Bennet, Romanoff Burying the Ol’ Hatchet?

Burying hatchet and/or digging to China

Burying hatchet and/or digging to China

Most Pols readers will not soon forget the odd, long, bruising, and odd battle between Andrew Romanoff and Sen. Michael Bennet in the 2010 Democratic primary for U.S. Senate. The weirdness began in early 2009 with Gov. Bill Ritter's out-of-left-field appointment of Bennet to fill the seat vacated by Ken Salazar, who accepted President Obama's nomination for Secretary of the Interior. Democrats weren't particularly excited about Bennet's appointment, largely because he was unknown outside of Denver. There was also a good deal of lingering resentment that Romanoff did not get the nod from Ritter.

Inexplicably, Romanoff then waited until August to finally jump into the Primary, giving Bennet lots of time to raise money and convince Colorado Democrats that he was the right man for the job. Romanoff raised just enough money to be a pain in the ass for Bennet, but not nearly enough to overcome Bennet's huge head start (not to mention his connections to President Obama). Bennet overcame some last-minute negative ads from Romanoff and ended up with an 8-point victory before going on to defeat Republican Ken Buck in the General Election. Romanoff, Bennet, and many of their respective supporters carried some obvious lingering resentment well past Election Day. 

Today that hatchet was symbolically buried with an email announcement from Romanoff's campaign for Congress in CD-6:

Now I have even more good news to report: I’ve earned the endorsement of Sen. Michael Bennet. Here’s what he said:

"Andrew Romanoff has a long record of fighting for Coloradans and a commitment to empowering our next generation with greater opportunity.  Andrew has always placed the needs of his constituents above Washington’s politics-as-usual.  At a time of partisanship and gridlock, he will work across the aisle to move our nation forward.  I am proud to endorse Andrew today and look forward to helping elect him."

I am very grateful for Sen. Bennet’s support, and I’m eager to work with him to break the logjam in Washington.

Our campaign is growing stronger every day. More than 1,000 Coloradans have joined our team in the last four weeks alone. I’m honored to count Michael Bennet among them.

Well now, doesn't that give you the warm fuzzies?

16 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. Theo says:

    Very nice of Senator Bennet.

    It's hard to forget the Andrew of that campaign.

  2. Gray in Mountains says:

    I also recall that a day or 2 after the election when AR had a party to raise $ to retire his debt Bennet's wife went and gave him a check

  3. Liberty OccupiedLiberty Occupied says:

    It makes me sick.  I'll never support Bennet.  I hope he faces a primary again.  This time Coloradans will not be fooled.  Bennet should resign.

  4. GalapagoLarryGalapagoLarry says:

    Actually, it does give me the warm fuzzies. Now if only the Romanoff supporters and we Bennet supporters can also bury the hatchet, CD-6 should go Dem this time around and many cycles into the future. Things are looking bright.

    • BlueCatBlueCat says:

      I'd feel warmer and fuzzier if Romanoff  wasn't sticking with his no PAC pledge for a race like this. Coffman will get tons of money to keep the seat. It's one of the only ones that could turn from R to D. It could be part of a wave to take back the House.  We CD6 Dems finally have a real shot for the first time and Romanoff is more interested in parading his purity than in winning the damn thing. And this from the guy who was happy to hire on super sleaze Pat Caddell in 2010 until word got out and everybody had a cow.

      I answered a campaign begging e-mail with my concerns and got a reply from Ken Gordon about how they're sticking with their high minded principles. Great. If anyone can lose this seat for us in 2014 for sure, it's Ken Gordon.  The pity is, Romanoff could win this thing with the new improved district, all the money he'd be getting without his precious purity pledge and without the exasperating Gordon in a campaign leadership position.  

      Romanoff sure wasn't anti-PAC when he was winning us a majority in the State legislature. Au contraire.  As a CD6er, I'm really, really not a happy camper right now.  For a while there I thought I was going to have a Dem US Rep. With their most recent track records, Ken and Andrew strike me as the blind the leading the blind.

      • GalapagoLarryGalapagoLarry says:

        Totally  with you on the campaign funding, BC. But still hopeful Dems can unite behind him. After the Bennet/Romanoff house burner, that'll be a good part of the battle. Meanwhile, it's still early.

      • skeptical citizen says:

        This is my reply to the Romanoff campaign contribution e-mail just received 3/7/13. I have not received a reply back.

        I plan to become a donor once you drop your ideologic but unrealistic opposition to Super-PAC funding. Follow Obama's lead here.

      • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:

        If Romanoff can win without selling his soul to Wall St., that would be wonderful. I think your point is good, but I also think Romanoff makes a very good point on this. I'm quite happy to support him with his no PAC pledge.

        • BlueCatBlueCat says:

          First, if he doesn't have alternate huge funding, such as a billionaire or two in his corner, the universe of let's all get together with our private contributions crowd for a CD race like this isn't large enough to fund a fight for one of the seats that will be fought for on a national scale with the other side taking all the money it can get its hands on.

          Second, not all PACs are Wall Street. Plenty represent hard working citizens.

          Third, the combined track record of Romanoff and pal Gordon winning  anything other than a safe D small pond district is non-existent. And now they propose doing it with a huge self imposed handicap?  Not very encouraging. Especially the part wher Gordon has anything like a big role in it.

          Fourth, I think someone who so enthusiastically embraced PAcs while serving in elected office and building a state level majority and who was most recently not at all too fussy to hire Pat Caddell  is probably not so much pure as assuming purity for purposes of making a self righteous point, (who knows why. He can't think it gives him enough political advantage to be worth it since he doesn't have to differentiate himself from fellow centrist Bennet this time around) which I would prefer he do on his own dime, not mine.

          I too will vote for Romanoff against Coffman (duh) but don't have enough extra money or time these days to be taking big gambles with the one or wasting the other.  I would welcome a candidate who is more concerned about winning than with making a look at how noble and pure I am  statement.  Such a candidate would be a much better bet and those who aspire to pristine purity should choose another profession in any case.  Nobody will ever mistake any politician for a saint.

        • MADCO says:


          Oh, well if Romanoff has your support, what could possibly go wrong.


          You, dwyer and thousands of others – IT ONLY MATTERS IF YOU WIN.

          The number of losing campaigns that have had any significane at all could be counted on one hand – and no one can name them.

          Senator Warrren (MA) did it in an interesting way – she challeneged her opponent to forgoe PAC money and she would too. If (when) he didn't she would have to go along.

          Brava!  She gets to claim the high ground, acknowledge PAC money is a problem and still WIN.

          No one – not even you DT – can suggest Senator Warren has soldout to Wall St or corp America


          So when hge can prove he can win without PAC money – I'm in.  Until then- he's just another D in CD6.

          • BlueCatBlueCat says:

            Same goes for most of us who started out back in the day as ignorant   starry eyed idealist volunteers but have been around the block a few times since.  Politics isn't an old Judy Garland Mickey Rooney movie. In real life, then as now, putting on a show in the barn didn't keep good ol' uncle Ned (or whoever) from losing the farm and blowing his brains out.

  5. GalapagoLarryGalapagoLarry says:

    Photo caption: Burying hatchet and/or Hick drinks fracking fluid, moons citizens.

    • roccoprahn says:

      Good to read you Larry.

      Ok, CD6 goes blue. Do you realize that leaves only 17 more CD races for a Democratic House Majority?

      I'm hearing 5 currently red Districts are highly competitive nationally right now, and that doesn't count CD6. You go 6-6, we're down to 12 needed.

      FYI, to all interested, Jefferson County Democratic Second Saturday Breakfast this coming Saturday, 3/9, 8:00AM-10:00AM

      1655 Simms, Lakewood, Colorado..

  6. GalapagoLarryGalapagoLarry says:

    Thx, rocco. I took a little stand-back-and-watch R&R, very happy with the way you, Duke, BC, Ari and others were handling the dirty work. Meanwhile, not finding enough synonyms to toss at Repubs, I guess I'll have to fall back on the old reliable asshole, and start carrying my weight again.

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account

You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.