progressive involvement

150th anniversary of the Sand Creek Massacre

On November 29, 1864, a contingent of Colorado Cavalry volunteers, under the command of Major John Chivington (a Methodist minister), attacked an encampment of Arapaho and Cheyenne Indians at Sand Creek in eastern Colorado near Eads.

The Cavalry destroyed the village, and murdered about 200 people, most of whom were women and children.  The tribes had been promised the location was safe.  (Click here for more information about the 150th anniversary of this event.)

In light of Major Chivington's clergy credentials, the anniversary is especially poignant for United Methodists who have, of course, utterly rejected the actions of Chivington, and, in light of the upcoming 150th anniversary of this horrible episode, have actively encouraged dialog and reconciliation is active ways.

This year’s United Methodist Rocky Mountain Annual (regional) Conference gathering became a two-day teach-in on the Sand Creek Massacre. It was a Methodist clergyman-turned-soldier, Col. John Chivington, who on Nov. 29, 1864 ordered the cavalry charge that slaughtered an unsuspecting, peaceful village of Cheyenne and Arapaho Indians.

Mountain Sky Area Bishop Elaine Stanovsky’s push for a major effort at understanding and healing climaxed on Friday, June 20. That’s when 13 buses carried some 650 Rocky Mountain Conference members and guests, including descendants of the massacre’s survivors, three hours into eastern Colorado, to the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site.

“Today is a little bit beyond belief for me,” Stanovsky said to the group at a conference dinner that night, back in Pueblo, Co. “I knew I had to bring you to the site. But I didn’t know if you’d come. And you came!”

Indeed, the throng nearly outnumbered Chivington’s cavalry and constituted the largest single day of visitation at the Sand Creek site — one of the newest and most out-of-the way in the National Park Service — since its 2007 dedication.

Al Addison, an Arapaho whose great-great grandfather survived the massacre, has visited the site more than 60 times, but doing so in a crowd of United Methodists touched him.

“I can tell the church has compassion,” he said.

Our bishop, Jim Gonia, reflects on the Sand Creek Massacre in a recent blogpost.  He said:

As people of faith, it is a moment for us to stop and reflect not only on the implications of this particular event for the witness of the Christian church but also on the broader story of the displacement of the Native peoples of this continent by white settlers. While Col. Chivington’s particular actions were condemned as early as 1865 by the United States federal government, the psychological and spiritual wounds of the massacre persist to this day, especially for Native peoples.

In the church we talk about kairos moments, Spirit-led moments when circumstances come together in such a way that we can hear God speak anew and live with fresh commitment to the way of Jesus in the world.  It is my hope and prayer that our holy attention to the Sand Creek Massacre may become for us such a kairos moment, leading us to renewed relationship with all our Native sisters and brothers.

Image:  Sand Creek massacre, Howling Wolf

It could have been worse

The loss of Mark Udall stings.  He's the archetypal Coloradan, a fine senator, a fine person, but, alas, not particularly good at retail politics.  He's wooden, and that can be deadly.  I once saw him grip a podium so hard I thought he might reduce the thing to sawdust.

Being politically nimble is a much under-rated quality--perhaps skill--in politics.  FDR was politically nimble, as was JFK.  Gerald Ford, on the other hand, was a plodder, but not nimble at all.  Jimmy Carter, bless him truly, probably regards nimbleness as something of a sin.  Richard Nixon was nimble, in his way.  Bill Clinton could be a little too nimble.

Mark Udall, bless him too, truly, is not nimble.  His first attack on the personhood amendment was good, and it drew blood.  He was right to pound Gardner on it, and Gardner completely deserved it.  Gardner's riposte, that he was in favor of over-the-counter birth control, was a fairly effective counter.

Over-all, Udall's attack on the personhood amendment was politically productive in September, but the campaign desperately needed a second act and there wasn't one.  (If, instead of hammering on womens' reproductive rights, about which he had already said plenty, he had instead shifted to Gardner's rank hypocrisy, that also might have drawn blood.  Tea party Republican Cory Gardner was the liberal in this race.  How did that happen?)

I kept waiting for candidates of either party to talk about jobs and the economy, the true concern of the voters, but, for some reason, nobody seemed to want to go there.  If jobs were mentioned, it was usually in a long list of other things the candidate was for.  I didn't follow every campaign everywhere in the country, but I didn't hear any Democratic candidate make jobs the centerpiece of his or her campaign.  What the hell is wrong with these people?

Other than Udall, however, the damage for Colorado Democrats was limited.  Hickenlooper survived barely, as did control of both houses of the legislature, barely.  Rep. Daniel Kagan survived a challenge from a political unknown who was exceptionally well-financed.  In the final weeks, Koch money came down like that huge hail storm that hit here in Colorado a few weeks ago and caused $8000 damage to my car.

I was surprised that Andrew Romanoff in CO-6 lost by 8 percent.  I'm not surprised he lost--over the final weekend, the enthusiasm for turnout didn't quite seem to be there--but I was surprised he lost by that much.  The only way Andrew Romanoff loses by 8 percent is if the Democratic vote does not turn out.  

I read somewhere that the national turnout was only 38%.  If it falls under 40%, Democrats are in trouble, as indeed they were, all across the nation, although that, too, is not quite the debacle it seems.  Shaheen survived in New Hampshire.  Hagen was running for re-election in a southern state, and barely lost.  (Better turnout would easily have saved this seat.)

Alison Grimes probably has a future in politics, but her campaign was poor.  She assiduously avoided Obamacare and President Obama and that was a mistake, especially in the way she did it.  If she had used Obamacare as a weapon to beat Mitch McConnell over the head, she could hardly have done worse.  If she had said she had voted for President Obama, which everybody of course already knew she did, she would have at least scored points for honesty and directness.

Ironically, President Obama's reluctance to act on immigration before the election, in order, the pros thought, to help a few Democratic candidates, might have backfired.  It doesn't seem like the hispanic vote turned out, which, along with low turnout among young people, definitely hurt Udall and Romanoff in Colorado, and definitely hurt Paul Davis and Greg Orman in our neighboring state of Kansas.    

Democrats tried so hard to appeal to a handful of swing voters that they forgot about the millions in their base.  That is not very astute.  Recent elections have been about turning out the base.  Why should hispanics turn out if one of their major concerns is put on the back burner, with vague promises, again, for the future?  Why should young people turn out if one of their major concerns, jobs, isn't mentioned at all?

 

 

Thank God THAT's over

It was an election about nothing.  I kept waiting for someone to talk about jobs and the economy, but very few did.  Then, in the last few days, like a recent hail story, Koch money descended all over from on high.  Now that that exercise in futility is over, maybe we can talk about jobs and the economy.

It'll be a few days before we see the numbers, but the vaunted Democratic ground game seems over-rated. Plus, the Democratic campaign seems to have peaked about two weeks ago.  The late movement was toward the GOP, so much so that Mark Warner, who was on no one's endangered list, barely snuck through in Virginia.

Jeanne Shaheen in New Hampshire wound up right where most polls had her, roughly 2-3% ahead.  Any late movement toward Brown appears to have been countered by Hillary Clinton the day before the election.

Speaking of whom, this Democratic near-debacle just about cinches the 2016 nomination for Hillary Clinton.  Suddenly, the Democratic Party desperately needs a winner, and the Clintons are the last winners they want to claim.  

For all the credit he's due for his considerable accomplishments, President Obama has not been good for the Democratic Party, which went from controlling both houses of Congress to control in zero.

Gov. Hickenlooper rallies supporters for final weekend of campaign

Fighting a head cold and late campaign exhaustion, Gov. John Hickenlooper rallies supporters at Sam's Diner in Aurora this morning.  He was accompanied by a host of local and statewide candidates, and introduced by Joe Neguse, candidate for Secretary of State.  

Andrew Romanoff, candidate for Congress in the 6th district, made a surprise appearance to boost Hickenlooper and promote his own campaign against incumbent, Mike Coffman.

Hillary stumps Aurora for Hickenlooper, Udall, and Romanoff

Hillary Clinton drew about 1000 party faithful to the ballroom of the Radisson Hotel.  People who wanted to see the next President had to sign up to work phones or canvass in order to get in.

In a pointed reference to GOP Senate candidate, Cory Gardner (and also Romanoff's opponent, Mike Coffman), Clinton said:  “This election is important to everybody, but it’s especially important to women of Colorado.  These Democrats will never shame or judge a woman for decisions that are deeply complex and personal.  They won’t tell voters of Colorado one thing about personhood and tell their colleagues in Washington the opposite about personhood.”

What Hickenlooper, Udall, and Romanoff are for:  raising the minimum wage, womens' reproductive health, Social Security and Medicare, equal pay for equal work, affordable student loans, immigration reform, clean energy and a clean environment.

Udall, Romanoff, and Bennet fire up volunteers for the final 19 days

Mark Udall is locked in a tight race for United States Senate.  Andrew Romanoff is locked in a tight race for Congress.  

Sen. Michael Bennet remembers a tight race he won in 2010.  Only one vote per voting precinct statewide separated Sen. Bennet from his opponent.

All three are shown here, firing up volunteers for the final 19 days of the campaign.  So far, volunteers in the 6 congressional district have signed up for 7000 shifts of canvassing and phone banking.

What Udall and Romanoff are for:  raising the minimum wage, womens' reproductive health, doing something about climate change, equal pay for equal work, more funding for the Center for Disease Control, more funding for veterans' benefits, immigration reform, affordable health care, repairing infrastructure, job training and voc rehab, early childhood education--for starters.

Their opponents are against all these things, and believe in something called "trickle down economics," a fanciful economic theory, of sorts, that has never worked, not one time, in any state or country in the history of the world. 

Ground war

Colorado ballots go out tomorrow.  For the first time in its history, every registered voter will receive a ballot in the mail.  

Also for the first time, Colorado has same-day voter registration.  If you are not registered, you can go to a voting center on the day of the election to register and vote.  Thank you, Colorado Legislature!

Democrats turned out in large numbers this evening for this year's Get-Out-the-Vote (GOTV) training.  The stakes are high.  Sen. Mark Udall is probably trailing Cory Gardner by a point or two, and Andrew Romanoff is locked in a tight race with incumbent Mike Coffman in Colorado's 6th congressional district.

They say the "ground game" can add up to a 2% boost.  Arapahoe Democrats are off to a good start.  As of today, 60,000 households have been contacted through canvassing, and another 70,000 households through telephone.  

Having worked GOTV in 2004, 2008, and 2012, I'm reasonably convinced that these GOTV efforts are getting better and better at turning out the vote.  In 2004, election day was chaos.  Even at that, we turned out a high percentage of the vote.  By 2012, GOTV had become better organized, almost business-like.

Under Colorado law, a citizen may take another person's ballot to the voting center.  Each person is limited to taking a total of 10 ballots.  The Colorado Democratic Party has chosen not to encourage its volunteers to take ballots.

The reason seems to be that Colorado currently has a Secretary of State who rivals Kansas' Kobach for worst in the nation.  He'll be all over the election looking for anything that might be dangerous to the state, such as people voting.  (Nevertheless, be it known that it is still a person's right, under the law, to take the ballots of 10 people to the voting center.) 

Deft

The Republicans have a good ad running against Governor John Hickenlooper--yes, the one featuring the Governor and President Obama playing pool.  The content is not that whoopy, but it's watchable and takes a clever angle, so to speak.

The Hickenlooper campaign countered it with this brilliant ad, one that sticks to Hick's pledge not to run negative ads, while at the same time deftly skewering the opposition:

 

Doesn't look 48

Andrew Romanoff accepts the cheers and well-wishes of his supporters at his 48th birthday party last evening.  His race against incumbent Mike Coffman in the 6th congressional district is one of the most-watched across the country.  

The 6th congressional district is, basically, the city of Aurora, CO.  It includes a bit more than that--Centennial, for example--but the district could well be thought of as "Aurora's seat" in Congress.

The old 6th CD was only about 2% hispanic and was one of the most solidly red seats in the history of the world.  With the change in district boundaries following the 2010 census, the district became much, much more competitive.  

The current 6th is 22% hispanic, which is why the words "immigration reform" have been spoken, apparently for the first time, by Cong. Coffman.

I haven't seen any polling, but I would imagine that only a point or two separate the two candidates.  This itself is a remarkable achievement for Romanoff, who is likely running even, or better, against an incumbent congressman, and doing so without taking any PAC money.  (Coffman has raised nearly a million through PAC sources, so far.)

You'd think he'd know the question was coming and that he would have had a prepared response

 

Congressional candidate, Mike Coffman, blows a question on womens' reproductive rights during yesterday's debate with Andrew Romanoff.