January 07, 2010 06:13 AM UTC

Questions, Answers (And Theories) From Ritter Announcement

•  
• by: Colorado Pols

(Bumped into Thursday for self-evident reasons – promoted by Colorado Pols)

After a wild 24 hours that saw more than 500 comments from Polsters in two separate posts, its time to take a look at the questions and answers from one of the more surprising political announcements in recent Colorado history.

Here’s what we know, what we’ve heard, and all of the questions both answered and unanswered surrounding Gov. Bill Ritter’s announcement today that he will not run for re-election in 2010.

WHY IS RITTER NOT RUNNING FOR RE-ELECTION?

Whenever a business executive, a sports figure or a politician says that they are stepping away from their job “in order to spend more time with their family,” people always question the real reason behind the decision. And in many cases, there is another reason aside from the standard rationale.

But in Ritter’s case, everything we’ve heard makes it sound like he really is retiring in order to devote more time to his family; there really may not be anything more to it. Remember, Ritter is not a lifelong politician — his 2006 campaign for Governor was his first real race for any office (we’re not counting his one re-election bid for Denver DA against Craig Silverman). Neither he nor his family were accustomed to the type of life they have led in the past three years, and it seems to have taken a toll on his family.

DID RITTER PULL OUT BECAUSE HE THOUGHT HE WOULD LOSE?

Republicans are strategically correct in trying to push the story that Ritter retired because he felt he would lose to Republican Scott McInnis, but it’s simply not true. While Ritter’s polling numbers may not have been great, it’s way too early for any politician to take polling results that seriously. Ritter’s fundraising was going well and he was working hard on the campaign trail.

To suggest that Ritter was afraid of McInnis — a flawed candidate in his own right — is silly. In fact, no Democrats are overly worried about McInnis in 2010; the three strongest Dems in Colorado are ready to run for Governor right now (more on that in a moment). If McInnis was such a concern, most Democrats would be hemming and hawing about a run like they were in 2005 — when then-Rep. Bob Beauprez was thought to be a very tough opponent. Democrats are not afraid of McInnis in the least, and neither was Ritter.

WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR REPUBLICANS?

Republicans are sticking to their message that Ritter is retiring because he couldn’t win in 2010, and again, that’s the right public spin to put on this. But privately, Republican strategists are very concerned.

McInnis’ entire campaign strategy was based on telling voters that Ritter had screwed up the state and thus Colorado needed a new leader; that strategy is now worthless. Polling nationwide has shown that voters are displeased with incumbents in either Party, which was the biggest advantage McInnis had; that advantage is now gone. And compared with other potential Democratic candidates, Ritter was definitely the preferred opponent for Republicans. Not only was Ritter weakened by being an incumbent faced with implementing unpopular budget and service cuts, but he’s never been the most charismatic of Dems nor a top fundraiser, and the Democratic base had been less than pleased with him lately.

All in all, this was not a good day for Republicans in Colorado, and it’s about to get worse because…

THE DEMOCRATIC FIELD IS STRONG

Here’s how the potential field for Governor breaks down:

1. Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar

2. Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper

3. CD-7 Rep. Ed Perlmutter

From everything we’ve heard, there will only be one Democrat, and it will be decided in this order. If Salazar says yes, and by all indications he will, then he’s the guy. If not, then Hickenlooper has the next right of first refusal. If for some reason both Salazar and Hick decide against a run — a highly unlikely scenario — then Perlmutter will almost certainly run for Governor.

Any of these three candidates are stronger than McInnis. All three are proven fundraisers with good name ID in the Denver Metro area — where most of Colorado’s voters reside. And none of them have any connections to Colorado’s budget crisis, which makes them nearly impossible to attack over what they did or didn’t do to harm the state financially.

But the Democratic nominee will most likely be Salazar, who presents a whole set of problems for McInnis and the GOP in Colorado in general. Not only does Salazar have fantastic name ID and fundraising contacts, but he’s one of just a few Democrats in Colorado who could really turn out Hispanic voters in large numbers. If Democratic voter turnout is depressed in 2010, which many pundits have predicted, a large turnout by Hispanic voters to vote for the state’s first Hispanic Governor could more than make up the difference. And that increased turnout will trickle down to help Democrats across the state, which is not something that Ritter could have provided.

When all is said and done, Ritter’s surprise retirement will likely turn out to be a significant benefit for Democrats in Colorado. Democrats don’t have to run an incumbent at the top of the ticket in a year where voters are mad at incumbents, and his replacement could turn out huge numbers of voters by himself. Republicans actually had a better chance of taking back the Governor’s mansion on Monday than they do today.