December 15, 2007 12:42 AM UTC

Is Polis Trying for Criticism?

•  
• by: Colorado Pols

Candidates generally get attacked for two reasons: 1) Their opponent is trying to proactively knock them down, and/or 2) Something they do backfires on them. Jared Polis has been frequently attacked by his opponents in the CD-2 Democratic Primary, but the vast majority of those attacks have been for reason #2. There is a cause and effect relationship in many of the criticisms aimed at the Polis campaign, and most of the time, his campaign is actually the cause.

Take today’s story in the Rocky Mountain News, for example. Polis was criticized in an article for investing in companies that make money from the War in Iraq. Was the criticism fair? Maybe, maybe not; but the key point here is that the criticism came because of the TV ad that Polis ran. If there is no ad that is critical of these companies, there is no negative newspaper article.

There are plenty more examples of this. Polis took shots in the media for the way in which he portrayed his recent trip to Iraq. Were the shots fair? Maybe, maybe not; but the reason he was attacked was because his campaign appeared to have lied about his trip being a United Way trip. His campaign led with its chin in calling the trip a United Way thing, which is why he took shots from reporters later when it turned out to be untrue. When you lead with your chin, it’s not a coincidence when you get punched in the face.

All of this is starting to make us wonder if Polis isn’t trying to get criticized. This wouldn’t seem to make a lot of sense as a strategy, but then it doesn’t make a lot of sense the way they keep sticking their heads out to get whacked. Take a look at this otherwise inexplicable press release sent by the Polis campaign today:

NOT POLITICS AS USUAL: POLIS TAKES OPEN AND HONEST APPROACH TO HIS STANCE ON ISSUES

“Voters in CD2 deserve to know what a candidate stands for,” states Polis.

Boulder, CO – In yet another example of Polis’ commitment to running a serious, issue-based campaign, voters in the Second Congressional District wondering where Jared Polis stands on an issue need to look no further than his web site, www.polisforcongerss.com.

As of December 14, 2007, Joan Fitz-Gerald has not taken a stand on anything. This is also the same tactic that Republican Bob Schaffer is trying to use in his bid against Mark Udall.  In contrast to Polis’ straightforward approach, Fitz-Gerald’s lack of any sort of issue stance on her web site or even a mention of what kind of leadership the voters of the Second Congressional District can expect, is concerning.

In addition to Polis’ extensive writings on his recent trip to Iraq and his opposition to the war, he also provides voters with position statements on global climate change, health care, higher education, retirement security, immigration, ethics reform, ending poverty, jobs and the economy, human rights and equal rights.

“I don’t believe in politics as usual,” said Polis, “including when a candidate hides behind negative attacks in order to distract voters from their stance on the issues that really matter. That’s not the kind of leader I am nor is it the kind of campaign I will run.”

“Looking at Fitz-Gerald in this race, the way she runs her campaign, and where she chooses to expend her energy, it would appear that her only newsworthy statements involve issuing negative comments about positive events, such as Jared’s recent trip to Iraq. She is producing an empty shell of a campaign that appears to be Bob Schaffer-like,” added Polis’ campaign manager Wanda James.

Look again at the headline of this press release: “NOT POLITICS AS USUAL: POLIS TAKES OPEN AND HONEST APPROACH TO HIS STANCE ON ISSUES”

An honest approach? Like when Polis claimed that he has always opposed vouchers, when multiple newspapers have him on record as supporting vouchers? Or maybe like when the campaign said he was taking that trip to Iraq as part of the United Way.

Before we get the inevitable “Colorado Pols hates Jared Polis” attacks (which were curiously absent from this post), consider again the point we’re trying to make here: Why go out of your way to say that you are taking an honest approach to issues when you have been rightly criticized repeatedly for NOT taking an honest approach to issues? Why bring this up when it is almost certain that you will be criticized for doing the exact opposite? You’re not going to fool the media into the idea that you have really been honest about the issues when you’ve already been caught, repeatedly, for NOT being honest.

Like we said, the Polis campaign does this so often that we’re starting to wonder if it is really being done on purpose. Are they trying to make Polis appear sympathetic as the “victim” of political attacks? That wouldn’t seem like a great strategy, but there has got to be a reason that his campaign keeps doing this.