Following the first Republican Gubernatorial debate earlier this week (which we live-blogged), we're shuffling the deck at the top of the Governor Line.
While Tom Tancredo and Scott Gessler declined to attend the debate, we still see them as the frontrunners for the GOP nomination. But the second tier has a new leader: Sen. Greg Brophy. His strong performance in the GOP debate made him stand out significantly from former state Sen. Mike Kopp, whom we had previously listed as being on the heels of Gessler and Tancredo.
While Brophy performed well in the debate, Kopp was downright awful. One debate does not a candidate make, of course, but this was the first chance the public had to see of Kopp, and perception matters a great deal in politics. Kopp was surprisingly ill-at-ease and unprepared for many of the questions. One of the more telling lines from Kopp was a reference to his claim that he has broad Republican support. "[Former U.S. Senators] Hank Brown and Bill Armstrong will support me," said Kopp. Armstrong has officially endorsed Kopp, but Brown has not — perhaps waiting to see what he does with his campaign before lending his name. It may be that many Republicans expected more from Kopp and have not seen it (Kopp had a pretty weak first fundraising quarter).
Regardless of what happens with Kopp, Brophy has seized the spotlight on the GOP side as we near the Republican caucuses, and that momentum gives us cause to move him up on the Line.
I see the clown car load isn't genating much buzz. Don't our righties care to comment?
I am reluctant to comment now, lest I get lumped in with a group not of my choosing.
This is why primary debates are good. Candiadtes reveal their weaknesses – and maybe get better. And it is hard to imagine any candidate who has opted out becoming the next governor unless he has tremendous hidden campaign debate skills and he is just waiting for the general.
I didn't watch the stream, nor pay that much attention. I know the best choice among the four participants.
But if Hickinlooper gets this clean air deal (see recent posts elsewhere) done -and doesn't ban guns or pardon anyone on death row between now and Nov -he's a lock. He's got the best triangulation in recent memory – it's real. He appeals to the pro-business , pro entrpreneur crowd. He appeals to moderate D"s (aka most Colorado D's). And in the end – can Tancredo really win? Can Gessler? I don't see it.
No and , no.
Hick is struggling with the O&G issue, but he has done enough good things to keep most of his base. The greenies won’t desert him..
For whom else would they vote?
For whom, indeed?
It's the short answer to an ongoing and still unresolved conversation I have been having with myself for a while. The plain truth is that Hickenlooper is not my friend, does not represent my values–despite widespread and vocal dissent from the people (like me) who elected him and their allied representatives. He is anti-environment, anti-labor, and my friends who are career administrative officials in state govt are telling horror stories that Hick is quietly emplacing his people at the top of state agencies, and dismantling or ignoring established policies and procedures. My assessment is that Hick is only "progressive" insofar as the legislature is pushing him; with a Repub legislature he would be perfectly comfortable to govern as a Republican. And there is a danger that if he is empowered with re-election, his ambitions will turn toward the national stage. I do not want that on my conscience.
The counterargument is that the Republicans are so much worse, that one can't take the risk of not voting for Hick (or Obama, etc etc) despite their serious flaws. Realistically, do you really think the Repubs are going to sweep the governorship plus the legislature and impose theocracy? Beyond that, the philosopher Karl Popper talked about the priinciple of falsibiability: that by continually rejecting the worse/false objective, progress is made over the longer term. Perhaps that is the kind of rationale I should apply to choosing candidates. But that is not how candidates are presented is it? They run to appeal to our emotions, to represent that they are likeable, they are like us, they "share our values." And we are led to believe that if we don't vote for candidate A, then candidate B will impose their antithetical worldview and destroy life as we know it. So you know what? Maybe the way out of the box, to actually effect change in the direction of the leadership that purports to represent me but refuses to listen or change course, is to tell them to go fuck themselves, I'm not playing. .
Perfect analysis. There was no one at or absent from the debate who has a snowball's chance in hell against Hick. I'm pretty sure even most of the R pols who will be out there claiming whoever they pick is going to win know that, too. But they still have to go through the motions of believing in their guy just like we CD6 Dems always had to go through the motions of believing we were asking people to volunteer for someone who could actually win in old CD6.
You can't just concede. You have to run someone for all of the big races even if you know there's no shot. You can't get volunteers to work their hearts out if you tell them from day one that losing with a halfway respectable showing is the best possible outcome even though you know that's the case. And you, JBJK, don't have to be for Hick to know which end is up.
I think former St. Sen. Kopp's comment that Hank Brown supports him is correct. If I read the campaign finance reports correctly, Hank Brown has contributed $1,000 to the Kopp campaign. I think that's an endorsement.
Please add to Big Line
Redstate's drafting Beauprez. I love the smell of desperation in the morning.