President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Kamala Harris

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

50%

50%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

70%↑

30%

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
March 20, 2008 05:48 PM UTC

Wadhams Brilliantly Triangulates Roan Drilling

  • 20 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

You were wondering when uber-operative Dick Wadhams (we’re trying to figure out what to call him now that he has seemingly every paid job in the Colorado GOP) was going to do something proving again what a crafty political strategist he is.

You can stop wondering, as the Denver Post reports:

Voters looking for ways to choose between the Republican and Democratic candidates for Colorado’s open U.S. Senate seat will likely be able to choose from a wide range of issues that divide the two, but the Roan Plateau won’t be one of them.

Republican candidate Bob Schaffer came out Wednesday in support of Gov. Bill Ritter’s compromise plan for surface drilling in the area, lining up with Democratic members of the state’s delegation and potentially against the position of the man he hopes to succeed, Sen. Wayne Allard.

“Bob Schaffer supports the Ritter compromise proposal that Gov. Ritter, to his credit, laid out several months ago and in view of the action by BLM this week believes it should be legislatively enacted before this Congress ends,” said Schaffer’s campaign manager, Dick Wadhams.

The move puts little space between Schaffer and Democratic opponent Mark Udall on an issue that has come to shape a contentious debate between preservation and energy exploration – and one that has riveted the attention of western Colorado for nearly five years.

The Western Slope is seen by both sides as key to winning in November…

What do you expect us to say? This was a very smart move by Schaffer’s campaign, meaning Dick Wadhams, and may well have the effect of shoring up his base in a region of the state where Schaffer’s longstanding support for laissez-faire oil and gas drilling (and let’s not forget the much-hated Referendum A) could have emerged as a serious liability. Heck, people might not even remember after reading this story that Schaffer was an energy company executive with absolutely nothing in his record to point to that would reassure West Slope residents worried about the impacts of drilling the Roan and elsewhere.

Not to mention that the Schaffer campaign has at long last–wait for it–taken a position on a major issue. That could have been the headline all by itself.

Tweet
Share

Comments

20 thoughts on “Wadhams Brilliantly Triangulates Roan Drilling”

    1. if that spill will have any effect on the environment. Wonder how quickly it will be cleaned up. Wonder IF it will be cleaned up. Do you suppose this is a result of appointing Tresi Houpt to the Commission? I’m sure she and others concerned for the environment will be blamed.

      1. If we hadn’t forced the industry to be afraid to report the spill when it first happened, they would have been right on it.  it DID happen in Garfield County, where Houpt is commissioner, so apparently she was asleep on the switch too.  The fish themselves are to blame as well, it only follows, since they just HAD to live in Parachute Creek and besides they are clearly nonadaptive species if they cannot tolerate a few increased hydrocarbons and sediment loads.  Its clearly NOT the companies fault, nor the the oil and gas industry at all.  As Meg Collins with COGA said, it shows the system is working perfectly (well, except for the company getting caught).

  2. I admitted long ago that I am a fan of Wadhams. Let’s be honest here… if he was a Democrat, the liberals would like him too.

    He effective. And he’s the worst news Udall has received ever since he realized how terrible his “department of peace” bill (co-sponsored with the shining example of logic and reason, Dennis “I believe in aliens” Kucinich) was.

    It’s utter hogwash that only Liberals care about the environment. Conservatives like me care too. In fact, I think that, generally speaking, conservatives have better, more balanced, and responsible ideas about conservation and nature management than Liberals do. That said, it’s ridiculous that nature conservation is a partisan topic.

    And with a doff of the cap to President Theodore Roosevelt… I believe he would be the first to agree with that.

    1. have no place in partisan politics. They affect everyone, regardless of race, gender, or political affiliation.

      As to your claim that

      conservatives have better, more balanced, and responsible ideas about conservation and nature management than Liberals do

      could you provide some specific examples of these ideas?

      Thanks.  

      1. Liberals for many years have pushed and cajoled the forest service into extremely poor policies regarding forest management. Instead of selective culling of trees to thin the forest and clear underbrush, the policy for too many years was to highly restrict commercial logging. The result are catastrophes like the Hayman Fire. If logging companies had been allowed to log, cull, and replant larger areas of national forest, Hayman (and other fires) would be more confined to a smaller geographical area.

        Some corrections are being made to fix this problem, but it’s a good example of Liberals with best intentions and Conservatives with good solutions.

        1. large, mature forests and roadless areas retain moisture, conversely logged areas dry out; many fires (like the Hayman fire you mention) are human caused–more roads increase the risk of wildfires in our forests.  increasingly climate change is being fingered as a major contributer  to the intensity of wildfire cycles.  

          mitigating fire danger close to communities and people makes sense.  supporting increased logging of our forests is not.

  3. Regardless of what Bob Schaffers opinion on the Roan, the bigger question is which party do you trust to protect the Roan?  It’s a given that an R controlled Senate would take a much more aggressive approach to drilling than one controlled by the D’s.      

    1. Not that I would vote for as Schaffer an individual either but people need to realize that the party that holds the majority and the size of that majority are what determines what can and cannot be accomplished in congress. It really can’t be just about individuals.  And whatever Schaffer says now , does he really strike anyone as somebody who would defy his party leadership once he gets to congress?

      No matter what GOPpundit says, Republicans do NOT have a good record on the environment, discounting coming up with great 1984 style names like the “Clear Skies Act”.  

      If you have to go back to Theodore Roosevelt that just shows what a stretch it is.  In fact, even going back to the ’50s and Eisenhower takes us back to an era in which the Republican Party bore no resemblance to the Republican Party of today.  For one thing, Eisenhower proudly called himself a liberal and liberal  Republican wasn’t an oxymoron back then.

      What, GOPpundit, has the current Republican administration together with, for most of its time in office, a rubber stamp Republican congress, done lately for hunters, fishermen (persons? boy that’s clumsy), outdoor enthusiasts, conservationists or simply those who want access to frivolous luxuries like safe water?  Or safe working environments in places like mines? Or accountability  for financial titans who are willing to take any risks with the little people’s  money to line their own pockets, then escape with golden parachutes when their houses of cards fall apart?  

      Has it been Republicans at the forefront of protecting any of us from anything other than the myth of Iraqi terrorists coming over here to put our women in burkas (I’ve actually heard that one from  several Republicans)?    

      1. Nixon created the EPA.

        And George H.W. Bush did some good things too (no net loss of wetlands).

        The Repubs have tended to be worse but it took Reagan and this Bush administration to totally screw the environment.

        1. but I’ll partly concede your point. Won’t concede that Bush has been anything but a disaster for environmental issues and kind of doubt that it was his idea to pay attention to the wetlands or that he has been in the forefront of any efforts there.  

            1. Just read it too quickly saw BUSH and reacted too fast.  HW Bush is not in the  the same category as GW, though the whole family is pretty scary, and while I’m no fan, I’ll admit he is capable of doing something  that makes sense once in a while.    

  4. but trying to top Udall environmentally is like trying to top Ron Paul libertarianly, which may not be a real word, but still functions in the analogy. I think the downside to this for Schaffer, Wadhams, and co. is that they accepted the liberal framing of the Roan as an environmental issue, and if the left gets to set the terms for this election debate it’s over for the GOP.

  5. and the vast majority (upwards of 95%) of comments in every single comment period held on the Roan Plateau support protecting the small amount of the planning area not yet open for oil and gas drilling, I am not sure how it is the ‘liberal frame.’  

  6. That is a brilliant move, no doubt. And shifty won’t have to back it up if he wins. But no, going so far as to say any body would like wadhams as a Democrat is just admitting that you’re stuck in the scorched earth politics that have ruined this country. The shift away from the conservatives is because of sleazy and compromising jockeying and positioning like wadhams is running here. You may not like it, but it’s turning.  

  7. How Republicans become “so-called enviro friendly” when it has to do with something in their own backyard.

    Republican’s “eco-friendly”, now that’s a joke if I ever heard one. Most don’t think global warming is real and the ones who do, think its Gods way of punishing gay’s.

    They are trying to get on the bandwagon, which has become easier as their butt-buddies in the energy sector turn towards a common senses approach to sustainability and renewable energy.

    The Republican platform is built around greed, its too bad that you can’t be a middle-class Republican, because don’t get any of the spoils 😉

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

122 readers online now

Newsletter

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