U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Janak Joshi

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line
(D) Michael Bennet

(D) Phil Weiser

60%↑

50%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) Jena Griswold

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) David Seligman

50%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line
(D) J. Danielson (D) A. Gonzalez (R) Sheri Davis
50%↑ 40%↓ 30%
State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(D) Jeff Bridges

(R) Kevin Grantham

40%

40%

30%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(D) Milat Kiros

90%

10%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(R) H. Scheppelman

(D) Alex Kelloff

70%

30%

10%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Trisha Calvarese

(D) Eileen Laubacher

90%

20%

20%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Jessica Killin

70%

30%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Manny Rutinel

(D) Shannon Bird

45%↓

30%↓

30%

30%↑

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
November 05, 2009 02:25 AM UTC

Scozzafava's First Casualty: Jane Norton?

  • 64 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

Interesting press release just came across from the Colorado Democratic Party:

SENATE REPUBLICANS DROP SUPPORT FOR JANE NORTON

GOP Can’t Count on DC Money

DENVER – Speaking about the upcoming 2010 Senate elections, National Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee Chairman Senator John Cornyn pledged that the committee would not spend a cent in a contested Republican Senate primary, in an effort to “ease some of the anger being directed at the party establishment.”

“We will not spend money in a contested primary. There’s no incentive for us to weigh in. We have to look at our resources. . . . We’re not going to throw money into a [primary] race leading up to the election,” said Senator Cornyn.

“It’s obvious that the GOP is having not just identity problems but fundraising problems,” stated Colorado Democratic Party Chair Pat Waak. “When Norton got into this primary race she assumed she would have the backing of the GOP establishment – whether she asked for it or not. Looks like now she will have to rely on bake sales and car washes to get the funding she needs to compete.”

The comments from NRSC chairman Sen. John Cornyn come from an ABC story today, evaluating where Republicans stand after yesterday’s failed right-wing coup in New York:

With Republicans grappling with the fallout of an intra-party battle that may have cost them a House seat, the head of the Senate Republican campaign effort is making a pledge that may ease some of the anger being directed at the party establishment.

“We will not spend money in a contested primary,” Sen. John Cornyn, the chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, told ABC News in a telephone interview today.

“There’s no incentive for us to weigh in,” said Cornyn, R-Texas. “We have to look at our resources. . . . We’re not going to throw money into a [primary] race leading up to the election.”

…”The first lesson is that competitive primaries are generally a good thing,” Cornyn said. “To me, that’s the overarching lesson to be learned out of the 23rd. When 11 people get behind closed doors and pick the nominee … the grassroots are going to find an alternative.”

Frankly, we’re not sure we buy either Cornyn’s or Colorado Democratic Party chair Pat Waak’s spin here. There’s very little doubt that Norton was indeed promised the short track to the nomination, which enraged the GOP base in Colorado. There’s a pretty compelling argument today that the GOP leadership is badly misreading this core base of support–to be strongly considered lest they create many more Dede Scozzafavas.

But if Waak seriously believes Jane “The Puppet” Norton is going to be relying on bake sales to raise funds–or if anybody seriously believes that Cornyn can’t funnel support to Norton six ways from Sunday, with or without a formal “endorsement”–well, that’s just touchingly naive.

And honestly, after every hard-right luminary in America descended on NY-23 to get their favored candidate elected, and failed, would you tell Cornyn to do what they say?

Tweet
Share

Comments

64 thoughts on “Scozzafava’s First Casualty: Jane Norton?”

  1. …especially given Jane Norton’s track record of being associated with RINOs like John McCain and Bill Owens (not the Congressman-elect), as well as RINO causes liked Referendum C & D.

      Jane will face a fierce challenge from the base.  Tom Tancredo has already served notice that she is unacceptable to his people.

    2. is she is a woman in a party that hates women.  How can any hard beer drinking rabid Republican vote for someone who menstruates?

      And Republicans want women to trust their bodies to them.

      Perhaps the big lesson from 23 is that women politicians will wake up to the fact that they are always going to get screwed by the rabid right.  Norton should be seeing little red warning flags regarding her campaign.  There are going to be a lot of nut-jobs who won’t accept her candidacy no matter how right wing and rigid her politics.  So can we expect a rancorous insurgency in Colorado if she is the nominee?

        1. The daily election update on dKos notes that the Club For Growth (of the Democratic Majority) is gearing up to go after Crist.

          Crist, in turn, has apparently decided he’s in trouble – he stated on CNN that he never supported the stimulus package, after having appeared at a rally with Barack Obama supporting the stimulus package.  (quotes at Political Wire.

          Sorry, Charlie – you might lose this race after all.  And the CFG will once again be responsible for the election of a Democrat in Republican-friendly territory.

          1. I cannot believe he’s even attempting to walk back on that considering how on the record he is for it.

            Phoenix, who’s the Dem running for that seat?  

            1.    U.S. Rep Kenderick Meeks who is given an outside of beating Rubio in the general election, but no chance against “Closet Case” Crist.

                We’re gonna have to count of Club for Growth, Sarah Palin and the proprietor of the “Green Iguana” to help place this race in the competitive column.

    1. Apparently the right wingnuts decided the R was no better than the D.  So, at no cost to them, they brought down the R in order to punish moderation among R’s.  They showed their power in order to scare other moderates R’s, and it might work!

      3. They lost the entire election. Scozzafava was a vote for John Boehner as Speaker, while Owens is a vote for Pelosi.

        I don’t recall Ned Lamont’s loss in the general election being considered a symbolic victory for liberals.

        1. Anyway, if they, THEY, thought the R was the same as the D, and THEY didn’t find the House ready to flip soon, how did the election cost them?  Them being the right wingnuts.

      4. Is to the right of the fake R that was running.  And we lost be 3 points, and we’ll get the seat back in two years. And we got rid of an EFCA-supporting goof.

        Sounds like a win to me.

        1. if you consider that in the interim the D will cast a vote for historic legislation to provide health care to all the people that would otherwise be screwed by Republicans.

          It looks like a win for Obama and the country to me even if Owens loses in 2010.  Talk about Republicans garroting themselves and then bragging about what wonderful zombies they are.  

      1.    Now all we have to do is get A.C.P. candidates running in legislative districts where there are squishly moderate Repubs (admittedly, there are very few left) like Al White, Ken Kester and Ellen Roberts, and get the wingnuts to turn on the GOP candidates, leaving the Dem to face the A.C.P. candidate alone.  

                1. .

                  The Colorado affiliate of the national Constitution Party.

                  No caucuses.  We hold a convention each year in July in Arvada.  2008 & 2009 Conventions were in the public library there.

                  If you register as a party member 30 days ahead of the Convention with your county clerk, and I think you have to be paid up on your dues, then you can vote at the Convention for statewide candidates and for candidates for offices for districts that your home falls in.  I think you have to be paid up to be a candidate, as well.  

                  I think there are fewer than 500 dues-paying members.  Dues are about $30.  It costs nothing to change party affiliation with your county clerk.  

                  In 2008, there were statewide, US Congressional, State House and Senate, and even a few county offices for which the Convention selected nominees.  

                  Fewer than 100 party members show up, so if you and about 80 of your closest friends want to register, pay dues and attend the Convention, you might be able to hijack the Convention and become the nominee for whatever office you choose.  Reminiscent of Dan Slater attempting to hijack the Democratic CD-5 Convention in Greeley in 2006 to prevent delegates from having any say.

                  If you’re an actual conservative, you might not have to bring any friends with you, and simply win by way of your debating and public speaking skillz.

                  I’ll let you know when I get more specifics on the 2010 Convention.  

                  While ACP may have more members, Libertarians got more votes in 2008. ACP was around 2.8 to 3% across the state; Libertarians got as many as 5% in some places.

                  .

                  1. Way, way too much to join a party.

                    If I can’t register for free, or even get comped in some way, it’s the wrong party for me.

                    And I wouldn’t need to bring a crowd – I could sell hard conservative if I had to.

                    And I would only wanna be a nominee if Sarah Palin would do things for me….endorse. I meant endorse.

  7. Is this turn of events working for you, sweetie? You were really into the Scozzafava purge thing, weren’t you?

    I’m especially interested in hearing what you think of your precious Jane Norton – as Scozzafava! The base is rising, isn’t it? Isn’t it?

    1. An unknown independent almost beat your well-funded D that had to run to the right of the R to get elected.

      Are you seriously as miserable and angry as your posts?  I can’t really believe that you are.

  8. Who knows really why anyone does anything in this crazy political game, but it’s interesting that the Dems release this just ahead of a Tom Wiens for Senate announcement.

    Can’t tell who is more afraid of Wiens being the real contender the Dems or the GOP establishment.

    Thoughts to ponder…

  10. First casualty will likely be Crist in Florida.  I’d also watch Fiorina in California and Kirk in Illinois.

    Norton may well be among the casualties but she is more acceptable to the wing-nuts than social moderates like the ones mentioned above, so is likely not to be as high on their list of targets…

  11. You know, I would love to see a Dem run to the right of Norton, just like the NY Bill Owens was to the right of Scozzafava.  The comparison itself is completely nuts.  There is no way that a Jane Norton candidacy would inspire a Republican to make a third party run in this state.  If Norton makes it through the primary process then she will have the support of the Republicans in the state.  

    Now if she was appointed to the position without any input from the voters, but we don’t have anyone like that running….oh, wait!

    1. she wears skirts from time to time which automatically makes her suspect to her base.

      Female Republican politicians can be as rabid as Palin but will always come with an asterisk as far as their party is concerned.  Latinos and blacks are in the same boat.  Republicans stand for white male dominance.  Always have and always will.  It is the pup tent of politics.

    2. Is based on the negative reaction of the conservative base in both races, which was, like it or not, similar enough to note. There are all kinds of reasons why the outcome might not be the same here, as we said above. For one thing, the “base’s” candidate lost. And obviously we at least have the affectations of a primary here.

      Props for the clever punchline, though. Doesn’t Bennet have a primary election coming too?

    3. was in any way illegal?  He was appointed by a Governor who was elected by all the voters in the state of Colorado to make just such appointments and he won by a double digit margin over an incompetent Republican Congressman.  Also Bennet is facing a primary challenge by a popular and extremely competent former Majority Leader from the state house so if he wins his primary than he will have won the support of the Democratic base.  How is that in any way elitist geekboy?

      Oh and there is the whole side story of his PhD in Education and being appointed to Ted Kennedy’s seat on the Senate Education Committee because of his expertise in education.  If you think that having someone in the Senate who isn’t a lawyer working for corporations and has expertise in his committee assignments is terrible for the state of Colorado then you must be a Republican.

      1. GG, the thrust of your argument is sound, but you sure get confounded with the details. Romanoff is a former speaker of the House, and Bennet doesn’t have a “PhD in Education,” he has a law degree.  

          1. Anschutz’s butler!

            I believe Bennet did, in fact, work for the Anschutz Investment Company, which is, technically, an LLC, not a corporation, though it is a holding company for corporations.

          2. then I hope Romanoff wins the primary.

            If Bennet is the big school district superintendent who understands what is needed to educate the next generation in their transition to a post hydro-carbon but sustainable standard of living then I can support him as the Democratic standard bearer.  He has time to define his positions by his votes which is evaluating a politician by what they are doing not where they have been.

            Either candidate looks more appealing in these times than an ex-lobbyist with an obsession about abortion.

              1. Except for once, in a different state.

                Madden was Majority Leader while Romanoff was Speaker.

                Romanoff was Minority Leader the term before the Dems became the majority.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Gabe Evans
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

85 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!

Colorado Pols