In a year that Republicans were supposed to roll to victory at all levels in Colorado, the fact that the biggest wins for the GOP were two congressional seats–as opposed to the Senate seat or the gubernatorial race–is a testament to how things didn’t go the way the pundits expected here.
But that shouldn’t take away from the success Rep.-elect Cory Gardner enjoyed this year in CD-4, and gets credit for managing pretty well overall. As we noted in our recap of Election Day winners, politics is largely about taking advantage of the right opportunity, and Gardner did that. It wasn’t easy–Gardner had numerous opportunities to alienate different groups of voters, and blow this race even though it was his to win: good examples being that abortive Rep. Steve King (R-IA) fundraiser this summer, unwavering support for the so-called “personhood amendment,” and an “oops!” attack ad targeting the wrong Rep. Markey (Ed, not Betsy).
The fundraiser with Rep. King in particular, canceled by Gardner’s campaign after King asserted to a talk radio show that President Barack Obama “favors the black person,” was a moment where Gardner resisted the temptation to pander to the “Tea Party” base, subsequently weathering fierce scorn from Rep. King and King’s close friend Tom Tancredo. This incident differentiated Gardner from other Colorado candidates like Jane Norton and Ken Buck, who jumped at the chance to stand behind similarly wacky remarks by Tancredo.
We and others rightly pointed out that Rep. King is far from an unknown commodity, and is usually brought in on campaigns to fire up the base with exactly this kind of red meat–which makes it hard to understand why Gardner could not have predicted this. But the fact remains that Gardner quickly identified the risks, and took action in a way that affirmed moderate credentials; making him safer to support by “Tea Party”-averse independents and business interests.
It’s tough to know what Congressman Gardner will face in 2012. Much depends on what the district will look like after redistricting, and a number of qualified Democrats are available to take a shot. But there’s no question that Gardner, despite some unforced errors on the campaign trail, earned his seat; without saddling himself with the extremist baggage that, by comparison, his counterpart Scott “Half Off” Tipton did in CD-3. And this bodes well for Gardner’s career.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
BY: JohnInDenver
IN: Colorado GOP Peeing Its Collective Pants Over Trump Visit
BY: JohnInDenver
IN: Trump Calls His Own Bluff On Aurora
BY: kwtree
IN: Arizona Republican Party Sends Second Mail Piece for Gabe Evans
BY: Ben Folds5
IN: Trump Calls His Own Bluff On Aurora
BY: spaceman2021
IN: Colorado GOP Peeing Its Collective Pants Over Trump Visit
BY: spaceman2021
IN: Trump Calls His Own Bluff On Aurora
BY: harrydoby
IN: Trump Calls His Own Bluff On Aurora
BY: harrydoby
IN: Colorado GOP Peeing Its Collective Pants Over Trump Visit
BY: Conserv. Head Banger
IN: Colorado GOP Peeing Its Collective Pants Over Trump Visit
BY: Genghis
IN: Colorado GOP Peeing Its Collective Pants Over Trump Visit
Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!
Link text
Anyone care to bet which way Gardner will vote?
Debt ceiling.
Farm subsidies (welfare or wealth transfers)
Watching Markey go down to a total dud candidate was particularly satisfying.
It seems P.J. O’Rourke’s notable quote is holding true:
And from the tenor of your comment, LB, it seems you’re just fine with that.
It beats ruining the country’s and my childrens’ futures by passing things like the failed stimulus and Obamacare…
Healthcare it’s way too early to know yet.
…and to your point, O’Rourke also called the November ass-kicking a “restraining order” on the Democrats.
… when the Teabaggers get laughed out of office?
The insufficient stimulus is now getting reinforcements with Stimulus II (after the ransom paid to the top 2%).
I can’t wait to hear the GOP and the baggers try to claim credit for the rising economy by the time the 2012 elections roll around.
Or will the new GOP slogan be “What’s so bad about Hoovervilles and breadlines? It can still be yours, if only you listen to us.”
The best thing Obama did was to give those tax breaks to the wealthiest folks. It might actually have a positive affect on the economy, unlike anything else he’s done in office.
The economy will rise from two things:
1. Existing companies spending more. They have trillions in reserve so they don’t need more money, they simply need more demand.
2. More startups (job growth comes from new companies). The VC community is presently awash in money to the degree that VCs are worried we’re headed for another high tech bubble.
The rich already have everything they want so the tax break will not increase their spending. Ergo, that break has no benefit. It does have a negative though in increasing our deficit.
If this were the case, they could easily lower their prices. Did you never learn about supply and demand in ECON 101?
And as any businessman worth his salt can tell you, if you have the financial resources a recession is the time to gobble up market share and put your competitors out of business. If the rich evil companies really had all the money you attribute to them, they would be expanding their businesses since they can get everything cheap right now.
Since apparently to you, facts don’t matter:
My crystal ball says:
Obama wins re-election, Dems hold the Senate and pickup at least 20 seats in the House.
because seven years of those tax cuts just wasn’t quite long enough to have a positive effect?
What’s worse LB: being BJ, or knowing better and still spouting all of BJ’s inanities?
It sounds like the millionaire tax-cuts might have spurred a rush on holiday nut warmers.
Taken from Thanks for the Tax Cut! by Larry David.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12…
Will be weak going into 2012. Anybody have any theories about who’s going to be challenging him?
But it really depends on the outcome of redistricting.
I was not impressed with his aborted run in 2007. And being from Longmont is not an asset in his district.
I hear Markey is being heAvily courted by the DCCC and the White House. If the district looks more friendly in 2012, I would not be surprised if she ran again.
She did a superb job the past 2 years and she’s won the race before.
Markey was a fluke. It took years to bring Musgrave down, and that only succeeded because of the Obama wave. The only way he could lose is if he moves too far to the left and the Tea Party mounts a challenge.
She was a Democrat who beat Marilyn Musgrave and ultimately lost her seat because she was willing to support things like the Energy Bill, health care reform, the stimulus, Hate Crimes and Don’t Ask Don’t Tell repeal.
That wasn’t progressive enough for you?
Please don’t cast aspersions on the record of a woman who was willing to support the most sacred principles of the Democratic Party and lose her seat in Congress because of it.
I helped her beat MM in 2008. She certainly was progressive enough to represent the 4th CD. She had a 70% approval rating from ADA in 2009. She stood up against a second F35 engine. She walked the plank on Cap and Trade — she was one of five Democrats who provided the margin of victory on Affordable Health Care Act. I’m not casting aspersions on her record. My comment was about her re-election campaign. Instead of running on a record anybody could be proud of she ran against her record. Among other things she said that she had voted against spending money to close Gitmo (I need to research since ADA says she voted with them), she ran against bailouts, etc. IOW she ran on GOP turf. That’s what my comment was about. I’m sorry that I wasn’t more clear.