U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse

(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Jena Griswold

60%

60%

40%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Alexis King

(D) Brian Mason

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line

(D) George Stern

(D) A. Gonzalez

(R) Sheri Davis

40%

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%

30%

20%

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) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Joe Salazar

50%

40%

40%

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
August 18, 2009 08:12 PM UTC

AM760 Interview: New Poll Shows Ritter Having Problems With Democratic Base

  • 36 Comments
  • by: davidsirota

( – promoted by Colorado Pols)

On AM760 this morning, I interviewed Tom Jensen at Public Policy Polling about his firm’s new survey of Colorado voters, which will be released over the course of the week. You can listen to the interview here.

Jensen said the new poll shows that in terms of approval ratings, both Gov. Bill Ritter and Sen. Michael Bennet are relatively weak, but that because Ritter right now seems to have a stronger set of Republican opponents, he is in more re-election trouble heading into 2010. Jensen also said that the new poll shows Ritter is showing signs of particular weakness among self-identified Democratic voters – and that this weakness is his single biggest obstacle to re-election.

I’m not all that surprised by this – over the last year, Ritter has made headlines sticking his finger in the eye of some core Democratic constituencies (I’m looking at you, labor), and his appointment of the little-known Bennet (instead of the better-known Andrew Romanoff) didn’t do him any favors.

Indeed, those moves no doubt pissed off more than a few Democratic activists. And sure, while activists may not comprise a majority of the electorate – or even a majority of self-identified Democrats – they are the folks who tend to talk to a lot of people in their communities (in Malcolm Gladwell terms, they are the Lois Weisbergs). And so it’s quite possible that Ritter’s highest-profile base-alienating moves are an example of so-called “inside baseball” moves having a cumulative slow-motion effect on his Democratic approval ratings.

Listen to the whole interview here – it starts about half way through the clip.

Tune to AM760 tomorrow (Wednesday) between 7am-10am Mountain Time – we’ll be going over the proposed budget cuts Ritter is announcing this morning, and how he can resuscitate his standing with Democratic voters – or whether he even needs to. Hopefully, we’ll get Ritter himself on the air.

NOTE: I know ColoradoPols has raised some important questions about the accuracy of PPP’s overall polling methods – and I think those questions are quite legitimate, especially when considering topline numbers that may be affected by oversampling of Republican voters. However, I also think it’s not a stretch to believe that while PPP’s polls have flaws, they also probably reflect a broad trend that is indeed real – especially the trends they track specifically among self-identified Democratic voters (data which would be less affected by oversampling of self-identified Republican voters).

Tweet
Share

Comments

36 thoughts on “AM760 Interview: New Poll Shows Ritter Having Problems With Democratic Base”

  1.    Anyone else recall four years ago when Joan Fitz-Gerald and Alice Madden were desperately running around trying to recruit Hick and anyone else who was pro-choice and pro-gun control to run a primary campaign against Ritter?  IIRC, Madden even considered running herself when all else failed.

      The Dem base is unenthusiastic until the general election campaign begins.

    1. From the get go, he was regarded with suspicion by the base, especially Dem women because of his anti-choice views. Since then  he’s pissed off the base with his “who the hell is that” choice for Senate and Labor by vetoing pro-labor legislation instead of negotiating to head off a veto. This is hardly earth shaking news.

    1. Robocalls do not a reliable poll make. While Sirota acknowledges that questions about PPP’s accuracy are legitimate, he turns right around and says, in effect, never mind. It’s a “trend” he can manufacture and try to make it so.

      If the economy is better a year from now, Ritter will be tough to beat. If it’s still in the dumpster, all incumbents will have their hands full and then some.

    2. Ritter has been a consistently inconsistent in applying his values to government.  All Dems. have asked for is someone who isn’t afraid/ashamed to be a Democrat.  Is that too hard to understand?  Candidates get elected then immediately backtrack on their progressive goals.  Sounds familiar to me.  It translates into less of an all out effort by a disenchanted base.  Fortunately for Ritter the Republicans will put up another hard-core candidate who won’t have any solutions except cutting taxes which is now a widely discredited scam.  Like Udall, Ritter will probably squeak out a win but he doesn’t really care about the positions of the left which helped get him elected.

  3. How could Ritter be down in the polls? He’s a Democrat who opposes unions and cuts jobs when the economy goes down instead of trying to create them.

    Ritter down in polls? Unpopular with (some) Dems? Say it ain’t so!

  4. What, so these frustrated Dems are going to turn to Penry for respite? Give me a break. When election time comes and Ritter is the sole Democratic candidate, these finicky Democratic activists will be the first to support him.

    I wish the Democratic party in this state would stop decrying Ritter’s 2-3 clumsy political decisions (which were, by the way, ethically sound) and start focusing on the good he’s done.  

    2. There’s only so much abuse the base will take before they check out and let Ritter be an object lesson in why bluedoggery fails. Right now the Democratic party is rotting from the top. One way to cure the rot is to remove the infected vegetable material.

      1. continue to win then there is no impetus for change.  The current blue dog formula is to get elected promising to push a progressive agenda then turn into a corporate whore once in office.  At least Ritter doesn’t have a soul mate in Argentina.  He’s even too bland to get the perks of the office.

      1. I’m debating whether or not to vote for Bill Ritter. He has between now and the election to convince me to do anything other than leave the first race on my 2010 ballot blank.

        On the other hand, the thought of saying the words Governor and Penry back to back really sends a chill down my spine.

        Maybe Owens is waiting to see if the Rockies make the playoffs, and then after they win the world series he’ll be so overjoyed he’ll throw his hat in the ring for the hell of it.

      2. “The Udall dilemma”

        Progressives are stuck with a mediocre candidate who routinely stabs his supporters in the back and is focused on climbing the political ladder as his primary goal but is opposed by a bat shit crazy who froths at the mouth and yammers on about how wonderful the world would be if we could just get women out of the workforce and back to baking bread.  The choices are so stark that you end up holding your nose and saying that the alternative is worse.  Ritter fits this dilemma perfectly.  Uninspiring but the alternative is much much worse.

        1. Udall is a mediocre back-bencher who’s primary goal is being in the Senate. Ritter I think is by and large focused on doing a good job. He doesn’t sell it well and his decision-making process in his administration is piss-poor. But the intent is there.

          And I think we see a difference in results from that. From Udall we get a relatively safe vote and that’s about it.

          But from Ritter we have had a superb response on handling the budget crisis. We have an honest mostly competent administration. And we also get some effort with an eye toward the future between trying to get more funding for higher ed and a focus on green technology companies.

          I’ll probably always be complaining about Ritter. But I’ll happily vote for him while in the case of Udall – yuck.

          1. I agree that Ritter has had a steady hand regarding the budget.

            It was the Bennet appointment that was the head scratcher.  You had both Romanoff and FitzGerald available and he rewards the position to an unknown.  What’s the point of having a strong bench if you don’t use it.  Romanoff and FitzGerald both had deep legislative experience dealing with intransigent Republicans from positions of leadership.  Joan FitzGerald who broke employment barriers by being the first woman Senate President should have at least given some consideration.  She is both talented and tough.  Romanoff now can’t primary Ritter and he can’t primary Bennet without damaging the party which he won’t do so he is out four to six years for another opportunity.  It seems a shame to waste such talent on such a lackluster pick.  Ritter might be steady but I think he hurt the Dems. with his Bennet pick.  If either Romanoff or FitzGerald had been picked and then won in 2010 then that would pretty much kill the Republican mantra that real liberals can’t win statewide.  It was a Shanahan type decision that will hurt the Dems. long term if Bennet loses in 2010.  Why bust your butt to excel at the state level when you’ll be overlooked when bigger prizes come along?

            1. Perlmutter and Hickenlooper, don’t forget, both of whom were in office, very popular and had proven they could raise money. The Bennet appointment is all you say it was, but portraying it as a snub just to Romanoff and FitzGerald misses some of the point.

              1. The Governor had to take into account that if he appointed Rep. Perlmutter or Mayor Hickenlooper, it would have forced a special election. Not saying those elections would have resulted in anything but a Democratic victory, but I’m sur eit played into his choice.

                Given that, Romanoff and Fitz-Gerald seem like better choices to play the “they got screwed” card with since they’re no longer in office.

              2. If he picked any of those others, all the rest are left upset that they came in second. By picking Bennet he left all the usual suspects treated equally.

                I also think Ritter took this as a chance to have a Senator who would never be elected the standard way, but would do a good job in DC. And do so differently because of his background.

                1. How’s that working out? It’s not like he’s Colorado’s answer to Bernie Sanders or anything, he’s about as conventional a freshman senator as can be.

                  I realize we had about 12,000 rounds of this discussion back in December, but this revisionist history that Romanoff (and FitzGerald? — does anyone seriously believe she was a contender, the way she and Ritter got along?!) is the one who got snubbed.

                  1. The hanging question continues to be how can the Dems. take advantage of such a deep bench when they pull someone out of the blue and act like it was some miracle.

                    I don’t particularly like the idea that Bennet was picked to avoid upsetting the other potential candidates.  If you believe any of the mentioned candidates (Perlmutter, Hickenlooper, Romanoff) has an excellent future in politics then they should be considered for their long term contributions.  Bennet might have been a great school superintendent but Perlmutter, Romanoff and FitzGerald all had experience in crafting legislation.  Bennet had none.

  5. Dems are mad about some of Ritter’s decisions (labor especially).  But they are also upset because of the way he makes and announces decisions.  It seems like he vetoes bills when he could have talked to the dem leaders and gotten a bill he would support instead.  This may give him maverick cred, but it wastes everyone else’s time and makes them look weak.

    1. because he can’t clearly communicate why he makes anti-base decisions.  Would anyone really trust this guy if he came out and said he supports unions?  The pity is that the “birthers” who would normally eat up stabbing unions in the back aren’t going to vote for Ritter in a million years.  He trying to appease folks who will always hate him.  Go figure.

    2. Vetoes should and can be avoided when the governor’s own party is in power in the leg. Doesn’t look like he makes much, if any, effort to head off that kind of fiasco with negotiations. Has not been very skillful politically.

      No Dem pol in this state should take statewide reelection for granted. And as far as Penry is concerned, don’t forget that most Colorado voters have no idea who he is yet.  If he makes himself very sound bite, slick ad attractive and Dems don’t feel like contributing and volunteering their free time for Ritter, who knows?  

  6. http://www.gjsentinel.com/news…

    GJSentinel.com Breaking News – August 18, 2009

    New poll: 31 percent approve of Colorado senator

    Posted @ 2:37 pm

    Colorado Sen. Michael Bennet’s approval rating is down to 31 percent, according to a Public Policy Polling survey released Tuesday.

    The poll of Coloradans found 38 percent of voters disapprove of the job Bennet is doing. In April, PPP found 34 percent of Coloradans approved of Bennet and 41 percent did not.

    Bennet, a Democrat, has been in office less than a year, but some Republicans have already suggested a few politicians run against him when he comes up for re-election in 2010. Former Congressman and gubernatorial candidate Bob Beauprez leads the pack in the poll, which shows Beauprez beating Bennet 42 to 39 percent if there were an election between the two men today. The poll found Aurora City Councilman Ryan Frazier and Weld County District Attorney Ken Buck would likely lose to Bennet, 39 to 35 percent and 38 to 33 percent, respectively.

    My Comment:  It is a Mesa County conspiracy.  Jane Norton announces and now the poll.  Why don’t you all quit and let Mesa County run the State.  We are the King’s of the World!!!  Or at least Colorado and Lake Louise.  So suck on that!!!  

  7. remember how red this state was just a few short years ago? Over here in Mesa County, we get reminded every day.

    How can he do the right thing if he can’t get elected? Ritter…McInnis…Penry. This is going to be our choice. This is a no brainer.  

    1. Ritter is steady if not spectacular and has managed to maintain a middle of the road persona at the expense of a progressive agenda.  The opposition is just so awful that you can’t even contemplate voting for them.  Ritter is the best we can do which says a lot about politics in the Centennial State.

      1. we experienced when, against all expectations, the Democrats took the state house and the governors’ seat.

        The only politician that is going to be effective in the future, at the state or federal level, is going to have to be a centrist. The bases on both sides are being asked to understand the necessity of breaking political deadlock.

        It is essential, at this time in history, that we proceed through a mediation process, instead of a process of confrontation. Arbitration, much like a court, starts with each side having a position and allowing the decision to be made by a third party.

        Mediation proceeds from a statement of need by each stakeholder and a process of guiding the parties to a decision they mutually reach.

        I suspect the Democrats’ base is more willing to accept the latter process than their Republican counterparts, who seem to be a bit more rigid than the Dems. That is one of the reasons I am a Democrat.

        I will reiterate, from above. If my choices are Bill Ritter, Scott McInnis, and Josh Penry, the decision is easy.

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

150 readers online now

Newsletter

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