Bennet Raises $1.35 Million in First Three Months

(Let it begin, let it begin, let it begin! – promoted by Colorado Pols)

POLS UPDATE: Bam, says the Denver Post’s Lynn Bartels:

That fundraising success is likely to go a long way to scaring off a potential primary opponent – and could even give Republicans eyeing a run against the newly minted Democratic senator some pause.

Up to now, Bennet has been an unknown quantity as a fundraiser, a political neophyte who has never run for public office but who also has strong ties to the business community and a national reputation as an education reformer.

The last of those factors have turned out to be major assets, allowing Bennet to beat Democrat Mark Udall’s best off-year effort – $1.12 million in the second quarter of 2007 – by several hundred thousand dollars.

“He has a deep network of donors, both in Colorado and nationally, who may not be the normal, traditional folks who would give to somebody but who are really stepping up in a big way,” said Craig Hughes, Bennet’s campaign manager.

Senator Bennet raised over $1.35 million during the first three months of 2009. Very impressive for someone who just got into politics. At that rate, he will raise over $11 million by the November 2010 election which should be enough to run a very good campaign. These have to be sobering numbers for Messrs. Buck, Frazier and Beauprez.

This is another indication Senator Bennet knows what he is doing.

78 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. ClubTwitty says:

    oh wait, never mind

    • twas brillig says:

      If a brand shiny new senator can raise over $400,000 a month, I think it speaks volumes to his political ability and the consolidation of support around Bennet.

      Every prospective Republican candidate will now be spending the evening re-thinking whether the prospect of a 2010 stomping will look very good on their resume. The already thin bench will dwindle.

      The Democratic Don Quixote Caucus bloggers trying to whip up a primary with homemade sticker campaigns will seem even more isolated and irrelevant. The empty bench will continue to be their biggest obstacle.

      It looks like Bennet is well on his way to meeting an ambitious budget.  

      • Ray Springfield says:

        Nevertheless, referring to loyal supporters of the ex-Speaker or Rep.Perlmutter as isolated and irrelevant is plane wrong.

        Sen. Bennet has a lot of class.

        Your references sadly do not.

        At some point you may come to believe in Democracy. Sen. Bennet does. Speaker Romanoff does. Rep. Perlmutter does.

        The President of the United States does.

        It wouldn’t surprise me to find that you referred to the Presidents’ campaign in 2007 in the same terms.

        • Ray Springfield says:


        • twas brillig says:

          Despite the Don Quixote Blogger Caucus’s best attempts, there was never any evidence that they were either broad-based or relevant — hence, they were instead isolated and irrelevant. Since they were characterized by silliness (e.g., attacking any and all critics with wacky zingers about “democracy” while offering zero evidence of seriousness), their isolation and irrelevance was repeatedly reinforced.

          Yesterday, Senator Bennet just happened to put an exclamation point on the end of that argument. Moving on….

          • Ray Springfield says:

            You consistantly attack and attempt to ridicule people who think differently than you.

            I happened to run into sen. Bennet at the after party of Colorao Young Dems after the JJ. I had my friend of Romanoff sticker on and clip board for supporters.

            We had a very good conversation and he even offered to assist me in getting back to my car at the convention center.

            The only one irrlevanet in this is you. Everyone else has particiapted in Democracy without attempting to constantly insult the opposition.  

            • Ray Springfield says:

              I really should spell check everything. My sight is slowly becoming more and more dyslexic.

            • twas brillig says:

              Ray, I’m going to lay out a simple premise good for both life and politics:

              IF raving lunacy, THEN irrelevance and isolation.

              You have engaged in the former with your creepy and unhinged commentsf, so my pointing out the latter (again, your irrelevance and isolation) is not an insult, it is a simple observation of an inevitable consequence.

              I don’t think this next bit will ever penetrate the fog, but here goes — you and Wade and David Sirota have been a gift for Michael Bennet. Here on Pols, your goonball rhetoric and inability to make a rational point, along with Wade’s insufferably strident horseshit that was laughed off, you two thoroughly delegitimized the “Draft Andrew” movement.

              I said it once, I’ll say it again: I like Andrew Romanoff, and argued for his selection, and I believe a primary would have been great fun! What you clowns have done is helped drive Bennet to consolidate his support, and made a popular former state house speaker look like a fringe member of his party. I’m actually more than a little pissed that you guys have tarnished the image of one of Colorado’s great Democratic leaders.

              If you want to feel insulted, well guess what, dipshit, thin-skinned people get insulted all the time in America…it’s called, “democracy.”  

              • Ray Springfield says:

                Your flaming demonstrates your fringe element beliefs  that you purport to be liberal.

                Frankly, I like Sen.Bennet.

                He’d do better to not have you as a supporter. You’ll cause people to vote Republican with your far left rants.

                Andrew did not discourage our efforts.

                His silence on announcing has stated his intentions.

                I not only like Andrew, he’s a friend.

                I suppose the labor supporters from Pueblo which applauded our efforts qualify as fringe in your view.

                I suppose that house districts activists all throughout Denver you consider fringe.

                I think perhaps that you’d think that Chomsky is mainstream.  

                It’s clear that when you have to resort to insults that you have lost the debate.

                I don’t feel any remorse for showing support for Andrew.

                I do now support Sen. Bennet who I lobbied in the US Capitol last week.

                Once again, this cites’ anononymity leads individuals like you to far over state your postions and attack without logic nor facts.

                Relationships matter. The only person who thinks Andrew Romanoff has been made a fringe element in this is you.

        • colorado_dude says:

          Clearly the “loyal supporters” of Romanoff and Perlmutter for a senate challenge are irrelevant, if they were (relevant) they would have done something to block the big donors’ flock to Bennet here. I bet if some of the top dollars had even thought that Romanoff might challenge Bennet they would’ve held off to see what happens so they could back the winning (or better) horse. Didn’t happen. Bennet has consolidated his support, hard to see how anyone could or would want to make a serious primary threat now. All of the Wade Norrises in the world didn’t do Romanoff all that much in the end.

          And what does that even mean “you may come to believe in Democracy”? I mean, really, I understand that purple prose can sound nice, but in the end it doesn’t mean anything by itself.

          • Ray Springfield says:

            of the favor of the powers that be.

            I’m sure he didn’t support the President at the beginning of the Obama campaign and probably labled it “Quixotic.”  

            • twas brillig says:

              I liked Richardson for the job. Not a fan of the Clintons, and thought Obama was a light weight. He began changing my mind in the summer of 07, after his speech on Pakistan. I became a donor the night of the Iowa primary.

              Ray, you don’t have a firm grasp on much, and you sure don’t have any grasp on what I believe, and you make yourself look like a creepy zealot when you label people “maoists” when you run out of logical things to say.  

      • CJ says:

        Senator Bennet is a Great Man.  He was, and Is, clearly the choice of The People.  That He has never been elected to any office, is Irrelevant!  To Hell!  with the Nattering Nabobs of Negativism who Harp on this [alleged] Fact!




        Who Needs Elections?!!  Ritter!  Knows Best!  That is Why He! was Chosen as Governor!

        His Truth! is marching on!

    • RedGreen says:

      is the figure I’ve heard tossed around, but the fundraising pace greatly accelerates once the election is under way.

      It’ll be interesting to see if he maintains this pace for the next couple quarters, though, because the Bennet people were beating the bushes to make a strong out-of-the-gate impression.

    • Libertad says:

      At this rate he can afford to vote NO on EFCA cloture.

      Now that is some Senatorial Free Choice!

      • Ray Springfield says:

        David Thi’s interview should be interesting.

        The 1930’s saw labor violence. If the stimulus plan doesn’t work, then it wouldn’t surprise me to see history repeat itself.

        I don’t think anyone wants to see that.

        Neo-libaeralisms’ globalisation has lead to destroying the middle class in the USA. Pres. Clinton, and Pres.Bush for that matter, did not sell this fact to the American public in the last 10 years.

        Labor will not become irrelevant as unemployment rises to a 26 year low tomorrow.

      • bhusher says:

        Don’t forget. Unions represent over 8% of workers in the state. If you factor in family as well, that is a pretty large voting block. They are also more likely to vote than the average citizen. While money really really helps, voters decide who wins.

        Let’s also not forget, the Employee Free Choice Act is a party priority as well as one for the President.  

    • Libertad says:

      You know, RINOs. Register GOP businesspeople that have been bought off with sugarplum dreams of stimulus cash and bailout financing.

      If they can just regulate my industry so that the consumer is forced to buy the shinny new green thing, I’ll be able to develop a billion dollar shinny green thing franchise which I can sell to a levered hedge fund using public pension dollars.

  2. MiddleRoadDem says:

    …and as it already stands, no real GOP opponent either.

  3. sierrafan says:

    It sounds like the Senate Race is almost all but over before it even started. Still don’t know what he stands for except that he’s pro small business (just like everyone in Congress) and hates Unions but you know its cool that I have no idea what my Senator thinks about anything from Israel or Homeland Security or the Environment or well for that fact anything. Give us some signs of life Mikey!

    Also for the love of god run some ads or something like no one knows who you are outside of us poli sci nerds. It’s very frustrating. I always have to go Senator Bennet, you know he replaced Ken Salazar. And then my friends are like Ohhh, that guy.

    • DavidThi808 says:

      It won’t give you detailed answers on everything, but I hope to provide where he’s headed on the major issues he’s working on.

    • bhusher says:

      I honestly doubt that he really has formed opinions yet on most issues. I bet you he is polling unaffiliated and Democratic voters in the state to decide his stances on the issues.

      BTW, he isn’t anti-union, but he is pro-business. He worked with at least 3 different unions while he was the superintendent of DPS. While they had some clashes, he was not viewed by those unions as anti-union.

      Going full-circle to what I mentioned before, his internal polling will show that his Democratic base supports the Employee Free Choice Act or doesn’t care. Most unaffiliated will likely be the same with a few more opposed.  

    • poodlelord says:

      Maybe Ritter saw a fundraising ability that nobody else took into account.

      • Republican 36 says:

        Although some people were upset with Gov. Ritter’s choice for U.S. Senator, primarily because they didn’t know Mr. Bennet and were worried about his ability to win an election, these numbers indicate he chose someone who is smart, as everyone has acknowledged, and politically savy.

        Gov. Ritter’s steady performance of his duties and his obvious political courage, has shone through again and again. He  fulfilled his promise on alternative energy and the new energy economy, funded additional transportation projects as promised and alleviated, as much as is possible, the funding issues with K-12 education, and now his choice for U.S. Senator is both substantively and politically a great choice.

        Gov. Ritter’s leadership has been steady and strong in what has turned out to be the most challenging economic circumstances any Colorado governor has faced since the Great Depression. He has lead through a thoughtful approach focused on enhancing and preserving our way of life here in Colorado; but what is most impressive is he leads without resorting to fear or attempts to stir the dark side of the human character. He is no ordinary politician. He is a governor with character, humility and empathy. His greatness is based on those qualities. We can be thankful we elected him governor in these trying times.      

        • jackblackCSU says:

          I just threw up a little in my mouth when read this. I appreciate a lot of what Ritter has done for Colorado too but the fact a senate appointment he made could raise a lot of money in the first quarter (from a donor list that we still haven’t seen) doesn’t lead me down the path of concluding that he is “a governor with character, humility and empathy. His greatness is based on those qualities. We can be thankful we elected him governor in these trying times.”

          His greatness? Steady and strong leadership?

          This about a guy who is afraid of his own shadow?

          Ritter has some qualities that are worth saluting and he has accomplished some impressive feats since taking office but your ringing endorsement puts him at the same level of Jesus Christ, Allah, and John Elway.  

          • Republican 36 says:

            The fact he took on the mill levy issue for K-12 education, vetoed HB 1072 (2007 union bill) and sheperded through the fee bill for transportation proves he isn’t afraid of his shadow. What leads you to believe he is afraid of his shadow? I’d like to read your factual basis for that assertion.

            His appointment of Senator Bennet is one more indication of Gov. Ritter’s good judgment and leadership.

            By the way, I don’t put him above Jesus Christ or Allah but he certainly rates above John Elway. Mr. Elway was a great football player but good statemanship is far more important and diffcult than playing sports.

        • Steve Balboni says:

          I don’t know any way to ask this without it coming across a bit crass but… are you in anyway connected to Bill Ritter’s administration or his campaign? Your posts regarding the gov tend to read like hagiographies.  

  4. Genius says:

    I had confidence Bennet could raise money and be a very good candidate, but this is almost obnoxious.

    Udall ran an awesome race, and outraised Shaffer by a healthy margin.  And Bennet just raised more in the first quarter of fundraising of his entire life than Udall ever did in 2007?  seriously — in this economy?  where did this money come from?  I can’t wait to read the FEC filing.

    A big tip of the hat to Mr. Bennet for an inredibly successful fundraising quarter.  

    This is a very serious signal to anyone thinking of running in this race, that is for sure.  

  5. redstateblues says:

    but where are Bill Ritter’s numbers? Has he done anything to prepare for his re-election campaign other than put up a lame website?

    I’ve been wondering when we’d start to see Ritter at least getting ready to go into campaign mode. Still waiting.

    Maybe he’ll have a fundraiser sometime in late October 2010.

    • droll says:

      My first thought is of course the Dems are coming out to protect the seat, it doesn’t matter who’s running.

      OTOH, seems like keeping Ritter in office would be more important.  Has it occurred to you that Ritter somehow managed to shoot himself in the Bennet foot twice?

      • DavidThi808 says:

        Which is what the state needs in the present mess. And I think when he does start to campaign the fact that he did concentrate on doing his job, and doing it well, will help him in the race.

        • redstateblues says:

          is that he can do both.

          Let’s not make excuses like Bill Ritter has been anything more than adequate–if that. If he had done more as Governor to address the issues, then I would be more willing to hear you out Dave and R36. The fact is that he’s been completely disappointing on nearly every major issue. The best way to overcome that is by refocusing his efforts, getting into campaign mode, and trying to win re-election.

          I’m not just talking about fund raising. I’m talking about making sure people realize that he’s actually up for re-election. This doesn’t necessarily even have to involve the Governor personally. He can get other people to do some ground work, start hiring staffers.

          If he does, in fact, want to get re-elected, then he has to balance both campaign and Governorship.

          Something tells me this has more to do with his team than him, and he’s made a critical error not getting rid of nearly everyone in his office and starting over again with people who know how to do things right.

          My overall point is that the Governor is weaker right now than he’s been in his term so far. We need him to step up so he can actually win, since there’s no primary opponent to speak of, and the best way to do that is to start hitting the road or making plans to hit the road.

          • Republican 36 says:

            believe the Governor has been disappointing and why?  I’d like to discuss those.  Thanks.

            • redstateblues says:

              There hasn’t been any real progress on that issue other than trying to help cover some uninsured children. As someone who is without health insurance because I can’t afford it, I was really counting on the Governor to come through on that. He talked about it in this year’s state of the state, but he doesn’t really have anything to show for it. It was a major campaign promise, and it’s his biggest failure if you ask me.

              I’ve also been disappointed in his leadership ability on other issues. The Amendment 58 campaign was a disaster from the start because it was a horribly written piece of legislation. The implementation of the Smarter Colorado campaign was horrible as well, and the oil companies got to keep their sweet heart deal of a tax rate. Now we’re cutting higher ed by $300 million–almost the exact amount of the tax increase that would have been put in place by A-58.

              He hasn’t been able to control the message very well on issues like state employees unionizing–he let Dean Singleton set the tone, rather than explaining why it was an important move for the state.

              One of the thing she’s done that I’ve liked has been promoting the New Energy Economy. The problem is that it’s just about his only success, and our budgetary problems are so bad right now that we can’t rely solely on clean energy to power our economy.

              I also appreciate his efforts on infrastructure improvements through FASTER, and that’s another area where he’s done well, but it doesn’t do enough to address the issues facing our economy.

              I may not be his biggest fan right now, but since there’s no one within the party who wants to challenge him, all I want is for him to put 110% of his effort into getting re-elected. We need him in the Governor’s mansion so we can do a proper redistricting in 2011.

              If there are people like me, within the Democratic party, who are less than thrilled with the Guv’s performance, then that doesn’t bode well for the Governor among those who are less forgiving than me.

              All I’m saying is that he has the steepest road ahead of any statewide elected official in 2010, and it doesn’t look like he’s doing much of anything–policy or politicking–to do what’s necessary to win.

    • RedGreen says:

      $110,000 cash on hand in his campaign fund at the end of the year, the most recent filing date. He’s got time to raise money, though — Bennet had to come out swinging in his first quarter, Ritter didn’t.

  6. JO says:

    She had the nomination sewed up too, all the Big Donors in hand.

    For abstemious beer drinkers, there’s Coors Lite. For quasi-Democrats there’s Michael Bennet.

    • twas brillig says:

      Phone home when Bennet gets one…not to mention someone who can bank $1 million right out of the gate.  

    • Arvadonian says:

      It ends when you realize there is no Barack Obama equivalent currently in the state of Colorado….

      • JO says:

        …and some people who contributed and worked for his election aren’t happy to see Boy Wonder try to nullify their efforts by being  seen to try to stymie Obama’s budget. Of course, when push came to vote on the budget, Bayh–on the defense next year in 2010 in a fundamentally Republican state– was a tad lonely out there, and ineffective. Whatever happened to Moderate Mike’s glorious stand for… for… for what?

        Can you really buy a U.S. Senate seat for under $1.5 million this far in advance? Seems cheap at first glance. What do we know of the contributors–how many, from where, how much? There’s much to be learned before declaring this race over.

        • droll says:

          If Obama kicks ass, it’ll be a cake walk and people will be happy to donate to the Dems is general.

          If things get moderately better, but something else goes wrong, then it’s close and people may not have the passion, or the huge amounts of cash to invest in either candidate.

          If the Dem controlled gov’t doesn’t fix anything in the next two years and screws up some other stuff, the party will be punished.  Our candidate will be facing an uphill battle.

          On stymying Obama’s agenda, let’s face it, the new groups of supporters are only going to notice if parts come close to failing.  As long as it’s not close, only the true observers will care and we volunteer no matter what.  What would Bennet have to do to switch your vote outside of a primary?

  7. HD3Democrat says:

    No primary challenger for the appointed Senator.

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.