER bringing up Mia Love and Tim Scott. To which the mind boggles.

                      I suppose it’s true that there are none so blind as those who will not see.

                      >

                    3. This morning, my younger son was complaining about talking to some people who were saying that only white people could be racist.

                2. Seems to be a good place to mention this. Every black Republican member of Congress represents a majority white district. Every black Democrat representative is from a majority black district. As Mia stated in interviews today- she was elected because of her views and positions, not her race.

                  1. Which is why Mia Love is not an “authentic” African-American Woman. She was elected for the wrong reasons.

          2. More directly to your point: the Ship of State is an unwieldy barge and turns very slowly if at all. The gyroscopic forces of the entrenched bureaucracies of the civil service tend to return the craft to its Forward orientation except when actively and vigorously steered.

            One reason we will see growing national support for Wisconsin’s governor Scott Walker is he has proven willing to scrape the barnacles and not easily cowed. It is well to remember that the unruly mobs occupying the statehouse, stomping their feet, pounding their fists and chanting “This is what democracy looks like” we not only right, they were what the Founders had in mind when they created this nation not as a Democracy but a Republic.

        2. The 80s weren’t even a detour, just a slowdown.

          Without Reagan we’d have run out of money a lot sooner before they’d finished conditioning the lumpen proletariat that socialism was the *proper* way.

  8. In the last redistricting in Missouri, we moved from being in Sam Graves’ district (R) to being in Emanuel Cleaver’s district (D). Realistically, there was no way for Cleaver to lose, but the early return numbers showed him behind, and I let myself hope for a bit.

    And I know that Gerrymandering is a long honored tradition (Gerry signed the Declaration of Independence) on both sides of the aisle, and that our district is by no means the worst one that way, but I look at a map and wonder why on earth did they draw it that way? By any logical means, we should be in Graves’ district, and a large chunk that is in Graves’ district should be in Cleaver’s.

    At least the “Early Voting” proposal was handily voted down.

    Anyway, I hope that the Senators and Representatives go in and get to work doing their job, and don’t waste time trying to be well liked, magnanimous, and bi-partisan. Because it won’t work. And we’ll end up worse than before.

    1. We voted down the amendment to Connecticut’s constitution to allow early voting and no-excuse voting.

    2. There is a major (and expensive) mapping program called MapInfo that has special features to create Gerrymander districts. There must have been a lot of demand to get that done.

  9. Eh. Everyone gets one (1) glass of champagne. My little aardvark will pour it. A morale boast before we get to work.

    A little aardvark never hurt anyone.

  10. We got another reason to move: the “written so that you need a background check to hand your CC purse to your husband, but they promise that nobody would ever enforce it that way” background check law is leading in Washington. (59.7% to 40.28%)

    While the “Washington can’t exceed Federal limits on background checks” one is behind. (45.45% to 54.55%)

    From the totals, a lot of people voted on one and skipped the other entirely, or my math is off….

        2. Yeah, they bought I594, but it cost them over $10m for something that is nearly meaningless. And yes, yesterday the progressives behind this nonsense discussed what gun restrictions they go after next.

          You know, this can be turned into a 4GW type exercise. There is nothing stopping another initiative to “clean up” I 594. Cut it back from the stupidity of an 18 page nightmare to a one page clean document that does what they claim they want, tighten up background checks. But without the problems you just mentioned.

          If presented properly, they can’t fight it. After all, they will say that what you mentioned isn’t what I 594 is about. If they do decide to fight it, because “control” is the real issue, then cost them another $10m in an off year.

          Rolling everything back is likely unwinnable. Background checks of private gun sales we’re probably going to have to live with. But cleaning everything else up should be doable.

          1. I’d rather fight to destroy the whole thing, because I know what happens when they have a record of all firearm transfers and can charge those who don’t have the weapons they’re “supposed” to have.

            It’s a back-door gun registry. And Cali already proved that YES, even in America, they WILL confiscate guns once they’ve got a list.

            1. The backdoor registry is one thing to clean up. After all, they’ve stated they wouldn’t use it to confiscate guns. So they shouldn’t mind if that gets “cleaned out”.

              That’s part of the reason I think they’d spend big to fight it. So you make them spend big to keep them from fighting the next fight they want to fight.

              There’s some numbers you might want to think about. Of the voting age population of WA, 10% of us are wild eyed progs. 30% of us are conservative to some degree or another, but are aware of the issues. The other 60% are clueless. Many of them arrogantly clueless but that’s another matter.

              The bad guys spent big, and lied big on their TV ads. Consequently a lot of clueless suburb dwellers sent in their vote with I 594 marked yes. After all, they want their kids to be safe.

              If you’re going to win in the State of WA anymore, you have to keep that 60% number in mind.

              1. King and Pierce counties run the state. It’s why I showed them the middle finger over my shoulder years ago. And I still have family that doesn’t understand why I won’t come over to visit them.

                I do expect to see another push for the East side to separate in the next few years, but expect it to go the same way of all the times in the past. Olympia will back off a little, grease a few palms, and the take enough wind out of the sales that it will never happen.

    2. Given the recent trend in 2nd Amendment jurisprudence, it is likely that the state restrictions will be overturned as infringing on a Federally Recognized Constitutional Right — but somebody will have to drag it through the courts, wasting much time & money.

      Give thanks that Obama will not now have a free hand appointing a new Justice.

      1. I can hope….. Unfortunately, that means that some poor sod will be hit with the stuff they’re swearing won’t happen, first.

        1. The DMV registering all the transfers is the part that bugs me the most. But as long as they don’t have data on your gun yet, I expect quite a few transfers will be conducted in “ignorance” of the law. It’s when they come back to “Verify” your possession some day that things will get really ugly.

              1. You don’t understand: with that law in effect, you either produce the guns, have a police report on file saying they were stolen (good luck buying ammo except on the black market; they will check), or you go to jail on the spot.

                1. That will last two minutes, giving its blatant unconstitutionality. No trial?

                  As soon as there is a trial, the burden of proof shifts.

                  1. Mary, there may be a trial, but most of these laws and regulations have removed mens rea from the equation. Instead of the government having to prove that the guns are missing because you intended to unlawfully retain possession, you will have to prove you didn’t. And that principle has been upheld for every drug prosecution ever made. See also civil asset forfeiture.

      2. I’ve heard rumors that because I-594 addresses several issues, and not one, like a proper initiative is legally required to do, it may be struck down solely on that technicality.

        If so, yay for technicalities!

        (In times past, I’d get mad at people who get off on a technicality, but I’ve come to respect and appreciate them as the price we pay for the illusion of the Rule of Law…)

        1. They’ve used that to take out conservative ones before– from memory, one was something like “remove X, replace with Y.”

          1. Yes they have, but it is only unacceptable to have several issues on one initiative if it is a conservative initiative. They held up I-655 against a court challenge on that very technicality, and it had much more obviously separated issues.

  11. In the greater scheme of things I’m satisfied for the most part.
    Our local thieves in Montgomery did win permission to dig even deeper in the Alabama trust fund. I figure it’s only a matter of time until it’s all been spend on really really important stuff and we’re broke again.
    The biggest puzzle for me this time around is what in bleeping bloody hell is wrong with the good folks of Minnesota? Re-electing Franken, how could you?
    Anyhoo, am now crossing every appendage flexible enough to bend and hoping the Repubs keep their word and inundate BHO with solid reasonable legislative bills for the good of the American people so he can veto them and further prove to everyone what a petty divisive butthead he really is.

  12. The courts have allowed it to stand and as of 2016 North Carolina will be requiring photo ID. We will be taking a wide variety of photo identifications, all must be unexpired (unless you are over 70 years of age but it must have expired after your 70th birthday). The list includes:

    Driver’s Licence or Non-operator ID (A DMV ID card available to people who cannot drive)
    Passport,
    Military Identification Card.,
    Veterans Identification Card,
    Tribal enrollment card issued by a federally recognized tribe or tribe recognized by North Carolina,

    Finally, for those who just moved into the state:
    Out-of-state driver’ license or non-operators identification card (valid only if the person’s voter registration date in the county is within 90 days of the date of election).

    Unfortunately there are exemptions, which are reasonable in and of themselves, including a religious exemption which requires substantial paperwork to receive. Still exemptions create opportunity for possible problems. For example: I don’t quite see the government officially declaring counties natural disaster areas wily-nily to fix an election…then again…

  13. “Perhaps there IS somehow, reason for someone to vote for Cory Gardner but not for Beauprez.”

    Politically? No. But not everyone votes based on politics, especially those who are politically ignorant or uncommitted. For those people the constant “Gardner’s gonna ban condoms/abortions/douches/IUDs etc.” of Mark Uterus and his supporters (I’m feeling schadenfreude at the millions blown by Tom Steyer’s PAC) probably made the difference.

    1. But wouldn’t that have affected the Udall race as well or primarily?
      In my nutty hardcore SJW neighborhood there were signs for Udall AND Beauprez on the same yard. The gun thing is really bad for Hickenloper.

    2. I voted Republican in all the national races, but Libertarian for all the local ones. Hickenlooper is mostly harmless and I don’t like Beauprez, so I cast a protest vote for Mike Dunafin. I also voted “no” on all the judges, since there are no term limits.

      For what it’s worth, but you did ask for an example.

  14. Let me know if you’re serious and if you get it written up. I’ll help try and get signatures. We definitely need to do something before 2016.
    On the plus side, if I read it right, the GOP took the state senate so we have that going for us. Which is nice.

    1. I am serious. I need a lawyer to write it out properly, and I need to figure out how the process works. It will put a serious dent in my writing, but it’s time to save the country and even Heinlein took time off to campaign for Goldwater.

      1. Let me do some research on petitioning to amend the state constitution. Do you (or anyone in the reading audience) know a good lawyer who would write something like this pro bono?

          1. It looks relatively straightforward (for a given definition of straightforward). The biggest parts are finding two responsible parties, getting a draft to the secretary of state for review, making any changes, resubmitting for final approval then getting the signatures. (There are some interesting laws/procedures around hiring circulators.)

            Do you have my email from WordPress or should I get it to you?

      2. I’ll do what I can, Sarah. The last three months have been he$$, though. Still, it’s a worthy cause, and I approve! Harder to write a law to overturn a Constitutional amendment.

      3. You don’t need a lawyer to write it. I’ve written one or two, but never did anything with them. I’ve got one for selecting Reps and Senators by lottery. If you want to see it, let me know.

        1. I would disagree. At least in Oregon, and in California, there is a history of courts throwing out amendments after they have been passed for whatever reason they could come up with. Having a good lawyer with the appropriate skills write it is a good investment.

          1. Oregon and California are in the ninth circuit, a place of its own distinctions — including the most cases overturned by SCOTUS.

            Colorado is in the tenth.

          3. Six of one, half a dozen of the other.
            Understandable text is easier to get people to vote for. Legalese is looked upon more favorably by the legal apparatus.

            For instance, in Idaho we just had a referendum narrowly go down to defeat. The gist of it was “no regulation from an executive bureaucracy shall have the force of law without first being ratified by congress”. Had it been written that way, I have no doubt it would have passed.
            Of course, we’re in the 9th Circuit, and the federal government owns an outright majority of property in the state and i very jealous of its prerogatives. The federal judiciary seems determined to turn us into helots.

    2. Too bad I’m no longer a CO resident. That, and not in the country.
      Also, if you wanted to do some fast-talking to get it by the left, you could look up what the OSCE or UN have as model election laws/voter ID laws. If a supra-national organization endorses it, it must be good.

  15. On different note, the first story in Yahoo’s news feed this morning was how the GOP win was good news for Hillary. Keep in mind my wife who is fairly liberal said she would NEVER vote for Hillary because that woman scares her.

      1. Can we please have Elizabeth Warren as the Democratic candidate for president? Please? I don’t think she could even win against Rick Santorum or Mitt Romney.

        1. There’s a good chance you’re right. She couldn’t do better than 53.7% against a Republican in Massachusetts, with Obama headlining the ticket. That was better than Martha Coakley, and enough to unseat Scott Brown, but hardly amounts to a resounding endorsement on the national stage.

  16. I tuned into CNN last night to see the shellshocked liberals.

    The Democrats didn’t look too happy, either. 😀

  17. The nation has just told Obama we’re completely sick of him. You know all of the horribly destructive stuff he’s been doing the past six years? That was when he thought we liked him. I’m afraid things are about to get much, much worse.

  18. Found this tweet, rewteeted by one of the Usual Suspects:

    “Fed-Up Writer. @thewayoftheid · 11h 11 hours ago Two more years of strange white men in my vagina.”

    So: why do you have strange white men in your vagina? 😉

            1. It’s *still* canoodling. You know it’s true, deep in your heart. You canoodler, you.

        2. Well, there’s a difference between “strange” and a “stranger”. Dan’s not a stranger to Sarah. [Wink]

          1. Dan’s not stranger than Sarah, you say? Whew, that’s… um. (Shuts up, backs away slowly)

            🙂

              1. 😀

                There’s a Frazz cartoon where Caulfield, having been called a “person of color” got some paint chips and let all the school children figure out what color they were. He was “Serengeti Sunset.”

                1. As much of a dork as Mork from Ork? I heard he eats with a fork, but in the field he’ll use his spork. 😉

    2. For some reason I don’t think the twit who tweeted would appreciate it if I were to point out that that comment was decidedly racist and sexist.

        1. I have actually seen someone propounding today that racist definition of racism that it occurs only to those with power. By which they mean, those races that they have defined as having power.

          1. Yep. I’ve heard that “definition” of racism. Of course that means that a Bigoted Rich Black can’t be racist toward a poor white male. [Sad Smile]

            1. Like most things Progressive, its purpose is singular: to discuss your racism. We aren’t talking about my racism because it is only your that matters.

          2. Weirdly, I think my first encounter with that was in a fandom where somebody was trying to explain that because racism was institutionally or societally defined, or whatnot, it was impossible to be racist against a white person, and therefore an alien conqueror’s contempt for humans as an inferior species could not be called racism when applied to a white character.

            */tangent*

  19. You’ve got the right idea Sarah to go after foundational issues. There are things that can be done earlier than a state constitutional measure though and ones that are probably a lot easier to accomplish.

    Now is the season of electoral math nerds poring over the tea leaves to try and figure out what it all means. In terms of voter fraud, now’s the time to identify which districts are the biggest problem children and figure out how to beat the problem in that district. Until they quit stealing votes or go to jail for it, those problems will persist in a cat-and-mouse fashion no matter what the law is.

  20. Via Twitchy: “LynnFYI @LynnFYI Follow Racist, sexist party of Republican voters elect Tim Scott, Nikki Haley & Mia Love, yet Sandra Fluke lost! Libs r confused!”

      2. I am pondering the population of the sphere defined by “noticeably saner than Ms Fluke” and concluding it comprises 97.3% of America.

  21. I think what happened was that there were Democrats crossing over to vote *against* Udall and his stupid war-on-woman campaign, and the rest of their slate was straight Democrat. That fits the facts, anyway.

  22. I was so happy I watched Allahpundit’s Humpbot twice. I hope to watch it again, in two years time.

  23. Let the excuses begin!

    “Popehat @Popehat · 9m 9 minutes ago Actual Headline at Alternet: “How You Let the Koch Brothers Manipulate Ebola, Lena Dunham, And Reality TV To Steal The Election” ”

    and from one of the Usual Suspects:

    “The midterms are usually bad. I know this. But I can’t help thinking: if the Dems were *actually progressive*, they’d win more often.”

      2. “If we were just MORE socialist, then those stupid proles would love us at last!”

  24. I agree, totally, Sarah. But, please! “The first Tuesday *after the first Monday* in November. Current Colorado law is as you stated. Which means at long intervals, when Nov 1 is a Tuesday – we vote a week before the rest of the nation. Let’s get that fixed, at the same time! ::Kitteh-Dragon likes things that mesh::

  25. One more thing. And I hope this is one we can get state legislatures or citizen initiatives going on ASAP: “No identification card issued by the Federal government shall be accepted as voting ID if such card is deemed to have been issued in violation of Federal immigration law.” A lawyer would have to pretty it up for each jurisdiction so it can withstand challenges; but the point would be to expressly forbid using any new Executive Order IDs as proof of eligibility to vote.

    I know, it would get challenged in the courts. I’m counting on that. That would drag the entire backdoor amnesty into the courts and tie it up. It might not keep illegal immigrants from entering, but the court cases would make an effective roadblock to at least some illegal voting.

    1. 2 problems.
      1. Federal supremacy, especially 14th Amendment.
      2. The first thing would be an injunction to prevent enforcement. Democrat approved judges would grant it.

      1. I want it in court. I want the next Attorney General in court defending voting rights for illegal immigrants. Make them admit that’s what they’re after, and the backlash will make them look back on the 2014 election as the good old days.

      2. Federal law only trumps State law when it is a matter that the Federal government has been granted the authority to legislate on by the Constitution. The truth of the matter is that the States have surrendered and abdicated their rights entirely too often (in addition to them having been stolen by the courts). If the States have the authority to rule that ID is required to vote, they also have the authority to State what is an acceptable form of ID and what is not.

      3. This is one area where state law might trump federal law. The US Constitution allows States to set the rules regarding how elections are run, and not the Federal Government. This was important back in the ’90s because it was used to shoot down a law passed in DC that would have instituted term limits for Congresscritters. The law was ruled to be unconstitutional because it violated the right of a State to choose who would represent it in DC.

        1. We’ve already seen voter id ruled unconstitutional on 14th Amendment grounds once it was past a certain level.

          1. But the US Supreme Court allows it. It doesn’t like all of the voter ID laws that have been passed, but it has no problem with the basic concept of requiring ID to vote.

  26. Sarah — while I endorse your proposed amendment and would like to see it (or equivalent) incorporated into the constitution of every state, I believe that it would be overturned by the Federal courts as infringing the rights of Democrats to be elected.

  27. I think that with many very local elections if someone has gone under the radar (and most voters really don’t pay attention) that people will go with their historic affiliations. So unless someone made a “name” for themselves they’re going to get the automatic votes. New people might lose to a vague “that name sounds familiar to me” vote for the other guy, too.

      1. Except that isn’t a velociraptor. *glares at Hollywood* Morons. They were only a couple feet tall: turkey height, really. Hollywood screws up everything.

          1. Yeah, “Velociraptor” has become synonymous with “murder dino that’s not T-Rex” in pop culture.

          2. In the book they were properly sized, I believe. Hollywood, like I said before. (I heard the director wanted to give the dinos forked tongues, like snake, to make them scarier. Don’t know if that’s true or not.)

          3. There are videos on line of cassowarys attacking people protected with shields. I suspect the Deinonychus attacked in the same way.

  29. One thing that several blogs have mentioned: the polls were wrong, spectacularly wrong, all of them. Candidates that all the polls said were safe fell. Not sure what significance this will have in ’16.

      1. The problem with polls is that they all contain a secret sauce — the pollster’s anticipation of the make-up of the electorate, what the turn-out will be. Having severely underestimated (so they think*) the Democrat get-out-the-vote success in 2012 it seems likely they over-estimated it this time.

        Look back at the last few months for the number of warnings about the Dems’ ground game and you have the answer for what soured that secret sauce.

        *May have, may not have. All elections have three phases, with arguably the most important being the post-election analysis of what meaning can be derived from the events just concluded. In 2012 the Dems convinced the MSM that their GOTV game had been state-of-the-art. The possibility ought be considered that the Romney Campaign GOTV effort was monumentally incompetent (a fact its developers would not want proclaimed, so they would likely be happy to over credit the Obama Campaign.)

    2. It’s been suggested that many polls can only really be trusted one week before the election. Prior to that, many of the polls are part of the battlespace preparation. “Support our candidate because they have a chance of winning!” Or “Support our candidate because they’re in for a tougher than expected campaign!” Then roughly a week before the election, everyone tries to adjust their polls to roughly correspond with the real world so that they can later loudly tell everyone how accurate their polls are.

  30. Some insight:

    Not the Beginning of the End, but Maybe the End of the Beginning
    By Victor Davis Hanson
    Race, class, and gender politics are not over, but maybe they are beginning to become just a bit stale.

    Part of the progressive problem was the huge disconnect between assimilationist reality and tribal rhetoric. …

    [SNIP]

    In truth, race/class/gender politics have devolved into narcissistic tropes. Once a candidate becomes hooked on the tribal narcotic, then any slight interruption in supply causes hysterical withdrawal meltdown. …

    [SNIP]

    In addition, in our sick political world, someone is supposedly authentically a “feminist” or an “African-American,” and their gender and race are essential not incidental to their characters, only to the degree they are leftists; otherwise they are either regressive or their race and gender are of no interest to the Left.

    Again, that was an argument that voters simply are growing tired of.

    [SNIP]

    … Perhaps emblematic of the strange coalition of liberal elite plutocrats and race/class/gender opportunists that now runs the Democratic party was not just the failed candidacy of someone like New York 19th congressional district challenger Sean Eldridge (multimillionaire husband of billionaire Facebook co-founder Chris Hughes), but the disastrously failed candidacy. Eldrige, for all his millions and green techie credentials, was crushed by nearly 30 points by the populist, war veteran, and scholar Representative Chris Gibson. Or take a congressional district like my own in California’s 21st, where a farmer of a Portuguese immigrant family, one-term incumbent David Valadao, buried by nearly 20 points his well-funded challenger Amanda Renteria , an Ivy League graduate, ex–Goldman Sachs analyst, self-described Latina DC congressional staff insider who recently moved back here to the valley, supposedly to take advantage of the fact that the Republican Valadao’s district has a 40 percent Democratic party advantage in registered voters, is 71 percent Hispanic, and voted overwhelmingly for Barack Obama in 2012.

    [SNIP]

    … Renteria came across, fairly or not, as an outsider and an elitist. In contrast, Valadao (why would he be considered less “Latino” than is Renteria, as if an ancestry of poor Portuguese immigrants is less “Hispanic” than of poor Mexican immigrants?) was the far more authentic and down to earth in his concern for the practical issues of his constituents, such as energy and water. …

  31. Sarah,
    Take my advice for what it is worth.
    I am a recent lurker to the website and share a mutual admiration of RAH. As someone who used to be involved in campaigns, my best advice is to identify key activists in your state that have done this sort of thing before and ask for their advice. Try to stay away from the party apparat as they often do not share the same goals as their supposed allies.

    A quick lexis nexis search should give you names and prior referenda/amendments that these activists have been involved with in your state. These activists (who are generally the front people for the initiative/referenda/constitutional amendment) in turn can often tell you which law firms, campaign law restrictions, petition requirements, practicial tips about the administering office which is generally the secretary of state (but not always) etc.

    Drafting legislation is a problematic exercise that requires experienced draftsman–this type of law is actually rarely taught to students in law schools because our law schools use the case law system. Administrative law and statutory interpretation classes are beyond the required 1L curriculum and are usually taken as electives. This area of the law is usually dominated by those who actually learned it by craft. Poorly drafted constitutional amendments often fail, are struck down by courts, or so poorly written that the court has substantial discretion in interpreting the language (often opposite of what was intended by the drafters). Do not go with amateurs here–the stakes are too high because you first have the get the ballot issue approved, then win the issue, then you have to win the subsequent court challenges. Thus, the drafting calls for a professional lawyer type with prior Colorado experience in such matters.

    FYI I am a closeted pol sci professor of a libertarian/conservative bent at a fairly large university, I teach public law classes at our university focusing on constitutional, administrative, and criminal law but IANAL. My doctorate is Political Science but I have taught in this field for over ten years and have coursework and published research in this area. Practical experience politically was at the congressional and state elections level for about a decade as a volunteer. Can give credentials if needed.

  32. I would recommend no vote-by-mail, even for those who can establish hardship. I would recommend giving them two weeks (I think we have a month here, but I’m not positive) and they can fill out their ballot when they come in to prove their citizenship and file for a ‘hardship ballot.’ Even with the requirement to prove hardship the vote-by-mail is very liable to fraud, the person who comes in and gets their ballot may prove they are a citizen and haven’t voted yet, but you still don’t know who is filling out the ballots after they leave.

  33. Pingback: Three Takeaways from Yesterday’s Election Results | Enjoyment and Contemplation

Comments are closed.