U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Michael Bennet
(D) Phil Weiser
60%↑
50%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Jena Griswold
60%↑
40%↑
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez
(D) J. Danielson
(R) Sheri Davis
50%
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(D) Jeff Bridges
(R) Kevin Grantham
40%
40%
30%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(D) Somebody
80%
40%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Somebody
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Manny Rutinel
(D) Yadira Caraveo
45%↓
40%↑
30%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
February 22, 2009 04:31 PM UTC
17 Comments
Burris’ appointment was too political – Bennet’s wasn’t political enough.
Blago was so transparently corrupt, it boggles the mind that Burris would be crazy enough to pursue the appointment.
Ritter is by all accounts, a man of principle, so as mysterious as his thinking may be to us, his selection of Bennet was based on merit (apparently uncovered during the interview process), not any political favors (or obvious calculations).
So while one appointment may be doomed as Fruit of a poisoned tree, the other I believe, will flourish through hard work and a sincere desire to help.
the appointment is when someone who normally would never run for the seat, but would do a good job, can be appointed. It will be interesting to see how Bennet does, but so far we just don’t know.
Why Ritter would pick this opportunity to play talent scout when he had a deep bench of veterans in their prime, ready to go.
The odds were 80% to something less than 50% (IIRC) on re-electibility given the two profiles.
Thus, we now have Wade Norris trying to start a cat fight, and in all likelihood, a better funded Republican field in 2010.
Bennet has 2009 to get up to speed, build a good track record, and scare off any serious competition. He’ll definitely earn his seat in 2010.
was not to leave any Democratic Congressional seats vulnerable, but that just narrowed the field.
That was the main reason why Bennet was so shocking to people. Once the Governor decided he wasn’t going to put any seats into special election, then and only then did Bennet become a candidate.
That of course brings up the other candidate who wouldn’t have created any chaos: Romanoff.
We’ll see if the Governor ends up regretting not picking Golden Boy in the first place.
If the economy is doing well enough next year, Ritter and Bennet should be able to take some credit due. If the economy isn’t showing signs of life, I still don’t think the majority of voters will say, “Darn, we should have cut taxes for the rich, afterall”.
The Republicans will need a white knight with a brilliant new strategy, and none are on the horizon that I can see.
And I really don’t see any Democrats challenging either one on purely ideological grounds.
I’ve voted for Romanoff four times since 2000. He’s far too smart and classy to make this personal.
But I wouldn’t get too confident about the voters not taking it out on the Dems if conditions don’t start improving next year.
Everything else you mentioned is (miraculously, if you ask me) lining up in Ritter and Bennet’s favor. I also doubt that Romanoff would engage in a selfish primary bid, but there’s still a lot of time for Bennet (and Ritter) to mess things up. to a point where it will be unavoidable.
Experience, ability to work across the aisle, make pragmatic deals and appeal to broad range of Colorado voters, urban, suburban and rural, in 2010. Anyone who thinks he couldn’t have raised plenty of money doesn’t know where the money comes from in Colorado Dem politics.
On the plus side, Ritter isn’t bat shit crazy and Bennet isn’t a self promoting loon. If Burris had any gravitas he would have refused the appointment and spared us this circus.
.
If Burris doesn’t belong in the Senate,
the voters of the state should get to decide that.
Why no mention of the MANIFEST conflict of interest in the new Governor wanting to sell the office himself,
only far more discreetly ?
.
that diffusion of decision making (ie, more rather than less people voting on the decision) has, all other things being equal (which, of course, they never are), the effect of reducing quid-pro-quos (due to the exponential increase in transaction costs as number of actors involved increases). That is one legitimate consideration in the debate over whether to eliminate government appointment of vacated senate seats.
Check out this item: http://www.politico.com/news/s…
Of course that assumes Burris resigns posthaste.
Are you advocating Burris hangs on for the 2010 general election?
.
for the Constitution Party candidate, I believe.
.
Blago made the appointment to confound the Illinois democrats, and not much can be inferred about the choice beyond Blago’s weird dementia. I’m holding on to the ‘you screw with me? I’ll screw with you’ explanation for Blago’s appointment of Burris.
Does anybody really know about or have good circumstantials on the Ritter choice of Bennett? I can’t even get close to a satisfying explanation. And Ritter’s fault is that he hasn’t said much — did I miss something when I had the flu? The Governor should have been expecting that people he’s going to rely on for reelection were going to get puzzled and frustrated about his terseness in this regard.
The fact that people, especially democrats, still don’t seem to be satisfied with Ritter’s explanation (not his choice, but an explanation) is not good. Somebody who doesn’t follow politics at all told me that Ritter’s reasoning was obvious — to try to bring the corpordos and rich guys, rich guys like Phil Anshutz in to the circle of gazillionaires influening state politics these days. Sometimes the correct explanation is the most obvious one?
He only has to hope that Bennet will win the hearts of Colorado voters.
Neither of them is a very inspirational public speaker.
Salazar has a sort of monotone, and so does Bennet. Bennet doesn’t sound as if he’s ever given an impassioned speech about anything his whole life.
Or am I missing something? Maybe Bennet can rev himself up and be a better public speaker?
Depending on his opponent, that might be enough.
We have a history of races in Colorado in which being smart and competent was not enough.