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

(R) Jeff Hurd

(D) Adam Frisch

52%↑

48%

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

52%↑

48%↓

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
April 20, 2008 01:12 AM UTC

Is Udall "pure" enough for us?

  • 30 Comments
  • by: DavidThi808

Ok, I’ll be the first to agree that I find Udall disappointing. My biggest disappointment is he appears to have joined Bob Schaffer in the witness protection program.

But we don’t get perfection in our candidates (as I’m not running). They are human beings and as such they come with trade-offs. With that in mind, here’s a post I wrote a while ago on my blog What I am looking for in a candidate

Let’s take a second and lay out what we want in a candidate. Who we elect is important. So important that most of us don’t even bother to vote, uh that most of us voters spend maybe an hour deciding who to vote for, uh damn-it, it’s important – trust me.

Ok, so what do we want from the person we will elect to run this country? Well what we want is really pretty simple. We’re Americans, we don’t do expect to get everything (and we want it now too).

  1. They grew up poor, born in a log cabin, raised themselves by their bootstraps.
    1. Growing up rich means they feel entitled and won’t work for us.
    2. Growing up middle class means they’re just like us – yuck.
  2. They are brilliant. We want someone smart for this job.
    1. But not someone who used their brains to make a fortune, because then they are part of the system.
    2. But not someone who went in to business and did not make a fortune, because then they are a failure.
    3. But not someone who went in academia because then they become a know-it-all and we detest those.
    4. But not someone who did nothing with their intellect because then they’re lazy.
  3. They have experience. This is no place for on the job training.
    1. But they must not have spent a lot of time in politics because then they’re part of the system.
    2. But the must show they have been able to accomplish great things in the system.
  4. Every donation must be totally clean. Money can only be accepted from people who have no interest in the candidate or their issues.
  5. Every policy they have is one I agree with. Everything important to me is important to them.
  6. They never make mistakes. We must have perfection.
  7. They learn from their mistakes – instantly and completely.
  8. They don’t campaign because that demeans the process.
  9. They only discuss "the issues" and refuse to reply to rumors and falsehoods because that demeans the process.

Anything less than the above and you will be classified as a "typical politician" who is unworthy of our attention or vote. We know Democracy will work better when all candidates fit the above profile and we know if we refuse to accept the compromise and trade-offs inherent in our system today, we will magically get the system we fantasize about.

Tweet
Share

Comments

30 thoughts on “Is Udall “pure” enough for us?”

    1. Seriously, tell me what you think would improve my posts, and what criteria I should use for front page vs side panel (I do post diaries there too if I think they are not worthy of the front page).

      At present my only feedback is the number of comments. The more comments, the more I think something belongs on the front page. And this one so far is doing abdly enough by that measure, that in hindsight it should have gone on the side bar.

      Anyways, feedback welcome, either here or via email to david@thielen.com

      thanks – dave

      1. for improvement, honestly. You have a “Master of the Obvious” approach that is really annoying to some people, and I don’t think you can change it. Some are fans. Some aren’t (I’m not). Don’t take it personally.

        However, I would suggest you restrict your front page stuff to attempts at analysis of genuine political stories — not whimsical stuff like this.  

        1. …was to try and hit people’s bitching about Udall’s stance on a bunch of issues in a way to make them think about it. Based on the comments, it wasn’t successful.

          I’m not really sure what Master of the Obvious means. I do try to keep in mind that what is “obvious” to many of us on the left is “untrue” to many on the right.

          Based on the small number of comments on this post, I’ve already taken it as feedback that a post like this belonged on the sidebar.

          thanks – dave

          1. and had it been posted at another time, it may have attracted more comments.  The awesome weather this weekend and John Galt’s diary (about Udall and MM) that got promoted on friday may have contributed to the lack of interest…

      2. It’s easy never to fail, all you need is to never try anything. This wasn’t a great post, but it didn’t suck either. One of my personal heros is Ulysses S. Grant, because he wasn’t afraid to fail. Failure was an old Friend to Grant; it taught him many lessons.  McClellan, who had known only success, was so paralyzed by the fear of failure that it wouldn’t do anything, thus guaranteeing failure.  Remember the following words from Teddy Roosevelt.

        Teddy Roosevelt – To the Man in the Arena

        It is not the critic who counts, nor the man who points how the strong man stumbled or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena; whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly…who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends himself in a worthy cause; who, at best, knows the triumph of high achievement; and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.

        Theodore Roosevelt, 1910

        1. In fact, I figure one of these days I should run for some office so I can put myself out there as those we all talk about here do.

          And yes, I love that quote from TR. I’m not afraid to fail (I’ve worked most of my life in the start-up world), but I do try to learn from every mistake.

  3. How?

    If he’s not enough of a left-wing nutcase for you, then vote for Bob Schaffer or stay home.

    Either one will get you Schaffer.

    Is that what you want?  Go for it.

    I guess that was the point of your post.

    The part about “Ok, I’ll be the first to agree that I find Udall disappointing” is what leads me to ask the question, “exactly what is it that you want?”  Somebody ideologically “pure” who can’t get elected?  If that’s what you want, then you’re welcome to whine about the quality of representation for the next six years.

    It’s time some ideologues (yourself not included because you were brave enough to bring this up) got a little more pragmatic.

      2. Udall has been holding these meetings called “IdeaRaisers” for the past year or more now.  They are essentially town meetings where he hears about ideas from average Coloradans all across the state.  He’s held several dozen of them.  What are you talking about??????

        Mark Udall is one of the most refreshing Dems to run in this state in a long time — why do you feel the need to diss him because he isn’t Dennis Kucinich?  (And, no, I don’t care whether you’ve ever supported Kucinich or not — the tone and concept that Udall isn’t “Good” enough is the exact same argument Kucinich folks made / make.)

        1. Udall does not attend the vast majority of his IdeaRaisers (100 so far). They are organized and run by volunteers in his absence. In that sense it’s misleading to suggest that “Udall has been holding these meetings.”

        2. I’m pretty moderate so I doubt my politics is much different from Udall’s, although to be honest, I have not heard much from him recently about where he stands on much of anything.

          My point is he’s invisible and I don’t think that is a good approach to winning and I don’t think it’s a good attribute in a legislator.

          1. If the point is that he’s invisible (which he most certainly is not — he just probably isn’t as visible in the Second CD as you’re used to since he’s out in the rest of the state introducing himself to six other CDs), then maybe your post should be entitled something other than “Is Udall ‘pure’ enough for us”.

            Sounds like your issue is not one of purity, but one of whether he works hard enough for your tastes.  This is a large state, and I’m sorry if you don’t see him as much as you’re used to in the Boulder area, but he’s definitely all over the state.

            1. I was not saying that Udall was not pure enough – I was pointing out that I think those demanding purity from him are off-base.

              With that said, I think those that say recently he has disappeared and appears to not stand for anything have a valid point. All I have heard from his campaign is we must vote for Mark because he’s a Democrat.

        3. They were used in his meeting at North High School to promote his pro-war machine agenda.  The meeting was a one way affair without an open microphone or any actual dialog with Udall.  Udall is scared to death of the left wing of the Democratic Party so he is carefully avoiding having anything to do with them because he doesn’t want to represent them yet he wants their money.

          The guy has devolved into another professional politician who thinks spending $5,000 a second on a fruitless occupation makes him a “moderate”.  He exemplifies the slick media packaged politician who carries water for the war profiteers while giving lip service to peace.

          To those who say we have to accept Udall because the alternative is Schaffer, I would say that principle IS more important than winning.  If Udall wins then we are stuck with a war-profiteer supporter well into the future.  If he loses than yes we have to deal with Schaffer but it clears the decks for a better Democrat to appear.  I would prefer to lose with a value-less Democrat today then be stuck with a pro-war profiteer phony leading the party for the next decade.

          It is a sad commentary on Udall’s career of serving CD 2 that all three candidates to replace him have vowed to honor the will of the constituents in his district and will vote to withhold funding for this disastrous occupation.  We can’t afford it but Udall doesn’t really give a damn what his constituents think.  That is why he is careful to avoid talking with them.

          1. Where there is an assumption that the “constituents” (i.e., Colorado voters) are left-wing folks who want a precipitous withdrawal from Iraq, as opposed to the Clinton and Obama solutions?

            It is a sad commentary on Democrats if they forget that Udall took what was at the time a very courageous stance AGAINST the war by voting against it.  If you’re now arguing that Udall is for the war, you’re falling right into the trap Dick Wadhams wants you to.  Sad.

          2. Sure he was against the war before he was for it but what has he done lately to end the war except give Bush every funding request that has been submitted to Congress?  He has been singing the “Sometime soon” song since at least 2004.  I personally talked to him about it then at the CD 2 Assembly and he hasn’t moved one iota since.  He could double for McCain with his support for a hundred year war.  I even asked him under what conditions he would consider removing troops from Iraq and never received a specific answer.

            If CD 2 was overwhelming Republican and Udall opposed further funding would he be representing his district?  Republicans would be howling in protest if their views were being ignored by their elected representative.  It is one thing to say that he has to consider all the perspectives in his district but CD 2 is overwhelmingly against continued waste on this travesty and he basically blows off the wishes of the majority of his constituents and then avoids talking to them about it.  If he won’t represent the wishes of the overwhelming majority in his district then does anyone know who he will represent when he is a senator?  The agenda of the war machine?  Where are his proposals to invest in our Peace Machine (State Department)?  Why doesn’t he support John Murtha or Jim Webb?

            If he is such and incredible liberal and great Democrat then why he scared to be known as one.  I hate his “I’m not really a Democrat.  I’m a moderate” BS.  Have Democrats really reached this point that winning is the only thing that matters and values need to hidden in the closet because we don’t want to be known as “liberals”?

        4. that Udall enthusiasts on this site insist on vague generalities in lieu of specifics to support their assertions. Udall’s legislative record is one example on this thread. His public appearances are another: his own campaign Web site touts his attendance at the 100th IdeaRaiser–on March 18. Of the handful of other events within 700 miles of Boulder, only one–a fund raiser–suggests he will be there. If he’s to be seen, SouthDem, tell us where. What do you find refreshing about him?  

          1. First, the easy answers:  just this past weekend, I know he was campaigning in Colorado Springs.  And I just received an e-mail this morning from DemNotes that said he was also in Canon City over the weekend, speaking to crowds at both.  A simple web search finds him speaking to things like veteran’s groups and aerospace forums in recent days. It also shows him speaking in places like Fort Morgan, Vail, Carbondale, and other places all across the state.  

            Don’t try to sell your Wadhams talking points here.

            Udall is a Democrat who understands the environment not from an intellectual “ecology” perspective, but from the perspective of an outdoorsman.  His work, just as one example, on the bark beetle mess, has been a key role in Congress.  He has also worked to preserve roadless areas and wildernesses throughout Colorado, including the Roan Plateau.

            Udall spoke out against the Iraq War when it was not popular to do so, because it was the right thing to do.  He’s been pushing for renewable energy measures for years — long before the rest of Colorado’s politicians figured out the political popularity of that.  

            Finally, his successful work to bring aerospace job development to Colorado is just another example of a leader who, while he has core values he won’t sacrifice, understands the need to work with the other side of the aisle to get things done for working families in Colorado.

            Do you want more?  (Of course you do, I’m betting no matter what I say, you would not be satisfied.)

          2. We are going to need stalwarts like you in the upcoming election.  I’m glad that Udall has been spotted in Southern Colorado so people down there can see him.  I have to point out that there is a difference between hosting an event and having a dialog with people.  My experience with Udall is that it is the former and not the latter.

            He is active in environmental issues but has a critical bill (H.R. 3072) that has been hung up in committee since July of 2007.  This bill deals with the effects of the pine beetle infestation.  One of the critical components of the bill is that it allows the National Forest Service to issue cutting permits to private entities to cut infested trees on public land.  I live in Gilpin County and we are on the edge of this epidemic.  We needed this bill passed last year so that we could have a chance this year to cut surrounding land and reduce the infestation inside our subdivisions and reduce the fire threat.  I wish Udall had the legislative ability to move his bill out of committee and onto the floor.  As it is it amounts to an “I tried” effort with no significant result.

            I don’t have a problem with you enthusiastically supporting Udall but I would suggest that you make sure that you don’t see him through rose colored glasses because the folks in his district don’t.  There is a difference between going through the motions and getting things done.  This is why I am excited by our three candidates in CD 2.  They all look like doers who have rejected the “Someday soon” excuse for staying in Iraq.  It is time to go and if any one of them campaigned on “Someday soon”, they wouldn’t stand a chance in my district.

            http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/…

  4. Yesterday, Bloomberg TV aired an interview between host Al Hunt and Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), in which the presidential candidate attempted to distance himself from President Bush and empathize with middle-class Americans who are struggling financially:

    “I respect the views of people who basically think that the status quo is satisfactory today. I don’t. I think Americans are hurting, and hurting badly. In fact, I think Americans are not better off than they were eight years ago, when you look at what’s happened to middle-income Americans.

    These remarks seem disingenous. On Thursday – just one day before the aforementioned interview, McCain also sat down with Bloomberg TV’s Peter Cook. During that interview, he said there had been “great progress economically” since Bush took office:

    MR. COOK: You think if Americans were asked, are you better off today than you were before George Bush took office more than seven years ago, what answer would they give? […]

    SEN. MCCAIN: I think if you look at the overall record and millions of jobs have been created, et cetera, et cetera, you could make an argument that there’s been great progress economically over that period of time. But that’s no comfort. That’s no comfort to families now that are facing these tremendous economic challenges.

    So despite all this “great progress,” Americans are still “hurting badly”? Maybe that explains why McCain has said that many of the country’s economic problems are just “psychological.”

    Are good Americans really ready to vote for this dysfunctional, incoherent, inconsistent, “straight talker” ???

  5. David, while I can’t speak directly to your issues with Udall in CD2 this past year, I have had the opportunity to acquaint myself with the Congressman over that same period of time.  I am a Republican who has not left the party — but knows the party has left me.  Running for Senator means that candidate will need to represent the entire state, not just a congressional district that may be either liberal or conservative (BTW, I hate these generalizatoins).  There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the Congressman will do just that — and I have an equally strong feeling that Bob Shaffer would not.  We have examples over and over in this state where my party representatives continue to represent only their narrow, fringe constituency while ignoring the balance of their constitutents after being elected.   Thanks for the post — but I think we both know at the end of the day the better choice for this state is clear…”pure” enough or not, the Congressman is going to make a great Senator, and will be bringing a lot of disgruntled Republicans into his column as supporters.

    Let’s have a cup of coffee someday — would love to share my perspectives with you.

      1. Once he becomes a Senator, he belongs to all of us 🙂   I’ve seen him in campaign mode in a rural part of the state…he’ll do just fine.  

  6. Time to hear from Udall fans something besides “Dissatisfied with Udall? Then vote for Schaffer, vote for Schaffer.” Is that the best you’ve got? It’s time to hear from the Udall campaign–we know you’re out there–something specific that Udall brings to the table. Your silence so far is deafening. I have to wonder whether dissatisfaction with the GOP candidate’s nonsense in Saipan is going to prove sufficient six-plus months from now to convert too many people in Colorado to vote for a Democrat without some positive reason(s) to do so.

    1. I seriously doubt Udall or any of his people gives a rat’s knuckle about some purity troll on an insider blog named JO who thinks Udall’s not liberal enough.

      I never said (nor did anyone) the words you have in quotation marks. Which means that either you don’t know what quotation marks are for or you’re being transparently dishonest.

      Please, keep it up. The more the far left bloviates about Udall being too moderate, the more the media and the voting public will start to understand that despite Dick Wadhams repeating himself like a broken record, Udall is actually a moderate.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

232 readers online now

Newsletter

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