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
October 20, 2008 07:42 PM UTC

Desperate, Indecisive NRSC Harms Own Candidates

  • 22 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

We want to follow up a story we broke last week that provoked a great deal of celebration, confusion, and ultimately angry denials from the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC), who insists despite multiple reports to the contrary that they are not pulling out of the Colorado Senate race.

As we and others have said, the NRSC’s decision to stand by or cut loose a candidate late in the game is a clear indicator of whether the national party considers a race winnable, an indicator of internal polling and research–a measure of how well a candidate is really doing, absent the bluster and gamesmanship. As a result, their decisions are closely watched.

This is the reason why reports that the NRSC is preparing to abandon Senate candidate Bob Schaffer provoked such heated debate: if true, it means the national GOP kingmakers are writing Schaffer off, that there really is nothing out there to contradict polls showing Democratic front-runner Mark Udall running away with the victory.

We want to 100% clear on this point: when we heard Tuesday evening from one of our most reliable Republican sources that the NRSC was set to bail out of the race, we had no reason to believe otherwise. When it was confirmed two days later by a writer for The Atlantic via entirely separate GOP sources, that was all the confirmation we needed that the story is accurate. And on Wednesday and Thursday, no reporter we are aware of was able to get anything other than “no comment” from the NRSC when asked if they were sticking with Schaffer.

We stand by the veracity of what we reported Wednesday, which is that the NRSC prepared last week to exit the Colorado Senate race, “citing dwindling cash reserves, candidate Bob Schaffer’s plummeting poll numbers, and unexpectedly strong threats to incumbent GOP Senators around the country.” The implications of that decision are what they are, however painful they may be for those with a vested interest in the race. And whether or not the NRSC spends a few hundred thousand more dollars on a TV buy this week is irrelevant — if they aren’t “all in,” then for all practical purposes, they’re out.

As you know, since Friday the NRSC has steadfastly denied that they ever intended to pull out of the race. A new TV spot started running Friday, and we’re told media buys for the week that began yesterday have not been reduced.

So what happened between Wednesday and Friday? The story we heard involves a telephone, Schaffer campaign manager Dick Wadhams, and an amount of profanity described to us as “truly impressive, even for Dick.”

We’ve also seen the NRSC vacillate on decisions about races in other states in the last week. Which is horrible strategy–to announce that you’re basically conceding the race, then change your mind? Based on what? Were those also cases of damaging leaks circulated that the NRSC needed to squelch, if only with a token “reconsideration,” since rumors of their ‘impending pullout’ take on a life of their own? Or are they really just that sloppy at this point?

When you take all of this together, a picture emerges of a disorganized party leadership trying to plug too many holes with too few resources. It reminds us of the Germans falling back in the spring of 1945, or General Lee’s last desperate defense of Richmond. The front lines are collapsing everywhere and they’re trying to save what can be saved–while getting verbally abused by every Dick Wadhams in the country when they call to demand their candidate not be cut loose. A growing sense of hopelessness colors their every move, but still they must fight.

We do not need to correct any of our reporting, and find the situation pitiable more than anything else. It’s almost over, guys.

Tweet
Share

Comments

22 thoughts on “Desperate, Indecisive NRSC Harms Own Candidates”

  1. pulled the plug on Mr. Schaffer.  Rarely do the national committees ever admit they are giving up on a candidate but as was mentioned the committee’s number one duty is to protect incumbents and Schaffer isn’t one of them.

  2. Apparently Sen. “Diapers” Vitter made a call similar to that attributed to Wadhams, and magically the funding for the Senate race down there was restored.

    All I have to say is, if the NRSC was really thinking of pulling out here and has been cowed into staying in, then Vitter and Wadhams had better hope that Nov. 4th doesn’t go badly in those close districts the NRSC was hoping to shore up with that money.

    1. If anyone with a phone and lots of swear words can change what they put money in to. As John McCain said, it’s important to understand what strategy is – and to come up with one.

      On the good news side, this is hurting every Republican Senate candidate in the country because they are all spending time lobbying the NRSC instead of campaigning.

  3. So the “story you broke” last week is that you heard rumors that turned out not to be true.

    Further, “a few hundred thousand” dollars of TV ads is irrelevant, because when two days later you said… “Per usual you heard it here first, it’s a done deal” …you meant it was a done deal in the sense that it wasn’t done at all.

    Fine. You nailed that one. Good job.

    So, what untrue breaking rumors do you have the scoop on today?

    [note: I get stories wrong all the time. I don’t fault you there, but defiantly writing that you somehow got this one right is a stretch.]

    1. This was a pretty solid rumor, here and in Louisiana.  And equally solid rumors say there was a home-state intervention in both cases.

      The NRSC is having a hard time allocating money; they’re going to lose seats – the question is now down to the words “cloture vote” – and everyone’s scrambling to make sure they’re not the one left without a chair when the music stops.

    2. You know, it wasn’t just reported here. It was reported on Daily Kos, it was reported over at Politico.

      Shouldn’t you be over at Square State getting the scoop on something that all twelve of your loyal readers will want to lap right up?

      1. Like I said, I have no problem with them running the story. Lots of people did. It looked solid enough at the time. I didn’t even mind them patting themselves on the back when it looked like they had nailed it.

        I just am amused by this long defense on how they got it right when they didn’t.

        The story was wrong. The ads are running. If the DSCC acted on the belief that the Republicans were pulling the plug here, then they would have gotten burned.  

        1. Every chance you get, you take a cheap shot at Pols or link to S2 to up traffic. It’s growing tiresome. And it’s time somebody called you on it.

          If you don’t want to be called out, don’t be so obvious.

          1. Please.

            I take shots at Pols when I disagree with them. I link to Pols when I see things worth linking to, and give them a hat tip when they give me the heads up about a story I want to cover.

            I link from here to SquareState when I feel there is something there that is worth contributing, and I think there are more than a few here who like that I do. I will bet you that amongst my dozen loyal readers are the editors of this site.

            I am often critical of CoPols, but who here isn’t? That is just part of the nature of this beast. When I think they are in the right, I go way out of my way to defend them.

            That said, feel free to “call me out” all you want. They still got it wrong when they said the defunding was a “done deal.”

        3. We, and all the others around the country who picked up this story, didn’t pull it out of the air. That’s not what happened at all, in fact, and the backstory to what did happen is significant.

          Squarestate.net is a perfectly astute blog with whom we have no quarrel.

  4. Had the NRSC not been intending to pull the plug on Schaffer, there wouldn’t have been two days of “no comments.” There’s no other reasonable explanation for that at all.

    In fact, there hasn’t even been any attempt at an UNreasonable explanation for the silence.

    In this case, silence speaks volumes.

  5. When you take all of this together, a picture emerges of a disorganized party leadership trying to plug too many holes with too few resources. It reminds us of the Germans falling back in the spring of 1945

    I love it. I’m getting a great picture of Wadhams rushing around in the bunker, a torn, creased map of Colorado precincts deteriorating in his sweaty paws. He grabs a hapless NRSC functionary and roars: “Where is the Steiner counterattack?”

        2. Wadhams marries Schaffer, they eat a vegetarian meal and sing a song about their glory days. Then the tanks arrive. Someone steals Wadhams’ brain and sneaks out with it in a jar.

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

115 readers online now

Newsletter

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