July 21, 2010 04:10 AM UTC

I Voted Bennet!!

• 6 Comments
• by: MADCO

I have posted more than once why I support Senator Bennet.  

http://coloradopols.com/diary/…

http://coloradopols.com/diary/…

http://coloradopols.com/showCo…

http://coloradopols.com/diary/…

http://coloradopols.com/showCo…

When Governor Ritter announced he decided to appoint  Michael Bennet,  like many I was surprised it was not someone better known or with prior electoral success.  I was eager to meet the guy and find out whether or not I would approve. I did not then nor do I now care that RItter appointed a relative unknown.

Sure, if Ritter had appointed  some well known, established D (Romanoff, Fitzgerald, Madden, or some other) that would have probably been ok with me.  I don’t know why Ritter didn’t choose anyone else- but I believe him when he says he chose Bennet because he thought  Bennet was the best person for the job.

The most important consideration to me at the time was that the governor appoint someone who would be a strong supporter of President Obama.  Senator Bennet is and has been.  

Other important considerations were to make it someone who is electable in Colorado, smart as hell, and bonus for someone who thinks like me on most, if not all, issues. Senator Bennet is a smart guy and, so far, apparently thinks like me on most things.  We will be finding out any minute now how electable he appears to be.   Then add in 19 months of voting – and I’ve disagreed with him on one vote. (cramdown- I would have preferred it passed and that Bennet would have voted for it even in a losing cause- the votes weren’t there.)

But even smart and electable, I think 2010 will be a much more difficult Senate election cycle in CO for the Ds than 2008.   The closest thing we have to model is Udall ’08. The numbers suggest that Romanoff would have a much tougher time in the general than Bennet.  The D nominee does not 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 too big in the ROS.

2008 we had large and motivated D 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%.   He also just barely won in Larimer and had a decent showing in Weld with almost 45%.  He got less than 40% in El Paso.  He 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 would Romanoff?  Udall had some track record and a US Rep gig.  Romanoff has less track record and only local gigs.

Some believe the same, or more damning could be said for Bennet- 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.   The last should bolster his turnout in the areas where Obama did well over McCain- especially in those areas where Udall didn’t do nearly as well as Obama or where there was significant President/Senate undervote.

Add to that, I think in 2008 many 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 continue to be more energized, and the if the D turnout is down we will have big trouble holding the seat.   Like  ’96 when Dole carried Colorado over President Clinton- I have been expecting a more energetic Colorado 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. If the R nominee is seen as reasonable, there will be a race.  A race that will be easier for Bennet to win.

I could dive into legislation that Bennet is co-sponsoring – rules and limitations that do not require a Constitutional amendment first but will reestablish some level of transparency to mitigate the impact of the SCOTUS decision in Citizens United v FEC;  Bennet Amendment to Protect and Strengthen MEDICARE (which passed 100-0 ); the just announced Oil Independence for a Stronger America Act, and others – but I have no doubt  that Romanoff would/will agree on all of these.

Oh, I know the public option letter! the public option letter!

Shocking that when the Senate & House leadership (Redi Pelosi) say no the freshman senator from Colorado can’t get them to do it anyway. He tried, they said no more amendments.  He will try again.

Many posters here have wrongly attributed to me (and others) bitterness or frustration that AR is even running.  I never said that Romanoff should not run.  I prefer Bennet, but if AR wanted to run, he should.  

That said, I have been frustrated by his campaign… in part for when it has devolved into circular firing squad – damaging to the D nominee whichever  it is. The campaign has to run in opposition to the incumbent, but when he he does it in a way that damages the eventual D nominee, it’s problematic.  Worse than AR, the AR supporters here on Pols and elsewhere have sometimes been shrill and over the top.  And, of course,  it would have been a lot easier to just focus on Norton/Buck with DSCC support from January.  In the end, I hope that almost all the D’s and enough of the U’s can come together and elect the D nominee whether it’s Romanoff or Bennet as either would be far better to me than either of the R candidates. And for the issues driven AR supporters, you too.

I have posted more than once why I support Senator Bennet.  Likewise I have posted many times that I will support the D nominee whichever it is.  Do the same for your choice.