Buck Can’t Help But Screw Up One More Time

Why is this room so smoky?

Why is this room so smoky?

Republican Ken Buck has been a pretty bad candidate for the U.S. Senate up until this point, which is why he has agreed to drop out of the race and run for the now-open House seat in CD-4. But it would be so un-Buck like to just walk of the statewide stage without missing a step on the way down.

Buck told the Greeley Tribune this afternoon that he and Rep. Cory Gardner had been talking about making the switch for about 10 days. D'oh!!!

Why is that such a problem? Gardner was already going to have to defend charges that this was a "backroom deal" (see Owen Hill's comments), but he could have danced around the question if there was still some ambiguity. But now, thanks to Buck, there is no way that Gardner can pretend that this was anything but a "backroom deal?"


45 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. DawnPatrol says:

    At least that foot in Buck's mouth won't be wearing a "high heel"!

    As for Cory, what's one more lie/con job in a lifetime filled with them? He'll do his best to weasel around and out of it somehow.

  2. mamajama55mamajama55 says:

    "Switching deck chairs on the Titanic"….the phrase keeps coming to mind, but it was never a winning strategy.

  3. Andrew Carnegie says:

    Why the suggestion that Buck and Gardner having converstions about I am thinking of entering the race, if you do I may run for the seat that you walk away from, as being something that needs to be hidden?

    Most of the Republican candidates for Senate would be happy if a Republican wins.  Leave open the possibility that they do not plan on hiding the conversations, because there is nothing to hide.  

    Buck has said before he would endores any of the other Republican candidates who won and if it would be helpful to their winning he would endore Mark Udall.

    • OrangeFreeOrangeFree says:

      Democratic "backroom deals" bad, Republican "backroom deals" good. Roger that. 

      Nothing to see here folks, move along…move along…

    • JBJK16 says:

      What?!  It's a lie by omission to everyone who was considering atteding the R caucus to choose a Senate nominee.

      It makes the campaign to day 100% bs.

      It's a bs move – and aif you were not so blinded by partisan loyalty you'd agree.

    • nancycronknancycronk says:

      The average voter thinks (and would be correct) that all decisions for people to run for Congress are "backroom" to some extent. Rarely (with the exception of a few like Ed Perlmutter), do they actually see their neighbor making it to Congress. That's why so many sheeple loved Sarah Palin at first. No one in their right mind would have chosen her in DC.  

      When it comes down to voters, Cory Gardner's record of being anti-woman will be his demise. Watch.

  4. IndyNinjaIndyNinja says:

    "Buck has said before he would endores any of the other Republican candidates who won and if it would be helpful to their winning he would endore Mark Udall."


  5. VoyageurVoyageur says:

    Buck is such a weak candidate that CD-4 just might be winnable for a good D.   Any suggestions?

    • OrangeFreeOrangeFree says:

      CD-4 has a PVI R+11. Buck may be a weak candidate state wide, but not in a solid R district that includes his base in Weld County, the loonies that wanted to seceed in NW Colorado and DougCO. A Democrat winning here is a pipe dream.

      Can't waste money and manpower on pipe dreams when the Senate race just went from likely D hold to leaning D-hold/toss-up 

      • Andrew Carnegie says:

        Maybe Romanoff will move there?

        He seems to be the Dem roaming opportunist candidate.

        • OrangeFreeOrangeFree says:

          Yeah, moving to a neighboring city sure is the calling card of a roaming opportunist. Could you at least try to be a little clever with your chortling?

        • nancycronknancycronk says:

          Romanoff is loved statewide. He is the hometown hero all over the metro area. I think you're jealous, Mr. Carnegie.

          • Ralphie says:

            Romanoff is loved statewide?  Really?  No, Romanoff is TOLERATED statewide.  Even among many of his "supporters."

            • BlueCatBlueCat says:

              I'd say, in general, he is widely loved by most of  the caucus going base and now pretty happily tolerated by most of us who were really pissed off at him over his unfortunate hissy fit last time as a viable alternative to the execrable Coffman.  And as a DLC style true centrist, rather than the fantasy progressive champion his people tried to pawn him off as last time, he really is a good fit for the new pretty evenly mixed CD6. Let's hope his camp has the sense to drop most of the phony stuff they were pushing when the only way forward for him was to primary pretty much equally centrist Bennet on the left. 

              • Ralphie says:

                "Happily tolerated" I think is a far more accurate statement than "beloved statewide."

                • BlueCatBlueCat says:

                  But he is widely loved by much of the dedicated Dem base.  It really tore apart the active Dems in my HD. A battle royal ensued between those who (with justification) believed he was screwed out of the appointment in the first place in favor of a guy who was perceived as being the Obama camp fave, Romanoff having been a big HRC supporter, and those who felt that Bennet, as the appointed incumben,t had the electability/funding advantage (not to mention, yeah he was the Obama favorite) and their wasn't a dime's worth of difference between the two of them on policy.  People stopped talking to each other over it. 

                  But everyone I'm still in touch with in my HD who, like me, was on the Bennet side considers that water under the bridge now. As for the die hard Romanoff supporters, well they're obviously thrilled.  

                  There still may be some cold shoulders coming from that side when we all meet at Romanoff events. So many of them really hated Bennet in a way we never hated Romanoff.  Some of them may never forgive. 

        • Half Glass FullHalf Glass Full says:

          Your flop sweat is showing.

    • DaftPunkDaftPunk says:

      Michael Bowman

    • Vic Meyers for Congress says:

      I'm running.  I've been quietly building a grass-roots organization for almost a year.  I'm filed with the FEC.  I can defeat Ken Buck!  Check me out http://www.vicmeyers.org.

    • krauseeekrauseee says:

      Vic Meyers is the Only candidate for the job…visit his website: http://www.vicmeyers.org, Facebook: Vic Meyers for Congress, Twitter: Vic4CO4 & VICMEYERS4CO4

      • Duke CoxDuke Cox says:

        I notice Mr. Meyers has no statement in his "important issues" file on the subject of energy development. Is he trying to avoid the issue entirely or just a position his fellow Democrats won't like?

  6. Meiner49erMeiner49er says:

    Gotta agree V.  Not sure who, but someone should jump in and make the RCCC play hard for that seat now that it has a weak candidate to "buck" around with.

  7. Diogenesdemar says:

    Strategery . . . 

  8. ct says:

    Had to log in to say that I would almost be willing to move to the flatlands to do everything I had to to get Michael Boman elected.  I hope that  you consider it sir.  I will work extra hard to earn money to max out if you run.

  9. krauseeekrauseee says:

    Vic Meyers said,

    Cory Gardner wasn't representing the people of the 4th CD and won't be missed.  


    Vic Meyers entered this race because the people of the 4th CD were not being represented in Washington.  We need a representative that cares about the issues affecting the citizens of Colorado and not one who is only interested in promoting a political party.  That's why today's news doesn't change anything for the Vic Meyers for Congress campaign.  


    When told of today's news Vic said, "I'm not running against Cory Gardner or Ken Buck or anybody else.  I'm running for the people, all of the people regardless of party, in the 4th Congressional District.  This morning I was running on Protecting Social Security, Passing Immigration Reform, Infrastructure Investment, and Honoring our Veterans with deeds instead of rhetoric.  Tonight, I'm running on the same things, because these are the things that are important to the people of this district."

  10. BlueCatBlueCat says:

    Seriously now. Anybody know something out there? Who's name is being bandied about by the big dog Ds to run against Buck?

    • MichaelBowmanMichaelBowman says:

      I haven't heard boo, BC, but then I'm not on anyone's speed dial in that sphere.  I didn't make any public announcement about this, but I left the party in early January.  After a lot of contemplation it was something I had to do. 

      The decision was based primarly around one issue: the farmers and ranchers across Colorado (in particular southeastern Colorado) who have been ensnared (and many of them facing bankruptcy) over the long-running battles over conservation easements.  Struggling farmers and ranchers, who, playing by the rules, were thrown under the bus by "Denver".

      I could write a diary on this (and I probably will when I get some time) – but let's just say this: 1) this entire situation could have been resolved with an Executive Order by this Adminstration instructin the Colorado Dept of Revenue to treat the transactions in the same manner as the IRS.  2) this Administration has shown zero intersest in resolving said problem. 3) the monied interests (the tax credit purchasers and the Denver lawyers) have all gotten their fees and inured to the benefits of the program – the farmers and ranchers are left holding the bag.  4) I have made a handful of attempts to reach out to the state party to discuss ways in which we could have made ourselves more relevant in rural Colorado.  For the most part there didn't appear to be all that interested.  I get it.  It's called "arithmetic".  But it's as much of a folly for Denver-centric leaders to dismiss the rural vote as it is for the residents of Dumphuckistan to think there's is relevant.  It's nothing but false choices by both sides.  Neither of us are independent.  We're interdependent.  And I'm not giving Republicans any pats on the back here, either.  Brophy, as the senate representative of the district, has been as useless as teats on a boar hog on this issue.  Ditto for Gardner.

      All that said, I'm don't anticipate (nor seek) any interaction with either party.  For the time being I'm parked back in the party I was a member of for 32 years – but there is "no room in the Inn"  for Teddy Roosevelt Republicans in that world either.  For the time being I'll focus on things that can make a difference that don't require the sign-off of either party. 

      • BlueCatBlueCat says:

        Please come back. But I understand. If the Denver-centric Colorado Dems don't understand what a great asset you represent for them then they don't deserve you. Even if not as a candidate but just as someone with a name and rep and knowledge of the problems rural Colorado faces. Sure arithmetic says the votes are concentrated in Denver/Boulder and 'burbs but why just cede the rural votes? In potentially close statewide elections why not make a real effort?  The Salazar brothers were great rural Colorado assets in their day. Won us two very important seats in a very important election when things weren't going so well for us elsewhere. Sorry to hear you're no longer on our team though I know you won't be supporting any idiotologues.

      • DavieDavie says:

        Michael, I'm very disappointed to hear that.  The Democratic Party needs folks like you, precisely for the perspective, drive and knowledge you bring.

        I hope you one day come back when the time is right.  But I know you will continue to do valuable service for your community and the state at large.  It's just that if you had a larger megaphone, like serving as the CD-4 Rep, you'd be the boar hog, and not the teats 🙂

        • MichaelBowmanMichaelBowman says:

          Thanks, Davie 🙂  I'll still be working on all of the same things – and promise not to be a wallflower!  I mentioned in a previous post that I am going to be very involved in the local control ballot iniative that we want to get on the ballot this fall.  It's unfortunate that we have to spend our time on these battles when we have so many other things that need our attention as well – but that's the hand we've been dealt. 

      • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

        That's probably smart – focus on issues affecting people's lives, transcending party labels.  We could all improve public discourse by being issues-focused, instead of promoting the puppet show that is partisan politics.



    • Andrew Carnegie says:

      Vic Meyers.  

      The Dems wrote this district off when the did reapportionment after the 2010 census.

      A 10+ deficit is a rather steep hill to climb.

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.