McInnis Silently Files For Governor’s Race

UPDATE: The Denver Post joins in the bemusement:

Former Congressman Scott McInnis has officially entered the 2010 gubernatorial race with little fanfare and after critics have for weeks argued he should file campaign finance disclosures.

The secretary of state’s office confirmed that the Republican turned in his paperwork Tuesday afternoon.

McInnis has traveled the state building support for his campaign in recent weeks and launched a phone campaign. But he has maintained until now that because he had not formally announced or spent money supporting his run, he did not have to register with the state or report the campaign’s financials.

A legal watchdog group has asked the secretary of state to look into whether McInnis’ actions violated state campaign laws…

Original post follows.

It’s funny because usually, when you announce you’re running for the state’s highest office, you hold a press conference and try to, you know, whoop it up as much as possible. It’s kind of the biggest chance you get to do that, so smart politicians rarely miss the opportunity.

Unless you’re about to be investigated for campaign finance violations? Then, it seems, you just drop the papers off quietly and hope nobody notices? We don’t quite see how that’s going to work, but that’s apparently what the now-official Scott McInnis for Governor campaign was thinking–having finally filed their paperwork yesterday with no fanfare whatsoever.



Here’s the filing in printable .PDF format. Better late than never, right? We’ll update with a release–at some point we expect he’ll be, uh, sending one. Great launch, gentlemen!

0 Shares

30 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. TaxCheatGeithner says:

    Could McInnis really be going through all of this brain damage because he wants to see Penry elected Governor?  Why else would he allow himself to be so sidetracked and derailed before he even begins running?  You’d think that a guy who served so many years in Congress would know how to announce a campaign, right?  

    Sure seems to me that Penry benefits by watching all of the other GOP candidates totally screw the pooch in terms of announcing their campaigns.  The bar’s been set pretty low.

  2. JeffcoBlueJeffcoBlue says:

    How long are we giving this abortion of a campaign? Weeks? That long? I can’t believe that McInnis is the most experienced GOP politician in Colorado seeking office. This is a joke, I’m starting to wonder if the guy above who thinks he’s killing himself for Penry’s betterment is on to something.

    • twas brillig says:

      McInnis has managed to begin committing hara kiri.

      I’ve said before that the McInnis common wisdom was overblown. GOP primary voters admire and reward guys who can demonstrate some ruthlessness every now and then. Right now, it appears that Josh Penry is the one really calling the shots in the McInnis for Guv campaign. It won’t go unnoticed by the grassroots and the kingmakers–not unless McInnis can step up and show he still knows how to knee-cap a guy.    

  3. twas brillig says:

    Scott McInnis just snatched Bob Schaffer’s brass-plated “Campaign Rollout Fiasco” trophy.

    Backing into a statewide candidacy, and he can’t even manage the Reverse gear very well?

    Shamed into a candidacy by conservative blogs and a liberal legal group?

    Clearly believing oneself entitled to run an entire state, but to embarrassed to make a public case for that belief?

    No ‘rogue staffers’ in sight — only oneself to blame?

    Even the country club set has got to be scratching their heads by this point.  

    • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:

      But I keep worrying about what happens if they ever do run people who are not self-destructive. I think McInnis would give the election to Ritter (as they compete to see who can pander more to the “business leaders” in the state).

      But what if it’s Penry? He appears to be able to run a competent campaign.

      • twas brillig says:

        McInnis today has implicitly conceded that all the people bashing him for not filing his paperwork were right. And where there’s smoke, there’s fire. McInnis has now given credibility and substance to every CEW and ProgressNow hit that may be coming down the pike.  

        • JeffcoBlueJeffcoBlue says:

          Just got this a few seconds ago:

          ProgressNow Colorado Congratulates Colorado Ethics Watch

          Ethics watchdog group publicizes campaign law violations, forces “McLobbyist” to file

          FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

          Wednesday, May 20, 2009

          CONTACT: Michael Huttner at 303-931-4547

          DENVER: After learning that former Congressman Scott “McLobbyist” McInnis silently filed papers to run for governor of Colorado yesterday, ending weeks of speculation and allegations of campaign finance law violations from both sides of the aisle, the founder of ProgressNow Colorado, the state’s largest progressive advocacy organization Michael Huttner released the following statement:

          “We were pleased to hear this morning that Scott ‘McLobbyist’ McInnis has decided to stop misleading the people of Colorado and start complying with the law. Republicans and Democrats have united in recent days to demand that McInnis stop playing games in order to avoid proper campaign finance disclosures.

          “The credit for this goes first and foremost to Colorado Ethics Watch, who doggedly followed up on McInnis’ many slip-ups and forced McInnis under threat of an embarrassing investigation to file his papers. Everyone who believes that no politician should be above the law owes Ethics Watch a debt of thanks for holding McInnis accountable.”

          ###

          Teamwork ka-pow! Good work guys, I signed your petition too.

            • wade norris says:

              bit of an apology from people who have said things about CEW such as this…


              “Of course, the real problem with this story is the association with Colo. Ethics Watch, a classic “cry wolf” organization with correspondingly low credibility.  Even if there is a wolf in this case, it’s difficult to believe it because CEW misfires so much.”

              if i am counting correctly, CEW has been successful twice in 10 days in being a very effective organization. 1st – the ethics ruling against the IEC and now this with McInnis.

              just sayin…

              • redstateblues says:

                they lost big time on the Coffman thing.

                • wade norris says:

                  it looks to me that the IEC did something wrong or at least unethical in matters related to the case.

                  I would say that if the IEC had done what it is supposed to do, Coffman would have been censured.

                  how else could he get away with hiring the voting machine software vendor to run his campaign?

                  • RedGreenRedGreen says:

                    Wade, you may be right that the IEC fell short in its duties, but that’s not remotely what Coffman did, or what Ethics Watch accused him of doing. Get your charges straight before flinging them around on a blog.

                  • twas brillig says:

                    God help me.

                    Which reminds me, I never got an answer from Dave in this thread after I challenged his repeated claim that CEW wasn’t credible: http://coloradopols.com/showCo

                    I think they’ve done a lot of good work. A recent example is that they stepped up to the plate in the Fort Collins election when Andrew Boucher shit the bed. They do a lot of work that doesn’t get noticed outside of local boundaries.  

                  • redstateblues says:

                    Coffman was cleared, and CEW isn’t going to appeal. Whether or not the IEC was following the law, Coffman is still the winner, which makes CEW the de facto loser.

                    And considering the amount of time and energy they put into the case, I’d say that qualifies as losing big time.

                    • guesswho says:

                      Until someone challenges the non-profit status of this organization with the IRS.  No complaint was filed as an example against Ritter lately for getting donations from lobbyist.

                    • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:

                      They’ve done good the last couple of times. I’m moving them over into the reputable column.

                    • twas brillig says:
                    • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:

                      I’m pond scum, how could I have ever doubted CEW in any way at any time?

                    • twas brillig says:

                      wasn’t of consequence. Your inability to provide an explanation or rationale for the blanket claims you make is annoying. It had little to do with CEW.  

                    • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:

                      I provide links & details in a lot of my posts. But all of us make short comments because if we provide long details on all then the length here would explode.

                      I could make the same claim about your comment that was the single word “whatever.” There was no explination or rationale provided with that comment.

                      As to CEW, they had a period where I thought they were making mountains out of molehills in a number of cases. Personal opinion.

      • gertie97 says:

        He made a few enemies as minority leader and not everybody is as star-struck by the little prince as his adoring followers at home are.

  4. OneEyedOwl says:

    I honestly cannot see myself voting for Ritter, McInnis, or Penry. Is this all the Dems and Repubs have got? Who are the Greens running for gov in 2010?

    • BlueCat says:

      Ritter apparently IS the best we’re going to offer.  Sucks, I know.  About all I can say is he’s good on green energy and OK on same gender couple equality issues. That beats any R in the mix.  Of course we all know that whoever the Greens are running, voting for that person in large numbers just gets us a conservative Limbaugh ring kissing R. So it goes… sigh…

  5. Raphael says:

    but shouldn’t McInnis’ home address and personal email address be blacked out? Just for professional courtesy?

  6. MesaModerate says:

    Anyone else notice the conspicuous absence of Hesse and his protoge (gopstudent) today?

    Why aren’t they presenting a spirited defense of their overlord on the blogs?

    Could it be that they’re as embarassed of Congressman McInnis’ campaign as the rest of the Colorado GOP?

  7. GOPwarrior says:

    This doesn’t look very good for McInnis. I think Penry is going to be our nominee, and that’s fine.

    I enjoy Pols keeping everyone up to date on what’s going on with our primary, it’s too bad that Ritter is falling apart at the seams. Even you can’t ignore it anymore, he doesn’t have any friends left! Maybe you guys should switch sides before it’s too late? There’s room on the Penry hayride for you!! To our next Governor!

    • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:

      …we’ld like to actually, you know, hold the election.

    • ClubTwitty says:

      Haven’t you read your own posts?  

      Maybe you guys should switch sides before it’s too late?

      Here’s something to consider, should you be interested in foundation beyond rank speculation:

      What is clear is that the Republican Party is facing formidable demographic challenges. Its constituents are aging and do not reflect the growing ethnic and racial diversity of the general public. As was the case at the beginning of this decade, Republicans are predominantly non-Hispanic whites (88%). Among Democrats, the proportion of non-Hispanic whites has declined from 64% in 2000 to 56%, as Latinos and people from other racial backgrounds have joined the ranks of the Democrats. At the same time, the average age of Republicans increased from 45.5 to 48.3, while the average age of Democrats has remained fairly stable. For the first time in at least two decades, Republicans are older than Democrats on average.

      Republicans continue to be disproportionately comprised of Southerners (39%) and white evangelical Protestants (35%). However, these figures are largely unchanged from 2004 and up only slightly since 2000 as the GOP has lost supporters across all regions and religious groups.

      http://pewresearch.org/pubs/12…  

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.