The elephant in the room of Colorado elections : who controls elections:Trump or Colorado

 Jena Griswold, current Colorado Secretary of State and now the Democratic Party winner in the primaries for Attorney General, is engaged in a very strange campaign.  She faced three opponents in the primary, none of whom garnered more than around 15-17% of the vote and who attempted to defeat her based on her management style. However, none of them even acknowledged the national debate on who controls elections in the face of Trump's ongoing attempt to federalize elections and control the outcome on his behalf. Griswold served as the leader of the nation's Democratic Secretaries of State (at the state level) and did much to protect genuine voter integrity from election deniers and from Trump's attempt to seize control of the election process. State control of elections (not by the federal government) was granted in the Constitution. 

In the primary this year, Griswold didn't raise the issue of who controls elections;  the state Democratic Party didn't raise it; her opponents didn't raise it; and the GOP itself did not either. There is a very big elephant in the room that is getting tiptoed around,  and I don't get it. Now, the same anti-Griswold campaign has appeared on social media today in time to kick off the general election in Colorado in November, in which Griswold is on the ballot for Attorney General.  That line of attack failed before in the primary, and there is no reason to believe it will succeed in the general. They are while referring to a 5-year-old negative report on her management style and claim she hid it. What is at stake is a national story..This is a deep blue state.  I, in all of my years in politics, have never seen anything like it when a state election's national implications are ignored as if they did not exist.

As a former election official myself, I have prided myself on supporting the clean election system that Colorado has (including that over 80% of ballots are "mailed in"). The mail-in system was constructed by GOP leadership and administered to the T by subsequent Secretaries of State, including Democrats like Griswold.  Colorado has had the most controversial free elections in the US. Its mail-in system uses, I hear, FBI-trained handwriting clerks of both parties to verify the ballots, and it is considered the gold standard in the US. For that reason alone, Griswold deserves accolades for her administrative skills and adherence to the rule of law. For an alleged  Gov. Polis or gubernatorial candidate/AG Phil Weiser or name identification for Griswold’s win in the primary, totally ignoring the elephant in the room: who controls elections- Trump or the state of Colorado. There was national focus on the big issue of whether election deniers could get away with grabbing the ballots and tabulation of the vote and sequestering them and giving authorized access to partisans because their allegiance was to Trump.. She disciplined county clerks for not following the carefully laid out rules of the state they were sworn to uphold on taking office. The most famous case was concerning Tina Peters. Griswold, with the help of the AG's office attorneys, beat Trump at his game. She had locked up the ballots in her county and gave access to a Trump partisan, putting up a co-worker to help her do it, and then covered it up with lies. This destroyed the chain of evidence and the required surveillance by others not in her party. Trump intervened to "free her" from a jury trial conviction, putting her in prison because she had committed a crime and a cover-up.  Peters became Trump's icon of the ideal county clerk: "defy local rules and do as I say", instead. Now it is no secret that Trump wants all election officials to act like Peters and control the election count to his benefit. Peters is his role model. There appears to have been election deniers placed in official positions all over the country. In Colorado, all GOP candidates for state offices- AG, SOS, governor- are election deniers, sworn to rectify the "stolen 2020 election."

  On the issue of Trump's demand that the details of all registered voters on state rolls be turned over to the feds, Griswold defied him, too, and that is another reason to admire her. Yesterday, Trump's demands to turn over voter rolls to the feds met their 23rd defeat in federal courts... as courts denied Trump's demand. We are now awaiting a Supreme Court ruling on Trump's demand to make the post office the agency to deny mail-in ballot delivery using those voter rolls. Trump has declared war on mail-in ballots, and that he uses them was yesterday’s headline. In the meantime, Trump has attempted to force Colorado to bend to his will by denying federal funds to Colorado, from food stamps to fighting wildfires, because we defied his demands as he tries to control the Nov midterm outcomes and lay the groundwork for another attempt to claim the election was stolen, as he told you in advance it was going to happen. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/06/us/politics/a-growing-number-of-election-deniers-hold-key-local-roles-in-midterms.htm

lhttps://www.democracydocket.com/news-alerts/trump-threatened-colorado-funding-as-punishment-over-tina-peters-judge-finds/

https://coloradonewsline.com/briefs/trump-colorado-voter-data-federal-judge

/https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/analyzing-presidents-executive-order-mail-voting

How Colorado detects fraud: https://coloradonewsline.com/2024/10/24/fraudulent-ballots-mesa-county-colorado/

Crowley beats Hong ; moderates surge in squeakers over democratic socialists. Now what, Dems?

This morning, young voters probably feel like the air was let out of their tires. The "progressive" movement vs the establishment, the enthusiasm this generated in recent primaries, and the appeal to grassroots activism have suddenly met resistance, with squeaker results of some close wins and some close losses. El-Sayed in Michigan's close win and Hong's in Wisconsin's close loss show the limits of the "progressive left".  https://www.npr.org/2026/08/12/nx-s1-5927119/2026-minnesota-governor-primary-election-crowley-hong  

Take heart, young voters. A message to younger generations from one of the (not so) silent generation.   Realize that, win or lose, the Democratic Party cannot win without your support because you did so well in bringing new blood of ideas,  young legs,  and talented candidates into a "big tent" that had become filled with the old, creaky, cranky, and geriatric. Your success will and cannot be ignored. Take a deep breath and know that a MAGA victory in November would be the worst outcome you could experience.  Also realize that to win those close races in November,  the "establishment" will have to embrace so many of the issues you raised, like affordability, or they, too, will lose to MAGA if they do not. 

 Pollsters took a bath, failing to pick up on last-minute waves of pragmatism driving ." the establishment" to crash the party's growing infatuation with Democratic Socialists and those progressives who embraced parts of the DSA plank. It appeared to the pragmatists that the rise of the progressive left and the ideology of Democratic socialism were a gift to MAGA in the general election, setting up their defense loaded with messages of fear and hate.   There is a split in the progressives: those who do support the platform of the DSA and those who still support capitalism with reforms. Reform or revolution is a dividing distinction. However, both share the pocketbook issues and offer similar legislative solutions for those who saw their inability to cope with day-to-day economic demands. Call those left behind "workers", the "middle class", or " ordinary Americans", both DSA and the establishment wings of the Democratic Party are in sync on pocketbook issues, and if all factions keep their messaging focused on solutions to those issues, they will still succeed in November. 

 It also appears that older and wiser moderates awoke at the last minute to the danger of the extremism of the DSA's plank, with its anti-capitalist and pro-Gaza message.  "Moderates and establishment feared the very progressive candidates were a gift of attack ads material to MAGA candidates in purple states in the November general election.  The demise of MAGA power had been the assumption that fueled Democrats' hopes of a takeover of the House, Senate, and state houses, but now the fear was that too-progressive candidates would be more easily defeated in the upcoming general election.  MAGA was beginning to see some blood in the water and was salivating at the prospect of keeping control of DC as they began to paint the entire Democratic Party as a bunch of communists.  If any air was let out of the tires, the strength of the establishment in the Democratic Party and the willingness of the factions to work to gather in a common cause of a Democratic Party victory, MAGA may be feeling a letdown, too, today.

This moment reminded me of the early years of my own political activism in the 1960's and 1970's. I, too, embraced candidates with cutting ideas that shook "the establishment" out of their post world war II slumber: What I did realize, however, if any of my ideas had a chance to succeed, it would take compromise and many half a loaf victories for the issues I  and so many of those like me, had supported   Those ssues many of us supported were consumer rights, city is for people, mass transit, fighting destruction of neighborhoods,  more sensitivity to environmental and quality of life issues, and, of course, civil rights and inclusiveness. The brown cloud of air pollution had become the city's infamous hallmark nationwide. Many of these issues and their solutions were absorbed into the goals and policies of subsequent leaders in Denver, thanks first to the election of Mayor  Federico Peña and then all those who succeeded him to this day.  

There is an issue that cannot be overlooked in these next few months: the reasons these liberal urban ideas took root were that we had a democratic form of government that permitted equal time media coverage and the political organization skills of those who initially challenged the existing big-city boss form of government.  For that reason, fundamentally, supporting democracy in the form we have known it and democratic institutions allows new ideas to be accepted.  The idea of autocracy, dictatorship, and suppression of political opposition are the basic enemies that will cripple reform and the implementation of new goals.  MAGA and Trump himself are the enemies of this vision of democracy, because they try to upend our democratic form of government that enables good ideas to rise like cream to the top.  Young progressives should not lose sight of that fact and include the defense of democracy in their priorities. 

Updaate: 8/14/2026 If there were any doubts about the importance of democracy to those who want to protest,  look at what happened in Minnesota. After the murder of two demonstrators by ICE, Homeland Security investigated the protestors, not the ICE agents, using techniques and tactics characteristic of communist and fascist regimes, including modern technology, infiltration, espionage, and name gathering/finances of organizing entities. They found nothing to use to publish or to even prosecute, but they now know, for future reference, who they can suppress or prosecute on bogus charges in the future. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/13/briefing/immigration-supremecourt-jews.html

To believe that government is for one economic class or race or religion is the greatest enemy we face today if we want a peaceful, prosperous tomorrow in our multi-cultural, multi-racial nation. Elements in both the DSA and MAGA are guilty of promoting to powerful positions only those who are very much like them and suppressing or disadvantaging the " others".   All need a fair shot at getting their voices heard. Democracy provides the mechanics and hope for that to occur.

The American political system forces compromise and embracing of new ideas at the local and national level early in the election cycle.   Primaries are very important, and in the long run, the math counts. The bigger the tent, the more the numbers add up, and it is more likely that those appealing to the most voters win the seats of power that enable the implementation of their agenda.

Pointing fingers in conflicts, Israel/Gaza, and Iran raises political passions but miisses a bigger issue.

 Pointing fingers in conflicts raises passions, but misses a bigger issue. Immediately, I  predict that this post heading sounds like I am about to address the Gaza issue that the Democratic Socialists support: Hamas over Israel.  Wrong.  So am I a partisan of Netanyahu's reducing Gaza to rubble and the death of women and children by starvation or bombing? No. Do I think we can bomb Iran to force it to change direction? What we lose sight of is a bigger issue. commission of war crimes. The recent conflict's political and military leadership do not care a whit about the fate of those who are the victims, regardless of the regime or politics they support. They then use their suffering and death as propaganda tools to gain support for the actions of their leaders.   In recent times, we have seen this at play not only in Gaza/Israel but in Iran, as well.   The focus of our condemnation should be directed at the leadership if we profess to care about the innocents, the women and children. The evil forces at play in those related conflicts are the leadership of those on "either side" who care more about their power and military success than their concern about humanity and commit war crimes. It does not stop with Israel/GazaIran. We in the US have a political leadership who wants the freedom from accountability to commit war crimes, too.

The plight of women and children in Gaza in Israel's campaign and the raped and murdered victims of Oct. 7 of Hamas is the fault of their leaders who do not care or and later who see playing on the rest of the world's care for victims of such violence used as a propaganda tool. At the same time, the Trump administration has learned, or should have learned, that making the everyday people of Iran the victims of a bombing campaign has been ineffective because the  Iranian leadership, clerics, and IRG do not care about the suffering of non-combatants, women, children, and men, either.  Iran, it has appeared, had anticipated that the US would attack, but slaughtering as many demonstrators against the regime as they could. The death toll of those mowed down in Iran is at least in the thousands, though. 

  I have not forgotten Oct. 7 and Hamas beginning the conflict in that horrific rape and massacre of young Israelis attending, of all things, a concert in support of peace.  I have not forgotten that Hamas leadership in effect used their own women and children as human shields by refusing to give them access to their tunnels as refuge from Israel's attempt to bomb Gaza to rubble.  We do not have access to the total suffering of the Iranian civilians, but there is a stand-in icon for that: the horrible killing of over 150 school girls (whether it was a mistake or not) in Iran. 

The rest of us who are observers, if not partisans, of these conflicts still have the responsibility to raise our voices against such crimes against humanity, to try to bring those who commit them to justice in world court tribunals, and to provide aid and compassion for the victims.  We also should take the personal responsibility to realize and to condemn leaders who use the suffering of their own people, suffering their policies caused, as a propaganda weapon.   Instead of pointing fingers at who is the worst war criminal, we should not fall for such messages that abuse the reports of the suffering of their own people to convince others of their rectitude.  Instead,. we need to support institutions that enforce the law and hold accountable those who commit crimes against humanity, regardless of the "side" involved.  

The establishment of the UN (providing a forum for talking is better than military fighting) and the World Court of Justice were founded after World War II's air and bombing with modern weapons that wiped out millions of non-combatants. Rules were devised  inthe Geneva Convention for combatants to take care of civilians., War crimes were defined. And now we have our own president who no longer wants our armed forces to abide by the Geneva Conventions and wants to do away with the world court tribunals. We are not members but want it ended, anyway.  It sounds like Trump wants to commit war crimes without any accountability or shame.  Trump is constantly threatening to bomb Iranian infrastructure to bring more pain and suffering to non-combatant civilians, even though he should understand that would not change the behavior of the IRG and clerical leadership. (They have not suffered enough, he opines)  . That, for the sake of humanity, needs to be nipped in the bud, and that is what we at home can and should stop now. 

https://mufticforumblog.blogspot.com/2026/04/trump-advocating-war-crime-t-when-hague.html

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/31/donald-trump-geneva-conventions-the-problem-military-foreign-policy

Trump and Rubio proposing dismantling the world courts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjGcWLFmTnk

see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjGcWLFmTnk.  Why the world court tribunals?

Abdul El-Sayed says he is a progressive and not a democratic socialist, but will it make a difference in November?

Updated: 8/7/-10 /2026 from my Muftic Forum Facebook post: I've always suspected white " Christian " nationalists and white supremacists had a home in the MAGA base, but what percentage of the MAGA base they were was difficult to grasp by pollsters. The racist, Muslimaphobia scree hurled at El-Sayed after the Michigan Senate primary narrow victory brought them out of the closet with no blowback from anyone in the GOP I could see. If you who plan to run on hate campaign planks in November are a whole party, either you are a silent supporter or an instigator.. Please, do not call yourselves Christian, at least.. Hate of neighbors or those of another religion like the one helped by the good Samaritan wer, were never Christ's values, were they? Nor was El-Sayed a jihadist, a member of the Democratic Socialist of America, or endorsed by them, and he was clear he was a supporter of capitalism (with some reforms). Attack him for being a progressive and for his position on issues if you disagree, but do not make it based on hatred of his race or religion that you have so hatefully stereotyped. Also be aware how political leaders will try to cater to your own closely held hate, as Ted Cruz did ar once .and : Donald Trump unleashed a racist, bigoted Islamophobic vitriol from the Oval Office on August 10. If there was any question whether Trump himself, he who rose to the White House on birtherism and sneering at Obama's given names, is a bigot and a racist, there should no longer be any doubt. The other question is, how many are there like him in America? We will soon see in 2026 and 2028.

Updated 8/6/2026 from a Facebook post: Whipping up the Red Scare in the wake of Abdul ElSayed's narrow Michigan Democrat Pirmary victory, the GOP hopes that branding all Democrats as communists will offset the negatives of the mess Trump and MAGA have made in Iran, and the actions like illegal tariffs will have on the cost of living. It is a deceptive diversion, and they hope voters will fall for it. FYI, El Sayed was not endorsed by the Democratic Socialists of America, and he does not subscribe to or is a member of them. He supports capitalism, and he is a progressive who believes in "big tent" participation in the Democratic Party, but a DSA?, no.

The use of the Red Scare is an old one made by the 1950s by paranoid and later discredited Sen.Joseph McCarthy. To succeed, the GOP will have to hope the recipients of their red scare only listen to FOX and are low-information voters. and the Democrats hope voters realize that a campaign based on this will not make their lives more affordable.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSvnGRAp4o0.  

_____________________________________________________

continuing with original post:

On the news this morning, the not-yet-called Democratic Michigan Senate Primary...a very close victory for Abdul El-Sayed. El-Sayed says he is a progressive and not a democratic socialist, but will it make a difference in November? The question that is hanging out there is whether El-Sayed will be painted as a democratic socialist and ripe for deceptive and vicious attack ads by GOP candidate Mike Rogers, which will doom the seat for Democrats. It will take an enormous effort on behalf of El-Sayed to educate unsophisticated voters that he is not a democratic socialist but is indeed a pro-capitalism progressive seeking reforms, not revolution. El Sayed has made it clear and is on the record as being in favor of capitalism, the kind of democracy, and the form of government we once had for 250 years.

El Sayed was not endorsed by the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), whose platform proposes to upend both, replacing capitalism with socialism and replacing our checks-and-balances system with a parliamentary form of governance, among other very controversial planks. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/AJCcNbFfLd4

The GOP is already salivating at their prospects by attacking those adhering to or looking like they are adhering to the Democratic Socialists of America's platform.' There is beginning to be a realization among voters that the Democratic Socialists of America's platform is very close to communism and is very vulnerable to being charged as that.

The DSA is more extreme than their kin in Europe and is nothing like Bernie Sanders' benign version. This is why we are seeing more and more progressive candidates distancing themselves from the DSA as fast as they can and self-described moderate and progressive Democrats positioning themselves as "not the DSA."

The media is reporting this controversy as a self-defeating internal party fight. There is one, but the Democratic Party can survive if DSA candidates clarify what parts of the DSA plank they do not support.