Notable Links



Denver Internet Marketing by Parallel Path

Knowledge Messenger

Arvada Boutique Clothing Store Stella B's

Romanoff Picks Fight With President Obama

by: Colorado Pols

Mon Feb 08, 2010 at 12:14:44 PM MST


The AP reported Friday:

President Barack Obama's visit to Denver later this month has some Democrats upset.

The president is headed to Denver Feb. 18 to raise money for Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet. Bennet's primary challenger, former House Speaker Andrew Romanoff, says the state party should insist the president hold an event for Romanoff supporters, too.

"Many of my supporters were among the most active organizers for President Obama during the 2008 campaign and they remain staunchly behind the president," Romanoff wrote in a letter Friday to state party chairwoman Pat Waak.

"Unfortunately, the current plan of events during the president's visit has sent a clear message: 'Support the appointed incumbent Senator or do not be part of the president's visit to Colorado," Romanoff wrote...

Romanoff was considered a likely candidate for the Senate seat when it came open last year as former Sen. Ken Salazar became Interior Secretary. But Democratic Gov. Bill Ritter chose Bennet, who was superintendent of Denver Public Schools.

Romanoff said in his letter that there is "growing frustration" among Democrats that the party heavyweights are backing Bennet.

Here's what we'll say about this: it remains a fact that Barack Obama is considerably more popular than Andrew Romanoff, and there is a difference between making yourself anti-establishment (good idea) and anti-popular President (much less solid ground). This move is fraught with risk of backlash, of reasonable dissent giving over to Romanoff vs. everybody--as we've said before, if there's no compelling difference driving that rebelliousness, it's going to crash and burn.

Not unpredictably, we see GOP-leaning editorial boards are already carrying Romanoff's torch.

While there is a sentiment in the abstract that the Democratic Party shouldn't take a formal position on a primary, that doesn't mean the President can't pick a favorite if he chooses. Ultimately, Obama wants to make sure this seat stays with a Democrat, and if he thinks that Bennet is the more likely one to do that, then his interests lay in supporting him. Disagree as you will, but Bennet is just one of many incumbent Senators Obama will campaign for, and the poll numbers urgently indicate that--here and around the nation--there's no time to lose.

The rest of the commentary we leave to you.
Colorado Pols :: Romanoff Picks Fight With President Obama
Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Romanoff Picks Fight With President Obama | 110 comments
Appointed, Entitled, what's the difference?
Time to give it a rest and focus on real issues.

When I use lots of words, they always form an analysis (and, while producing high volume, also produce high information-density).
--Steve Harvey, 2009
Obama is opening backing the Interim Senator
Attacking the master of the Hickenlopper-Bennet-Ritter corporate contribution money machine will fall on deaf ears at the end of the day.

But its really the only choice he has at this point.  Obama is not up, but Bennet and Hickenlooper are, therefore Bennet can't attack them for their partnership with the corporate money machine directly.  

He must use the proxy of Obama.  

 

[ Parent ]
Is that your attempt at analysis?
Or is it some sort of secret code?

"Yes Twitty, I'm an idiot." Ben Stein's $$
[ Parent ]
When you fill in the blanks
you really should keep your evil Democrats straight. You probably mean Romanoff can't attack them, unless you think Bennet should attack himself. You also must have missed that Romanoff has been attacking Bennet quite directly for some time for just those things.

You really should wait to start drinking until after lunch, Libertad.

[ Parent ]
Waaah
 
[ Parent ]
Romanoff...
...is probably elated that Obama is coming to campaign for his opponent.  After all, it worked so well in NJ, VA, and MA.

"Kevin and I will keep them out somehow -- even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!"  
I've seen you make this comment several times
I am wondering if you really think it is true, or if you are just taking some (very understandable) delight in the MA election and the others you mention.
[ Parent ]
I think there's truth to it.
His approval isn't exactly stellar right now, and I think a majority of voters overall are not happy about the way the Health Care reform process has gone with the secrecy and politicking/bribery to get votes on board.

"Kevin and I will keep them out somehow -- even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!"  
[ Parent ]
Who's approval is higher?
Seriously.
[ Parent ]
Obama and whom? n/t


"Kevin and I will keep them out somehow -- even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!"  
[ Parent ]
Obama and anyone else.
Plus, keep in mind Obama isn't parachuting into Colorado on the eve of an election. The president is still quite popular among the target audience for this visit -- Democrats heading to caucus in a month.
[ Parent ]
Name a national politician with higher approval
People tend to like their house members, but right now people don't like any politicians that have a national profile.

Palin?
McCain?
Pelosi?
Reid?
Cantor? (maybe his profile isn't that high)
Bachman? (national profile, but I don't want to saddle you with her)

Name a national politician with a +50% approval?

[ Parent ]
Scott Brown
Hehehe.

"Kevin and I will keep them out somehow -- even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!"  
[ Parent ]
Approval very high among Dems
and very low among Republicans. From a couple weeks ago:

Obama's 88 % approval rating from Demcrats is the second highest level of party support for a first-year president, trailing only the 92 % Republican support for George W. Bush in 2001.

On the other hand, Obama's 23 % rating among Republicans is tied for lowest party rating of a rookie president, matching GOP "backing" of Bill Clinton back in 1993.

http://content.usatoday.com/co...

It's "the highest first-year gap of any president" measured by Gallup.

But again, who's Obama's audience for this visit?

[ Parent ]
Rasmussen has POTUS Obama at minus 15 (-15)
[ Parent ]
If the election were held today
and everyone who answers a Rasmussen robocall planned to vote in Democratic caucuses, that might matter.
[ Parent ]
Obama worked well in VA, NJ and MA
0 - 3

....but he did grab a Nobel Peace Prize and jacked up the national debt by $1.35 TRILLION DOLLARS

[ Parent ]
LB, You're confusing
Obama's standing with all voters, as reflected in NJ, VA, and MA and his standing with voters in a Democratic primary.
  I have no doubt that Obama's support helps Bennet in the primary, only the magnitude of that benefit is in question.
  As a voter still leaning to Romanoff, I'm not particularly happy to Obama beating the drums for Bennet but I doubt that you could seriously deny that such activity will benefit Bennet in the primary.
[ Parent ]
A good point.
I didn't think about it like that.

"Kevin and I will keep them out somehow -- even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!"  
[ Parent ]
Just so I'm clear --
are you saying Obama's visit in February will help a Primary contest in August?  Or are you saying his February visit will influence the caucus and assembly results - which might not matter a lot unless Bennet's people fear he might not get enough support to get on the ballot through the assemblies.  

Perhaps I've confused something.

[ Parent ]
I'm going to be part of the caucus and I am not impressed with Obama.
His short time as president has been one disappointment after another with no end in site. And many more Democrats are coming to the same conclusion.  

The only chance we have to elect a Democrat to that seat is Andrew Romanoff. Bennet will not win in the general. Of that I am sure.  

"Hehehehehe. Blow me. Clarify that."   by: 2010 Front Page Editor, Colorado Pols, Middle of the Road @ Thu Feb 11, 2010 at 20:10:07 PM MST

[ Parent ]
Then why are you going to the Democratic caucus?
Or do I have it wrong, and you're going to the Republican caucus instead?

When I use lots of words, they always form an analysis (and, while producing high volume, also produce high information-density).
--Steve Harvey, 2009
[ Parent ]
What are you smoking?
If you're seriously disappointed with Obama after a year in office, you're clearly disillusioned or don't know what he's accomplished. I hope you don't represent AR's office or his supporters, it's very concerning that you'll attack anyone who challenges AR even the current Dem president.

AR has no chance to win; he doesn't have the campaign team, monies or statewide support necessary to take on T-Norton. Not to mention that Bennet is proven and has toed the party line on all of the vital votes.


"Maybe Sarah Palin would be smarter if she had bigger hands." --Jimmy Kimmel  

[ Parent ]
I'm sure that he's not impressed you either
n/a

How about a 5 trillion tax cut for the upper 1% that's borrowed from China  and then invested in China? The Republican platform has legs.
[ Parent ]
Obviously, Obama's visit will help Bennet
at both the caucus and primary levels.  Additionally, it raises yet more money, which may be spent at the primary level.  
  On that point, you have indeed "confused something."  
   The question is not whether it helps Bennet -- at both levels -- but how much.  I would judge the impact to be significant but not overwhelming.  Certainly whatever psychological lift it gives Bennet will dissipate somewhat by August -- but that ignores two points:
  1-How Bennet will spend the money raised at this and other events and
  2--Whether Obama will do another visit for Bennet closer to the primary.
[ Parent ]
How it helps Bennet
in addition to the (brief) psychological boost, selling 2,000 tickets at $25 apiece won't raise that much money, in the scheme of things, but lets Bennet report 2,000 contributors who live in Colorado (mostly). Since one of Romanoff's key talking points has been that he had more individual contributions from Colorado residents than any other candidate in the state last quarter, this event will likely keep him from being able to make that claim next quarter.
[ Parent ]
That's a very solid point
Also, if someone has contributed money to a candidate, even a modest $25, he or she is more likely to attend a caucus for that candidate and/or vote for that candidate in a primary and general election.
  Finally, re: money, don't forget their are smaller fundraisers going on in conjunction with the visit with considerably higher price tags.
[ Parent ]
considerably higher price tags
Yes, and those will bring in serious bucks. The ticket for the VIPest one is $15,000 and for the merely VIP one it's $1,000.

But the point of the Fillmore rally is to fill the room for the cameras, harvest e-mail addresses, fire up a crowd, and boost the number of individual contributors. If it raises $50,000, the campaign won't net much after all the expenses, but that's OK.

[ Parent ]
Great Point
I can understand that the President might be doing his best to build up some political capital, but so far he has been pretty bad at helping to pick a horse that can win.

Despite Romanoff's lackluster start, I'm still trying to figure out why the ColoradoPols editorial staff seems so biased on Romanoff challenging Bennet?

[ Parent ]
It's all a big conspiracy
We've said this over and over, but it bears repeating again. We're just calling it like we seem them. We wrote a year ago, on many occasions, that Bennet was not the best pick that Ritter could have made for Senate. If Romanoff, or anyone else, would have challenged Bennet within the first few months of that nomination, this race might have been a different story.

We're not for or against anybody. When you objectively look at the race, it's hard to understand how this is going to turn out well for Romanoff because of his lackluster campaign and fundraising. Same for Ken Buck on the Republican side; we're not pro-Norton or pro-Wiens, but when you look at Buck's campaign, it's hard not to shrug and say "where is this going?"

As for this post, can you tell us why it makes sense to take a strategy - in a Democratic primary - that is basically about picking a fight with Obama? In a general election, if you are a Republican candidate, then sure. But in a primary?


[ Parent ]
why it makes sense
Because that's what Pat Caddell does. He's the guy to thank for New Coke, remember.
[ Parent ]
Not to mention his desperate swift-boating of Bennet...


I believe today more than ever, US Senator Michael Bennet should be retained in office.  Here's why: http://www.coloradopols.com/di...
[ Parent ]
Such as....?

[ Parent ]
The video.


I believe today more than ever, US Senator Michael Bennet should be retained in office.  Here's why: http://www.coloradopols.com/di...
[ Parent ]
The video that implies everyone in public service except Andrew Romanoff
was born without a conscience. Sorry, but that's a stretch for me.

I believe today more than ever, US Senator Michael Bennet should be retained in office.  Here's why: http://www.coloradopols.com/di...
[ Parent ]
The read on Obama's motives is probably wrong.
Pols writes: "Ultimately, Obama wants to make sure this seat stays with a Democrat, and if he thinks that Bennet is the more likely one to do that, then his interests lay in supporting him."

I think that is very doubtful.  This is a case where the administration needed the support of Senators for administration positions in the U.S. Senate.  Backing an incumbent helps secure this kind of support.

There is little or not indication that Obama's endorsement was based on competence, on political positions of the candidates, or on electability.  As the Rasmussen poll recently released (and the history of Senators appointed with no electoral experience) makes clear, Bennet is not more electable.

Obama's endorsement came just a one day into the primary race, with no apparent deliberation, at a time when Senate passage of health care reform was looking hard pressed to capture sixty votes in the Senate.  Forced to guess, I'd guess that the call was made by Rahm Emanuel whose political guidance as White House Chief of Staff has not earned him a reputation for being very astute.  He apparently missed "all politics is local" day in Congress 101.

Romanoff and Obama have a lot in common in both style and substance, and in a honest evaluation probably would have come out in favor of Romanoff.  Both are inspiring orators with vision.  Both are moderately liberal.  Both have stellar academic credentials.  Both have served in state legislatures of states where they were not natives, while earning money teaching college students before running for the U.S. Senate.  Both are very competent at organizing people at a grass roots level.  Both don't have strongly corporate career roots.  Obama campaigned against the influence of corporate money when he ran, and Romanoff has done the same in his race.

So, it is hardly surprising that Romanoff and Obama supporters strongly overlap.  But, Obama missed that local detail when he made his call which had nothing to do with who was more likely to win.

[ Parent ]
Talk about clueless.
Let's get your talking points in order, shall we?

1. Bennet was an informal adviser on education during Obama's campaign. They have a relationship. Get that?

2. Bennet was on the short list for Secretary of Education. Are you really surprised he has endorsed Bennet, when he was considering adding the man to his Cabinet?

Come on, Andrew. Do try and get your AR talking points up to speed.

--From a "real dick."
by: JO

[ Parent ]
And another thing ...
Bennet was also an early and strong supporter of President Obama long before the primaries.  Romanoff supported Senator Clinton.
[ Parent ]
My politics is local.
I care about my family and friends who don't have health care.  

Michael Bennet sat down and talked to me about it. He said he would fight hard for it -- even if it meant losing his job.

Can't get much more local than that.

I believe today more than ever, US Senator Michael Bennet should be retained in office.  Here's why: http://www.coloradopols.com/di...

[ Parent ]
I'm Not Much for Conspiracy Theories
I know it's hard, if not impossible, to be "objective."  I made the observation based on the most recent posts: How Long Can Buck and Romanoff Keep the Lights On?, That Wasn't So Hard, Was It? and this story.  If it weren't for ColoradoPols' guest editors (great idea by the way), I wonder if the post on Polling Numbers for Bennet and Romanoff would have made it on the front page?  I know this is just a week in ColoradoPols lengthy history (at least by Internet standards).

No doubt Romanoff is between a rock and a hard place since Obama endorsed Bennet right away.  I'm not sure he has any other choice than to challenge Obama to some degree, if Romanoff is really "in it to win."  ColoradoPols was dead on when they observed that the cheap seats to the Obama/Bennet Rally will boost Bennet's small donor numbers, and in my opinion this was a brilliant move if done deliberately (and it almost certainly was).  When you see the game being manipulated, you have to point it out and hope people pay attention and I think this is what Romanoff is trying to do.  Whether or not it will work is a different story.

[ Parent ]
I'm the one that front paged it and I'm an open Bennet supporter.
:)

--From a "real dick."
by: JO
[ Parent ]
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.
Bennet Pols. That is funny.  

"Hehehehehe. Blow me. Clarify that."   by: 2010 Front Page Editor, Colorado Pols, Middle of the Road @ Thu Feb 11, 2010 at 20:10:07 PM MST
[ Parent ]
So you're conclusion is that
a) Romanoff is a liar, only attempting to stir up bad feelings in the Party, and

b) Romanoff doesn't really want the President to do anything for the Party and

c) Romanoff is an idiot.

I don't agree.

[ Parent ]
Obama can endorse who he wants.
It was foolish of Obama to do so.  But, he did.

But, the Colorado Democratic Party is grossly inappropriate in taking sides in a primary between two Colorado Democrats, even when the President himself picks sides.  The state party is supposed to be an honest broker that treats all primary candidates equally, and is the body that runs the process.

The state party has created the impression that it has endorsed Bennet in this race, in connection with its publicity for the Obama event, and that is inappropriate.  

The State party will benefit
from a visit by the President no matter who wins the primary.

When I use lots of words, they always form an analysis (and, while producing high volume, also produce high information-density).
--Steve Harvey, 2009
[ Parent ]
Exactly. Considering Romanoff should know the inner workings
of state party politics, after being in the inner circle for 8 years.

Yet he is behaving as though he is suddenly and remarkably clueless about the machinations. Which is very odd since the CO Coordinated Campaign is designed to help down ticket races such as state House and state Senate races.

Here you go, Andrew. Let me help you out.

We have a received some questions about President Obama's event in Denver and why the Colorado Democratic Party is listed in the paid for line.

Certain people who are attending this event are making donations to the Colorado Coordinated Campaign which is operated though the Colorado Democratic Party. In order for us to accept those contributions, the FEC requires that we are listed on the paid for line. The State Party is
not involved in any part of the event, organizing or otherwise. We are only
listed for legal reasons.

From Jennie Peek-Dunstone, Executive Director of the CDP.

--From a "real dick."
by: JO

[ Parent ]
Pretty dubious.
(And FWIW, not the first doubtful call from the CDP on election law issues).

The legal reason that the FEC requires a "paid for" line is so that sponsors know who the message is paid for (truth in advertising and all that).  You're in, or you're not.

The "we're in on a legal technicality", but really we're not in, waffle is not convincing.

There are all sorts of things people do solely for "legal reasons."  They register their cars, file deeds in with the clerk and recorder, make campaign finance filings with the FEC and/or Secretary of State, refrain from making defamatory statements about people, comply with building codes, honor copyrights, etc.  Generally speaking, "legal reasons" are there for a reason.

[ Parent ]
Hahahaha.
Ah, good one. What's the matter, Andrew? With John getting fired, you all have nowhere to turn for this week's talking points?

--From a "real dick."
by: JO
[ Parent ]
I have no idea what you are talking about.

[ Parent ]
Uh huh.
:)

--From a "real dick."
by: JO
[ Parent ]
Help me out here Dan
Are you saying that the State party should tell the President of the US to go fuck himself because he supports a different candidate than you do?

When I use lots of words, they always form an analysis (and, while producing high volume, also produce high information-density).
--Steve Harvey, 2009
[ Parent ]
Did you see these on HuffPo?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...


I believe today more than ever, US Senator Michael Bennet should be retained in office.  Here's why: http://www.coloradopols.com/di...

wait a second
I think Romanoff's statement was meant to ask that the Colorado Democratic Party withdraw its participation (through Colorado Victory 2010) in the events with the President.  I'm sure Andy's not thrilled that the President is stumping for Senator Bennet in Colorado but its no secret that the President has endorsed Senator Bennet.  I think the issue here might be a little more nuanced than you're implying....and that he's upset that the CDP is involved instead.
Yes.
If Romanoff were really picking a fight with Obama, the letter would have been addressed to Obama himself, not to Pat Waak.
[ Parent ]
How do you spell whiny?
They take a week to come up with this whiny response?

Andrew is that all Pat Caddell, Joe Trippi and Celinda Lake could come up with?

I am Neutral
But I am discomforted by the CDP taking sides, or appearing to take sides, in a primary.

I remember this from Miles v. Salazar and it left a bad taste in a lot of people's mouths.

 

Danny the Red That is a very good point

[ Parent ]
""Many of my supporters ..."
 
Why didn't Romanoff just come right out and say he supported Obama in 08 and has remained a staunch supporter of the President and his agenda?

Oh, yeah, ....

And it appears to me that  participating in the President's events supports the DSCC, you know, those  guys who pledge to support the nominee no matter who it is.

Except AR has already rejected their potential support, saying he didn't want outsider support and  called them something like an "incumbent protection racquet."   Clearly, AR is not listening to me (fork, please) but what all Colorado D's would have preferred to hear him say is of course the DSCC support and any support will be welcome in the general.  And for those supporting him - former Obama supporters and all - I would have though they would have wanted to hear him talk confidently about how when he was the nominee he could evaluate the DSCC support then.   I don't know- something, anything that indicates he wants to keep the seat D beyond he really really wants the the gig.


more popular than andrew....really ?
I'd put Andrew's approval rating up against the President's falling rating any day
There is no point whatsoever...
discussing the Romanoff-Bennet contest on a site that has over and over and over, without exception, shown itself to be BennetPols.com.

IF I thought it was worthwhile, I could point to the intentional manipulation, on at least one occasion, to place a ColoradoPols posting on top of a much later anti-Bennet posting--out of reverse chronological order--after the latter had been promoted to the Front Page, presumably in order to assure that readers would read ColoradoPols slavish Bennet support comment first.

ColoradoPols and the dozen or so kaffeeklatch participants who dominate the site are free to do whatever they wish with their editorial powers over the software; but they aren't free to also claim that this is even remotely an objective, non-partisan forum for political discussion of the Senate race.

Anyway, there's no point in doing so: the late night comedian slots are all filled.

I'm kind of sick of you.
Bennet Scramble to Show Democratic Bonafides Too Little, Too Late by - Colorado Pols

Bennet Primary Moves Closer by - Colorado Pols

Michael Bennet's Problem, In a Nutshell by - Colorado Pols

Schumer Heart Bennet--Who The Hell Cares? by - Colorado Pols

What the Hell?!? by - Colorado Pols

Can you please explain to me how these Bennet-critical posts comport with your paranoid conspiracy theories? Isn't it possible that the Pols are, just like they say, calling it how they see it?

[ Parent ]
"Over and over and over, without exception, shown itself to be BennetPols.com"
Except for all of those.

JO, this is why people don't take you seriously.

[ Parent ]
It would be more accurate to say
Over and over and over, with a few exceptions -- most of them in the early days of Bennet's tenure -- has  shown itself to be BennetPols.com

Happy now, Bennetistas?

[ Parent ]
Yes, PumaOFF.
Aren't these little nicknames fun and incredibly childish? :)

--From a "real dick."
by: JO
[ Parent ]
You left out the "n"
in Pumanoff
[ Parent ]
Ah, I see.
It's my first time slinging it around--yes, you're right. That makes it so much better. Or not. I wonder who thinks these nicknames up. Somebody with an unhealthy amount of time on his hands.  

--From a "real dick."
by: JO
[ Parent ]
I kind of like " Pumanoff"
though, strictly speaking, the Puma acronym applies to someone who refuses to get behind the party nominee after that nominee is chosen -- not to those who merely wish to exercise a voice in the selection of that nominee, a group in which I include myself.

 As to Bennetista, I don't regard it as pejorative, merely descriptive of those who support Bennet.  

[ Parent ]
I find them both sort of childish and idiotic. n/t


--From a "real dick."
by: JO
[ Parent ]
You say the sweetest things;-)

[ Parent ]
Here you go JeffcoBlue, I'm kind of sick of you with your denial of reality and all.
People like you will ensure we lose the Senate seat.

I wrote a Diary awhile back and compiled this list of articles that were front paged. Most are either in favor of Bennet or bashing Romanoff.

Head, Meet Brick Wall. Commence Banging (+)
by: Colorado Pols
Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 13:59:28 PM MST - Unfavorable to Romanoff

Who's Driving the Romanoff Train? (+)
by: Colorado Pols Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 13:44:15 PM MST - Unfavorable to Romanoff

Bennet makes the CNN political ticker (+)
by: DavidThi808
Sun Nov 22, 2009 at 09:20:39 AM MST - Favorable to Bennet

More Weirdness from Romanoff Campaign (+)
by: Colorado Pols
Mon Nov 16, 2009 at 10:11:04 AM MST - Unfavorable to Romanoff

Sen. Bennet in the AM760 Progressive Dojo This Morning (+)
by: davidsirota
Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 10:50:26 AM MST
( - promoted by Colorado Pols) - Favorable to Bennet

Romanoff Pushes On, Still Sans Message (+)
by: Colorado Pols
Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 15:49:00 PM MST - Unfavorable to Romanoff

Adopt a Senator for Climate:CO Sen-Michael Bennet (+)
by: wade norris
Fri Oct 30, 2009 at 14:54:13 PM MDT - Favorable to Bennet
We Love Bennet v. Romanoff Rumble Threads (+)
by: Colorado Pols
Thu Oct 29, 2009 at 10:12:20 AM MDT - Neutral

New Bennet v. Romanoff Flamebait Thread (+)
by: Colorado Pols
Tue Oct 27, 2009 at 10:54:44 AM MDT - Neutral  

"Hehehehehe. Blow me. Clarify that."   by: 2010 Front Page Editor, Colorado Pols, Middle of the Road @ Thu Feb 11, 2010 at 20:10:07 PM MST

[ Parent ]
What if
the facts of the campaigns were such that just front paging the best and most substantive  diaries resulted a preponderance of Bennet favorable diaries?

I'm not saying that's what has happened- but what if?

You see a preponderance of Bennet favorable or Romanoff critical and conclude it's because Colorado Pols is in the tank for Bennet.  

CoPols links to bunch of not favorable Bennet posts- you dismiss them.
Others post here and write in the DenPost and other MSM or  anywhere else essentially agreeing with CoPols - and you dismiss them.

So what if? You would just see whatever you want to see, and see it anyway you want, any other views and even the facts, be damned.

[ Parent ]
Good Point
The number of negative AR front page posts vs Bennet's positive front page posts is symbolic of how each respective campaign have been conducted. The fact of the matter is that AR has run a pretty lousy campaign and the posts reflect that. If you don't believe that, you are letting your emotions get in the way.

"Maybe Sarah Palin would be smarter if she had bigger hands." --Jimmy Kimmel  
[ Parent ]
JO, maybe you have a point.
If you don't want to discuss Bennet vs. Romanoff here, there are many of us who would be completely behind that idea.

You can start now.

When I use lots of words, they always form an analysis (and, while producing high volume, also produce high information-density).
--Steve Harvey, 2009

[ Parent ]
Andrew was a Hillary Supporter

I believe something is missing...
There is nothing wrong with Pols starting this thread but it is a little misleading.  
Channel 7 News actually has a little more of what the letter said:

"Romanoff proposed that an additional event be scheduled for people to show support for Obama, "regardless of their choice in the U.S. Senate race" and that all proceeds go to the Democratic party.
"I am not asking that any of the money raised go to my campaign," Romanoff wrote"

What is wrong with a joint event?  Is the Colorado Democratic Party and the White House too concerned Andrew Romanoff is going to outshine Sen. Bennet?  (I have seen the both Romanoff and Bennet speak at the same event and personally I believe there may be cause for concern)

Obama...
Does not need to accomodate a minor candidate if he does not choose to. Most people, here and in Washington, taking the long view of this race regard him as a self absorbed attention seeker, not a serious candidate.

As much as you would like to refight the Miles/Salazar battle, Obama is focused on this Senate seat remaining Democratic in January of 2011. If the greater good was more important than personal desire, none of this would be an issue.

[ Parent ]
Calling Romnaoff a minor candidate is cold JeffcoBlue. Cold

[ Parent ]
Yeah well
I would have gotten decked at the 2004 caucus if I had called Miles a minor candidate.

Would anyone disagree today?

[ Parent ]
Mike Who?

[ Parent ]
We are living in tough times now. Nothing is the like it was before.
Mike Miles may or may not have been before his time but now we have an incumbency problem because the Democrats don't have the political will to push through legislation that most Americans want and America desperately needs to remain competitive globally.  

So the Democrats will get trashed at the polls in November. Another of the many problems Michael Bennet has is he takes lots of money from special interests namely Wall Street and banks and he voted no on the cram-down. On top of that he said he would stand with the Republicans to block banking reform legislation.  

If you think he is going to get elected after all of these negatives you are, with all due respect, out of your mind.

"Hehehehehe. Blow me. Clarify that."   by: 2010 Front Page Editor, Colorado Pols, Middle of the Road @ Thu Feb 11, 2010 at 20:10:07 PM MST

[ Parent ]
Really?
he said he would stand with the Republicans to block banking reform legislation.  

Link?

[ Parent ]
blah blah blah
MUS blah blah more MUS and therefore hoo-ha blah yada.

I know you are but what am I?

[ Parent ]
We're still debating the Mike Miles primary of 6 years ago?
Seriously?

Just when do all these jilted Dems stop behaving like ex-girlfriends and move on?

I believe today more than ever, US Senator Michael Bennet should be retained in office.  Here's why: http://www.coloradopols.com/di...

[ Parent ]
You joined just for this?

What exactly is your role in the AR campaign?
[ Parent ]
Typical response from someone who can't respond
Convince me I am wrong
 
[ Parent ]
Nothing's going to convince you
However, you signed up for the first time less than a week ago and you're already spouting the campaign talking points.  Many people here look at someone's first few posts to understand what's motivating them.

When I use lots of words, they always form an analysis (and, while producing high volume, also produce high information-density).
--Steve Harvey, 2009
[ Parent ]
Wrong about what?
I'm sure you're wrong about a lot of things.

You believe something is missing: no argument here.
Fine thread but there was more to the quote - no argument here.
Two rhetorical questions - no argument here.

What is wrong with a joint event?  Is the Colorado Democratic Party and the White House too concerned Andrew Romanoff is going to outshine Sen. Bennet?  (I have seen the both Romanoff and Bennet speak at the same event and personally I believe there may be cause for concern)

Paranthetical comment about there may be cause for concern because AR can deliver a better speech.  I disagree but because it's such a subjective perception, there is no "right or wrong". You see one thing, I see something else.

I push back that you joined to post such a trivial comment - constructed as  a gentle reproach of CoPols's approach to the subject at hand (Romanoff picking a fight with Obama) and mix in some half baked implication and innuendo. The hbi that because something was left out of the original quote, the Bennet campaign must be afraid of a joint appearance with AR. And the innuendo that because you've seen them both speak there "may be  cause for concern."  

Here's where you are wrong: you think this was a worthwhile post that added to the discussion in a  moderate and balanced way. It was trivial with nothing to say, and no facts to back up the implication that AR s the stronger candidate.  (Yes I'm overreacting in my reply- mostly because it's exactly this kind of nonsense that passing for political analysis that leads to losing D seats for no good reason and because all of a sudden I feel a surge of AR supporters.)  

[ Parent ]
Well, I can speak...
only for myself as a die hard Democratic voter who is more than a bit irritated at President Obama (where's the leadership?).  

I've been supportive of Senator Bennet, but frankly, given Romanoff's recent propensity to stick his finger in the eye of the Democratic establishment (most especially, President Obama), I'm inclined to give the man a chance to earn my support at the caucus and possibly the primary.

"But when I see a 9-11 victim family on television, or whatever, I'm just like, 'Oh, shut up!' I'm so sick of them because they're always complaining."  Glenn Beck  

You and Patrick Caddell


Michael Bennet had me at "Obama"
[ Parent ]
Yeah, because
what makes primareis good and what we surely need is more finger poking in the eye.

See if more D's  would just beat the crap out of the President and move further and further left of the electorate then somehow it will all be better. ...pfffft

[ Parent ]
No Madco
We need more inertia in the Senate, more political unwillingness to do anything and more Senators bought and paid for by special interests and we need to appease the Republicans above all else.  The good Senators in Washington need more senatorial rules they can hide behind so if legislation can't get passed by 60 votes (never through reconciliation) they can blame the obstructionists who they have teamed up with like Joe Lieberman and the Republicans.  

And we don't need an outsourcing plan, an educational investment plan or healthcare and banking reform that actually helps the citizens and not the insurance companies and banks. And we definitely need another life negating financially ruinous war that will ensure us a place at the bottom of all developed countries.  Yes I can hardly wait until the November elections whilst we have nothing to show for our efforts. It's going to be a memorable election year.  

"Hehehehehe. Blow me. Clarify that."   by: 2010 Front Page Editor, Colorado Pols, Middle of the Road @ Thu Feb 11, 2010 at 20:10:07 PM MST

[ Parent ]
People voted for change....
in '08 and not a whole lot has changed.  Democrats, including and most especially Obama, have not shown that they are willing to fight for anything.  Our leaders seem to afraid that they are going to piss someone off.

Reagan was far more to the right on issues than was the electorate, but the electorate respected him for staking out a position and then following through on it.  So ultimately I'm not convinced it is a right-left thing that concerns voters.  It is a willingness to lead and that is what we Democrats seem to suffer a deficit of....and fairly or not, it stems from the top...and that is Obama.

"But when I see a 9-11 victim family on television, or whatever, I'm just like, 'Oh, shut up!' I'm so sick of them because they're always complaining."  Glenn Beck  

[ Parent ]
What a crock
Actually a lot has been accomplished in 09 especially considering the economic crisis that  Obama and company had to confront.

I would argue that the left/right has made it difficult for the center to get things done. Let's be realistic here, Colorado is a independent leaning state, if AR goes to the left of Bennet which is what many here have suggested, he will have no chance at winning in Nov. If that happens, i'd like to reengage in this conversation about what the definition of "change" means.

"Maybe Sarah Palin would be smarter if she had bigger hands." --Jimmy Kimmel  

[ Parent ]
I'm not going to try and argue that point
except to direct you to one source and make one observation.

Source:
http://www.politifact.com/trut...

Anyone who thinks nothing has change is....just not paying attention. If we had elected McCain we'd be in a shooting war with Iran by now. The Bush tax cts would have become permanent. And on and on

What you are really saying is that change is not happening fast enough for your preference. Fine. But Obama never campaigned on changing everything the Day 1. Or even year 1. He said over and over and over that electing him was the beginning, not the end.

[ Parent ]
When the President....
gives an interview and says he has no problem with multi-million dollar bonuses being given to executive of companies that, were it not for taxpayer dollars, would be bankrupt...not enough has changed.

There is a strong argument to make that at this point, it is apparent that Obama is going to get a "finger in the eye" during the election season this year.  It can either come at the hand of democratic primary challengers who are "outsiders" or from Republican general election challengers.  Personally, I'd prefer it come from democratic challengers...

"But when I see a 9-11 victim family on television, or whatever, I'm just like, 'Oh, shut up!' I'm so sick of them because they're always complaining."  Glenn Beck  

[ Parent ]
Hardly credible
Speaker Romanoff endorsed the President only after the nomination was secured. He's engaged a Democrat that participates on fox news that frequently attacks the President. David Sirota, a Romanoff supporter, has made it perfectly clear that he dislikes the President's chief of staff and the President's performance this last year.

Meanwhile, Speaker Romanoff puts out videos suuggesting that other politicians are "bought" by pac money. He should name names of people he believes have been "bought"  in the Colorado delegation and the Colorado state house.

The only reason he objects to the fundraiser  is because the President is popular and endorsed Sen.Bennet. i.e. The Speaker cannot compete monetarily. This is not new. Perhaps if he had not shown indecision and announced his candidacy last March wwhen he paid 27k for a poll, then the situation would be different.

Every President has the right to express his preferences and raise money for that preference.

One of Mr. Romanoff's staff has  had their spouse say flat that they never supported the President in my presence.

His complaint has no basis, just as his credibility for "bought" politicians has no basis unless he returns all the PAC money that he ever took while serving the people of Colorado.  

How about a 5 trillion tax cut for the upper 1% that's borrowed from China  and then invested in China? The Republican platform has legs.

As a Miles supporter,
but not a Romanoff supporter (tho I might have been if he'd had his act together a year ago), I'm forced to note that Miles had a much more credible resume/expertise. He'd have brought national and international experience to the U.S. Senate that Romanoff has none of.

Mike graduated from West Point, served in the Army's elite Ranger Battalion . After the Army, he studied Slavic languages at  Berkeley and the University of Leningrad in Russia. Then pursued advanced study of Soviet affairs and public policy at Columbia University after being selected as a Mellon Fellow in the Humanities and winning a National Science Foundation Graduate Scholarship.  He joined the U.S. State Department, handled a portfolio usually reserved for more senior officials at the Soviet Desk, making policy recommendations and writing talking points for the Secretary of State regarding German reunification, chemical weapons, NATO and other issues.

As a diplomat in Warsaw, Miles tracked Poland's evolving relations with Russia and the countries of Eastern Europe. He analyzed the strength of the post-Communist Party, correctly predicting its return to political power in 1992. Then, as Special Assistant to the U.S. Ambassador to Russia, Miles helped coordinate the Embassy's response to critical events during a time when Russia's relations with the U.S. in a post-Cold War world were as yet undefined. He received the State Department's Meritorious Service Medal in 1994. Came back to CO and has done much in eduction and community service since.

If you want to compare Romanoff and Bennet resumes, check it out
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M...

You what always amazed me about Mike Miles?

He never understood why he wasn't electable.
Great, really great,  in every measurable way but that one.
[ Parent ]
Wasn't my point,
not trying to make him electable after the fact.  Just sayin', he brought a lot to the table and started running early and hard.  Hate to see him dissed.    
[ Parent ]
Agree.
And I understood your well said point- I was making a new one.
[ Parent ]
MADCO
Will always try to obfuscate any issue he can. Perhaps he's narcissistic; perhaps his personality.

I liked Mike Miles as well. What is he up to these days?

"Hehehehehe. Blow me. Clarify that."   by: 2010 Front Page Editor, Colorado Pols, Middle of the Road @ Thu Feb 11, 2010 at 20:10:07 PM MST

[ Parent ]
I know you are but what am I.

[ Parent ]
Thanks, madco
The word missing from your subject line, and something about the structure of your comment threw me.  After I read it the fourth time, I got it :-}  But that was after I'd posted.
[ Parent ]
cold weather brain works not
as well or thing some
[ Parent ]
I haven't a clue what you are implying, but I have my theories...
I worked hard for MM, and still think he would have been a better senator.  At least he wouldn't have introduced Alberto "Torquemada" Gonzales for confirmation.

Anyway, Mike did not win the primary because the state party didn't want him to win. He didn't play their game so they weren't going to help.  The day Salazar announced his bid, the party gave him $34,000.  

The second reason, and I mean this objectively, is that Mike isn't very attractive.  Would Lincoln win a race today?  I was at the county convention that year.  Mike's speech was stirring and well received.  But here comes Ken with his western suit and cowboy hat and despite a less stirring speech, won the primary.  

Would Mike have prevailed in the general election?  I doubt it.

"Collective fear stimulates herd instinct and tends to produce ferocity toward those who are not regarded as members of the herd." -Bertrand Russell

[ Parent ]
I'm not implying anything.

I think MM is and was brilliant.

"Eletctability" is a strange and hard to measure factor.
And either direciton  ( + or - ) sometimes it's obvious, sometimes it's impossible and sometimes it's surprising.

I mean no disrespect of Miles.

[ Parent ]
Thanks, Rainidog
I was a Miles supporter, too.  I appreciate these facts.  I was also a Romanoff supporter for most of the last decade.  I am not pleased with what I have seen this past year. He should have jumped in earlier. He should have bowed out by now. He is destroying the CO Democratic party with the childish behavior of his campaign. I expected more from him.

JMHO.

I believe today more than ever, US Senator Michael Bennet should be retained in office.  Here's why: http://www.coloradopols.com/di...

[ Parent ]
Guess we can't blame it
on madco's "cold weather brain" (oh, boy, do I know about that!), since it was still warm weather when Romanoff began his late and limp campaign.  And it seems he's had no control over it every since.  Flail, is the word that comes to mind.
[ Parent ]
He's reckless
Implying that everyone that takes pac money is a crook (except him of course), makes him not only a hypocrite but a man with a messianic complex that violates the Mitzvah of do not bear false witness.

If he has specific knolwedge of politicians being bought then he must inform on them
If he doesn't have specific knowledge, then he should retract and  shut up.

Engaging  a fox news rovian tactic advisor shows how low he will go.

 

How about a 5 trillion tax cut for the upper 1% that's borrowed from China  and then invested in China? The Republican platform has legs.

[ Parent ]
but I am also sure that he isn't impressed with you either
Why should he be pro sharon?

How about a 5 trillion tax cut for the upper 1% that's borrowed from China  and then invested in China? The Republican platform has legs.
Romanoff Picks Fight With President Obama | 110 comments
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?



Advertise Here!
ads@coloradopols.com

Active Users
Currently 28 user(s) logged on.

Search




Advanced Search

Colorado Pols Network




















Stay home if you have flu symptoms. Visit www.cdc.gov/h1n1 for more information.


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



Relevant Links

Back Roads to the White House

The Big Media Blog

Blog It Right

Blog For Growth

Blogometer

Colorado Capitol Journal

Colorado Center on Law and Policy

Colorado Democratic Party

Colorado Ethics Watch

Colorado Independent

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

Colorado Young Democrats

Commentary Today

Coyote Gulch

CU Democrats

Curious Stranger

Daily Kos

Dan Willis-Rumors

Dem Notes

Democracy for Colorado

Denver Politics

Denver Post

East Boulder County Politics

Ed Stein Ink

Election Neutrality Now

George in Denver

Great Education Colorado

Head First Colorado

The Hotline Political Network

Left in the West

Liberal and Loving It

Maintain Educational Standards in Colorado

Mount Virtus

MyDD

National Journal

On Call

Peak Dems

Political Gravy

Politics West

Political State Report

Progress Now

Prometheus

Project Vote Smart

Radio Free Denver

Rocky Mountain News

Senate Guru

Slapstick Politics

State 38

Steam Powered Opinions

Square State

Stygius

TalkLeft

The Thicket

The Bell Policy Center

The Hypothetical Wren

ThomasMC.com

Toilet Paper Online

Ultimate Politics

View From a Height

Walter in Denver

Wash Park Prophet

Washington and the West

Western Democrat



 
Colorado Pols is wholly owned by www.ColoradoPols.com, LLC
webmaster-at-coloradopols.com
Powered by: SoapBlox