Mitch McConnell Wooing Mike Coffman at Breakfast Tomorrow

Sen. Mitch McConnell, table for two, please.

Table for two, please.

As Roll Call reports, Rep. Mike Coffman (R-Aurora) will have breakfast tomorrow with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who hopes to pursuade Coffman to challenge Democratic incumbent Sen. Michael Bennet in 2016. Judging from the headline of the Roll Call story (“What if Mike Coffman Says No“), somebody may have more than egg on their face tomorrow afternoon:

Republicans are trying to recruit Rep. Mike Coffman to challenge Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet in Colorado. If he stays put in the House, that gives the GOP a crop of candidates who could have a harder time in what will be one of Republicans’ few offensive opportunities in 2016.

Coffman will have breakfast Thursday with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who will surely make the case to convince the four-term lawmaker to try and join him across the rotunda. Asked about recruitment efforts, Coffman quipped, “Pressure, pressure, pressure.”

Coffman is taking his time. He told CQ Roll Call a decision would come “probably within the next month.”

“Still thinking. Never say never. But I haven’t ruled it out,” he said.

Roll Call says that there is a “large field of Colorado Republicans” who are waiting on Coffman’s decision, though the story just mentions a bunch of obvious names that we already know to be less of a list than a scribble on a napkin.

We’ve said for a long time in this space that we do NOT think Coffman will run for the U.S. Senate. Coffman’s troubles with the VA Hospital in Aurora certainly won’t help.

0 Shares

21 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. ZappateroZappatero says:

    The larger factor than his Republican opponent is Bennet's record, such as it is, his Blue Dog political posturing, and his media manipulation skills. He probably can't change his colors this late in the game and start being all "Democrat-y", as current events would seem to indicate.

    Wall Street, the largest source of mainstream Democratic financial support, is comfortable with socially liberal initiatives like gay marriage. But it is largely opposed to some of the specific measures that would reduce wealth inequality and encourage economic growth, especially in the areas of taxation, stronger regulations, and the criminal prosecution of banker fraud.

    That's our Mike. Could he possibly engineer a foxhole conversion in what should be the fight of his short political life?

    The Left Was Right

    Which raises another point: On issue after issue, the left has been prescient in its analysis.

    Welfare reform? When Bill Clinton signed 1996's legislation, it was the left which pointed out that it wouldn't work. "I have devoted the last 30-plus years to doing whatever I could to help in reducing poverty in America," said Peter Edelman of the Department of Health and Human Services as he tendered his resignation. "I believe the recently enacted welfare bill goes in the opposite direction." …

    The invasion of Iraq? Many on the left were marginalized for opposing it, but they stood up when others — including some leading Democrats — did not.

    Deregulation? When top Democrats were pushing it, it was the left that warned of fraud and future financial crises.

    Austerity and deregulation sure are popular in DC, as seen by the number of Democrats who blindly sign on to those policies, but what do the people want?

    The left hasn't just been right. It has also been popular.

    Some centrist Democrats like to say they'd govern more liberally, but the United States is a "center-right" country. There is very little truth in this. It's true that relatively few Americans describe themselves as liberal or progressive (although that number is rising), but Americans hold progressive positions on many issues.

    Vox said it best: "Bernie Sanders's ideas are so popular that Hillary Clinton is running on them." Polls show that, issue after issue, Americans support a leftist agenda of economic populism – that is, as long as is presented to them on an issue-by-issue basis. 

    As Eddie Murphy once said, "Who you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?"

  2. BlueCatBlueCat says:

    You  keep talking about his troubles with the VA hospital being a negative but I just saw him in yet another appearance, this time on Channel 7 local news, looking like the caring vet congressman bravely fighting for vets against his own House leadership. Not a word about his sub-committee having supervised the whole fiasco as it was going south. So far, it looks like more of a huge plus for him. As far as the casual voter knows, he's the guy fighting to get this back on track for our vets. Get out of your progressive bubble, Colpols.

    • Wong21fr says:

      Meanwhile the safest congressperson in Colorado (maybe 2nd safest), Diane Degette, seemingly hasn't uttered a peep about the VA fiasco despite the fact that the existing, outdated, terrible facility is in her district.  Especially since the facility might just have to provide care to veterans for a lot longer than expected and is currently being left to rot.  Why is that?  

       

      It sometimes seems as if the left only cares about veterans when there's political hay to be made.  

  3. UglyAmericanUglyAmerican says:

    He'll run. He'll lose, by a hair.

    • MADCO says:

      No. No. No!

      Bennett must lose: he's just not left enough.  See, all Moderate, centrist Ds must lose. It's the only way to prove only more lefty Ds can win.

      • ZappateroZappatero says:

        for a detailed history of the sad and perpetually declining Blue Dog coalition, and their destructive philosophy, go here.

        R's have been dragging D's, and DC media, to the right since Reagan. It hasn't stopped for one second. And if the kind of R's we have to be bi with are Cruz, Christie, Gardner, Jindal, Boehner, McCain, Paul, and McConnell, I'd rather we not.

        Bennet will lose and I will not miss him one bit.

        • FrankUnderwood says:

          I will miss Bennet if President Scott Walker's first Supreme Court nominee ends up being confirmed on a 51/50 vote with Senator Mike Coffman providing the 50th vote and Vice President Ted Cruz breaking the tie.

        • BlueCatBlueCat says:

          And we'll have people like you, Zap, in various states who think their center right Dem Senators (in reality no more center right than President Obama) are just as bad as Rs and so don't vote for them to thank for the devastation that will be left in the wake of the Supreme Court that will be the direct result. You don't like Citizens United? You don't like corporations are people and money is speech? You don't like rolling back voters' rights?  With your help the wackos are just getting warmed up. What they lose in future elections to the growing Dem leaning demos they can take back in a Supreme Court packed with wacko justices young enough to last for decades.

      • FrankUnderwood says:

        We must purify our party of people like Bennet, Mary Landrieu, Mark Pryor, Joe Manchin, Robert Casey, Mark Begich, the two guys from Virginia and all their ilk even if it means that the Tea Baggers will be calling the shots for the next decade because it is better to have that than to have DINOs who are simply watered-down versions of the Republicans.

        (P.S. I'm being sarcastic. However, this does reflect the views of some of the more fanatical true believers in the Democratic Party.)

    • BlueCatBlueCat says:

      A not unlikely scenario, Ugs.

  4. PKolbenschlag says:

    As someone who feels personally responsible from time to time for Mitch McConnell I first apoligize to the world and all her inhabitants, and next wish to convey as much as I would like to watch Morgan Carroll clean Coffman's clock I would also enjoy watching Sen Bennet do that.  

  5. JeffcoDemoJeffcoDemo says:

    Am I the only one cynical enough to see this as kabuki theatre where a deal is already set where Mikey rides in in a white horse and saves the VA and rides the pony all the way to the senate?

    • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

      Mikey can't save the VA hospital without $1.3 Billion, and his BFFs are allergic to spending money on hospitals, roads, and other lasting contributions to the public good. So all he can do is kabuki theatre, and I don't think that will be enough to get him elected. 

       

  6. Republican 36 says:

    JeffcoDemo I think you hit the nail on the head. All the thrashing about is merely political show. At the end of the day, the new VA hospital has to be completed and the Republicans will try to posture it in a way that makes it look like Congressman Coffman saved the day.

    • BlueCatBlueCat says:

      Coffman is already all over the media as the brave military background congressman fighting for vets over this. If anything positive gets done, he gets credit. If it all goes south, all the better. Just goes to show how dysfunctional the VA is as part of the Dem administration (It's dysfunctional under all administrations but you can't really argue that it's doing a good job now) but Coffman sure was out there fighting the good fight. Republicans like him needed to right the ship! This is a total win/win for Coffman at this point regardless of outcome.  

      While R pols have no problem attacking Dems who served in the military, no matter how many limbs it cost them, Dem pols are way too squeamish. They won't be out there pointing out Coffman's role in allowing this fiasco to happen on his committee's watch or detailing his many votes to screw troops and vets while supporting the top .1%. They'd hate to be accused of being mean to a Reserve officer, retired or serving, because everyone knows Rs are patriots who support the troops and Dems have to be extra careful not to look mean to any R who served since Dems are labeled as less patriotic and more wimpy, even the ones with bronze and silver stars. 

      It's the same ol' same ol'.  Fetal seems to be Dem pols' default position on everything but abortion and gay marriage.

      • Diogenesdemar says:

        Plus a sad . . . 

        . . . because you're completely correct.

        I quit the Democratic Party in 2002, as a personal protest I suppose, because the dem-fetalists allowed the Cheney Administration to run roughshod over the constitution and the planet (loyal opposition, my aching arse) — reregistered as "unaffiliated", but remained pretty much a reliable D vote . . . 

        Fetal seems to be Dem pols' default position on everything but abortion and gay marriage. 

        . . . [flash forward to about 2012] Although I strongly support reproductive choice and sexual orientation non-discrimination — that does not a Party make.  

        Newsflash Dempols — there's a big, wide world out there and you better start getting engaged in improving all of it, or make some room for yourselves next to the Teabaggers in that ole' dustbin of history!

        We're tired of waiting here . . . !!!

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.