Romanoff: “Pat Caddell is one of the most insightful, strategic thinkers in politics.”

(That’s verbatim, folks – promoted by Colorado Pols)

To make such a sweeping statement, one would have to assume that Andrew Romanoff has actually examined some of Pat Caddell’s thinking.

Thinking that would cause Caddell to say, “I agree with Ann [Coulter].”

And that’s really the problem, isn’t it? It was no mystery to us that Caddell has been a regular contributor to the Glenn Beck show, the Sean Hannity show, the Neil Cavuto show, and others. There is a reason why, in 2004, Ann Coulter said there were only two “liberals” she respected: “Pat Caddell and Zell Miller.”

Now we’re to believe that Pat Caddell was never actually hired by the campaign, but he was just another volunteer who was “told to “take a hike.”

Assuming for a moment that’s true, why send out a press release touting Caddell’s “polling, message and strategic advice” and that he was coming out of retirement and “joined his campaign team?”

It took ColoradoPols contributors mere moments to start chattering about Pat Caddell’s horrific public stances. The very next day, ColoradoPols posted a video of Caddell on the Glenn Beck show trashing health care reform and climate change legislation.

Pat Caddell was no mystery. I simply can not believe the statement that Romanoff was suddenly shocked by Caddell’s statements in the video I posted. There is nothing in that video that is any better or worse than the hundreds of statements Caddell has made against Democrats over the past eight years, including those posted right here on ColoradoPols in the two weeks since Romanoff announced he was hiring Pat Caddell.

49 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

    • wade norris says:

      for Bennet has been disproved by this episode.

      Had Colorado Pols not promoted the diary w/video about Pat Caddell, I would have had no idea about who the guy was or what he had said about Environmental issues.

      Thankfully, this website pointed this out, and supporters like me emailed/called the campaign to demand an explanation.

      Andrew Romanoff and his team listened and parted company with Caddell, perhaps also not realizing how toxic this guy’s comments were.

      If Colorado Pols was really ‘Bennetpols’ they would have sat on this story until a later time heading into the primary to promote a story like this, when it could have caused more damage.

      Thanks for getting Romanoff supporters alerted to this issue and resolving it early on, and thanks to Team Romanoff for listening to the will of the Colorado voters.

      • redstateblues says:

        Having Pat Caddell working in this race would have been bad for Democrats at all levels, not just Romanoff.

        But I appreciate your comment, and your valiant attempt to be gracious to the Dead Guvs.

        If everyone involved in this primary developed a less… how to put this… unbelievably nasty attitude toward one another, it would go a long way to unifying the party when the primary ends.

      • Middle of the Road says:

        but doing something about it. We may disagree, to the bitter end, on the judgment involved with this hiring, but I genuinely appreciate that you went immediately to the source for an answer.  

    • BobMoore says:

      I believe I posted the first diary on Romanoff’s appointment of Caddell, Trippi and Lake a couple hours after the announcement:

      http://www.coloradopols.com/di

      I’m not the most astute observer of the national scene, and my interest in the race is journalistic rather than partisan, but even I noted somewhat cattily in the diary that Caddell was “probably best known as the token Democrat frequently deployed by Fox News to rip Democrats” and provided a link. I think it’s stretches credulity to suggest that somehow the Romanoff team wasn’t familiar with Caddell’s recent history. And if they weren’t, that suggests something else.

  1. Middle of the Road says:

    If Colorado Pols hadn’t made his scumbag comments a public issue, he’d still be on the campaign and Romanoff would still be touting his “insightful, strategic thinking.”

    Welcome to Politics 101, folks. Feel cynical yet that your Boy Wonder is turning out to be just another opportunist politician?

    Are we really expected to believe Romanoff is such a stupid, incompetent candidate that he didn’t vet his own inner circle? Or is he a naive candidate that has to be so managed that he’s in a bubble, surrounded by paid staff that purposely tell him nothing? Which scenario is it, folks? Because it can’t be both and neither option is particularly flattering. Neither scenario paints this as a guy anyone in his right mind would want in charge of anything, let alone being our next Senator.

    • DavidThi808 says:

      I am trying to give Romanoff every benefit of the doubt here (because I favor Bennet). But bringing on Caddell shows poor decision making no matter which of those scenarios it was.

      Mis-steps like this can lose the primary and will lose the general.

  2. BlueCat says:

    views until he saw the post with video here on ColoradoPols is ludicrous, a completely cynical insult to our intelligence. If anything could make him look worse than taking Caddell onto his team in the first place, his completely dishonest explanation does it.

    Or are we to believe that Romanoff is such a hot house flower, he never makes himself aware of what goes on in the world of the cable news media? In which case, are we  supposed to be willing send Bambi to represent our interests in the up-coming tough election? Cynical liar or deer in the headlights?  I’ll take neither, thank you very much.

    • sxp151 says:

      Last month many of us had no idea who he was. I think the first time I heard of him was when he wrote an opinion article for the Wall Street Journal.

      It’s not like he’s on Beck’s show every day, so you have to watch a lot of Beck to notice him. And I don’t really need my Senator watching a lot of Beck.

      • Middle of the Road says:

        Respectfully, in the political world, he was very well known. He’s been on the political scene since 1976. Maybe the average Joe didn’t know him but a campaign most certainly would and it’s their responsibility to vet paid staff.  

        • sxp151 says:

          not for his whackjob personal views. And he hasn’t done anything of note since 1992.  

          • Middle of the Road says:

            I’m not going to spend the better part of today arguing with you but his personal views have been on air for almost a decade. It took me ten minutes to find 25 youtube videos of some of his more outrageous remarks. Perhaps I have different standards of what I expect from a candidate so to be clear, here’s what I expect–a vetting process that includes 10 minutes of googling. Is that really too much to ask, you think?

        • indipol says:

          what are you, crazy? 😉

          but I agree with sxp: before this had erupted I hadn’t even heard of Cad.  Guess I don’t watch enough cable news.  Actually, what I mean by that is, thank god I watch no cable news.  Not having a TV has its benefits.

      • BlueCat says:

        Anyone who watches any cable would instantly recognize the face and connected views, if not the name. Even if you don’t watch Beck (I don’t) video of outrageous remarks  have been all over various  other cable network shows and posted on various blogs. During the past several elections he’s been all over cable, not just Fox. Certainly, regardless of all that, any active Dem pol would be completely familiar with him and his views. He’s been a major player for a very long time. Trust me, Romanoff knew exactly who and what this guy was.

  3. sxp151 says:

    put “Fox News whackjob protofascist” on his resumГ©. He used to be a reasonable guy and might still have had a reputation as such. Maybe they did a background check and didn’t find any sex scandals (for…obvious…reasons), so they figured he was clean.

    I think it was innocuous.

    As for “Why now?” I would guess it’s because they just hired someone to monitor the blogs (the person who registered as “RomanoffForColorado”) who quickly noticed Romanoff was getting reamed here. It wasn’t a national story that people on this blog disliked Caddell, so unless one reads all the comments on all the blog posts here, one might have missed it.

  4. Rainidog says:

    Geez, Google is our friend.  Ten minutes.  How could AR or any of the people around him CHOOSE not to know who and what Pat Caddell is?

    The guy who said he would leave on the same boat with Bill O’Reilly if Hilary Clinton became president, for instance?  I remember that, and I don’t even watch cable infotainment.

    Yesterday’s statement from the AR campaign, on HuffPo now, containing this:  

    Andrew heard those comments for the first time this afternoon

    And this comment on HuffPo:

    Are they nuts? Pat Caddell had his lips affixed to Sean Hannity’s posterior for well over a decade!

    How could this be?  Who’s in charge there?  Why should the campaign get a pass?  And how much of a pass would the Bennet campaign get if something equivalent showed up there?

  5. Ray Springfield says:

    It means that he doesn’t VET who he associates with

  6. sufimarie says:

    I don’t know who brought Cadell on the campaign but I do think that a google search probably is above and beyond the chain of command in a campaign. Most senior staff on campaigns are blindly trusted to have the most and best information and when it comes to the intersection of the internet with any part of an operation, there is an aura and mystery the campaign projects onto it and management can blindly follow anyone who acts like they know (or maybe they do know) what they’re talking about.

    It didn’t take you or the members of this community long to run a search on this dweeb but why would a staffer or manager do it? They could risk their job and contradict the gospel the the almighty leaders! They would demonstrate a lack of faith in uppers. And if they did find dirt on a new hiree, they shouldn’t say anything because they would be rocking the boat and in campaigns, if you rock the boat, you’re not only pissing off the higher ups because you’re showing them how incompetent they can be, you’re also not taking one for the team which is the ultimate sin in campaigns.

    In short, I think expecting the intel on Cadell to be found is a stretch– only in the sense that there is still a (basic) technological lag. Jobs are handed out by word of mouth and everyone trusts each other in the wrong ways. Practicality and efficiency are valued after superficiality and ass-kissery.

    …not that I think that’s what happened here, I’m justsaying that’s been my observation.

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.