McInnis Mimics the Method

In a letter hitting today, former Congressman Scott McInnis asks readers the most popular question so far this year, “Do you think I should run for Governor?”

As we saw in 2004, primaries can be extremely divisive… However, primaries are also an important part of the process and healthy competition often energizes and unifies the party. I believe that with proper leadership, acting in the best interests of our state and party, we can avoid a divisive primary in 2006.  Therefore, at this time I come to you, not seeking financial support, but your honest input about the future of our great state and my role in that process.

Because I am asking that you make an informed decision on the best candidate for Governor, I would encourage you to visit… www.draftmcinnis.com for more details… I would also like to ask for your support and ideas on how we can work together to keep Colorado strong!

The surprising move (we all thought Scotty was playing chicken) comes after Mark Holtzman surprised everyone with his fundraising madness and Bob Beauprez already began building his campaign team (again – remember, we’re still 15 months out from a Primary).

The Center-Left Republican must be seeing some green on the table; with Bobby B and Marky-Mark already fighting over the all-important Conservative Base, Scotty Boy might just be able to capture the requisite 30% at Assembly. 

But in the end, the supporters he brings with him might be less important then most are realizing; CD-3 is relatively minor in the total game of an election, as any race is won on the Front Range…

…Making politico’s wonder if Scotty-Boy is really just trying to position himself for future political gain. A deal to get out of the race early could entail anything from a future Senate Race to a National Appointment (Beauprez is certainly in a position to barter) and would clearly be a smart business move for the now-attorney.

And it should also be noted: this letter was very unique from either the Holtzman or Beauprez intro letters that went out – this letter came with no BRE, no buck slip and no Campaign Tag line. It was “Paid for by Scott McInnis”.

*** UPDATE ***

Here's the entire text of the letter:

Scott McInnis

3320 Crestview Way

Grand Junction, CO 81506

Dear Central Committee Member (Text Crossed out, Member’s 1^st name substituted):

As you may know, I have been approached by a group of concerned Colorado citizens who have requested that I consider a run for Governor in 2006. I am deeply honored by their confidence in me and the level of support they have generated statewide through the "Draft McInnis for Governor" campaign. Because you are an important part of the nomination and election process, I want to let you know that I have discussed this important decision with family and friends, and am seriously looking at entering the race.  However, before making a final decision I wanted to take the opportunity to gather feedback from party activists like you.

In addition to my role as a public servant for twenty-two years, I have a long history of working with the party to support GOP candidates and initiatives. In 1998 I followed the will of the party and stepped aside so that Ben Campbell could run for re-election without a primary. For years I have provided financial support for the leadership and candidates across the state, lending my name and resources toward furthering the goals of the party. Like you, I want to strengthen our party and work together towards the ideals that unite us. That is why your advice and support during this time of decision is so critical. As we saw in 2004, primaries can be extremely divisive. I am a strong advocate for unity and will continue to work hard to strengthen and grow our party. However, primaries are also an important part of the process and healthy competition often energizes and unifies the party. I believe that with proper leadership, acting in the best interests of our state and party, we can avoid a divisive primary in 2006. Therefore, at this time I come to you, not seeking financial support, but your honest input about the future of our great state and my role in that process.

I know most of you personally, and have had the privilege to interact with you over the years. As many of you know, I began my public service career as a volunteer fireman and Police Officer in Glenwood Springs before being elected to-tile Colorado State Legislature, and ultimately the "" U.S. Congress. As an elected official in state and federal government my primary concern was always to represent and protect the interests of Colorado. I worked hard to protect Colorado's public lands, environment, and natural resources, passing important wilderness bills and landmark wildfire legislation while in Congress. I was able to successfully champion the cause of rural health care, provide improved veteran services, protect taxpayer interests through capital gains and Rancher Drought tax relief, as well as working to abolish the Death Tax. I have extensive experience in water legislation, and am confident that experience will be a critical factor to consider when addressing the future of for our state. I believe that because of my experience as a state and federal legislator, combined with my legislative successes, I am uniquely qualified to serve as the Governor of Colorado.

I appreciate the grassroots "Draft McInnis for Governor" effort, launched by former Secretary of State Natalie Meyer. The volunteer list includes a large number of people from across the state that represents all walks of life. Together we share an important common interest ~ the future of Colorado!

Because I am asking that you make an informed decision on the best candidate for Governor, I would encourage you to visit the groups' website at www.draftmcinnis.com  for more details on this effort. I am humbled and honored by their request for me to run for Governor, and greatly appreciate their support. I would also like to ask for your support and ideas on how we can work together to keep Colorado strong!

Please enter your comments below and return as directed. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

Scott McInnis

Comments

[vladimir]

Went to the McInnis website -- amateur hour -- this blog even looks in comparison to the McInnis site -- McInnis is telling folks that he missed all those votes cuz he never thought he would run again -- but now the fire is back -- guess he should have thought about that before he ignored his Congressional duties while hustling clients --
But, all Dems should go to his site and thank his relative losing Congressional candidate Smith -- Smith helped and continues to help John Salazar after Smith lost the Rep primary -- you can see Matt Smith's picture in the dictionary next to "sore loser"

[jimmy]

So,Red Hawk, as the token "Republican" on this site...why is it that most (all?) of your posts seem designed to start debate within our Party? Have you ever gone after a Dem? Don't Romanoff or Udall ever stir your interest, or are you just concerned about "Scotty-Boy" and "Marky-Marc"?

[RedHawk]

We should never be afraid of “debate within our Party”. We should also never refuse to critically analyze our candidates, their races and our future together as a Party.

Do Romo and Udall ever still my ire or interest? Sure – on many occasions. Though we should try to remember that the brilliance of this particular blog lies in its discussion of the mechanics of politics; and toward that end I will Report from the Right while trying to refrain from simply being a bullhorn for the Republicans.

[Rock 5]

Oh come on jimmy, McGinnis brings nothing to this race aside from being a spoiler and free marketing for his law firm. The only politicians backing him are the ones that are for sale and Bruce Benson hates the guy so he's got no future.

[Jake]

RedHawk - You want to bring up issues within the party, fine. Unfortunately then, there is little in the way of critical commentary regarding the Ds on this site. All one needs to do is look at the political attacks by the other posters (the latest Beauprez postings, DeLay etc...) to see the bias. Even when they are critical, it is of minor players (Conti) or lobbyists (Labor) and not of the major players on the D side.

Come on RedHawk, you don't need to be a bullhorn, but how about a critic!

[blake]

"CD-3 is relatively minor in the total game of an election, as any race is won on the Front Range…" Where do you come up with this comment? I am die hard GOP from the rural Colorado and I can tell you that CD-3 and CD-4 are the make it or break it part of any state wide election for our party. You can split the front range easily each year, or the GOP can fall behind there and then you find out how important the rural parts of Colorado are to the GOP. That comment is literally the stupidest thing I have ever read from you Red Hawk. Next time, please think before you write.

[Ter Ducken]

Sorry, dude. The facts are the facts. Ken Salazar won his race because of Denver. 80% of the votes in Colorado are along the front range now. Times have changed. The Western Slope doesn't play the role it once did.

[thinkin]

Even you said it yourself: "I can tell you that CD-3 and CD-4 are the make it or break it part of any state wide election for our party". Yep. The two combined. Three and four will tip any close election for the R's. But three alone? for a republican? no way.

[Phoenix Rising]

Blake - the fact of the matter is that Dems don't currently have a lot of hot scandals chasing them. But still, this site attacks just about every candidate that pops up on the radar. Perlmutter, Lamm, Bridges, Fitz-Gerald - all of them have come under some fire.

Just because Red Hawk isn't playing a game of "random target" doesn't mean he's a plant or a lamer. It stands to reason that Republicans have more to say about Republicans, etc.

[RWN]

jake - there have PLENTY of critisicms (both R and D) posted on this site. Just because you seem to be a "republican first and always", don't lump us all into the same pile. If I want Party Spin, I'll read the GOP Newsletter (assuming that ever comes out.)

Beauprez messed up with the DeLay thing. But at least it happened now - plenty of time to address it and move on.

Stengel is being goofy, trying to run for Treasurer. But best to nip that 'exploratoty thing' in the bud BEFORE the next session.

And Republcians made stupid mistakes last session. But at least we can talk about them and move on.

Why don't you do what Donald does? Post your thoughts, and sign with your own blog site, allowing readers to read your stuff if they want.

[blake]

Ter Ducken- First off dude (what stupid word), I think you should rethink your Salazar comment, "Salazar won his race because of Denver". If Denver won the race for Ken, why in the hell is the guy always telling the story about where he came from? Or, wearing the cowboy hat and boots? I will tell you it is not to win over Denver votes. Ken is not stupid and there is a reason he wants to be called "Cowboy" Ken, the kid who grew up on a farm with a dirt floor in his house. People who vote (the rural population) relate to those stories.

Second, just because 80% of the population lives on the front range doesn't mean 80% of the vote does as well. Thats the problem with you Dems, you think of numbers not how people actually act. Salazar is a moderate and he targets the rural voters because they are dependable, Ken is also a Democrat and that alone will bring in the D's from the front range. Thus my point, D's will get D votes from the front range and R's will get R votes from the front range. The difference is found in which party can convience rural Colorado (CD-3 and CD-4) that they best represent their needs. Salazar was able to do that because he wears cowboy boots and drives a beat up old pick truck in commercials, Coors was just a rich guy from Golden who makes a decent beer.

Again my apologies to Red Hawk, just when I thought I had the stupidest posting, Ter Ducken comes along and blows you right out of the water.

[3rd CD]

You can't guarentee your win on the 3rd. Those Republicans will go wherever they want. They are independant and soft. We like 'em. We need their vote if it's close. But statewide - we just need to be competitite there.

[Jake]

RWN - Gee, thanks for the advice. You seemed to have missed the point completely, oh well.

As I said earlier, I have no problem with the R critics. I do, however, think that there is a comparative lack of discussion about certain Ds, and frankly I wonder why.

[Smemaacalt]

They were gluing difficult.