It’s political blackmail, pure and simple.

There is no real need for the coming special session of the state legislature, but Michael Fields and his team at Advance Colorado have successfully blackmailed the governor, who may not mind so much, and Democrats in the state legislature, many of whom definitely do mind, to agree to a special session to once again reduce property taxes.

Advance Colorado, the advocacy group that claims to oppose “radical” — meaning liberal — Colorado policies, and Colorado Concern, a conservative nonprofit that represents state business interests, are sponsoring two property tax ballot measures that are generally described as either “reckless” or “devastating” or — maybe this is just me — something very close to extortion.

And if the state legislature passes a new property tax bill — as it almost certainly will — Fields has promised to withdraw the initiatives, which are sufficiently radical and would be sufficiently dangerous that everyone, — by which I mean virtually everyone, suddenly felt the absolute need to give in to Fields.

The betting has been that neither measure would pass. The early polling seemed to suggest that neither would pass. But suddenly, in just the past few days, those who seemed ready to gamble got a collective case of cold feet. By cold, I mean ice-age cold. Pre-global-warming cold.

The stakes apparently were just too high. And the final bet by Jared Polis and those in the state legislature was that Fields et al were not bluffing.

State budget director Mark Ferrandino said if the two proposals passed — Initiative 50, which would place a strict cap on property tax growth, and Initiative 108, which would cut property tax revenue by an estimated $2.4 billion — they would cause a recession-equivalent budget crisis.

And so with just weeks to go before the two proposals would be certified for the November ballot, a wide-ranging group of Coloradans, from labor groups like the Colorado Teachers Association to school districts and university officials to conservative groups like Club 20, came together to call for a special session to ward off a “very significant and real threat to all communities in Colorado.”

Want early access to
Mike’s columns?

Subscribe to get an
exclusive first look at
his columns twice a week.

SUBSCRIBE

These are groups that rarely agree on anything, but they did agree there was more than a little justifiable panic in the air.

The mayors of Colorado’s three largest cities — one mayor a Democrat, one a Republican and one Unaffiliated  — also wrote a letter citing the desperate need for a special session.

”If passed, these two initiative will drastically defund K-12 schools statewide, deplete public safety resources and demand crippling cuts to local fire districts and special districts,” wrote Denver Mayor Mike Johnston (D), Aurora Mayor Mike Coffman (R) and Colorado Springs Mayor Yemi Mobolade (U). “These are very real impacts that will negatively impact every resident’s quality of life. We are depending on our legislature to ensure this does not happen.”

We could also expect cuts in transportation funding, in higher education and in Medicaid.

Yeah, dangerous. And radical.

As Polis put it, “whatever the level of risk is — whether it’s a 50-50 chance it passes or a 30% chance it passes” — the risk is too high.

And so Polis has decreed that the legislature will meet, starting Aug. 26, to hammer out what has apparently already been agreed to. It takes at least three days to get a bill passed and ready for the governor to sign, and the hope — although maybe not the reality — is that’s what will happen. If past is prologue, and it often is, sometimes these special sessions can go off the rails.

It’s an election year, meaning anything is possible. And it’s not just Republicans who might have an interest in making the session more interesting than Polis would like. Several progressive Democrats who lost in primary races to candidates backed by the party establishment would be back on the floor and might have something to say.

Which doesn’t mean that Polis is entirely unhappy. You may recall that just last May, at the end of the regular legislative session, they passed a bill, one that Polis signed, that reduced property taxes by somewhat more than $1 billion. You may also recall that Polis, who hasn’t seen a state tax rate he doesn’t want to lower, wanted a bigger cut.

And of course, in a special session called last year, the legislature passed emergency aid for homeowners and renters. And there’s the bill passed in the 2023 session. I think you can spot a trend.

There was the thought — or at least the hope — that the bill in the last regular session had sufficiently addressed, at least for a while, what has been a crisis in property tax hikes, fueled by the runaway rise in housing prices. Although Colorado property tax rates are relatively low compared to most states, that didn’t prevent untenable growth in costs for many homeowners. 

A new proposal would cut property taxes by $255 million in addition to the cuts already passed. And if the legislature sends a similar proposal to Polis to sign, Fields said that not only would he pull both measures from the ballot, but that the bill could provide  a “permanent solution to Colorado’s property tax crisis.” 

When The Sun asked Polis, as reported in The Unaffiliated newsletter, about the outside groups using the ballot to force the legislature’s hand, he said, “This is another example of an issue where, of course, it’s the right of people who petition and go to the people to decide things, but if the legislature can work it out, and we can avoid that and provide more stability for the states, that’s a good thing.”

Which, I believe, is Polis-speak for, this has worked out just the way I wanted it to.

He also said in the interview that he didn’t think this meant the issue was solved “forever,” but that he hoped the issue might be resolved for maybe the next 10 years.

Which brings us back to the issue of blackmail.

You know how it is with blackmailers. If they get away with it once, they can be counted on to come back again. And again. And again.

They may say that they won’t. They may promise with a blood oath that they won’t. But, here’s the catch: Why should anyone believe a blackmailer?

Look, it might well be that Advance Colorado or Colorado Concern won’t bring up another initiative. But who’s to say that some other group won’t bring up something even more radical and more dangerous and find someone else with big money to back it?

The risk is there. But in this case, neither Polis nor the legislature had any real choice but to pay up. 

Mike Littwin has been a columnist for too many years to count. He has covered Dr. J, four presidential inaugurations, six national conventions and countless brain-numbing speeches in the New Hampshire and Iowa snow. Sign up for Mike’s newsletter.

The Colorado Sun is a nonpartisan news organization, and the opinions of columnists and editorial writers do not reflect the opinions of the newsroom. Read our ethics policy for more on The Sun’s opinion policy. Learn how to submit a column. Reach the opinion editor at opinion@coloradosun.com.

Follow Colorado Sun Opinion on Facebook.

It turns out, as expected, that the question of Tina Peters’ guilt was never really a question at all.

Even Peters herself, according to testimony, knew that once her election-security breach was uncovered, that she was, uh, well, totally screwed and likely headed to prison.

It took the Mesa County jury less than five hours to convict Peters, the former county clerk, on seven of 10 charges — including whatever charges would cover a harebrained scheme to allow a former professional surfer, using a fake ID, to gain access to voting machines whose hard drives he would copy and which, ultimately, would be made public.

It was refreshing to see that a jury, presented with the evidence, would come to a clear and unanimous conclusion. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t any questions remaining.

You can start with the most obvious one: How could a county clerk and recorder, whose job is to oversee elections, fall so deeply into the rabbit hole of election denial that she would risk everything — her job, her reputation, even her freedom — to try to illegally prove a lie?

You can just blame Peters for her role in the plot and the coverup that followed, which is what the jury did.

You can blame Donald Trump, whose fear of losing is so great that he had to invent a conspiracy to explain away any defeat. And we must include those Republican politicians who knew better but who enabled the Big Lie to grow virtually unchecked to the point that election denial became party dogma.

Want early access to
Mike’s columns?

Subscribe to get an
exclusive first look at
his columns twice a week.

SUBSCRIBE

You can blame the MyPillow Guy, who spent much of his fortune trying to con the world into thinking that the 2020 election actually was rigged and who, with help from his followers, turned Peters into a convert and an unlikely hero to his unhinged movement.

You can blame the culture of conspiracy that allows Trump, even today, to charge without any evidence that a crowd of 15,000 or so people who greeted Kamala Harris at a Michigan airport didn’t, uh, exist. That, in Trump’s words, Harris had “A.I.’d” a photo, despite the fact that, well, 15,000 actual people were there, including the press, to record the event in real time. 

Is it possible for anyone to be so credulous, even someone like Peters who apparently still thinks the 2020 election was rigged, to believe an accusation so utterly bizarre?

The future of the country may rest on the answer to that question.

Because that question leads inevitably to this: Is this a case where past is prologue, meaning we should fully expect another round of craziness following the November presidential election?

I’d like to think the Peters trial — it seems she may well be headed to prison when sentenced in October — was an object lesson and that election deniers, whether out of fear or just plain common sense, would see themselves sufficiently warned.

But I somehow doubt it.

Certainly Trump, who seems deeply shaken by how significantly the race has changed since Harris replaced Joe Biden on the ticket, is working the Big Lie, and so many smaller ones, at every turn.

Voting for Trump now, more than ever, means that you have to accept what has become his campaign philosophy — anything that hurts him or benefits the other side simply can’t be true. 

So if NPR counted 162 lies and distortions from his recent news conference, you must either believe Trump — sure, his January 6 rally drew a bigger crowd than Martin Luther King’s March on Washington — or you believe that NPR, and every other fact checker, has conspired to make him look like a liar.

You either believe all the photos from Harris’ airport appearance were faked or you believe Trump has special insights into the power of AI.

You either believe Trump’s rantings are the product of a stable genius, or you believe, as Never-Trumper Rick Wilson put it, that Trump is now auditioning for the lead role in “The Madness of King George.”

When Trump was in Aspen for a fundraiser over the weekend, he posted a social-media rant on mail-in voting in Colorado, blaming it on the “Radical Left Governor” Jared Polis, while also slamming the “Lunatic Left” in Colorado for pursuing the since-overturned Colorado Supreme Court ruling briefly keeping Trump off the ballot for his role in the January 6 insurrection.

Of course, mail-in voting in Colorado started in 2013, long before Polis was governor, and the case to keep Trump off the Colorado ballot was brought by a group of five Republicans. And there is no evidence, anywhere, that mail-in voting is somehow unsafe.

The Colorado legislature, to its credit, did respond to the Mesa County breach by passing a law making it specifically illegal to photograph voting machines or to allow unauthorized access to them.

But Peters isn’t the only election denier to have gained a position of some power. According to a report in Rolling Stone, at least 70 pro-Trump election deniers are working as county election officials in swing states. 

And in several states, most notably in Georgia, they’ve changed the rules to make it easier for local officials to delay, or possibly even reject, election certification. As you might remember, Trump and others have been indicted in Georgia for trying to overturn the election. And there was a major breach in election security there — not unlike the breach in Mesa County — in Cobb County.

If Trump loses again, he’d almost certainly claim he was robbed, and chaos would inevitably follow. 

And Tina Peters? You’d like to think she’d be a distant memory by then. But the Big Lie that she still believes, despite everything, isn’t going anywhere. 

Mike Littwin has been a columnist for too many years to count. He has covered Dr. J, four presidential inaugurations, six national conventions and countless brain-numbing speeches in the New Hampshire and Iowa snow. Sign up for Mike’s newsletter.

The Colorado Sun is a nonpartisan news organization, and the opinions of columnists and editorial writers do not reflect the opinions of the newsroom. Read our ethics policy for more on The Sun’s opinion policy. Learn how to submit a column. Reach the opinion editor at opinion@coloradosun.com.

Follow Colorado Sun Opinion on Facebook.

For those of you who didn’t have Tim Walz in your vice-presidential pool, here’s another chance for you.

Raise your hand if you had swiftboating on your “how desperate can Trump get in this mondo bizarro presidential campaign” bingo card?

I’ll confess I didn’t, although I now realize I should have guessed it as soon as Walz’s name was announced and Democrats began loudly touting his 24-year tenure in the National Guard, which he joined at the age of 17.

Of course, he’d be swiftboated — for the same reason that the Trump forces are busily race-baiting and slutshaming Kamala Harris.

Suddenly the race, which Donald Trump thought he had locked up before Joe Biden dropped out, looks to be tied again, with Harris even marginally ahead in most recent polls. And Walz, meanwhile, has had the kind of rollout that JD Vance could only have dreamed of.

And since the Trump team doesn’t seem to know what to do about it, they’re desperately searching through the playbook they had used to get them this far.

As we’ve been reminded, Chris LaCivita, co-chair of the Trump election campaign, was a driving force behind the reprehensible, if all-too-successful, swiftboating of John Kerry back in 2004 when George W. Bush’s campaign tried to turn Kerry’s service in Vietnam — where he earned a Silver Star, a Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts — into scandal.

Want early access to
Mike’s columns?

Subscribe to get an
exclusive first look at
his columns twice a week.

SUBSCRIBE

It won’t work this time for a number of reasons, starting with the fact that in 2004, when the Iraq war was raging, the candidates’ respective military service during the Vietnam war became a central issue. 

It’s a different time obviously — even Republicans, and especially Trump, don’t approve of the Iraq war any more — and if it seems like an old, tired strategy, that’s because it is.

And Democrats, including Colorado Rep. Jason Crow, the Army Ranger who served three tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, are busily reminding everyone just how ugly and retrograde the swiftboating strategy looks.

“We’re not going to allow this to happen,” Crow said on a Democratic National Committee call, joined by other members of Congress who are military vets. “We’re going to defend one of our own because it’s not OK.”

Crow then moved to Twitter (OK, X) to take on JD Vance, who is apparently taking a break from attacking childless cat ladies and photo-bombing Air Force Two to lead the swiftboating forces in attacking Walz.

And, of course, Crow also came after Trump, whose relationship to military service is, uh, slightly problematic.

In one tweet, Crow wrote, “Let’s get something straight: denigrating a veteran’s service when your running mate *checks notes* dodged the draft, called veterans ‘suckers’ and ‘losers,’ and refused to honor fallen WW1 soldiers to avoid getting rained on isn’t just weird. It’s a flat out disgrace.”

In another, he put it this way:  “We’re starting to see a pattern here. Turning on your own fellow veteran for political gain is … kind of like turning on your beliefs to be the running mate for a man you once described as a ‘moral disaster.’”

Other Democratic veterans, including Pete Buttigieg and Mark Kelly, made similar cases in defense of Walz. If Kerry didn’t answer the charges against him quickly enough, Democrats seemed to have learned the lesson.

The case against Walz begins with the fact that he retired from the Guard two months before his unit was informed it would deploy to Iraq. He was running for Congress at the time, and the decision to retire after 24 years, several veterans remember, was very difficult for him.

But it became an issue when two colleagues who served with Walz charged that he had effectively deserted his post. That the charge came when Walz was running for governor by two vets who disagreed with his politics is probably worth considering.

The second point is that there is a video of Walz as governor speaking in support of gun-safety laws. He told a crowd that “we can make sure these weapons of war, that I carried in war, are only carried in war.”

Walz did not serve in a war zone, but he did teach the use of weapons of war, including artillery. Does that make him guilty of “stolen valor” or was he just trying to make a point that he understood the danger of, say, assault-style weapons?

But Vance, who did serve in Iraq as a Marine “combat correspondent,” blasted Walz,  saying, “What was this weapon that you carried into war, given that you abandoned your unit right before they went to Iraq, and he has not spent a day in a combat zone? What bothers me about Tim Walz is the stolen valor garbage.”

Some Republicans also say they’re bothered by the fact that Walz has described his rank as command sergeant major when he actually retired as a master sergeant. But, in fact, he was a command sergeant major in the Guard, but apparently retired before finishing coursework for the position.

OK, there’s some smoke — there usually is — but does anyone see a dumpster fire here?

If you think the charges reek of desperation, just listen to how Trump, in his rambling news conference the other day, described Walz — as a “radical man that is — he has done things that — he has positions that are not even possible to believe that they exist. He is going for things nobody has ever heard of. Heavy into the transgender world. Heavy into lots of different worlds.”

Weird, huh?

It got weirder when he turned to Harris, or maybe you didn’t hear Trump’s Willie Brown story. Harris used to date Brown, the powerful California Democrat. She was single at the time and he was very publicly separated from his wife.

And when Trump wasn’t talking about transgender heaviness or delusionally calling his January 6 crowd bigger than the MLK crowd for the March on Washington or charging that Harris wasn’t smart enough to hold a news conference, he moved on to the story of a harrowing helicopter ride he shared with Brown.

Trump said the helicopter had to make an emergency landing and that, “We maybe thought this was the end.” And at the time, he recalled Brown telling him “terrible things” about Harris.

Trump’s story continues: “And Willie was, he was a little concerned. So, I know him, but I know him pretty well. I mean, I haven’t seen him in years, but he told me terrible things about her. But this is what you’re telling me, anyway, I guess. But he had a big part in what happened with Kamala. But he — he, I don’t know, maybe he’s changed his tune. But he — he was not a fan of hers very much at that point.”

Couple of problems with the story. The helicopter  ride was with then California Gov. Jerry Brown, not former San Francisco mayor Willie Brown, who later said he’d never been in a helicopter with Trump. Current Gov. Gavin Newsom, who was in the helicopter that day, said there was no emergency landing and “no discussion of Kamala Harris.”

And then there’s this: Trump called the Times to argue that the helicopter story was true. According to a story in Politico, though, Trump might have been in the helicopter with Nate Holden — a former Los Angeles city council member who, like Willie Brown, is Black. Holden said he was the one in a helicopter, in the late 1990s, with Trump when it nearly crashed.

In other words, the Willie Brown story holds up about as well as the swiftboating story.

Here’s an idea: Maybe it’s time to try something new.

Mike Littwin has been a columnist for too many years to count. He has covered Dr. J, four presidential inaugurations, six national conventions and countless brain-numbing speeches in the New Hampshire and Iowa snow. Sign up for Mike’s newsletter.

The Colorado Sun is a nonpartisan news organization, and the opinions of columnists and editorial writers do not reflect the opinions of the newsroom. Read our ethics policy for more on The Sun’s opinion policy. Learn how to submit a column. Reach the opinion editor at opinion@coloradosun.com.

Follow Colorado Sun Opinion on Facebook.

I have a pretty good idea why Kamala Harris defied conventional wisdom — and maybe Electoral College wisdom, too — to pick Tim Walz as her running mate.

You can blame, or credit if you like, the disaster that is JD Vance.

Walz is the anti-Vance pick. He’s the anti-anti-cat-lady pick. He’s the small-town guy who not only isn’t “weird” — Walz’s Trump-Vance descriptor that somehow lifted him from semi-obscurity to the Democratic ticket — but might be, as politicians go, something closely resembling normal.

I mean, if he weren’t a liberal Democrat, which he is, he might even fit Sarah Palin’s description of a “real American.” You know, one of 25 people in his high school graduation class — half of whom, he jokes (I think he’s joking), were cousins. Joined the Army National Guard at 17 and retired 24 years later as a master sergeant.

Owns guns. Hunts for turkey and pheasant. Was a high school football coach, for cripes’ sake, whose team won a state championship. 

He’s folksy.  He’s avuncular. And if you’re into the dad vibe, you might even think he’s funny.

He’s a two-term governor in a midwestern state after spending 12 years in Congress — first flipping a rural Republican-held district — after spending 20-some years as a teacher.

Want early access to
Mike’s columns?

Subscribe to get an
exclusive first look at
his columns twice a week.

SUBSCRIBE

He’s not a lawyer — the first non-lawyer, according to the Washington Post, to run as vice-president on the Democratic ticket in 60 years. He’s not an Ivy Leaguer. In fact, he graduated from Chadron State College, which is apparently in his native Nebraska, where, last I looked, elitism went to die.

And in his introductory video as Harris’ running mate — he’ll obviously need more than a few introductions since most people have no idea who he is — Walz stressed his rural roots. Of course he did. Soon, I’m sure they’ll roll out Walz’s award-winning recipe for his Turkey Trot Tater Hotdish. It’s all part of the package.

Most importantly, if Harris’ team did a decent job with its speed vetting, I don’t see how Walz will do much harm, which is the vice-presidential nominee’s main job, other than, of course, attacking the other guys.

Unless, that is, you buy the Republican line on Walz, which you’ve already heard. He’s an extremist whom they’ve called “radical” and “dangerously liberal” and someone — this from Vance — “who listens to the Hamas wing” of the Democratic Party.

Trump took it a few steps further down the rabbit hole, of course, saying Walz would be the “worst VP in history,” and — get this — “would unleash hell on earth.”

Weird, huh?

The conventional wisdom was that Harris would pick Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, a popular moderate who might have proved to be the difference in carrying the most important swing state in the election. Or she might have gone with Arizona’s Mark Kelly, who is not just a senator but also a former astronaut and from yet another swing state.

There is risk involved in picking Walz. If Democrats lose Pennsylvania and that defeat puts Trump over the top in the Electoral College, the decision to choose Walz over Shapiro will be second-guessed from November until approximately forever.

In any case, the VP picks are both from the Midwest — blue Minnesota vs. red Ohio — and the stakes obviously extend past Pennsylvania to the other swing states of Michigan and Wisconsin. The latest polling in those three states, all of which are must wins for Democrats, is basically even. And if voters care about who is vice president — history suggests that most people don’t — they present a clear contrast.

Vance’s “Hamas wing” comment was a not-so-veiled shot at the fact that some progressives thought Shapiro, who is Jewish, was too pro-Israel. But I’m not sure there’s much difference between Walz and Shapiro, or among any of the possible Democratic VP contenders for that matter, on Israeli policy. And the suggestion, heard in some right-wing corners, that the pick is somehow antisemitic is, of course, ludicrous. I mean, how many Jews are on the Republican ticket?

But Walz is a mainstream liberal and, in picking Walz, Harris clearly made a policy statement. Walz, who began his career as a moderate Democrat, has become more liberal over the years, particularly when it comes to guns. And after Democrats took over both houses of the Minnesota state legislature, he signed into law a laundry list of progressive legislation, much of which won’t look entirely unfamiliar to Coloradans.

You can start with universal gun background checks and a “red flag” law. Legalizing pot. A state law protecting abortion rights. Restoring voting rights to felons, meaning Donald Trump might consider moving there someday.  A state law protecting the right to gender-affirming care. Another allowing undocumented Minnesotans to apply for driver’s licenses. Child tax credit. Free meals for K-12 students.

Those laws are definitely progressive. But how many of those laws actually poll well? Even Vance, the self-proclaimed pro-family candidate who missed the vote on the recent bipartisan bill expanding the child tax credit, is apparently pro-child tax credit. He even falsely accused Harris of opposing the credit.

And, by the way, Gwen Walz — Tim’s wife — underwent years of fertility treatments before giving birth to their two children. Yes, Walz is definitely pro-IVF.

But it’s on gun policy that Walz most obviously changed. He was once among the NRA’s favorite Democrats, earning an A rating. After the 2018 shooting at Parkland High School, he came out in favor of a ban on assault weapons. And now, he says of the NRA, “I get straight F’s, and I sleep just fine.”

The criticism that is most likely to stick is that Walz was governor during the riots following George Floyd’s murder. Republicans in Minnesota charged that he didn’t move quickly enough to send in the National Guard. Of course, we might remember when Trump was just a little slow in sending in the reinforcements to the Capitol on January 6. 

Walz also had a DUI charge 30 years ago, but now doesn’t drink unless it’s Diet Mountain Dew, which, in a coincidence that defies explanation, is also Vance’s drink of choice.

What Democrats hope will stick is how Walz presents as Minnesota nice, which they think will contrast nicely with Vance’s exhibition of straight-up weirdness.

I mean, the craziest thing that we know so far about Walz is that two weeks ago, hardly anyone had ever heard of him and now he could be our next vice president. Which, in this strangest of strange presidential campaigns, means that we should have known all along that Harris would pick him.

Mike Littwin has been a columnist for too many years to count. He has covered Dr. J, four presidential inaugurations, six national conventions and countless brain-numbing speeches in the New Hampshire and Iowa snow. Sign up for Mike’s newsletter.

The Colorado Sun is a nonpartisan news organization, and the opinions of columnists and editorial writers do not reflect the opinions of the newsroom. Read our ethics policy for more on The Sun’s opinion policy. Learn how to submit a column. Reach the opinion editor at opinion@coloradosun.com.

Follow Colorado Sun Opinion on Facebook.

In what must seem like a bad dream for what’s left of the Colorado GOP establishment, Tina Peters is finally on trial for her role as Clerk Tina — you remember: the MyPillow Guy’s favorite election official — in the long-running 2020 election-denial saga.

In actuality, though, I think the trial of the former Mesa County clerk could be a good thing for state Republicans, who are in desperate need of, at minimum, a few good things.

Want early access to
Mike’s columns?

Subscribe to get an
exclusive first look at
his columns twice a week.

SUBSCRIBE

If a jury of her peers on the conservative Western Slope finds Peters guilty of tampering with election equipment — in a case, which from a few hundred miles away, seems pretty much open and shut, but you never know — it would close one sordid and embarrassing chapter for Colorado Republicans.

And it could happen in the same relative time frame in which state Republicans may finally be prepared, if a judge allows it, to kick Dave “God Hates Flags” Williams  — who basically made election denialism, not to mention petty corruption, official party policy — out of his job as state chair.

If Williams goes — even Lauren Boebert seems to have jumped ship — that would close yet another sordid and even more embarrassing chapter for the all-but-moribund party.

In fact, the official demise of Peters and Williams would amount to nothing less than a double exorcism.

You know the Peters story. It has been with us for more than three years. Everyone agrees to the basic narrative — that Peters brought in an election conspiracy theorist, who was using a fake ID, to copy the hard drives of the Mesa County voting equipment, which were then leaked and ended up, with passwords included, on the internet for all to see.

Peters’ defense team says she did this in order to save data from being erased during the state’s “trusted build” process. She said she wanted to preserve the data because, against all reason, she believed the Dominion Voting Systems were, yes, rigged and that the Secretary of State’s office would cover up the, uh, crime. In fact, she still seems to believe it.

Prosecutors say, well, you can guess what they say. Peters is an obsessive delusional who believed in the Big Lie so fervently that she broke the law — she is charged with 10 counts, seven of them felonies — to prove the unprovable. 

In the process, she became a hero in the election-denial community, and, as if that didn’t seem crazy enough, there’s a fundraiser scheduled for her in Grand Junction during the trial with tables selling for as high as $5,000.

I know that in some ways, this oft-delayed trial seems like a relic from a long-ago story.

But it isn’t.

It’s as up to date as the 2024 presidential race. It’s as up to date as the GOP’s anti-cat-lady vice-presidential pick. It’s as current as Trump’s antagonistic date this past week with the National Association of Black Journalists.

The headline from Trump’s sitdown with Black journalists was his insistence that Kamala Harris used to identify with  — as Trump put it — her “Indian heritage,” and only recently “happened to turn Black, and now she wants to be known as Black.” 

Although many thought Trump was having a meltdown, I’m pretty sure that this was part of a game plan, harking back to the birtherism strategy he employed against Barack Obama.

You’ve seen Trump, and many of his allies in right wing media, doubling down on the strategy, which can’t be surprising. For Trump, race is always front of mind, which is apparently how the MAGA base likes it.

But it wasn’t the only headline material to emerge from the interview. He was also asked whether he would pardon those found guilty in the January 6 attack. 

His answer: “If they’re innocent, I would pardon them.”

When the questioner noted that they had, in fact, been found guilty, with some of them guilty of assaulting officers trying to defend the Capitol, Trump said they were convicted “by a very tough system.”

That’s the same system, you might note, in which Trump has been convicted on 34 felony counts.

It’s also in line with Trump’s alliance with the rioters, whom he calls “J6 hostages” and victims of a corrupt system.

It’s obvious that Trump will never give up on the notion that the 2020 election was rigged. It’s way too late for that. It’s basically the essence of his campaign — which amounts to a Trump restoration and the promise of retribution that would come with it.

And it’s a major reason why JD Vance is Trump’s running mate. Among Vance’s crimes against truth and justice, he says he wouldn’t necessarily accept the outcome of the 2024 election, using the Trump line that the election would have to be “free and fair.” He has railed against the so-called danger of mail-in ballots, although he has voted by mail himself.

And in what was clearly a play to earn Trump’s affection, Vance said that unlike Mike Pence, he would have recognized the fake electors at the heart of Trump’s scheme to overturn the election and would have sent multiple slates on to Congress. 

Where does that leave us? 

The country may yet elect Trump and return election denialism to the White House. Polls continue to show that a majority of Republicans believe the election was rigged.

And in a swing state like Arizona, two prominent election deniers won contested GOP primaries. 

But if Republicans ever want to make headway again in solidly blue Colorado, where Democrats own every statewide office, that’s one part of the culture war they’ll have to eventually abandon. If you’re looking for a sign, you could look to the reliably red 5th Congressional District, where Dave Williams ran in the GOP primary as an election denier and a Trump endorsee. He was crushed by the very conservative Jeff Crank, who pointedly did not run as a denier.  

Meanwhile, the case against Peters has begun. The judge has ruled that the trial won’t be about election conspiracies or the efficacy of voting equipment. He also ruled that Peters can’t claim that she was a whistleblower. And the prosecution, falling into line, told the jury that this is “a simple case of deceit and fraud.”

You’d think it was simple. You’d think it was obvious. Soon we’ll find out if a jury in a Republican stronghold sees it the same way.

Mike Littwin has been a columnist for too many years to count. He has covered Dr. J, four presidential inaugurations, six national conventions and countless brain-numbing speeches in the New Hampshire and Iowa snow. Sign up for Mike’s newsletter.

The Colorado Sun is a nonpartisan news organization, and the opinions of columnists and editorial writers do not reflect the opinions of the newsroom. Read our ethics policy for more on The Sun’s opinion policy. Learn how to submit a column. Reach the opinion editor at opinion@coloradosun.com.

Follow Colorado Sun Opinion on Facebook.

You know the truly weird thing about this presidential campaign?

Weirder than childless cat ladies.

Weirder than you’ll never have to vote again, “my beautiful Christians.”

Weirder than “White Dudes for Harris.”

I mean, even weirder than the fact that, thanks to a former social studies teacher turned politician, the word “weird” has become a political term of art among Democrats? I guess it’s better than “far out.”

It’s clear to me the absolutely strangest thing — not counting, of course, the horrific assassination attempt, which belongs in an entirely different category — is how Kamala Harris has turned into an overnight sensation, at least among Democrats.

Want early access to
Mike’s columns?

Subscribe to get an
exclusive first look at
his columns twice a week.

SUBSCRIBE

Think about it. Think about how you thought about Harris, say, a month ago, if you thought about her at all.

Think about how Democrats who were pushing Joe Biden to step aside after his disastrous debate performance were busily throwing out every possible non-Kamala name as a potential successor because of Harris’ perceived weakness.

Think about the conventional wisdom that Harris had been a failed presidential candidate, and, at best, a so-so vice president who presented Republicans with a ready-made target for mockery and worse.

Now think about where we are, and where she is, today.

It’s not just that Harris has pulled even with Donald Trump in the polls in the few days since Biden dropped out and she quickly became the presumptive Democratic nominee, although Nate Silver says she still trails in his Electoral College model.

Or that her polling positives, stuck in the mid-30s for most of her vice presidency, have surged into the mid-40s and, in some polls, even slightly higher.

The fact is that Harris is not simply being welcomed by Democrats as a necessary or logical replacement for Biden, but actually embraced, even celebrated. Certainly cheered at every turn. OK, not exactly Simone Biles-level embraced, celebrated and cheered, but still.

Yeah, weird. And there’s no telling how long her sudden popularity will last or how well it survives the first inevitable major campaign screwup. There’s no telling how it will hold up under the barrage of negative ads, like this one.

Before we might guess at its possible staying power, though, the phenomenon needs to be understood. The easy and obvious explanation is that Democrats were desperate for something new. Anything new. As we know, Democrats had been more than nervous about the campaign before the June 27 debate. Afterwards, the mood ranged somewhere between miserable and inconsolable.

It could be that virtually any semi-viable candidate would have roused Democratic passions in much the same way.

Another explanation, just as easy and just as obvious, is that the creepy misogyny and racism with which many MAGA types greeted Harris was met with a ferocious backlash.

The idea of publicly calling out Harris as a DEI hire — yes, the expected diversity, equity and inclusion dog whistle — was quickly shut down by Republicans like House Speaker Mike Johnson, not just because it was idiotic, but because it was so obviously beyond dog-whistling racist.

And the expected misogyny — a Trumpian calling card — was reinforced by the revelation of J.D. Vance’s “miserable childless cat lady” remarks to Tucker Carlson about Harris and other Democrats, not to mention the rest of Vance’s “The Handmaid’s Tale” vibe. Although Vance has defended his “cat lady” description as obviously sarcastic, it turns out he has repeatedly used other descriptions for childless Democratic politicians, with his apparent favorite being “sociopathic.”

Surprisingly, this has offended many women who, like Harris, are part of blended families, not to mention all the women who haven’t yet had children or don’t plan to have children and who have never had children. It probably, just guessing here, has even offended some men.

Or maybe the explanation includes the notion that Harris’ diverse background — to the surprise of some MAGA types — may actually be a plus, particularly for those younger voters who had been turning away from Biden and may be attracted by the not-another-old-white-guy candidate. Polling so far shows that the double-haters — those who didn’t like Trump or Biden — seem to be leaning to Harris.

And then there is the timing. In 2020, when she ran for president, her background as a tough prosecutor was hardly a recommendation in progressive Democratic circles. This time, she is the necessary tough former prosecutor when Democrats are endlessly frustrated by the fact that Trump’s many indictments apparently boosted his standing.

Here’s Harris to remind voters that Trump is a convicted felon, just like the type of felon she used to put behind bars.

In any case, history tells us this is just a moment. These things don’t last forever. Ask Barack Obama. But the near term looks encouraging for Harris. She has announced she will campaign next week with her as-yet-unnamed vice-presidential choice. In most non-cat-lady cases, a vice-presidential pick comes with some positive press.

Next on her schedule is the Democratic National Convention, at which time Democrats may, with luck, be able to stick to a unity theme all the way through Harris’ acceptance speech. Of course, the pro-Palestinian demonstrators coming to Chicago may test that unity.

Maybe the best way to look at this is through the lens of the “White Dudes for Harris” fundraising Zoom call. There had already been similar calls from groups, according to a running count by the Associated Press, including Black women, Hispanic women, Native Americans, Asian Americans, Black men and the LGBTQ+ community.

And because Democrats are just that giddy over the new state of the presidential race, somebody thought a self-mocking “White Dudes for Harris” could be a thing. And so it was. With nearly 200,000 people on a three-hour call, a total of $3.7 million was raised from a, uh, diverse crowd described by former “West Wing” actor Bradley Whitford as “a rainbow of beige.”

On the call, of course, was The Dude himself, Jeff Bridges of “The Big Lebowski” fame, who explained why he was on the call: “I’m white, I’m the Dude, and I’m for Harris.”

Do you need any more explanation?

If so, Bridges offered up this one: “As the Dude might say, ‘That’s just my opinion, man.’”

Of course, your opinion may vary. Mine is that in a race this weird, the best bet — maybe the only safe bet — is that it will inevitably get even stranger. But for those suddenly excited by the prospect that the campaign is competitive again, that doesn’t seem so scary at all.

Mike Littwin has been a columnist for too many years to count. He has covered Dr. J, four presidential inaugurations, six national conventions and countless brain-numbing speeches in the New Hampshire and Iowa snow. Sign up for Mike’s newsletter.

The Colorado Sun is a nonpartisan news organization, and the opinions of columnists and editorial writers do not reflect the opinions of the newsroom. Read our ethics policy for more on The Sun’s opinion policy. Learn how to submit a column. Reach the opinion editor at opinion@coloradosun.com.

Follow Colorado Sun Opinion on Facebook.

You may be relieved to hear it — I know I’m relieved to say it — but I will not be writing today about childless cat ladies or any of the many MAGA variations on The Handmaid’s Tale.

I will not be writing a paean to selfless politicians who give up their dream — but only after waking to the sound of a full-scale mutiny — of a second term.

I will not be writing about Trump’s ear — was it or wasn’t it a bullet, and isn’t there a doctor somewhere who can tell us for sure? — and certainly not any of his other body parts, not even his short fingers, although they are reliably good for a laugh.

I won’t be writing about the veep search because I’d have to mention that some pundit on some obscure website lists Jared Polis as a legitimate contender. He’s not, of course, although I did like Polis’ line that if Kamala Harris is looking for a “balding, gay Jew from Boulder,” he’s ready.

Today, I write of the Paris Olympics, the only story where the drama and spectacle, not to mention the big money and petty corruption, could possibly compete with the breakneck thrills of this presidential race.

Like many of you, I need at least a small break from the rough and tumble of presidential politics.

So we go to the rough and tumble Olympics, and its long history of politics being played on a far grander scale, but with constant commercial breaks and with, oh, I almost forgot, the greatest athletes in the world playing for the greatest stakes. The competition is guaranteed to either thrill you — I mean, who doesn’t want to see Simone Biles’ twisty comeback tour? — or confound you — as in the case of the newest Olympic sport, which is, I swear, break dancing. 

Or, more likely, both.

Want early access to
Mike’s columns?

Subscribe to get an
exclusive first look at
his columns twice a week.

SUBSCRIBE

I mean, beach volleyball at the foot of the Eiffel Tower. It’s so audacious. It’s so incongruous. It’s so, well, French.

As were the Opening Ceremonies featuring the flotilla of boats on the Seine carrying athletes from 200-plus nations and — if you’re looking for a rooting interest — also the 37 members of the Refugee Olympic team, representing the more than 100 million refugees currently displaced on our typically war-torn and famine-plagued planet.

The opening was suitably picture perfect. They usually pull off the Opening Ceremonies even in cities that aren’t as beautiful as Paris. And, naturally, it rained because the only thing more romantic than a Paris evening is a Paris evening punctuated by raindrops.

When you watch the Olympics, you can almost forget how rife they have been with corruption and scandals and, most of all, commercialism over the years. When the Opening Ceremonies were set to begin, the announcers thanked the sponsors for bringing the first hour commercial-free. What a gesture. What a bunch of companies. The six companies, led, of course, by Coke, settled for having their logos in discrete type — 10 minutes for each — at the top right of the screen.

And before these Olympic games could even begin, life had intervened. We saw three high-speed rail links into Paris sabotaged, causing delays for more than a million passengers. And we saw the Canadian women’s soccer coach sent home for spying on the New Zealand team, with drones no less.  

From my vantage point, though, the best thing about these Olympics is how they seemed to have arrived, at least for many Americans, with so little notice. I know. We’ve been, uh, preoccupied. One day, we’re watching an attempted assassination, and now, on the next, we’re off to dressage at Versailles. The mind reels.

And I think the fact that we’ve been so busy will mean that at least a few of the endless up-close-and-personal stories set for broadcast by NBC and a flotilla of aligned stations, might seem a little fresher than usual. As I write this, a friend tells me one of the preview stories is being shot on a snail farm where we’re learning the finer points of eating escargot. You can expect a lot of that.

The TV story will be interesting and not just because NBC is bringing an AI Al Michaels to be the broadcast booth. Read the link. Yes, they’ve cloned the iconic broadcaster’s voice, which will be used on Peacock apparently in the summaries of the day’s events. Do you believe in the, uh, miracle of artificial intelligence? 

How about the miracle of streaming? On Peacock, they are apparently going to show every single event live, just because they can — and because they can charge you for the pleasure. So if you really need to watch fencing live, Peacock is there for you. If you need to watch horse dancing — which, as Jason Gay wrote in the Wall Street Journal, long predates break dancing as an Olympic sport — Peacock is there for you. It’s particularly there for you if you might want to watch athletes who aren’t American.

For those of you who don’t need to see every sport live, there will be the usual prime-time lineup of the most compelling stories of the day, during which you can pretend there’s no such thing as the Internet to find out who won. This is nearly always an American-loaded lineup because we’re America and we live where nationalism rules. If you want to watch athletes who aren’t American, Peacock is there for you.

There are great story lines, of course, from Biles and the rest of the women’s gymnastics team to swimmer Katie Ledecky and her many gold medals to the U.S. men’s and women’s basketball team, to track and field, where, if form holds, sprinter Sha’Carri Richardson will leave Paris as an international star.

Back in my sport writing youth, I was lucky to cover five Olympic Games, on four continents. Along the way, I saw the DMZ in Korea 1988, I saw a mob of kangaroos racing my train between Sydney and Melbourne in 2000, I saw and (ate) midnight meals in Barcelona in 1992, I saw the miracle of traffic moving smoothly on LA freeways that were virtually empty of cars in 1984 as millions of residents fled the city.

Oh, and I saw some thrilling sports, too.

But what makes the Olympics so remarkable, as we’ll be reminded constantly for the next two weeks, is the agony and the ecstasy of the athletes who have worked so hard to get there. My favorite moment in the games that I covered was in Barcelona, where agony and ecstasy came together in one unforgettable scene.

It involved an unlikely hero in an unlikely race — Kevin Redmond, a not-exactly-celebrated 400-meter runner out of Britain. 

He was running in a semifinal heat when his hamstring gave way. He sank to his knees, head in hand, tears streaming, an Olympic dream shattered. We’ve seen that kind of heartbreak before.

But then in a bit of Olympic-sized inspiration, Redmond decided he would finish the race, that nothing was more important than getting back and up trying. He could barely walk. He could barely hobble. And so he began.

And then, from high in the stands, a man charged past security guards and made his way onto the track. It was Kevin’s dad, Jim, who would put an arm around his son’s waist and take his son’s hand into his own, as they circled the track together.

Slowly, as more and more of those in the crowd saw what was happening, the cheering turned into a thunderous roar. It beat any gold medal event.

And after they’d finished, the father would reveal what he said to the son: “We started your career together. We’ll finish this race together.”

And so they did.

And so we watch. Because there will be such a moment, or many such moments, this year, too. 

And if we’re lucky, no matter what fresh hell the world has in store for us over the next weeks and months, we’ll still be able to say we always had Paris.

Mike Littwin has been a columnist for too many years to count. He has covered Dr. J, four presidential inaugurations, six national conventions and countless brain-numbing speeches in the New Hampshire and Iowa snow. Sign up for Mike’s newsletter.

The Colorado Sun is a nonpartisan news organization, and the opinions of columnists and editorial writers do not reflect the opinions of the newsroom. Read our ethics policy for more on The Sun’s opinion policy. Learn how to submit a column. Reach the opinion editor at opinion@coloradosun.com.

Follow Colorado Sun Opinion on Facebook.

Faster than you can say Donald Trump is a convicted felon, Democrats rushed to choose Kamala Harris, the one-time DA, as their nominee to prosecute the case.

I’ve been on record for weeks calling for a contested mini-primary as the best way to choose a nominee to replace Joe Biden — I still think that was the Democrats’ best option — but that turned out to be a political junkie’s pipe dream.

In real life, you could look at the Harris coronation as an end run by the Democratic establishment, in respectful consideration of Biden’s brave, if belated, decision to step down. Or you could look at it as Harris, the candidate, quickly and skillfully locking down the nomination before any potential rival could gather momentum to challenge her. 

In any case, she is the presumptive nominee. And for anyone hoping for Donald Trump’s defeat, the question is no longer whether Harris is sufficiently electable — and the jury, as they say, is still very much out —  but how she can win.

At this point, Dem strategists are hoping that this is her time in the way that four years before, during her disappointing presidential run in the 2020 primary, it clearly was not.

It’s worth taking a brief look back at the race to see what happened to Harris, who entered the primary season with what seemed to be unending potential.  As a Black woman of South Asian descent, she was being described as a logical heir to the Obama coalition.

Then it all slipped away.

Some of the blame goes to a disorganized campaign, more of it to a candidate who, when she stumbled, couldn’t find a way to pick herself back up. As you’ll recall, after early promise, she dropped out of the race before a single vote was cast.

Want early access to
Mike’s columns?

Subscribe to get an
exclusive first look at
his columns twice a week.

SUBSCRIBE

Part of the issue for Harris may have been timing, or at least that’s what Democrats are hoping. “Kamala is a cop” became a meme in 2020, and not in a good way, back when being a cop — Harris was a San Francisco DA and California attorney general who called herself “top cop” —  was hardly in fashion in progressive circles, even before the death of George Floyd and the nationwide protests that followed. 

For that and other reasons, she never gained much trust or enthusiasm from much of the Black community, the same community that lifted Biden, after his disastrous primary start, to the nomination. Not only that, Harris could never find a lane she could comfortably run in. She had Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren to the left, Biden, Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar claiming the center. She stumbled badly during debates over universal health care, changing her position several times.

Whatever else Harris has, she definitely has a lane this year.

Being the top cop when you’re running against a convicted felon has a different feel. In her first major speech as a candidate, she spoke about her work prosecuting “predators who abused women,” with Trump as the clear target.

”Believe me when I say,” she said, “I know Donald Trump’s type.”

She repeated the line Wednesday to huge cheers at a Wisconsin rally that offered something new in this year’s Democratic presidential politics — lots of enthusiasm.

The “type” line works on a number of levels. Trump, you’ll recall, said he couldn’t possibly have sexually assaulted E. Jean Carroll, because she wasn’t his type.

We know what Trump describes as his “type” from a conviction for fixing the books to cover up an affair with a porn star. We know, too, that Trump is the type to denigrate women, and we’ll expect a full-on misogynistic blast — also no shortage of racist commentary — for the rest of his campaign.

Trump is also the type who thought he could get away with sexual abuse. Hundreds of millions of dollars in civil suits later, he might have a different idea.

And I’m hardly the first to note the direct line Harris can walk from prosecuting the case against a man who abuses and denigrates women to prosecuting the case against a president who, with his three nominees to the Supreme Court, set the stage for the shocking overturn of Roe v. Wade.

Harris has a strong record on abortion rights, which, in the post-Dobbs world, is obviously the Democrats’ strongest issue. Biden sometimes had trouble articulating the Democratic take on the issue. Harris may carry much of the baggage from a Biden administration, but this is one problem she won’t have. 

We can think back to her time on the Senate Judiciary Committee during Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s 2018 Supreme Court confirmation hearing. Like most on the Democratic side, she was having trouble pinning him down. But as Washington Post columnist Monica Hesse writes, Harris subtly changed the argument.

Hesse takes us through the key part of the exchange:

“Can you think of any laws,” she asked the nominee, “that give the government the right to make decisions about the male body?”

“Um,” Kavanaugh replied, furrowing his brow. “I am happy to answer a more specific question, but — ”

“Male versus female,” Harris offered, smiling, and when Kavanaugh still expressed confusion, she repeated her 19-word question: “Can you think of any laws that give the government the power to make decisions about the male body?”

Kavanaugh responded, “I am not thinking of any right now.”

We still can’t think of any. But we’ve seen a post-Dobbs world in which red states have rushed to make even more decisions on women’s bodies. Every ominous prediction following the overturn of Roe seems to have come true — and, in some cases, even worse than imagined.

In 14 states, abortions are essentially banned in nearly all cases. In three other states, abortions are banned in nearly all cases after six weeks of pregnancy.

And we’ve seen states where women, facing critical medical needs, have been airlifted from emergency rooms to states where abortion is still legal. We’ve seen cases where doctors are simply too afraid to treat a pregnant woman.

It has gotten to the point that Trump is now trying to downplay the abortion issue, which has been central to Republicans for approximately forever. It was barely mentioned at all at the Republican National Convention. But it’s not an issue they can bury.

I’m still not sure Harris is the best candidate Democrats could have chosen. But there’s every reason to believe she can effectively make the case on abortion rights. It’s the case she’s making now, with weeks yet to get to the Democratic National Convention. It is the case she has made many times before.

And as you’ll be hearing in every Harris rally from now on, she knows the type of person she is up against and how to handle him.

Now the former DA just has to make her case before the voters.

Mike Littwin has been a columnist for too many years to count. He has covered Dr. J, four presidential inaugurations, six national conventions and countless brain-numbing speeches in the New Hampshire and Iowa snow. Sign up for Mike’s newsletter.

The Colorado Sun is a nonpartisan news organization, and the opinions of columnists and editorial writers do not reflect the opinions of the newsroom. Read our ethics policy for more on The Sun’s opinion policy. Learn how to submit a column. Reach the opinion editor at opinion@coloradosun.com.

Follow Colorado Sun Opinion on Facebook.

To his great credit, Joe Biden did the right thing. And no one should try to diminish just how right, or how difficult, it was.

If it seemed inevitable that Biden, under intense pressure from his own party, had to eventually step away, that seemed to make Biden’s decision even more painful.

You have only to be a modest student of history to understand how rare it is for a person of power to voluntarily surrender it. And if, until the end, Biden raged against the dying of his political light, we shouldn’t have expected anything different.

You have only to be a modest observer of Joe Biden’s long career to know how these last post-debate weeks, in which his mental fitness was under question, have fed into his long-held belief that he has been underestimated by his fellow Democrats.

What matters, though, is that Biden made the right move, the necessary move, the essential move. 

The only move. 

With three weeks to go before the Democratic National Convention begins, with Democratic donors threatening to pull away, with polls in swing states suggesting the race was slipping away, with a growing number of members of Congress calling for Biden to step away, that was the only chance left if Democrats hoped to put together a credible campaign against Donald Trump.

Want early access to
Mike’s columns?

Subscribe to get an
exclusive first look at
his columns twice a week.

SUBSCRIBE

The truth, though, for all those who wanted Biden to step aside — and the chorus had grown deafening — is that the road ahead promises to be unimaginably difficult. 

The immediate next step, it seems to me, is to find a way — if that’s even possible  — to push back against the momentum that would turn a Kamala Harris nomination into a coronation. 

It seems Barack Obama might be leaning that way, too, which may matter slightly more.  

We’re seeing an attempted coronation in action. We’re seeing Biden — who has previously held barely private doubts about Harris’ chances — being joined by the Clintons, Bill and Hill, and a growing list of influential Democrats and, maybe more important, many potential Democratic rivals. 

There is the understandable urge to coalesce around a single candidate and get the race against Trump underway as quickly — and as harm free — as possible. And the fact that Biden took so long to make his decision adds to the urgency. But getting the best candidate has to be more important than getting the obvious candidate. 

I’m not saying Harris would be a terrible choice. I’m not as down on her chances as some observers. When she first came onto the national scene, I considered her a smart, talented politician. Despite a disappointing presidential run and bad reviews for her shaky start as vice president, I think she’s still viable.

She was, after all, a successful prosecutor before she became a senator. And prosecuting the case against the oft-convicted Trump is the principle job of any Democratic nominee.

But does Harris, whose polling numbers are nearly as anemic as Biden’s, give Democrats the best chance to save American democracy from the anti-democratic demagogue who has won the Republican nomination for a mind-blowing third time in eight years?

As I might have mentioned before, the Republicans nominating Trump once or even twice — he was an incumbent the second time — was beyond reason.

But nominating him a third time is beyond contempt.

So now, finding the strongest candidate is the monumental job facing the delegates to the Democratic convention. The problem is that there is no sure way to guarantee that the strongest candidate wins the nomination. There is no sure way to even know who would be the strongest candidate. 

The known unknowns are staggering. What is known is that there have been few moments in presidential history — from the disastrous debate to the horrific assassination attempt to Biden’s decision to drop out of the race — more eventful. 

And now there is the race, if it is a race, to find a replacement. The people who do this for a living obviously look to the Democrats’ so-called Blue Wall, which crumbled in 2016 when Trump won the presidency, for a potential candidate to challenge Harris. The Electoral College math makes it difficult to see how Democrats can possibly win without winning each of the contested Blue Wall states — Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin.

But no one from the region has stepped forward yet. Most potential contenders have said they endorse Harris. OK, Joe Manchin has hinted he might run. Yeah, as if he were a serious option.

And yet, there still seems to be room — though quickly shrinking  — for a three-week contest of sorts in the run-up to the convention. It seems clear that even if such a sprint offers the risk of great chaos, it would also ensure great attention and focus.

In making his statement praising Biden’s decision, Obama pointedly did not mention Harris. He did mention his faith that the party would find a way to “create a process from which an outstanding nominee emerges.”

Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries also did not mention Harris.

As Democratic strategist and Obama adviser David Axelrod keeps saying on CNN, a contested mini-primary would not only be good for the party but also for Harris — whose nomination as a Black woman of South-Asian descent would be historic —  if she were to become the nominee.

Meanwhile, she is gaining support from most corners of the Democratic coalition. Jared Polis and Michael Bennet lead a long list of Colorado Democrats endorsing Harris. The race may already be over.

Certainly, there isn’t much time to make a choice. And at this volatile point in our history, there couldn’t be a more important choice.

Biden made the right decision. It was right for his legacy and his party and, I’d venture to say, his country.

The question now is whether Democrats, given this incredible opportunity, can do as well.

Mike Littwin has been a columnist for too many years to count. He has covered Dr. J, four presidential inaugurations, six national conventions and countless brain-numbing speeches in the New Hampshire and Iowa snow. Sign up for Mike’s newsletter.

The Colorado Sun is a nonpartisan news organization, and the opinions of columnists and editorial writers do not reflect the opinions of the newsroom. Read our ethics policy for more on The Sun’s opinion policy. Learn how to submit a column. Reach the opinion editor at opinion@coloradosun.com.

Follow Colorado Sun Opinion on Facebook.

I was tempted to write that the most important takeaway from the surprisingly disciplined Republican National Convention is that, whatever you might have heard, the post-assassination-attempt Donald Trump was, in the end, very much like the pre-assassination-attempt Donald Trump.

Which is to say, undisciplined, erratic, mean-spirited, dishonest and fully steeped in grievance.

Which is to say, Trump is still eminently beatable, just as he was beatable four years ago.

If you watched, you know New Trump began his acceptance speech  — billed somewhat optimistically by his campaign as a unity speech — with a stirring account of the terrifying assassination attempt and with a pronouncement of his newfound wish to heal discord and be a president for all people. 

And then, for the following hour, New Trump disappeared. And in his place rose the Old Trump, who still wore the bandage, but was otherwise recognizably himself. Or as Kid Rock would put it — and as Hulk Hogan would surely agree — Trump is still an American bad ass, discord be damned.

So, yes, there is the iconic photo of Trump from Butler, Pennsylvania.

And there is also a 92-minute speech from the GOP convention in Milwaukee filled with the usual not-exactly-life-lesson-style rantings — Crazy Nancy, rigged election, homicidal migrants, Hannibal Lecter. Let’s hope those sweet Trump grandkids we saw had already gone to bed.

Want early access to
Mike’s columns?

Subscribe to get an
exclusive first look at
his columns twice a week.

SUBSCRIBE

But, at this point, there’s a more important thing to say about where the convention leaves us than the fact that there isn’t a New Trump and won’t ever be a New Trump. At this point, what must be said, post-convention, is that Democrats are presently in no position to beat anyone.  

For Democrats, the road back, if there is one, obviously begins with persuading Joe Biden to step aside. As long as Biden is running, the race is about him, his can’t-be-unseen debate performance, his halting speech, his refusal to take a cognition test, his loss of support from Democratic leadership, his daily loss of support from Democratic members of Congress, his loss of support from many Democratic voters.

To win, Democrats must be able to return the focus directly on Trump. And it’s hard to find a reason to believe that Biden could still make that happen.

As I write this on Friday, days after Pelosi, Obama, Schumer and Jeffries each made it clear they believe Biden can’t win, he is either dug in or looking for a way to make as graceful an exit as possible. 

I don’t know what he’ll do, but he seems to be having at least a few issues with self-awareness. All that’s at stake is a possible Trump restoration, more Trump Supreme Court picks, the loss of the Senate, another defeat in the House.

In other words, everything.

And yet, there’s also this:

If Biden does leave the race, that may give Democrats a chance, but that’s all it does.

It doesn’t give them a replacement candidate.

It doesn’t give them any more time to put an extraordinarily complex campaign in place.

It doesn’t automatically give them a clear path to unity — the byword at the GOP convention.

As Michael Thomasky points out in the New Republic, Democrats wouldn’t be able to win unless they’re able to soothe the feelings of the Biden faithful. If the polls are right that 60% of Democrats want him to go, that leaves 40% who don’t, and at least half of them, I’d guess, would harbor deep resentment at what they’d see as a coup. Like Thomasky, I see that resentment in every column I write that Biden should step aside.

Meanwhile, Biden is issuing statements that he’s returning to the campaign trail next week, as if nothing has changed. And some Biden supporters like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez are warning of “enormous peril” if Biden steps aside. 

What everyone understands is that if he does leave, there’s no certain path for what might happen next. 

I’m not sure where I heard the idea first, but I still like the idea of a mini-primary — at this stage, it would have to be a mini-mini-primary — to showcase potential candidates, starting presumably with Kamala Harris.

That would mean a brokered convention, in which delegates would be free to choose among the candidates. Would there be chaos? Yes. Would there be resistance if party leaders tried to force a candidate on them? I think so.

We’ve heard potential names — Gretchen Whitmer, Gavin Newsom, J.B. Pritzker, Andy Beshear, Wes Moore, Amy Klobuchar, Pete Buttigieg, Cory Booker as well as Harris and certainly others — but how many of them would actually step up in the face of what would be, at minimum, a daunting task? I’d guess only a few.

Who would supervise the vetting process? Could there even be one? Without a vetting process, what peril actually would lurk, and would that basically disqualify anyone who didn’t run in the 2020 Democratic primary and was already vetted?

There are so many more critical questions. And the longer Biden hangs on, the more urgent it becomes to find answers.

The hope is that whoever replaces Biden — if he actually steps aside — would bring a new dynamic, including much-needed excitement, to the race. The thinking is, New Candidate would take on Old Trump in a New Way. Maybe that’s naive. Or maybe it’s the only chance.

Old Biden —and I’m not speaking only chronologically here; Trump is only three years younger — somehow refuses to believe the race needs a makeover. At least Trump recognized that he might benefit from one. 

He just couldn’t pull it off, even in 92 minutes. How long does Biden have?

Mike Littwin has been a columnist for too many years to count. He has covered Dr. J, four presidential inaugurations, six national conventions and countless brain-numbing speeches in the New Hampshire and Iowa snow. Sign up for Mike’s newsletter.

The Colorado Sun is a nonpartisan news organization, and the opinions of columnists and editorial writers do not reflect the opinions of the newsroom. Read our ethics policy for more on The Sun’s opinion policy. Learn how to submit a column. Reach the opinion editor at opinion@coloradosun.com.

Follow Colorado Sun Opinion on Facebook.