President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump



CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*


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

(D) Joe Neguse*


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

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks




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

(R) J. Sonnenberg (R) Lauren Boebert (R) Ted Harvey

15% 10%↓ 10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Doug Bruce

(R) Bob Gardner




CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*


CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen



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

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Scott James

(R) Gabe Evans




State Senate Majority See Full Big Line





State House Majority See Full Big Line





Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
October 04, 2020 10:35 AM UTC

Rope-A-Dope: Cory Gardner Tries Too Hard In First Debate

  • by: Colorado Pols

Friday evening, as readers know, Colorado’s U.S. Senate candidates met in Pueblo for the first of several scheduled debates. Friday’s event was not televised, but was live-streamed with somewhere in the neighborhood of 4,000 people tuned in at any given time. The relative lack of viewership compared to subsequent debates which are expected to be televised made this first outing a useful warm-up for both sides, and a preview for those of us following the race closely of what’s coming when voters are paying attention.

As the Denver Post’s Justin Wingerter reports, from the opening bell Sen. Cory Gardner was single-mindedly on the offensive against former Gov. John Hickenlooper, managing to turn practically every question into a confrontation from one of Gardner’s factually-challenged attack ads–with an earnest determination that as the hour wore on began to visibly straddle the line of, well, desperation:

Gardner, a Yuma Republican who is trailing in every poll, is the better debater, and Republicans are hopeful he can gain ground during this month’s forums. On Friday night, the freshman senator pressed Hickenlooper on two ethics violations, his refusal to comply with a subpoena in June and an ensuing contempt citation…

Hickenlooper, a Denver Democrat and former governor, spent much of his time on the defensive, pushing back against an almost endless barrage of attacks from Gardner on topics from ethics to energy to his former judicial nominations. Hickenlooper tried to keep the focus on health care, specifically an effort to overturn the Affordable Care Act, a health law Gardner considers unconstitutional.

John Hickenlooper at Friday’s debate.

The Colorado Sun recounted Gardner’s sound and fury, and Hickenlooper’s low-key strategy for managing it:

Republican Cory Gardner hurled attack after attack at his Democratic rival John Hickenlooper, from the opening minutes of the first debate in the U.S. Senate race to his closing statement…

Hickenlooper rolled his eyes, said his opponent was lying and repeatedly dismissed the broadsides as a “wall of words of untruth and distortion” without addressing them.

Colorado Public Radio’s Bente Birkeland:

Gardner was more often on the offensive, posing direct questions to Hickenlooper multiple times. He hammered on ethics complaints against the former governor and attacked Hickenlooper’s character. Meanwhile, Hickenlooper referred to Gardner as a “liar” more than once, and argued he is aligned too closely with Trump rather than Coloradans, especially when it comes to his votes in support of repealing Obamacare.

Sen. Gardner came into this debate as the universally-acknowledged “better debater”–that is, better than Hickenlooper at delivering a pre-scripted message and staying on that message no matter what externalities get in the way. Hickenlooper’s objective was much simpler: knowing that Gardner was going to turn the debate into a bellicose string of endless attacks, Hickenlooper’s job was to not get stuck in the weeds of those attacks, and allow Gardner to press his case past the point of plausibility–thereby turning Gardner’s intensely negative message against itself. Hickenlooper’s refusal to take Gardner’s bait on all but a very of Gardner’s lines of attack visibly frustrated Gardner, who responded by ramping up the invective–a cycle that ended with Hickenlooper holding the high ground.

And when it came time for Hickenlooper to deliver the blows that mattered, as KUNC reports, Hick’s proverbial powder was dry:

Hickenlooper responded saying Gardner hasn’t offered a feasible health care plan. He also said it was the issue the two men have the biggest disagreement on.

“You know what’s the cruelest lie of all, it’s that Cory Gardner says he has a plan to protect people with pre-existing conditions,” Hickenlooper said.  [Pols emphasis] “We need to get to universal coverage. It’s not going to cost a fortune. It’s not going to break the bank.”


“The problem is that Cory Gardner is not just lying to all of you watching this debate. He’s lying to 2.4 million Coloradans. That bill has 117 words in it. It does nothing to say that insurance companies have to take people with preexisting conditions,” Hickenlooper said. “It’s almost like Swiss cheese.”

It is precisely this dynamic–Gardner’s relentless sales pitch versus Hickenlooper’s easygoing charm–that early supporters of Hickenlooper’s U.S. Senate bid foresaw would be Hick’s greatest asset in reclaiming one of Colorado’s last statewide Republican-held offices. Debates are not won by word count, or by negating every single argument of your opponent, or amount of energy expended by either candidate–they’re won by who comes across, in the final analysis, as more relatable.

That is and has always been Hickenlooper’s sweet spot, to the frustration of opponents who try much harder.


9 thoughts on “Rope-A-Dope: Cory Gardner Tries Too Hard In First Debate

  1. Guess Cory has been believing the b.s. propaganda being pushed by the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC), an entity that is always factually challenged. 

    1. I am still gobsmacked that both candidates seem to be focusing on the ethics (lack thereof) of the other. Maybe they should both rethink that.

      OTOH, Cory can’t state any platform beyond total allegiance to the Orange King. John knows he treads lightly on the sensibilities of significant forces within his party.

      If ever there was a time for John to tell his buddies at the Petroleum Club and the Chamber of Commerce, that he needs to restructure both his relationship and his rhetoric vis a vis his Fossilonian friends, and cut them loose, this is it.
      You know, John, you will need to embrace many “New Deals”, not just the green one.

      1. Not sure what else these two could focus on? 

        This was always going to be an interesting race — two long time politicians with years in office and no record of accomplishments or stances to run on.

        When Hick wins this he'll owe Ttump a huge "Thank you."  If Donnie had been any less of a completely disastrous shithead these past four years, Gardner could have won this race.

        1. Yup, I agree. Without the Orange Albatross around his neck, Cory might prevail against a ho-hum capitalist like himself.

          But I think Hick will win…so….

  2. Thanks Pols for the analysis.  You guys and gals do a great job of reporting Colorado politics in a relatable way.

    Gardner's "Wolf/Ethics" attacks are starting to sound a lot like Udall's "He's an women's healthcare adversary" except Udall was spot on in content.

    1. Gardner's "Wolf/Ethics" attacks are starting to sound a lot like Udall's "He's an women's healthcare adversary" except Udall was spot on in content.


      Yup.  I feel like Gardner is falling into a similar claptrap, that Udall did against him in 2014, of attacking his opponent on one narrow issue and pigeonholing himself into that message.

      1. But what else can Gardner talk about?

        His slavish devotion to Trump and Moscow Mitch? His votes to repeal ACA?

        His vote for the "big and beautiful" (Trump's words, not mine) tax cut?

        His vote to confirm an accused rapist for a Supreme Court seat?

        His vote to acquit in the impeachment trial w/out seeing any witnesses?

        His support of Trump and McConnell's handling of COVID?

        Stay the course, indeed, senator.

  3. Here's hoping Hickenlooper asks, at some point, if Cory is so offended by ethics complaints, why is he still supporting Trump? 

    Hick and team could no doubt pick and choose, finding the ethical violations which offend the most in Colorado:  there's lots to choose from.

    • Domestic and international emolument issues,
    • Personal and administration members with conflicts of interest,
    • the impeachment for extorting Ukraine
    • 20,000+ "false or misleading statements" (as of early July).
    • Having a Vice Presidential party to go out of its way to stay at Trump's property in Scotland. 
    • Charging the Secret Service for rooms, meals and golf carts at his personal clubs.

    And so on….

  4. The onslaught of Gardner’s ads attempting to paint Hick as corrupt – plausibly effective if running against a less well known candidate but Coloradans know their former 2-term governor as decent if not nerdy – reminds me of the overload of abortion ads Udall ran in 2014. Too, too much, especially for an incumbent who is supposed to run on his record. Moreover, none of Gardner’s ads speak to voters’ real concerns in a pandemic and recession. I see a 15 point Hick landslide 

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments

Posts about

Donald Trump

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo

Posts about

Colorado House

Posts about

Colorado Senate

60 readers online now


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