I like Bennet.

Earlier this week in a reply* I posted to JO and Sharon Hanson  I disputed their claim that no one at CoPols.com has posted any reasons to support Bennet.   In that same reply I challenged JO & Sharon  to explain why they are for Romanoff beyond they are against Bennet.  I didn’t bother to ask if they will support the D candidate whomever it is, because they have been challenged on that so often adding another seemed off point.

I promised I would repost my reasons for supporting Bennet and offered to let them go first.  I hoped that one of them would lay out a pro – Romanoff postion beyond dislike of Bennet.


(Which by the way has also been their consistent reply to whether they will spport the eventual D nominee.)

And so now I’ll agree with Jambalaya  “Ready your next round of fire at Senator Norton, y’all.” — Jambalaya”  

Except that it’s not just Norton, it’s Norton, Wiens, Buck and the NRSC and the rest of the CO R organization that is already mobilized and energized.


I like Michael Bennet and support his candidacy to retain the seat.  Later this week I’ll look it up, I’m sure it was in Sep and Oct that I first posted typed it here.

You claim type to not have seen any reasons why anyone supports Bennet.

Yet I have never seen either of you provide type a coherent summary of why you support Romanoff. Sure, plenty of typing about why you dislike Bennet.  Innuendo and implications about realDemocrats and dues paid.  And now a glimmer of an electability argument from JO.

So, I promise I’ll re post type my reasons for supporting Bennet.

But you first:

Why do you support Romanoff?

by: MADCO @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 08:40:07 AM MST

Just below are are two pro-Bennet posts I made in Sep/Oct.

In addition I agreed with others who posted some reasons to like Bennet So rather than either claim credit for their words, or bother to post my “ditto” or “agreed” – I’ve posted their posts.

Senator Benent supports the President’s agenda


I agree with Bennet’s votes (except one),



The more I think about Udall’s numbers in  08, the more I think AR has a tougher, maybe much tougher, time in the general than MB.  Forget that I like both of them too. Forget that AR has won elections and MB has not.   Forget that MB came out for the President’s agenda a long time ago- something I have never heard from AR. Forget endorements- if no one turned it over to DC, surely no one turned it over to Denver.

Just think about the electoral math.  You don’t have to carry Wray or Frederick or Steamboat to win.  You do have to carry the metro area by a wide enough margin and get at least close to 40% in C-Springs/Ft Collins.  And then not get crushed in the ROS.

Udall won in Jeffco & Arapahoe with just over 50%.  He also won in Larimer (barely) and had a decent showing in Weld with almost 45%.  He got less than 40% in El Paso.

And lost in Park- though Obama carried Park to a tie. Outside of Denver- Udall didn’t do as well as Obama anywhere in the front range.

Why will AR?  Udall had some track record and a US Rep gig.  AR has less track record and only local gigs.

Some believe the same, or more damning could be said for MB- except a) he’s the incumbent b) he’s not as threatening to Business c) he’s more of an outsider and d) Obama endorsed him. I would expect this to bolster turnout in the areas where Obama did well over McCain- especially in those areas where Udall won but didn’t do nearly as well as Obama, or where Obama won but Udall didn’t or where there was significant President/Senate undervote. (overvote? I always get those mixed up- I mean where the Presidential turnout was higher than in the Senate race- like Arapahoe.)

Add to this that in 08 we had a generally apathetic (and perhaps somewhat pathetic) R organization in CO, certainly in Arapahoe and Jeffco.    Like in 96 when Dole carried CO not Clinton- I would expect a more energetic R party in 2010.  I’m not saying the R’s will topple Degette or Polis, nor that the R gubernatorial nominee will carry Denver. Just that R turnout will be higher than otherwise expected in a non-Presidential cycle.

I’m not even sure how this affects Ritter – I never looked at county by county numbers for him form 2006. But he’s not in a primary (yet) and so I don’t care.

But if the R’s field a reasonably reasonable Senate candidate, there will be a race.  A race I think would be easier on MB.

And I like Andrew, not all the other MB supporters do.

by: MADCO @ Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 16:40:23 PM MDT

Initially my personal political analysis was more helpful getting behind the Senator  than any policy consideration.

I think 2010 will be a much more difficult Senate election cycle in CO for the Ds than was 2008. 08 we had large and motivated turnout. Caucuses set records all over the key locations- esp suburban Denver. (ArapCo, JeffCo,)

And in the general- Udall did really well in JeffCo & BoulderCo- which I would have expected for him.  He barely carried Arapahoe 52 or 53% – where Obama won by 14%.  

I think in 2008 the county R organizations were …complacent. CO R’s weren’t that excited about McCain, everyone had some GWB fatigue and in  2010 that isn’t going to be there.  The R’s will be (are so far) more energized, and the turnout should be down.  I’ve posted more before- but I’m not going to dissect the state anymore.

As for policy- the most important consideration to me last winter was the governor appoint someone who would be a strong supporter of President Obama’s agenda.  Senator Bennet is and has been.

Beyond that, I would have said make it someone who is electable in Colorado, smart as hell, and who thinks like me on most if not all issues. Senator Bennet appears to be electable, is a smart guy and, so far, apparently thinks like me on most things.

Then add in 10 months of voting – and I’v disagreed with him on one significant vote. (You and I agree on cramdown- I would have preferred it passed and therefore that he voted for it even in a losing cause- the votes weren’t there.)

If the governor had appointed Senator Burris, I’d have been calling for a primary.  Or if he had appointed someone who didn’t meet all of the above, same.   I like Speaker Romanoff. And if he had been appointed my analysis would have asked the same questions. I have some questions about his electability- he’s never had to win a state wide race (much larger fundraising, it’s different campaigning in ElPaso & Grand Junction, not to mention the suburbs) so assuming he would have voted exactly has Senator Bennet has (not that voting is all there is to the job) I’m not sure how I would have reacted.

by: MADCO @ Thu Oct 29, 2009 at 16:24:56 PM MDT

This wasn’t really cross posted at CoPols.com – if it was I couldn’t find it.


And again, dear lord

I didn’t want to have to run down the list for you. You can teh google I presume, but here you go:

1. Co-sponsor of the DREAM act

2. Voted yes on President Obama’s stimulus and budget.

3. Visited all 64 counties in Colorado.

4. Making the hard sell on other Democratic legislation like cap and trade to farmers in rural Colorado.

5. Held town hall meetings in areas of the state a little less friendly than HD-6. Making the hard sell on Obama’s health care reform plan to the people who need to be sold on it.

6. Strong supporter of public option, before Romanoff was even an afterthought.

7. Strong supporter of CHIP re authorization, which provides health care to millions of under insured children.

8. Voted yes on the Lily Ledbetter Pay Act.

All of that is in just 8 months of being in the Senate.

But just to turn it around: in the time that Bennet has been in the Senate, can you give me a list of Romanoff’s accomplishments? Hell, I’ll even give you the last year and a half since he’s been out of office. He graduated law school, got a DLC fellowship (howprogressive!) and started running for Senator. That’s about it.

“Ready your next round of fire at Senator Norton, y’all.” — Jambalaya

by: redstateblues @ Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 09:04:25 AM MDT





Though my promise was to repost  my posts that gave explicit pro Bennet reasons,  I also looked for AR supporters’s expressed reasons for supporting AR  besides just bashing Bennet.

Romanoff will be a much better representative for the people of Colorado.  He’s dedicated and cares.  

What I like most about this is that it sets a great example for other incumbents to see that if you don’t tow the progressive line you’re out.  We’re fed up with politics of the past we need real change.  

Romanoff you rock! This is a great showing for your first month of fund raising.

by: Sharon Hanson @ Wed Oct 07, 2009 at 20:03:58 PM MDT

[ Parent | Reply ]

I have never said I supported Romanoff because he should have been appointed. I knew some elected Democrats that felt he should have been appointed but I have never said that is the reason I support Romanoff.  I would have supported Joan Fitzgerald had she stepped up to the plate and I think Diana DeGette would also be a strong candidate and I would support her as well.  

I don’t support Bennet because I don’t trust him. And I don’t trust him for two reasons; he was appointed by Ritter who I now despise because of what he has done to the union and our safety workers.  I originally voted for Ritter as the lesser of two evils because I didn’t like his views on abortion rights.  And here’s the one that should be no surprise he voted no on the cram-down legislation.

Now whether you realize it or not I believe by the time 2010 rolls around people will be so pissed at banks they will vote for anyone who comes out in favor of a massive overall of the banking and investment industry. This includes regulating them and putting some away for a long time and although I believe Colorado is a state that prides itself on its ignorance of the issues I believe Colorado voters will have had enough and they will want a new Senator. But it’s not Bennet even if he did vote yea on new Credit Card reform legislation it was a weak excuse for not voting for the cram-down.

by: Sharon Hanson @ Thu Oct 29, 2009 at 18:49:56 PM MDT

I may have mentioned this anecdote before about Romanoff.  I saw him do something at the 2008 State Dem Convention that I’d never seen an elected official or candidate do before, and don’t expect to see anyone do it the same way in the future.  Romanoff literally spent several HOURS working his way slowly around the World Arena in Springs stopping at each section to talk to a number of people, and have his photo taken with a number of people.  He talked to everyone who wanted to talk to him, and it was hundreds of people.  It was amazing to watch.  It’s Romanoff’s connection to Dems around the state that some folks just don’t seem to know about, or don’t want to recognize.

by: The realist @ Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 11:02:49 AM MDT

I don’t think that there are a lot of “committed” Bennet

supporters.  Plenty of folks were willing to support him against a Republican when he was the only person running.  But, I think AR has more loyal backing.

And, there is a huge difference between simply knowing the rules of the caucus and really knowing what it takes to win in that process and making the one on one connections with the people who are important to do that.  You have to know who the influentials are at a very detailed level, what arguments who in a caucus setting, and how the rules and the reality differ (often regionally).

Jared Polis is no fool and has a long standing involvement in Colorado politics, but seriously fumbled some of his caucus process meetings.  On the other hand, Obama’s campaign, a newcomer to Colorado, did a brilliant job in that process relative to Clinton’s campaign.  

by: ohwilleke @ Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 11:00:53 AM MDT

The Latino vote in Colorado is the swing vote.  I believe Romanoff will appeal to them much more than Bennet.  Romanoff’s Spanish is impeccable and will very much impress Latinos even if they are not bilingual.  It worked for Salazar, it will work for Romanoff.

“To be a patriot, one had to say and keep on saying, my country right or wrong and urge on the little war. Have you not percieved this as an insult to the nation?” Mark Twain 1906

by: Mike Collins @ Mon Sep 28, 2009 at 13:00:54 PM MDT

Re: Andrew, he did organize and campaign for amendment 59 to cut the state’s fiscal Gordian Knot, though since it failed that can’t be counted as an accomplishment.  It was however the kind of difficult bipartisan work for which he is known.

I’m sure both guys would be decent Senators, but Bennett doesn’t strike me as the bold leadership type.  He’s had nine months of OJT, and he could develop into a very good Senator.  Or not.  Everyone I know who has met him says he’s intelligent, thoughtful, sincere and passionate.  Those are great qualitites, but not in themselves sufficient for being a good politician.

Andrew has a track record, and Bennett does not.  It’s only reasonable to question what he’s accomplished besides getting up to speed.

” Don’t worry scrote.  There’s plenty of ‘tards out there living really kickass lives.  My first wife was ‘tarded…Now she’s a pilot.”

by: DaftPunk @ Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 12:12:59 PM MDT

4 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. Sharon Hanson says:

    Why do you care what I think? And why are you giving me so much power?

    After all the name calling in your posts I’m not inclined to answer any of your questions. I’m just not into you that much.  

  2. ClubTwitty says:

    and will even front page it if it comes today and lists reasons why AR would be a better Senator, better represent the writer on issues, is a better candidate, etc…

    I got a call yesterday from Bennet’s campaign, and I told the caller I remained undecided.  I am still waiting for AR to provide a compelling reason to vote against the incumbent.  

    The made up dialogues, the continual Bennet bad refrain, the fantasies that something AR wrote on 12/17 means he would have been the only Dem Sen. to vote against a different health care bill on 12/24…none supported by facts or reasoning, or really even an argument, is tiresome.  

    It reflects poorly on the candidate these broken-record-posters support, and it pushes me further into Bennet’s camp every time one refuses to provide substance to explain why they support AR.  It’s like they are saying, over and over again, vote for Andrew–join with his bitter and fact-challenged supporters!

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.