May 31, 2013 12:52 PM UTC

Throwing Darts, Picking Names Out of Hats

• 20 Comments
• by: Colorado Pols

It is always amusing, and somewhat irritating, when national pundits decide to take a gander at political races in Colorado with very little understanding of what is actually possible plausible in our state. The dead giveaway that a national outlet is clueless about Colorado is when they start mentioning candidates for higher office based solely on the fact that they hold another office currently…and particularly whenever the name Doug Lamborn comes up. For example, here's the national conservative site RedState running down Colorado's Senate "race" in 2014:

There are still names out there who could possibly mount a decent challenge to Udall. The first is former representative and gubernatorial candidate Bob Beauprez. Another, but unlikely choice, is Representative Doug Lamborn who may be just a tad too conservative for a changing state like Colorado. He additionally carries some baggage that Udall would capitalize on- his “tar baby” comment, his refusal to attend the 2012 State of the Union address, and his inadvertent and innocent release of classified national security information in a speech on the House floor. Then there is former Governor Bill Owens who had a lot of success as Governor cutting taxes, improving educational accountability, and improving transportation in his first term. Although his second term was lackluster, he left office a fairly popular figure. State senator Owen Hill and state treasurer Walker Stapleton have also been mentioned, but they are dark horses at best and would not likely be on anyone’s top 3 list. [all bold emphasis per Colorado Pols]

In the previous paragraph (not quoted here), RedState mentions that Ken Buck, Rep. Mike Coffman, and Rep. Cory Gardner have all declined to challenge Sen. Mark Udall in 2014, but those are the clear and obvious politicos to mention. With the exception of Bob Beauprez, who has been on-the-record about considering the U.S. Senate race, the paragraph above is basically formed around pulling names out of a hat…

Lamborn is the embodiment of this nonsense approach to long-distance prognosticating. Lamborn could NEVER win a statewide race; he knows this, and he'll never try for something bigger. Lamborn is only in Congress because he made it through a six-way Republican primary to gain a seat that is unwinnable for a non-Republican candidate. He is so politically weak, in fact, that he has had a legitimate primary challenger in every cycle since his initial victory in 2006. Out-of-state pundits often mention Lamborn's name as a potential candidate for higher office because they see that he is one of the only Republicans to have held onto a top tier seat for several consecutive years, but there is no greater meaning behind that fact.

Former Governor Bill Owens is often mentioned because he is the last Republican to have been elected as either Governor or Senator, but he's not running for office again and has not hinted otherwise. Stapleton will be lucky to be re-elected as State Treasurer, if he chooses to run again. And Owen Hill? He's no more remarkable than any other Republican legislator, which says plenty. And then there's this:

The final possibility is former Lt. Governor Jane Norton. [Pols emphasis] She was the establishment choice against the Tea Party favorite Ken Buck in 2010 and narrowly lost the primary after making the decision not to attend the party convention to get her name on the ballot. A developing GOP senatorial power broker- Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire- has been talking her up of late and chaired a recent fundraiser to retire her 2010 campaign debt. Personally, this may be Norton’s year, but Owens would likely be a better challenger against Udall. It will take an effort since Udall comes off as many describe as a "real Colorado guy."

Huh? First of all, Norton's decision "not to attend the party convention" doesn't have much to do with the reason she lost to Buck (and you can debate whether she would have even made it onto the ballot had she tried). We also have a hard time believing that Sen. Kelly Ayotte is "talking up" Norton for a 2014 run. Ayotte's primary motivation for helping Norton retire her 2010 campaign debt has more to do with the fact that GOP bigwig Charlie Black is Norton's brother-in-law. If Norton wanted to run for Senate in 2014, she wouldn't need someone to "talk her up," because nobody else is even running. Norton made it pretty clear after her 2010 loss to Buck that she was unlikely to run for public office again, and we have heard nothing to indicate otherwise. "Personally, this may be Norton's year…" What the hell does that mean?

Frankly, the most relevant information in this RedState rundown is the final line: Udall is going to be tough to beat in 2014. Period.