« Good Government Advice | Main | Owens Makes Judicial Appointment »

Comments

JeffCoDem

Is it just me or is the star starting to fade on Ken. Don't get me wrong I worked hard last year and would still do so for our Senator but he seems to be rudderless. I do not blame him for wanting to stay out of the Governor's race at this point with the field unsettled, it is a wise move. I do think though he needs to focus on the job he was just elected him to do which is be Senator otherwise, he should have never run and let Cong. Udall run who would have done equally as well. As for John he is fine in the 3rd but too weak to win Governorship in my opinion.

Alfalfa

I found it interesting that another quote in the story was from Pat Waak saying Salazar remained commited to staying in the Senate. I'm thinking she hopes so.

I don't buy the Salzar for Governor talk either. But, if he were to do it, the supporters who put Pat Waak into the chair of the party have a lot to lose. If Salazar were to run for Governor, and were to win, and then appoint his Senate successor, it tightens his control over the party.

Waak rode to the chair on the backs of people angry over the treatment Miles received from the party elders in the Senate primary. They also seem to be turned off by Salazar's centrist postions. If he becomes governor and puts his guy in the Senate, it diminshes any gains made by the supporters of Waak. It moves the state Democratic party further to the center and back into the hands of established leaders.

JS

I get frustrated reading some of the most un-politically savvy stuff come from this blog. Ken Salazar beat Coors. Coors is a name with a 100% name ID. Name ID is 90% of an election. That is a very impressive win. Beauprez and Coffman are not more impressive than Coors. Personality and debates etc don't matter. It's 30 second commercials and sound bites. Image. Ken Salazar's image is a western country boy raised poor who pulled himself up by the bootstraps. That is a powerful image. That is the Ben Campbell image. And that's why he won his second Senate race with 70% of the vote.

Also, Hickenlooper is not all that impressive as a statewide candidate. And, let me explain why to you. (it's become clear that the ColoradoPols aren't campaign or political people - they probably are webmasters for the Denver Newspaper Agency)

First, he did not have a serious challenge in his mayoral race. Sure, there were 8 candidates, but when the runoff started everyone knew Hick would win. The writing was on the wall. If it were close then we'd have seen the race get nasty. Among the things that weren't addressed in TV ads included: a) a nude birthday card he sent out a couple years ago, b) past arrests, c) business practices. And if he ran statewide, the public would learn that he's a raging liberal. It's not popular in Colorado to be an environmentalist, pro-gay marriage, and pro-immigrant. Twelve weeks out from the election, his popularity in the suburbs would plummet. You guys think that when Tancredo voters (that's where polls indicate he's currently strong) find out that he's way left on the ideological spectrum, that they'd stick with him over Beauprez? That's just stupid. Plus, his name ID in the rural parts of the state is poop. And, they'd never support him there anyhow. It's the old FDR coalition, urban and rural, that's how Salazar won. Hick can't win ticket-splitters in rural Colorado because he's a Yuppie from the city. He's a nice guy, but rural people hate city slickers and they hate yuppies. And the two together? In the end suburban voters will go where it feels safe (Republican) when the shit hits the fan and it gets negative. That's usually what happens in a negative race. The voters go to the party where they feel most comfortable, because that's what becomes important when both candidates' pos-to-neg ratio drops. You forget about the person and pay attention to the party. But, why should I expect Coloradopols to know anything about electoral politics.

Secondly, you obviously only get your gossip from 400 West Colfax, and never actually speak to any real politicos. Because if you spoke to any Hickenlooper staffer over beers or in a social situation, off the clock, they’d tell you that Hick isn’t running. To them it’s as clear as Coffman not running. Who are your contacts? If a guy’s not running how can he be top of your odds? Because you’re so clearly out of the loop, spreading rumors for the hell of it and with little proof.

Finally, I don’t know how to respond to your asinine argument that the Reps would rather face Salazar, and that’s why the story has resurfaced. Let me get this straight? You think that the first Dem US Senate winner in 6 tries is weak state-wide? I can think of several ways to prove how stupid this is. But, I don’t want to waste any more time.

PS- Obama won big because his first opponent got caught in a se scandal and his second had never lived in Illinois in his life. Had he a real opponent, it would have been close.

heavenly

Obama was charasmactic whether he won easily or not, you gotta give him that.

Rebel Rep

Jennifer,

Some of the points you make are very valid, and I agree with you %100 percent on Hick. But, there are a few things that prove to me that you still have a lot of learning to do about this business:

1. Name ID is a very large part of winning an election. But, like Coors, when you can easily associate that name with negatives (i.e. Drinking age, Pollution, In-experience, etc.) it is VERY easy to overcome. ID never makes up %90 of an election, if so, money only makes up %10?? That is a joke! Coors was outspent by $3 million, in his narrow defeat to Salazar. Combine that with the negatives I spoke about before and the round-the-clock Salazar commercials near the end. THAT is how Salazar won. Anyone who disputes that is really asinine!

2. I agree that Reps would not rather face Salazar over Hick, but not for the (all-be-it brief) reasons you stated. Beauprez would have a field day with Salazar if he were to run for Gov today. Salazar has some real problems: he can't debate (Coors had chances to kill him but blew it due to lack of experience), he can't keep his mouth shut (Antichrist), he can be backed into corners vary easily (if Coors could, imagine what an experienced debater could), and now he has a record of making campaign promises he won't keep (still fresh in everybody's mind). Personally, I would prefer to see Salazar run, but I know there are people out there (in power of R's) who wouldn't - understandibly.

PS- I'm pretty sure it is 200 E. Colfax where these guys attempt to get their info, but from low level staffers at best sometimes.

The comments to this entry are closed.