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
May 09, 2008 10:28 PM UTC

Wadhams Goes (Seriously) Crazy

  • 56 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

Republican Party Chair Dick Wadhams is really mad that he can’t get the press to do his bidding, so he’s resorted to bullying and threats in hopes of getting the media to pretend his candidate for Senate, Bob Schaffer, doesn’t have any warts at all. Wadhams and Schaffer shamelessly attacked and belittled a blog reporter a few weeks ago, and Wadhams just recently did the same thing to a reporter for The Grand Junction Sentinel.

As the editor of The Grand Junction Sentinel writes in his blog:

Newspaper editors and political reporters don’t need a calendar to tell them that it’s an even-numbered year. Even-numbered years are election years. We can tell that because those are the years when we get complaints from politicians and their handlers. It’s as predictable as Rick Wagner staking out a position to the right of just about everybody else.

We got a couple this week, and I think they are instructive. One was nothing more than a political handler trying to bully a reporter, the other a legitimate question about why we failed to do something. One was ugly, the other a genuine discussion between people who saw the same thing differently.

First the ugly.

Early in the week Democratic Senate candidate Mark Udall proposed the government quit stockpiling gas in the strategic petroleum reserve.

Reporter Mike Saccone, as any good reporter would do, called Udall’s opponent to get a response. Republican Bob Schaffer is very seldom available. He called Dick Wadhams, Schaffer’s campaign manager. I don’t think he ever even got to tell Wadhams why he was calling. The minute Wadhams got on the phone he launched into Mike, telling him he was a biased reporter, that he’s taken cheap shots at Schaffer and asking when we were going to do the same thing to Udall. I listened to the tape of the conversation. Mike seldom got to complete a question. Every time he tried Wadhams interrupted with yet another complaint about Mike and/or our coverage. He did manage to ask Wadhams for specific instances of biased reporting or cheap shots and Wadhams provided none.

The exchange was amusing. I don’t know what Wadhams was trying to accomplish other than to try to get our reporter to go easier on his candidate in future stories. Whatever it was it will have no effect whatsoever on how we cover the Senate race. We’ll continue to cover it as completely and fairly as possible.

This has always been a part of Wadhams’ repertoire – to attack reporters either directly or through a surrogate in attempts to shame them into reporting more on his opponent than on his own candidate. It worked well when he did it through the use of bloggers in the 2004 South Dakota defeat of Tom Daschle, but it doesn’t appear to be working in Colorado, where conservative blogs don’t really have the reach or the respectability that they may have had in other states.

There’s a fine line between strategy and flat-out rude bullying, and Wadhams has definitely crossed that line. Here’s hoping reporters around the state don’t fall into the trap of Wadhams’ intentional belittling and end up turning over their lunch money to him.

Tweet
Share

Comments

56 thoughts on “Wadhams Goes (Seriously) Crazy”

    1. When jerks try to be domineering, all a reporter has to do is promise to print every stupid remark that the politician makes. And promise that every time the jerk calls, there will be a story that won’t please the candidate.

      Bullies respect strength, not the Obamas of the world. Submissives shouldn’t be political reporters. They should write real estate section puff pieces.

      1. Seems to me Obama has shown himself to be extremely strong – as one would expect someone to be who came up from the rough-and-tumble Chicago political establishment.

        Obama will make a great President – so says this old white middle-class guy.

      2. Another Kerry like character assassination attempt swinging hard for an effete elitist label all the while ignoring the fact that McCain flies around to his eight mansions on his wifes jet.  Feeble smear attempts by supporters of a discredited philosophy.  Sorry dude, the country hungers for some real leadership not more photo-ops of good old drinking buddies down on the phony ranch.  I would rather have a street fighter like Obama than a doofus like Bush.  I’ll never drink with the guy so I prefer my presidents to be intelligent.

        1. But I’d generally rather hang out with intelligent people, too.  I don’t know how someone you’d want to drink with became code for an idiot.

      3. Papers like the daily sentinel are the bullies, AS.  And they are so unethical abouth their reporting they will make up stories or insinuate something terrible about a candidate when the story is wholly different.  

        1. Or is that one of the bloggers on the payroll to attack the press?

          It worked in South Dakota because no one imagined the Thune campaign would sink that low. The same dirty tricks won’t work in Colorado.

          You don’t get to throw a bomb like that and leave it there. Provide an example of a story “made up” by the Daily Sentinel

  2. the Sentinel didn’t post the audio from the call.

    I can only imagine the berating, shaming and browbeating Wadhams will inflict on El Paso County Republicans at their Lincoln Day dinner tomorrow night.

    “What are you religous nuts doing? You’re asking Bob Schaffer about forced abortions half way ’round the world while you give a pass to boulderliberal Mark Udall about legal abortions? What kind of zealots are you?”

    2. Douglas Bruce imitation for the skit at the Lincoln Day dinner.  For Republicans it is endless practice to perfect being a rude and classless person.

  4. Stuff like that makes reporters less willing to listen to Wadhams. Pretty soon all Wadhams will get is a 30 second phone call asking for a response and when he declines – they hang up and that’s it.

    If this is the best the Republicans have in Colorado this year they are in a lot of trouble.

  5. an elected public official these days?

    Reporter Mike Saccone, as any good reporter would do, called Udall’s opponent to get a response. Republican Bob Schaffer is very seldom available.

    Is that normal for a Colorado office-holder, much less candidate for statewide office?

      2. NO issues-none-not even platitudes

        Economy–nothing

        Gas prices/energy independence/Drilling– nothing

        Iraq–nothing

        terrorism–nothing

        Immigration–nothing

        His support for sweatshops has been his only policy proposal so far.

  6.    Sweatshop is “unavailable,” and will probably remain so throughout the campaign.  His spokesman can do little more than launch in tirades of diatribes against anyone he distrusts.

      Brilliant campaign strategy, guys!

      1. We have made it so.

        Blogs, Youtube, Kos, Huffpo, Countdown

        The media is diversified.  As budgets are slashed at the dailys and at the networks, the power of the “street” grows as professionals begin to echo the environment.

        Plus Democrats have remembered how to throw a punch.  

        1. Yeah, that’s why it didn’t work in Virginia either.

          Wad is on the ropes.

          Where are all the forced-abortion apologists with their straw men in this thread?

          If you’re going to make it the CENTERPIECE of Udall’s campaign, that Bob Schaffer is SOLELY RESPONSIBLE for his campaign manager bullying reporters, then you’re going to LOSE BIG!!!

          1. Give us a break Santa.  Udall is going to be riding the Big Change train this year.  He doesn’t need to do anything to have this next generation Beauprez campaign implode.  These folks have a knack for doing in themselves anyway.  Hari Kari Keystone Cops politicians.

            Every Libertarian with a Ron Paul button should know that conservatives sold out their principles for power and are going to be punished for their incompetence.  The centerpiece of Udall’s campaign should be that Mark isn’t tied to Boat Anchor Bush and his corporate greed policies.

            1. Yeah, yeah, I’m citing that nut in the other thread who kept throwing up that nonsense about Schaffer’s CNMI record.

              Of course, the economy, the war, health care, the environment (because it’s Udall and because it’s Colorado) will be the centerpiece issues, while the centerpiece theme will be “we can do better.” But the centerpiece question will be, do you trust this guy to speak for you? And there, Schaffer fails because he’s up for sale.

  7. It’s normal for Silent Bob, who won’t even give a speech in El Paso County to partisans.  The Sentinel has a definite republican slant in its editorial positions and columnists, oppressively so, but the reporting’s pretty good.  I don’t think its a given that they will endorse Schaffer, however.  They appreciate Udall’s conservation ethic, and have positively opined on a number of his initiatives.    

  8. Just ask Senator Daschle, Governor Schoettler and Senator Strickland this guy’s no good.  When his candidates listen, as it appears Bob Schaffer is doing this guy is hard to beat.  The Udall team likes to pat their collectives selves on the back but they’d best be careful.  There is no one in the game of politics any better than Dick Wadhams. Spare me the George Allen talk. Allen was an over confident idiot who’d have won by a dozen if he’d kept his mouth shut. A better comparison is Gail Schoettler who had a large lead in a year that Democrats made gain across the country and lost.

    2. he’s not any good, or hasn’t been good in the past. Will his bullying fly in an age when reporters and editors put it up on their blog instead of silently slinking away? And will hiding his candidate work when every blogger and YouTuber wants an interview? These are legitimate questions.

    3. The world is a different place then it was 6 years ago.

      I know that Republicans like to look backwards (1980s, 1950s, 1850s, 1750s, 1600s–how far they look back depends on the type of republican they are), but its not morning in america today and its not compassionate conservatism.

      Your party damaged its brand, failed to understand the new tools, and most importantly, bullied liberals until they finally said enough’s enough.  Wadhams is the past.

    2. the Democrats have a few campaign managers who didn’t lose the last election they ran.

      You’re only as good as your last race. Wadhams can only run on bluster and reputation so long.

    3. who just 32 minutes earlier wrote: “There is no one any better in the game of politics than Dick Wadhams”?

      His stock must be slipping fast.

  10. At least Wadhams is still on speaking terms with some reporters, even if Schaffer needs his quotes passed along by his campaign manager.

    Today, Michael Riley of the Denver Post reports, Schaffer challenged Udall to a series of seven debates throughout the state over the summer. Udall expressed qualms over the proposed format but agreed to enter talks with the Schaffer campaign.

    Republican Senate candidate Bob Schaffer has proposed holding seven debates across the state over the summer, countering complaints that he’s been slow to tackle the issues with a proposal for extensive debates long before most voters tune into state-wide races.

    Democrat Mark Udall immediately said the proposed format – which would limit questions from moderators – was unacceptable. But Udall aides said they would enter into talks with Schaffer’s campaign as soon as this month, and expected at least some debates would be scheduled before Labor Day.

    “We could start as soon as Memorial Day week,” said Schaffer campaign manager Dick Wadhams, who conceded that he couldn’t remember a proposal for such an extensive number of debates before Labor Day.

    “Bob told him, ‘Look if you don’t want seven, we’ll work on the number,'” Wadhams said. “We’re open to the format even.”

    The Republican proposal reflects both a confidence in their candidate’s debating skills and a dramatically altered 2008 landscape. An open Senate seat in a competitive state is a tantalizing target for independent groups, who are expected to spend millions in Colorado to frame the race with 30-second attack ads.

    Schaffer’s campaign said the debates would allow the candidates to frame the issues themselves.

    While cautious about the effectiveness of debates that would have to compete for the attention of voters with Beijing Olympics and the Democratic National Convention in Denver, political analysts said the proposal throws the ball back in Udall’s court.

    “We’ll start seeing the press releases anytime now that Udall doesn’t want to debate,” said Jennifer Duffy, of the Cook Political Report in Washington, adding that it’s unlikely to stick as a major issue if Udall agrees to even a small number of summer debates.

    “The only time voters really get upset if no debates happened,” Duffy said.

    1. I was worried that the silence from ol’ sweaty had a more sinister source.

      I thought maybe Wadhams had taken matters into his own hands after sweaty admitted to supporting the pro-sweatshop agenda.  

      I thought Wadhams schaffer might have killed him and was pulling a “Weekend at Bernie’s” to enforce message discipline

      2. that George really was wired up?  Isn’t that kind of like taking steroids if you are an athlete.  People’s opinion of the man is already lower than low.  What happens to his “legacy” if it turns out he’s no better than Marion Jones and her denials?  “Dumb as a rock only dumber”.  He has the protruding antenna to prove it.

        2. Can you really damage his legacy any more than he’s done seemingly on his own?  If anything, the impression of being under constant control of others might improve his reputation to that of Harding’s.

    2. Face the State posted a pdf of the letter Schaffer sent Udall proposing the “Lincoln-Douglas style debates,” one in each of Colorado’s congressional districts this summer. Schaffer wants to do it without a moderator — just a timekeeper.

      Is Schaffer really that good of an unsupervised debater? In Riley’s story above,

      Udall immediately said the proposed format – which would limit questions from moderators – was unacceptable.

      What are the format’s pluses and minuses for both candidates?

      Wadhams couldn’t point to as extensive a series of summer debates in recent Colorado history. Has another contest elsewhere staged anything like this (since 1858)?

      Schaffer also notes this is the 150th anniversary of the Lincoln-Douglas debates, which I did not know.

        1. Clinton and Obama debated, what, 26 times, as the Democratic field dwindled. Clinton’s last-gasp challenge for debates has been an attempt to get herself on the same stage as Obama, slow the marginalization. Schaffer’s not in the same straits by any means.

      2. How ironic that Schaffer would wade back into this topic, since the main issue debated between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas was none other than Slavery

        The Lincoln-Douglas debates of 1858 were a series of seven debates between Abraham Lincoln, a Republican, and Stephen A. Douglas, a Democrat, for an Illinois seat in the United States Senate. At the time, U.S. Senators were elected by state legislatures; thus Lincoln and Douglas were campaigning for their respective parties to win control of the legislature. The debates presaged the issues that Lincoln faced in the 1860 Presidential campaign and are remembered partially for the eloquence of both sides. The main issue discussed in all seven debates was slavery.

      3. I have no idea who would do better in this format although I suspect Schaffer would as he is proposing it.

        But I like the concept. I think true debates like this would be a useful tool in evaluating the candidates.

        I’m curious to hear why Udall rules this format out.

        1. From the Rocky

          “Of course we want to debate,” Udall said after the event. “Of course I want a chance to tell the people of Colorado why I’d be the best choice as the next United States senator.”

          Udall said the debate schedule will have to be worked out, but said a number of groups traditionally hold debates, including Club 20, the Rotary Club and public television.

        2. He knows that Udall can’t come down as hard on him about Abramoff, forced abortions, sweatshops, etc. as could journalist moderators looking for great soundbites.

          Schaffer knows that Udall would be kinder and gentler, while the journalists would see the blood in the water.

          And woe be unto Schaffer if one of the moderators had recently gotten the Wadhams treatment.

          1. he prefers debates that include questions from voters,not necessarily journos.

            But you’ve got Schaffer’s reasoning exactly right.

            1. Debating someone directly gives you the best advantage if they are weak on points and you can ask questions right. I’d always prefer that setup to any other if my opponent was weaker on the issues.

  11. tried the same slimy tactics with the good reporter last election.  Didn’t work then either.  Cost Penry, at least in some part, the endorsement of the newspaper.   Wonder why Republicans are preparing Penry for a leadership position?  They seem to like people with character flaws in their party leadership.  Could be a toss-up between Doug Bruce and  Penry in taking over the Dick Wad role down the road.

    Tom DeLay tactics seem to backfire more often than not.  Oh, well, all to the benefit of Democrats.

  12. Let us not forget, this is what actually qualifies Wadhams as a “good” campaign manager as the Rethugs understand it. He’s a bully, eager to “let the crap flow”, while his candidate hides behind him smiling.

    Beating the Media Into Submission, Wadhams Style

    While the local media trumpets the return of native son Dick Wadhams to Colorado politics, a review of his brutal slash-and-burn tactics against political journalists may have the state press corps clutching their fire-retardant underwear.

    Eminently quotable, the Republican operative dubbed “Rove 2.0”, may give good copy for news stories but Wadhams has racked up a nasty reputation for impugning the ethics of reporters who fall out of favor for simply doing their jobs-reporting the foibles of his frequently dull-witted candidates packaged as common guys.

    He wasn’t dubbed Rove’s heir apparent for nothing. Don’t brush this off as rash or foolish; it’s apart of his game plan playing good cop, bad cop.

    However I haven’t seen anything during this campaign to make the case that he’ll be effective in our new media era, even after his “Macca” collapse.

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

102 readers online now

Newsletter

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