President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Kamala Harris
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) V. Archuleta
98%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Marshall Dawson
95%
5%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
50%
50%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(D) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank
(D) River Gassen
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) John Fabbricatore
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen
(R) Sergei Matveyuk
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
70%↑
30%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
February 12, 2019 08:00 AM UTC
39 Comments
As I've said before – oh, dear God, please no.
This is a better place to cast my scorn in the direction of a Bennet candidacy than the Open Thread, so…thanks for writing it.
The righties and Russians who installed T***p as Klepto-in-Chief have now realized they have lost control of the monster they created and he is about to eat them. They are desperate to find a way to avoid facing one of the most crushing electoral defeats in modern history.
2018 gave them a heads up, but they changed nothing and still do not have the collective balls to take back the wheel from the madman who is driving their clown car off a cliff. Their fear of T***p though, is exceeded by their fear of the great socialist menace of 2020.
Here is how this went down…
Phone rings…"Hello, this is Joe Scarborough".
"Hi, Joe, this is WRD (wealthy republican donor)…I had dinner with several other WRDs last night and we have come to the conclusion that the Democrat that would do us the least harm would be Sen. Michael Bennet, you know, the beige drapes from Colorado."
"We want you to come out early for him because the fucking socialists are getting all the press. Bernie this, Warren that, Ocasio/Cortez something else. Until Biden or another FOWS (friend of Wall St.) gets in the race, he is our best shot at getting a Dem who will lose to Mitt."
Joe replies.."yes, Mr. WRD…"I will do it right away."
You forgot the line — "Bennet is a whole lot easier to spell than Hickenlooper."
You are welcome.
My own scorn for the trial balloon candidacy comes from the level of self delusion that Bennet must be under to even suggest this. It is like seeing a CFO of barely profitable mid-western auto parts supplier suddenly start talking about how he'd be a great CEO of Starbucks on the basis of having had opinions on coffee at one time.
WRD = Phil Anschutz. It's OK to speak the name.
If that is his reasoning, he really should take a look at Amy Klobuchar. She outperformed Clinton in Minnesota by 22%. Klobuchar won her race 60-36 while Clinton eked out a 2 point victory over Trump–46-44.
Exactly. I was inspired to do this kind of analysis by another W. Post piece looking at the electoral performance of various Democratic candidates vs. their state's partisan lean, etc. "Want to know which Democrats can actually beat Trump? We don’t have to guess." Jan. 2019.
Assuming you folks are more interested in winning an election than in scoring ideological points while losing (think: Goldwater in 1964, McGovern in 1972), somebody like Klobuchar, Bennet, Sherrod Brown would have the best chance of taking out Trump.
Harris, Bernie, Gillibrand, Warren, Booker…….too far left. Think having to defend "Green New Deal" and the part about paying people who don't want to work. And think what your answers would be to far right wing 60 second sound bites. Hillary had good ideas on her web site. But who read them when the national chant became "lock her up."
There are interesting experiments concerning a guaranteed income going on in other countries. Emphasis on "experiments." But that isn't an idea that is ready for mainstream America just yet.
There are good points to the "Green New Deal," like retrofitting buildings to make them more energy efficient. As for phasing out fossil fuels, I think the Rocky Mountain Institute has better knowledge than AOC.
Go read the Washington Post piece I linked up there. Warren is called out in it as being unimpressive relative to her state's partisan lean.
"The only candidate who objectively performs poorly is Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), who somehow managed to underperform Clinton despite 2018 being a much better year for Democrats than 2016."
Talking about electability, you could be right about Klobuchar or Brown. But you are dead wrong about Bennet. As a Senator he has won with all the winds of weak opponents, big money, and demographic change blowing the right way for him. As a presidential candidate he’d be a loser like Thomas E. Dewey.
I did read your link. The reporter seemed confused, which probably is appropriate since we're a year away from the Iowa caucuses.
Warren does come to the game with the Massachusetts curse.
My heart says Kamala but my head says we have to win Minnesota, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania or its over, and that says Amy Klobuchar with perhaps Beto, Booker or Castro for veep.
And we need coattails to win some senate seats in NC, GA, ME and AZ, and I know Warren will have no coattails. We also cannot run Warren or Brown because their Senate seats would become Republican. Klobuchar's would stay Blue.
So, Amy, start being nicer to your staff and win my heart over. Valentine's is Thursday.
I wouldn't be terribly upset losing a seat in Massachusetts (again) because whichever Republican placeholder Baker could choose would lose in 2022. Brown's seat on the other hand would be a lost cause.
On the other hand, I don't think Warren has the campaign chops to win this thing, nor does Brown have the chops to win the primary, so I'm not too worried about it at all. Biggest threat with Klobuchar is Walz might appoint someone more moderate and further degrade our standing in their legislature, but that's a fairly low-level threat.
Would not be upset in the least if Bennet got the VP or SoS slot (special to replace him would have to coincide with the regularly scheduled general, right?), he can speak passionately when prompted, and Polis could hand his seat to any number of great CO Dems.
A cabinet position for Bennet would be excellent — just not education!!
We also cannot run Warren or Brown because their Senate seats would become Republican. Klobuchar's would stay Blue.
Excellent point. I hadn't even been thinking about that. Since the Dems are likely to net no more than 3 or 4 Senate seats (pickup ME, CO, AZ and either NC or Iowa while losing AL), we can't afford to lose OH or MA to a Republican appointee.
Beating Trump is all that matters.
That is all.
Yes. And Bennet would perform slightly worse than Clinton in the rematch that no one wants.
I'm struggling to see how Bennet, whose lone moment of national noteriety was a passionate speech against Trump's most unpopular move yet, would do worse than Clinton. The SoS had decades of shit thrown at her and she only lost by 70k votes where it counted. If Bennet inexplicably won the primary (I don't think he could, and would probably still vote for someone else myself), how the everloving hell would he do worse than that against Trump of all people?
Because he'd have even less of a defense against Trump's anti-elite rapid fire spin than Clinton does/did. She had baggage. He is a blank slate that Trump would paint whichever way he wants. By the time he hit back one on the first lie Trump would have already put out a dozen more.
Also, the lack of enthusiasm. Clinton did not lose because lots of people switched parties. She lost because turnout was weak for her. Turn out in Michigan 2016 compared to 2012. Rural areas up and urban areas down. Trump does not have to actually get more votes, he and his surrogates just need to keep Democratic participation low.
Do you see people being more fired up for Bennet than Clinton? I do not.
Trump spewing anti-elitist trash is the perfect example of the pot calling the kettle black.
FYI – Scarborough made it clear that he is NOT endorsing Bennet at this time. He noted on his show this morning that he hasn't even met Bennet. He's only encouraging him to run based on his quiet leadership on many issues who combines positive traits of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.
Awwww, but that makes a boring headline. Seriously, I’ll change my headline if anyone suggests one as equally fun, but more accurate.
Also, more weasel words. What is it with bloviating opinion writers and using weasel words to try to claim they are not saying what they are actually saying? Is there a style guide that says that newspaper columns need to use "could" and "possibly" to avoid any appearance of actually taking a position? What would be so wrong with just saying, "If he gets in he's got my vote because I like him in comparison to the other announced and potential candidates"?
I presume that Michael Bennet is going to get a huge endorsement from Benjamin Moore.
Would that be because of the similarity between the senator and watching their product dry?
We’ve come to the point in American politics where not having a record of taking positions -plus- not having accomplishments -equals- a good reason to
endorse(but, not really, huh Joe?) , er suggest, a candidate as qualified for our Presidency . . .. . . in other news while you await the apocalypse, did you know you can now get a DNA test for your dog??
My ticket is klobuchar/sherrod brown . Ds sweep midwest, ohio included.
Bennet stays in Senate. Indoor work, no heavy lifting.
I do not dislike your ticket, but I think Klobuchar might need a more exciting VP pick (attack dog for VP strategy). How about Beto O'Rourke? Also, the plus of not giving up a Senate seat.
I have yet to meet a voter who was swayed by a VP pick.
I can’t believe you never met a west slope
tea partierPalinista?!?Voters over here vote R. The names don't matter.
I think Beto has to be in the conversation. Someone who can appeal and relate to young voters.
I never heard of beto until he lost a senate race. So he moves up because?
Because, though he lost, he performed very well. He got to just three points behind a sitting Republican Senator in Texas. Beto has that magic of firing people up. He connects very well with Hispanic voters and perhaps pulls more of them onto the Democratic side for 2020.
Also Vice President is not exactly a rewarding position. It is a spot for someone young-ish to prove themselves in (or fall on their face politically like Dan Quayle). It can also be a last job for someone who is ready to exit politics after a long career. Putting an A-lister who still has a good run in the Senate before them like Brown does not make sense to me.
If getting people fired up on the campaign trail were not an issue I think that Bennet would be perfect for VP. Move him off to the side and see if Polis can appoint someone with a bit more mojo.
He still lost, to an obnoxious and unpopular incumbent. Sorry, I'll take winning ugly over moral victory every time.
"He’s the human equivalent of a bowl of soggy shredded wheat."
How the fuck did this make it past the censors?
Hey notModdy. Could you answer the following question: If a woman was raped and became pregnant because of said rape, should she be allowed to have an abortion?
Same way you did, I guess.
What censors? This is not a Russian run society yet. Go cry in your Borsch.