Notable Links



Denver Internet Marketing by Parallel Path

Arvada Boutique Clothing Store Stella B's

Romanoff to Launch Campaign Wednesday

by: Colorado Pols

Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 08:59:52 AM MDT


As The Denver Post reports:

Former state House Speaker Andrew Romanoff plans to officially launch his bid for the U.S. Senate on Wednesday in Pueblo followed by a forum in Colorado Springs and a party in Denver...

...The official kickoff at the Arkansas Riverwalk in Pueblo begins at 10 a.m. The Colorado Springs forum at the Penrose Library starts at 1 p.m.

And the campaign soiree in Denver starts at 5 p.m. at the Volunteers for Outdoor Colorado headquarters in Washington Park.

Colorado Pols :: Romanoff to Launch Campaign Wednesday
Tags: , (All Tags)

Share this post:

Romanoff to Launch Campaign Wednesday | 78 comments
from August 31st - a comment
http://coloradopols.com/showCo...

he is in this race
i have it on solid source that he was to make a surprise announcement on the 16th of sept. but it got leaked at the capitol and to the post - he is not 'testing the waters'.

(i particularly like this response to that statement)

Objectively, based on past performance
you like to hype things and make vague, unverifiable claims, and then whine like a little girl when people call bullshit on you.  

You have a history as an particularly inept propagandist, so in that respect your abuse of language is worth pointing out.

(well it is true that i am a propagandist on Climate Change Legislation)

Actually, Wade
If people will click through to that exchange, they'll see I was responding directly to a different claim of yours, patting yourself onthe back about the impeccability of your work. It stands to reason, however, that you couldn't get even pull off this little smackdown in an honest manner.

And yes, Wade, you like to make vague, unverifiable claims and you have a history as a particularly inept propagandist. These two things are true. Own them.  

"At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid." - Nietzsche  

[ Parent ]
I can't believe
that you are continuing to attack my credibility after I just proved here that my source was true and reliable and your attacks were not?


"it's inconceivable!"

[ Parent ]
What credibility?
For instance, you have been repeatedly lying about Bennet's health care position. Then today you took my response to your claim that you had once showed "people" were rising up for your Draft Romanoff clusterfuck (when I showed you were only able to come up with one guy) and liberally copied & pasted to claim I was responding to your leak. That's dishonesty, which is all I expect from you.

Actually this was my response to your leak:

You've been in the rainbow selling business before
Please forgive if your pronouncements somehow don't impress anyone.  

Well, your leak was spot on, Wade. Well done. I guess this makes up for your purity trolling, record distortion, water carrying, accusing rsb of being a sockpuppet, and terrible formatting.

Don't forget to complain about this one too: http://coloradopols.com/showCo...

"At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid." - Nietzsche  

[ Parent ]
excuse us everyone
your attack and my response that day also included the earlier posts where you accused me of making up
"support" for Andrew because I would not name any elected officials who supported Romanoff openly -
so I had to get permission to post the House Majority leader - Paul Weissmann's vocal support,
just to put you at ease?
http://coloradopols.com/diary/...

and still you attack credibility?

fine. you win.
I am making it all up.
Andrew has no support, he is not running, and I don't have any real sources.
wah...

Sorry for the interruption guys,  y'all can go back to your regularly scheduled programming.

[ Parent ]
Did I mention, your mother wears Army shoes?
Actually, I've never met your mother, or you, for that matter.  But if this is Poop on Wade Norris Day on pols, I just felt I should say something... ;-)  
[ Parent ]
Every day is
Poop on Wade Norris Day around here, except when David Sirota shows up.

"Have a Bobby bar! My dad made them." --Jon Huntsman Jr.
[ Parent ]
Great analysis from Stygius today
http://www.squarestate.net/dia...

But first, what is the rationale for a Romanoff candidacy at this point, a rationale presumably developed over the nine months since Bennet filled the seat? Well, there really isn't one, but I have identified four common pro-primary arguments: (1) the routinely embraced "all primaries are great" assertion; (2) the contention that Bennet isn't sufficiently ideological, is too centrist, or his campaign refuses to edit its website to one's personal specification; (3) emotional expressions of entitlement or resentment, i.e. the "Andrew deserved to be picked, so now I'm mad at the governor" school of thought; and, (4) the "protesting Ritter's appointment process" argument. Awkwardly absent from all of this is any clear or persuasive argument that incumbent Michael Bennet has somehow failed the country and Colorado Democrats. And we know that's because he hasn't.

Even though the diary is an argument against Romanoff running in the first place, it brings up some interesting questions now that Romanoff is for-sure in the race:
1. Why is he running?
2. How will he differentiate himself from Bennet?
3. Will grassroots be enough to carry Romanoff through? Will he end up like Mike Miles, and if he does, will his political career be placed on hold even longer than it would have been had he sat this one out?
4. If he does lose, will he lose graciously and endorse Bennet, and will his supporters go on to vote for Bennet in the general?
5. Will his supporters (whatever their reasons for supporting him) take it personally like they did with Miles, or will the party come out stronger?

That is a fantastic analysis.
And it puts aside all the emotional rhetoric and really asks the hard questions--I'd be very interested to see how Wade and compadres respond to such a rational point by point discussion that raises some serious issues and doubts about this run. (I can guess but I'm willing to be pleasantly surprised.)

I strongly suggest folks read the whole post, particularly the last few paragraphs that talk about the potential damage to down ticket Democratic races as a result of a primary race that drags out until the end of next August. Strange to think that a former Speaker of the State House may be the very person to undo a whole lot of what is considered his finest work--aiding in returning the State House to the Democratic Party.  

"I wouldn't characterize caloric intake as "professional development." c rork

[ Parent ]
and here is a response to these issues
http://www.squarestate.net/dia...

Colorado Pols' break down on Rasmussen

Bennet outpolls Buck 43-37, but trails Frazier 40-39....

More...

Frazier basically plays the roll of the "generic Republican candidate," and what voters are saying is that right now they'll take an unknown Republican candidate over Bennet...

and...

The biggest concern for Bennet is in the 34% negative rating he holds. This is pretty high for someone whom the public really doesn't know at all.

All other issues aside - Bennet is being outpolled by someone no one really knows - and despite his fundraising numbers, Jane Norton will be ready money wise.
All issues aside - we need a democrat that can keep the seat.

[ Parent ]
Show Romanoff's polling numbers, please.
Without those, you don't have an argument, yet, Wade.

And please do address the last point Stygius made in his diary. Your response to his thoughtful diary lacks substance and indicates that detailed analysis is beyond your grasp.  

"I wouldn't characterize caloric intake as "professional development." c rork

[ Parent ]
'yet' being the key word here
yes, you can say without numbers my claims merit no argument,
but this is a blog right?
so for the sake of the 'argument' that does not exist...

Are you willing to make a prediction on Romanoff's numbers?
Will you bet that they will be worse than Bennet's?

would anyone here take that bet?

name yourself, so we can document it for the day when the polling does come out.  

[ Parent ]
Why would I predict?
You see, this is the difference between you and I--you pulls figures and numbers out of your ass. I wait for facts.

I would hope, for your sake and for Romanoff's "awesome name recognition" that he would poll much better than Bennet at this point in the game. And I still don't find a poll to be a compelling enough reason for a primary so again, I would ask you to address the four points outlined in Stygius's diary. If you can...

"I wouldn't characterize caloric intake as "professional development." c rork

[ Parent ]
why wouldn't you predict?
are you afraid that if you openly guess at a prediction that you will be proven wrong?
takes guts huh.
as for Stygius' wonderful diary and points, Andrew will respond to those, I don't have to.

so your prediction?

[ Parent ]
It doesn't take guts to make shit up, Wade.
Hopefully, you will learn that someday. So no. I will not "predict" or as it is more commonly known, pull a random number out of my ass.

And since when are you so gutless than you can't respond to a diary that is clearly right up your brilliant alley? Now you need to let Andrew respond? You can't, all by your little self, form a few thoughts and respond? Wow. That is sad. If you are what passes for a progressive these days, the movement is in serious trouble.

"I wouldn't characterize caloric intake as "professional development." c rork

[ Parent ]
as per the conversation
upthread with TB
you can see that all the accusations about 'making shit up'
were wrong before as I proved, after time, that I was speaking the truth.
and the truth here is you won't say whether or not Romanoff will poll better or worse than Bennet.
I say Romanoff will poll much better.
what say you?
[ Parent ]
Asked and answered.
[ Parent ]
Some other factors..
This isn't a particularly awesome time to be an elected Democrat who strongly supports healthcare reform in most moderate states. Despite what many Romanoff supporters believe, Colorado is still a purple state. Washington isn't too popular with a lot of moderate/indi voters these days. Demo Senators around the country are facing difficult poll numbers and re-elections in '10. I believe the tide will turn once we actually get meaningful healthcare reform passed.

So, my point is that Roma supporters are pointing to the Rasmussen survey to mean that a) Bennet isn't a strong candidate for the general ergo Andrew will be better. I'd be seriously curious to know what Andrew's numbers would be at were he the sitting Senator right now and what his actual hypothetical match-up numbers are. Are we really to believe that Andrew's numbers would be seriously higher than Bennet? Why? How would he be handling things better or differently than Senator Bennet?  

[ Parent ]
that's just bad luck for Bennet
these 'woulda coulda shoulda' questions about Romanoff don't really address Bennet's vulnerability in either the primary or general.

I do believe that Andrew would not have joined the Centrist coalition right off the bat.

[ Parent ]
And please tell me how...
can you say with a straight face that Andrew wouldn't have joined the centrist coalition? Because he is such a lefty D? Seriously? You have looked at his record in the State House haven't you? So, we forget all of that and now he becomes the champion of liberals everywhere?

No, it's not just bad luck for Bennet, it's reality and it matters to the conversation. Michael has put himself up front and center in supporting healthcare for months now. Andrew would be facing the same difficult mood of the electorate were he in office. Regardless, you still haven't addressed how you can be just certain that Andrew's numbers are higher anyways.  

[ Parent ]
eh,
i don't want to get personal with anyone else here.
time will show where the numbers are,
and the primary will give us all the opportunity to push the candidates to take stands on issues.
[ Parent ]
It's a tough time to be a Dem.
That I agree with.  Realistically though, I think that as the economy starts to recover and after health care reform is passed and other legislative priorities are passed, you'll see a recovery in polling numbers for Democrats.  It's an enternity between now and next November.

My point about Bennet is not whether he's stronger or not against a Republican.  I just think we now have a choice and we should be able to choose the candidate we want, someone we've known, liked, and followed for years and who has benefitted our entire state tremendously.  That person is Romanoff.

[ Parent ]
If you wait long enough
Wade will make some up.

Today, you're either going to get better or you're going to get worse, but you're never going to be the same.  Which one will it be?  --Joseph V. Paterno
[ Parent ]
Perception is important
people who post here have the perception that I
"make stuff up" even though it can be demonstrably proven that my claims are factual.

but perception is not fair, for instance, even though Michael Bennet was talking up his support for the public option, he did not release a video of his statements of support until after Romanoff's rumored primary was leaked.
that left people like Kos, Rachel Maddow, the Denver Post, Colorodo Pols, and average voters with the perception that Bennet was trying to
change positions because of the primary.

It might not be true, it might not be fair, but that is the perception of the people.

[ Parent ]
Average voters?
Honestly, if you think that the "average voter" is even aware yet that Romanoff is running, or was 24 hours ago anyway... well, then I guess you're wrong about that.

I'm looking forward to the primary contest, though.

"Apple denies that, based on their common meaning, the words 'app store' together denote a store for apps"
-- Legal filing by Apple Computer

[ Parent ]
Also find Stygius analysis and RSB's questions spot on
I can see absolutely no point in supporting centrist Romanoff against centrist Bennet other than the fact that I too was really ticked off and disappointed when Bennet got it and Andrew was kicked to the curb in the first place.

Since we don't have access to a time machine and  there is no reason to believe that Romanoff will triumph or that, if he did, Senator Romanoff would be much different from Senator Bennet, I just don't see the point.

The passion of Miles supporters made much more sense since Miles really did represent a much more liberal choice than centrist Salazar. Bennet and Romanoff present no such choice. "I should have been the one in the first place" is not my idea of a reason for bucking Bennet now.  

[ Parent ]
The people will speak.
The main reason to vote for Andrew is that he's the people's choice.  He's someone we know, like and want.  Whether he's like Bennet or not is irrelevant.
[ Parent ]
Who's choice is he?
The people's? Really? Well, I'm one of the "people" and I want Bennet so speak for your fucking self. And where he stands on the issues is completely relevant. My God, the sycophants arguments for why we need Romanoff grow increasingly shallow when exposed to the light of day and basic facts.  

"I wouldn't characterize caloric intake as "professional development." c rork
[ Parent ]
Daylight is shinging now.
The reality is that there is now and will be likely very little daylight between the candidates on issues.  But that's not the issue--it's about ability, history, and connection with the Democratic Party base.

I challenge you to go outside the warmth and cocoon of this blog to actually speak with Democratic activists and other non-activist Democrats and find more than 5 who are supporting Bennet.  That's a fact.  Polls, when they are done, will prove this out.

It's not about being a sycophant for Andrew, it's called support.  I had a party with about 20 Democratic activists in SE Denver last Saturday, and all of them support Andrew.  How's that for a straw poll?

[ Parent ]
I am an activist within the party
and I hate to break bad news to you but half the folks I have spoken with think a primary is just about the worst idea ever and fear we are going to end up losing this seat because of it. How's that for a straw poll? About as reliable as yours, wouldn't you say? Maybe Denver loves Romanoff but once you all break out of your little cocoon and move to the other 63 counties, you might just find out that support isn't quite so strong.

"I wouldn't characterize caloric intake as "professional development." c rork
[ Parent ]
"Losing the seat because of primary"
FALSE Statement.

If anything, this primary gets the base energized for all levels of the ticket in a non-presidential election year.  The money spent on the primary will be worth it as an investment in getting Bennet's name out there just as much as Andrew's.  Whoever wins the primary, Democratic voters will support him, I'm sure of it (myself included).

[ Parent ]
Again, just like Wade,
you state things as fact without an ounce of proof to back up your assertions. No wonder Stygius's diary is so confounding to you folks.

"I wouldn't characterize caloric intake as "professional development." c rork
[ Parent ]
Same here
Most of my activist friends and associates plan to support Bennet and take a dim view of the Romanoff campaign/extended tantrum. And I'm talking about grass roots, boots on the ground, phone calling, contributing, event attending "people".  But we'll see, won't we?

Agree with Middle that who is more in the cocoon here is highly questionable. I certainly don't get all my info here. I get it through the Dem events I attend and my network of activist contacts, a few of whom have close access to real players. Not pretending that I do but I have a well connected source or two outside of this nice warm blog.  

[ Parent ]
I think part of the problem here is that some folks
like those we have responded to in this diary do not really get beyond Denver city limits. And worse, they don't understand how diverse this state is as are the Democrats in it. It was the same way back in Illinois--the universe revolved around Chicago and Springfield and most Illinois politicians couldn't find or be bothered to visit any other part of the state...until election time. And then by God, they remembered the other 96% of the state. But the folks that were "in the know" in Chicago and Springfield were bordering on delusional in regards to the needs of the rest of the state and how voters felt about just about everything and anything.

And let's not forget one other very important point--Romanoff didn't even have to run an actual campaign where he lived--I remember him telling me that himself--that his district was so firmly behind him that it freed him up to work on the House Majority project and get out and campaign for other house candidates (this was back in 2004.) I greatly appreciated that he knew that his district was a lock and he took that opportunity and parlayed it into assistance for other Dems. I still love him for it.

On the down side of that, Romanoff has never really had to run for office any more than Bennet has and I can assure you that for years Larimer County Dems begged him to come to our annual County dinners and he couldn't be bothered. Interesting how he is suddenly making the time and the rounds now--when he has his eye on the Senate seat.

"I wouldn't characterize caloric intake as "professional development." c rork

[ Parent ]
True
Romanoff has spent his political life so far in the safety of the blue cocoon, if we're going to talk about cocoons.  We haven't seen him in a tough race. He might be too thin skinned and touchy.  He might have too much of a false sense of entitlement.  Sure looks that way .  
[ Parent ]
right on Paul
and i can confirm rural support in
Canon City, the Plains, the Western Slope, Greeley,
with support around 8 to 1 for Romanoff over Bennet...
[ Parent ]
Solid Numbers
Thanks Wade and Paul for your solid internal polling numbers. Who was the polling firm that put those numbers out one more time? "Bullshit Research Inc." or "Convenient Things We Make Up and Co." Wow, those outfits even make firms like PPP look good.  
[ Parent ]
Yes, that's why the people should choose him...
because he's the people's choice!  Oh.  Can't argue with that, huh?

Seriously, some people need to step back and listen to themselves.

"Apple denies that, based on their common meaning, the words 'app store' together denote a store for apps"
-- Legal filing by Apple Computer

[ Parent ]
Good questions
In the end, no one needs to have a reason that Sen. Bennett has "failed" anyone, as the article you quote seems to suggest.  After all, in a Democratic country, I just don't see how "Ritter picked him" is any kind of a reason to assume that he's the default choice for the job, anyway.  BUT, if the campaign does end up being about a sense of entitlement for Andrew Romanoff, then it will look fairly petty.  I have a lot of respect for Romanoff, and to his credit, I don't think that is what his campaign will be about.  I don't think this will be a primary like Lamont/Leiberman, where the main issue is anger at someone's betrayal of his party; and assuming it's not, then I think we're definitely in a better position for having the contest in place.

At the moment, I really don't have a position in this one.  I really like both of the pair; I see them both as very pragmatic legislators who are not "moderate" as a brand, but just like to think things through, think for themselves, and reach a variety of conclusions.  In other words, I'd be proud to have either of the two as a senator.

"Apple denies that, based on their common meaning, the words 'app store' together denote a store for apps"
-- Legal filing by Apple Computer

[ Parent ]
Well, this circle jerk was a blast,
but I'm off to make a living. Talk amongst yourselves Wade and Paul. Preaching to the choir is fun, fun, fun!

"I wouldn't characterize caloric intake as "professional development." c rork
Nobody answered my questions
I think that's the most telling part of all.
[ Parent ]
Yes, I think it is, too, RBS.
I didn't see too many people addressing Stygius's points, either. I hoped for better but saw the responses I pretty much expected and from the usual suspects.

"I wouldn't characterize caloric intake as "professional development." c rork
[ Parent ]
Answers and more.
1. Why is he running?

Andrew of course speaks for himself, but clearly this is a man who has really dedicated much of his time, effort and life to making Colorado a better place to live and do business.  He has the passion for public life which all of us who have known him for some time have seen firsthand.  It has been also clear that ever since his days on the DNC that national issues were critical to not just the world and our country function but how we live our lives here in Colorado.

2. How will he differentiate himself from Bennet?

Romanoff is the people's choice.  From the feedback from 5,000 people that the Governor solicited, to ProgressNow's poll, to the man and woman on the street, it has always been clear that he is the person who should have been chosen.  Why do all these people believe this?  It is because Romanoff has actually been in leadership in a legislative capacity, crafted legislation, worked across the aisle but didn't sacrifice Democratic values.  His collegial but strong leadership skills were crucial to the passage of Ref C.  As a long-time Coloradan and as a widely traveled Speaker, he knows intimately how this state ticks, thinks, and breathes.  Bennet doesn't have that support, that legislative experience or leadership or knowledge of the state.

3. Will grassroots be enough to carry Romanoff through? Will he end up like Mike Miles, and if he does, will his political career be placed on hold even longer than it would have been had he sat this one out?

Yes, the grassroots now is totally different than with the Salazar/Miles race.  The vast majority of activists prefer Romanoff and he will win big at the caucuses and state convention.  Bennet will have to spend a lot of money to get his name on the ballot via the petition process, and he'll have to pay for staff to work on his campaign because as I mentioned, most of the activists will work tirelessly for Romanoff.

4. If he does lose, will he lose graciously and endorse Bennet, and will his supporters go on to vote for Bennet in the general?

This is a silly question.  If there is one word that describes Romanoff to a "T", it's that he's "gracious".  He will actively encourage all Dems to support Bennet if he loses.

5. Will his supporters (whatever their reasons for supporting him) take it personally like they did with Miles, or will the party come out stronger?

The party will actually be the stronger for this primary.  This will really activate the base, get them excited in a non-presidential year when many of them are not pleased with the Governor, and get them really excited up and down the ticket.  As mentioned earlier, Romanoff has such cross-over appeal to R's, U's, and D's, that his support will put him over the top in the general election.

[ Parent ]
That's a disingenuous answer to No. 5
If Romanoff loses the primary, do you (and his other supporters) vow to support Bennet wholeheartedly?
[ Parent ]
Absolutely
We're Democrats, and there's too much at stake not to support the nominee.  I hope Bennet supporters feel the same about Romanoff when he wins.
[ Parent ]
On this we agree.
I can only speak for myself. Just as you can only speak for yourself. So, speaking for myself, whoever wins the primary has my full support--not lukewarm, but full, including my time and my dime. This seat is far too important in the larger scheme of things to hold a grudge. If we ant to move forward a more progressive agenda, we cannot afford to lose a Democrat in the Senate. Period.

"I wouldn't characterize caloric intake as "professional development." c rork
[ Parent ]
A comparison--Romanoff v. Bennet.
Bennet's actually a good senator, in my view.  He's like one of my favorite wines, an any-year Rosemount Shiraz.

It's just that in my opinion, Romanoff would be better, like a 1949 Chateau Lafite Rothschild.

[ Parent ]
I'm more of a beer guy
I actually like PBR, so your metaphor goes right over my head.

However, I like both guys too.

[ Parent ]
I like a lot of people
Likability isn't my idea of a good reason to elect someone to anything but Miss Congeniality.
[ Parent ]
But, but, but...
[ Parent ]
And once again, don't let facts get in the way
[ Parent ]
2. Romanoff is the people's choice
... except for John Salazar, John Hickenlooper, Ed Perlmutter, Federico Pena, Diana DeGette, and a half dozen others who scored better than Romanoff on different measures.

Romanoff was apparently just fine with Ritter's choice -- until his deal to get appointed to another plum job fell through.

[ Parent ]
Meooow.
You are bitterrr.

Andrew seems always had his eye on being a US Senator.  The fact that the governor didn't extend him an offer of a job isn't Romanoff's fault.

As for popularity, as I said, the governor requested that people let him know who they wanted, and they resoundingly said Andrew.

As I said, I have no problems with Bennet; it's just I like Romanoff better.

[ Parent ]
Meooow?
Not bitter, and, frankly, I'd be as happy with Romanoff as I would be with Bennet. But the rationale for Romanoff's candidacy seems to boil down to his perceived snub -- which he could have swallowed if he'd gotten another good job! But since he didn't, there's plenty of revisionist history going on, including your conclusion Romanoff was the people's choice. I don't disagree Bennet came out of no where, but Romanoff wasn't the only leading candidate --  far from it.
[ Parent ]
For you it was the snub.
For me, not at all.  Romanoff and Hickenlooper were my favorites to fill the seat.  The governor chose neither.  Romanoff is now running for senate, so one of my favorites will be on the ballot.  So, how does my decision relate to a snub?  If someone wants to run for office, it's a free country, they should be able to.  

Also as I said, this primary will be good for both Bennet and Romanoff.  They'll both get lots of great press, and I can assure you neither one will say anything remotely as bad as has been said on this website.

[ Parent ]
"answers and more" post above
is good. However, your predicting on #3 that Bennet will have to get on the ballot via the petition process with only two candidates in the democratic field?

Bennet would only need 30% at the state convention to get on the primary ballot right?

My guess is it would be about 60%-40% Romanoff with the insider dems. That would get both on the primary ballot.

[ Parent ]
Really, that's Wade's reason
I think we should maybe be a little patient and hear Andrew Romanoff's reason.

"Apple denies that, based on their common meaning, the words 'app store' together denote a store for apps"
-- Legal filing by Apple Computer
[ Parent ]
This puzzles me
I think any sane person acts exactly the way Andrew Romanoff did.  Ritter appointed someone else as Senator, he accepted that.  He weighed his options, looked for other positions of public service, some of which might not have worked out, so in the end, he decided to try his hand at being a Senator after all.  So now we're going to have an election, which is the normal democratic process for deciding who gets a job as a senator.

I just fail to see the problem here.  Why should any of this reflect poorly on Romanoff?  Should we feel better about Romanoff had he gone around badmouthing Sen. Bennett before he even had a legislative record to look at?

"Apple denies that, based on their common meaning, the words 'app store' together denote a store for apps"
-- Legal filing by Apple Computer

[ Parent ]
What's all this about Romanoff accepting the Bennet nomination with good grace?
Not exactly.  In fact he left town in a monumental snit immediately. Understandable to be sure. Clear since then that no matter what he's offered or what his options have been, the rage of Romanoff can only be satisfied by running against Bennet.  That's what this is about.  Noble hero bowing to the Voice of the People my ass.  

Would have loved it if the choice had been Romanoff, mind you.  It wasn't. Doubt it will be now.  Would like to think he wouldn't have proven to be such a dick if not for the sense of betrayal and would have made a fine Senator.  But no good reason, for anyone other than Romanoff and his biggest fans, to change Senatorial candidates at this point.  

[ Parent ]
I'm still seeing a lot of emotion; no reasons
So now, in addition to


Romanoff was apparently just fine with Ritter's choice -- until his deal to get appointed to another plum job fell through.

we also have


In fact he left town in a monumental snit immediately ... the rage of Romanoff can only be satisfied by running against Bennet

Clearly the two of you have diametrically opposed views of what Romanoff's response was, and you both seem to think your opinions are obvious enough to not need evidence... so, again, I don't see a real problem.

"Apple denies that, based on their common meaning, the words 'app store' together denote a store for apps"
-- Legal filing by Apple Computer

[ Parent ]
Then you'll be even more annoyed when I say
without going into specifics that he WAS offered a plum job without offering evidence. I just can't help myself.  I know I'm being a pain in the ass.  But whatever.  If you think Romanoff should run, your entitled to your opinion.
[ Parent ]
diametrically opposed views of what Romanoff's response was
Not at all. I'm in absolute agreement with BlueCat's recollection. Romanoff was "apparently just fine" with the appointment in the sense he didn't declare his campaign to overturn it until he was unable to leverage a better job. There is ample evidence he didn't publicly protest the Bennet appointment at the time, just as there is ample evidence he left town in a snit.
[ Parent ]
Add Speaker Carroll to the "except" list n/t

[ Parent ]
And Bernie Buescher

[ Parent ]
Presumptions
Several commentators here suggest that Mr. Romanoff needs a compelling reason to challenge Sen. Bennet.

I disagree.

Why is it inappropriate for a politician to simply argue that he or she is a better choice, for whatever reason, for that public office? And when did we reach the point that an appointed U.S. Senator, with no previous record of elected public service or work on behalf of his party, should become immune from a challenge by a guy who played a key role, if not THE key role, in returning statehouse control to his party?

Andrew Romanoff might not win the primary. But he had a credible - some would say convincing - case to be appointed to Salazar's seat in January and he has the same credible arguments to make to the Democratic party's base now.

Those who say he should not try are essentially arguing that Bennet, because he got appointed, should not face intra-party competition. They couch it in terms of "well, Bennet and Romanoff are both centrists, so what's the difference?"

The difference, if Romanoff wins the primary, is that he, unlike Bennet, would be the choice of his party to run for the seat against Ms. Norton or Mr. Buck or Mr. Wiens or whoever the GOP puts up. And that is no small thing, and it's something Sen. Bennet cannot say right now.

Bill Ritter's preference is not necessarily the same as the Colorado Democratic Party's preference, and since we live in a democracy . . .

I disagree
Romanoff's reasons for running are incredibly important.

What you are advocating with this post is that there should be a primary with a generic D candidate for Bennet. Arguments that the primary nominating system itself is hardly "democratic" aside, I think your point is worth debating. What we are talking about is why Romanoff?

You say this isn't about how they're both centrists, but if that's the case, what is it about? A popularity contest? That just doesn't make sense to me.

But again, the whole point is moot because Andrew is definitely running. Like I said with my post that started this, my biggest concern right now is making sure this primary doesn't cause more problems for the sake of saying "well, my guy won."

I am a fan of Andrew's, but not only is he going to have to convince me as to why he'd be a better senator than Bennet, but that there is a compelling reason for his candidacy. We can argue all day about the merits or dangers of a primary election against a fairly weak incumbent--or whether our US Senate appointment process is fair--but we must be aware that a massive inter-party fight right before redistricting is in no one's best interest but the GOP.

People tend to get emotional about this issue above all others since the election. I can tell there's a lot of resentment about Sen. Bennet, the process by which he was appointed, and the events that have transpired since his swearing in. There are one or two votes that even I disagreed with him on, but all in all I'd say that the arguments against Sen. Bennet are superficial. They are brought on by a mixture of resentment toward Bill Ritter, and I completely understand the place they come from.

What I am concerned about, and why I think that Andrew and his supporters need to be careful of how they treat this race, is threefold: first, historical precedent tells us 2010 is going to be a bad year for Democrats anyway; second, it's important that Dems don't balkanize themselves right before this election and hurt potentially weak state legislator races; third, we need to find a way to keep the Governor's mansion from being turned over to (probably) Josh Penry.

You say that the people deserve a chance to choose between a man who was appointed, and a  "...a guy who played a key role, if not THE key role, in returning statehouse control to his party?"

While I think whether Bennet is immune from a primary challenge is a moot point right now, my question for you is: should a rising star in the Democratic party whose

A)last attempt at a statewide election was defeated by 10%
B)has been mysteriously silent on major issues so as not to have had to stake out positions (unlike Sen. Bennet, though his detractors frequently accuse him of doing so.)
And...
C) hasn't had to be put to the scrutiny of a single poll or fundraising report be risking the very majaority he worked so hard to put together in the first place?

Besides, if anyone deserves a primary for primary's sake, it should be Ritter. I mean, he's broken more campaign promises than anyone. Why should the very man who messed up the appointment in the first place be immune?

[ Parent ]
I disagree
I think Romanoff can run for any reason he wants. We're a democracy.

Your point about why he is running is what we voters ask as we consider who to vote for.

Where all the cool kids will be on Saturday - Code War!

[ Parent ]
Obviously he can do whatever he wants to do
I'm pondering whether or not voters will decide it's a legitimate reason. And, IMO, if a candidate doesn't have a real reason for running, then they're toast.

As I said above, a primary is going to happen, I'm merely wondering why it's happening.

I'm assuming Andrew is planning on addressing these concerns in his speech on Wednesday anyway. If he doesn't then there will be a huge problem--and I don't think we should have to figure it out for ourselves and then apply that to our decision on who to vote for.

[ Parent ]
Wait . . .
You're saying, RedStateBlues, that we have to assess and understand Romanoff's reasons for wanting to go to the U.S. Senate before he should put his name on the ballot.

I think that's backwards.

We use the primary campaign season to consider the arguments candidates put forth, including their reasons for running.

I think what you really mean to say, and in fact you do say it later in your comment, is that a primary might hurt the Democrats' chances of holding the seat and even hurt the party's hold on the General Assembly.

I doubt that, but even if you're right it's no reason to say that Romanoff, instead of Bennet, should be the one to bow out.

After all, Sen. Bennet has his job only because of Gov. Ritter. No voter has ever said that Bennet should be Senator. So why should he get the presumption in favor of staying on the primary ballot while Romanoff doesn't?

[ Parent ]
Bennet has been a leader for this state in the Senate
On virtually every major issue. He's supported the President, and the President's agenda, and he's done so while visiting every one of Colorado's 64 counties. He's held town hall meetings, and had to talk down angry protesters. He's been on the front lines of the battle that's been going on both in Washington and Colorado.

Where has Andrew Romanoff been? He's been silent on the issues, and busy consolidating support in his bid for Senate--which he waited to announce for only after Bennet had raised nearly $2.5 million.

So yes, I want to know his reasons, and I think he should explain that clearly in his announcement spree.

I think what you're really wanting to argue about is who is a better choice for US Senate. Why don't you phrase it like that, instead of putting words in my mouth.

[ Parent ]
Dark Side
While Romanoff and other Democrats were working to rebuild the Colorado Democratic Party, Bennet was the managing director of Anschutz Investments making $250M for Mr Anschutz.  Mr Anschutz was using his fortune to fund right wing causes and the National and Colorado Republican Party.  I don't know how Democratic primary voters get around these facts and support Bennet. If Romanoff runs a credible campaign, Bennet will pay dearly for his trip to the dark side.
[ Parent ]
Your "sincere" concern is touching


Where all the cool kids will be on Saturday - Code War!
[ Parent ]
Ad hominem nonsense

[ Parent ]
Agree--ad hominem nonsense. (and I'm supporting the other guy)

[ Parent ]
Thanks Paul
And thanks for your answers to my questions earlier. You were the only one who sought it fit to answer them.
[ Parent ]
You're assuming here
that the whole purpose of Andrew Romanoff running for Senate is that he thinks that Sen. Bennett "deserves" a primary challenge.  To me, that seems like dysfunctional politics at its worse.  If Romanoff thinks he can do a better job as a senator, let him run and prove it!  Hell, if I thought I would do a better job as a senator, I'd run too.  (As it turns out, I'm pretty sure I'd make a lousy senator.)

Where is the part where you say that Bennett's reasons for running are very important, too?  I'm a big fan of his, but he's never actually explained to people in Colorado why he'd make a good Senator, either.  So now both Romanoff and Bennet will do that, and we'll have an election to decide.

What I object to is the stacking of the deck in advance... it's as if some people here think Bennett would have to be shown to be a child molestor before Romanoff is justified in running.  That's simply not true.  Andrew Romanoff can choose to run for U.S. Senate simply because he thinks it's where his gifts are best used, and it doesn't need to have anything to do with Michael Bennett.

"Apple denies that, based on their common meaning, the words 'app store' together denote a store for apps"
-- Legal filing by Apple Computer

[ Parent ]
Bennet is the (unelected) incumbent
I agree that his reasons are important as well, but he's been working tirelessly to represent the people and the Democratic party in the Senate.

To me, Romanoff has more of a burden to prove his case because he's done exactly nothing since A-59 was shot down by voters. If he had been out on the front lines, doing town halls, talking to people (not just consolidating support for a primary) then I would definitely agree with you.

But the fact of the matter is that Romanoff is risking a lot with this race--his reputation, and his own career to be sure, but he's also risking things that a lot of other people have worked their butts off to create in this state. 2010 is going to be a pivotal year for Democrats, and "because he thinks it's where his gifts are best used" is not going to cut it for me.

Like I said, he will probably answer all of these questions tomorrow, but it's so much more layered than just Romanoff's ego vs. Bennet's perceived lack of hard work.

[ Parent ]
Surprise Announcement
He's not actually announcing a run for Senate.  He's announcing his engagement to me.
Romanoff to Launch Campaign Wednesday | 78 comments
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?






Advertise Here!
ads@coloradopols.com


Active Users
Currently 5 user(s) logged on.

Search




Advanced Search


Colorado Pols Network


Jeffco Pols
Summers, Kerr to Host Joint Town Hall on Saturday
Jeffco Pols
Joe Coors Announcing CD-7 Run Today
Jeffco Pols
Roybal Fined for Wiechman Loan
Jeffco Pols
  More >

Denver Pols
Poll: Who Will Win the HD-1 Primary?
Denver Pols
Hancock Rolls Out Economic Development Plan
Denver Pols
Michael Hancock Wades into ASSET Debate
Denver Pols
  More >













RSS 2.0



Pols Gets Mobile: ColoradoPols.com/mobile/

Colorado Pols is on Twitter: twitter.com/coloradopols

Email Pols


How to Write a Diary That Will Make the Front Page



Terms of Use/Privacy Policy



Pols Posting Policies



The Pols Penalty Box



Yard Signs!



The Pols "Mailbag"

Mailbag #1



Relevant Links

The Big Media Blog

Blog It Right

Blog For Growth

Blogometer

Business Word

Colorado Capitol Journal

Colorado Center on Law and Policy

Colorado Democratic Party

Colorado Ethics Watch

Colorado Independent

Colorado Labor Blog

Colorado Veterans for America

Colorado Legislature

Colorado Lib

Colorado Libertarian Blog

Colorado Media Matters

Colorado Progressive Coalition

Colorado Republican Party

Colorado Secretary of State

Colorado Senate Dems

Colorado Senate GOP

Colorado Young Democrats

Commentary Today

Coyote Gulch

CU Democrats

Curious Stranger

Daily Kos

Dan Willis-Rumors

Dem Notes

Democracy for Colorado

Denver Politics

East Boulder County Politics

Ed Stein Ink

Election Neutrality Now

eleXn

George in Denver

Great Education Colorado

Head First Colorado

The Hotline Political Network

Junction Daily Blog

Left in the West

Liberal and Loving It

Maintain Educational Standards in Colorado

Mount Virtus

MyDD

National Journal

On Call

Peak Dems

Political State Report

Progress Now

Prometheus

Project Vote Smart

Radio Free Denver

Senate Guru

Slapstick Politics

Steam Powered Opinions

Square State

Stygius

TalkLeft

The Thicket

The Bell Policy Center

The Hypothetical Wren

ThomasMC.com

Toilet Paper Online

TRACER Campaign Finance

View From a Height

Walter in Denver

Wash Park Prophet

Western Democrat


 
Colorado Pols is wholly owned by Colorado Pols, LLC
webmaster-at-coloradopols.com

Powered by: SoapBlox