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 23, 2008 06:23 PM UTC

Has Schaffer Checked Out?

  • 83 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

As the Denver Post reports:

With less than two weeks to go in the contest to be Colorado’s next U.S. senator, Republican Bob Schaffer has spent parts of this week out of sight, and out of state.

Since warming up arena-size crowds that came to see Sarah Palin on Monday and ending the day with a debate against his Democratic opponent, Mark Udall, Schaffer’s profile has dropped noticeably.

The former congressman spent Tuesday afternoon at home making calls to potential donors, said campaign spokeswoman Kelly Brady. Wednesday, he was courting donors in St. Louis. Today, he has one appearance scheduled.

The Udall campaign, meanwhile, has made stops across northern Colorado and the Western Slope this week. It will visit the 64th of the state’s 64 counties Saturday.

…the light schedule has some scratching their heads.

“I couldn’t tell you why they were doing that,” said Scott Adler, a University of Colorado political science professor.

“There doesn’t seem to me to be any tactic in laying low now,” Adler said. “This is the time when campaigns get frantic, crazy. They’re all over the place with 10 appearances a day.”

Indeed, the last time two Colorado Senate rivals were in a race this hotly contested this close to Election Day, both rolled through the state as if miles were votes…

“We’re going to be all over the place,” Wadhams said. “Believe me, this campaign is on track.”

We’re not quite sure who Wadhams is asking to “believe,” since both national parties, the 527s, big donors, etc. already know what they need to know.

“On track”=”fate sealed.”

Tweet
Share

Comments

83 thoughts on “Has Schaffer Checked Out?”

  1. the Denver Post just reported that McCain is reducing his TV buys in Colorado:

    “McCain, who trails Barack Obama by an average of 5 percentage points in Colorado polls, this week bought a total of $305,550 worth of ads at KUSA-Channel 9, KCNC-Channel 4 and KMGH-Channel 7, according to records. That is a 46 percent decrease from the week before and a 56 percent slide from two weeks ago.

    “For the final eight days of the campaign season, McCain has purchased a little more than $50,000 of ad time at Channel 4 and $67,000 at Channel 9, which is watched by 40 percent of the market. McCain had not purchased ad time for those days at Channel 7 as of Wednesday.

    “By comparison, Obama has purchased more than $500,000 worth of advertising at Channel 4 and Channel 9 for the final week. Add on the $287,700 he has laid out for ads at Channel 7, and it’s nearly seven times what McCain is spending.”

    I wonder what’s worse – McCain cutting his budget, or Channel 7 being cut completely out of his budget…

    1. Not enough money to run commercials in a key battleground state, but no problem spending $ 150 K at Nieman Marcus and Saks.

      Who wants these people running the country ?

        1. He did decide to take the public funding that Obama had also promised to take. That is limiting him greatly.

          I think if he had it to do over again, he might not have taken the public funds.

          1. Everyone is going to look at this election and say that Obama’s far superior fundraising put him over the top. If this scenario has played out in Senate, Congressional and Gubernatorial races around the country, no major candidate will accept public funding again.

          2. Everyone is going to look at this election and say that Obama’s far superior fundraising put him over the top. If this scenario has played out in Senate, Congressional and Gubernatorial races around the country, no major candidate will accept public funding again.

              1. But like Obama said, the system is broken.

                There need to be changes made before candidates will ever accept them again, thanks to Obama. Of course, not every candidate is going to bring in the money like Obama has.

                1. I wouldn’t be surprised if they reform the system to keep it as a competitive option…like having something like a “I’m getting massively outspent by the other guy” amendment, that gives the public funded candidate a cash bump if they’re getting vastly outspent.

            1. for anyone who gave to the RNC in the past few weeks, who now knows that their contribution, during these challenging economic times, went to buy Spanx and lipstick for Sarah Palin. Unbelievable.

              1. I think that’s the ultimate insult to Joe the Plumber: your contributions went for obscene shopping sprees.

                Dressing nice is important, yes, but average Joes and Janes dress plenty fine on less than $150,000 a month.

              1. But would it have been more than $84 million? Nobody will ever know.

                The real story of this election, when it comes to campaign finance and advertising anyway, it the complete lack of outside players. There haven’t been any groups like Swift Boat Veterans For Truth.

                I originally thought that McCain’s strategy for taking public financing had something to it. I thought that the McCain campaign’s thinking process was that there would be at least some outside help.

                Another problem (there are so many) with the McCain camp’s approach has been underestimating, or even completely ignoring, the Dean/Obama 50 state plan.

                I watched videos that David Plouffe sent out laying out their electoral strategy. The goal was, essentially, win all the Kerry states while taking New Mexico and Iowa, turn a few Bush states red.

                The fact that Missouri, North Carolina and Virginia are even battleground states are a testimony to that plan’s ingenuity. McCain was spending so much in Colorado, Ohio and Florida, he wasn’t playing any defense in his “safe” areas.

                It’s like McCain’s running a Democratic-style campaign, and Obama’s running a Republican-style campaign. Actually, McCain makes Kerry’s campaign look like a well-oiled machine.

          4. Obama promised to take them if McCain promised the Republicans would try to keep a lid on the 527s.  He wouldn’t promise that; Obama trounced him in fundraising as a result.

            No sense in having a gunfight with pillows when one side’s cheering section brings artillery.

            1. This year is nothing compared to 2004 as far as 527s go. For the presidential race anyway. I can’t think of any negative 527 ads against Obama except for the NRA.

              The rest have been McCain-Palin and the RNC.

              1. That was the deal Obama offered to McCain.  He never said ‘yes’, and the rest is pretty much history.

                I think the 527s decided to go after Senate races this year in an attempt to stem the tide.  McCain didn’t excite them, and the prospect of Democrats expanding their majority frightened them.  Not that their money seems to be doing any good…

                1. But in retrospect, there’s no way McCain could have known the 527s were going to abandon him. If he had known, he probably would have taken the deal.

                  Is it too late for an independent group to come in and try to save his hide with a barrage of ads in swing states?

        2. It is one case where fiscal responsibility could’ve meant a few more commercials for McCain or Schaffer.

          But it does point out what’s wrong with the 21st Century GOP…where’s Jack Kemp when they need him?

        3. We’re all in this together, we’re just regular joes like you, Obama is an elitist, we all have to tighten our belts and times are tough…OK, off to Saks !

  2. Some folks have opined that Schaffer is going to rub for CD4 again once the seat is in Markey’s hands.

    I doubt that. I think he’ll run for Governor next.

    1. Why wouldn’t he just run for the Senate again when the other seat is up in two years?

      More likely, he realizes he can’t win and begs Bruce Benson to get him his own gov’t  gig.

      1. As we’ve discussed time and again. An ultra-conservative like Schaffer has passed his prime in Colorado – it’s a new era, and the GOP needs new candidates.  

        1. My take is that the hardcore ultra-right is going to take the McCain defeat as an indication that they are actually in the right. You see that anytime a ‘pub poster talks about “going back to our values” in order to return to power. That means more guys like Schaffer and fewer guys like McCain, Owens, or Scott McInnis. It will also mean more defeats, but that’s what blind faith in your own righteousness gets you.

              1. …and I don’t think your view is unreasonable, but I always saw Blowens as a wingnut.  Didn’t he support Schaffer before he stabbed in the back for political expediency?  Anyway, in case you can’t tell, I didn’t like Blowens one bit.

                1. is that Owens had, shall we say, issues on the family values front that will keep him from seeking office in this state again. So if there was anything going on between Owens and Schaffer like you describe, it must have happened back in 2004… which seems unlikely even then, given Trailhead’s alleged role in beating Schaffer for that year’s GOP senate nomination.

                  On the “Owens is moderate” side, his support of Refs C & D is the big thing. There may have been other issues that put him at odds with the right wing of his party, but C & D is just as much a reason that he can’t be considered a full-on wing nut – the full-on wing nuts have never forgiven him for that, just like they never forgave the elder Bush for going back on his “read my lips” pledge.

    1. Geez, this is the Cheeziest Political Ad I’ve seen this season! Did they make that one on a Mac in the Apple Store?

      60’s Japanese Monster Movies had better production values, right down to the voice over…

        1. Yeah – like the stoned-out turtle in “Finding Nemo.”

          Where do they come up with this stuff?

          And who are all those ninjas running around in the background?

    3. I don’t know how that’s Schaffer.

      Schaffer’s party unity scores ranged from a low of 89 percent in 1998 to a high of 94 percent in 2002.

      Oh, and on Bush, that popular President.

      In 2001, Schaffer agreed with Bush 74 percent of the time when the president took a stated position on House votes; in 2002, Schaffer’s CQ-defined “presidential support” score was 85 percent.

      Did Wadhams forget that Schaffer has been in Congress and has a record?

      http://www.nytimes.com/cq/2007…

    1. for that ploy to work. You can “find” hundreds or even thousands of votes, but if the poll numbers are accurate the margin is going to be hundreds of thousands of votes.

      (I know you’re being snarky, but I felt compelled to treat it like a serious issue anyway…)

  5. …check in?  Sure doesn’t seem like he was all that interested in winning from the get go.  

    Or is it just that he was a terrible candidate from the start?

    1. 1.  Bush…advantage Dems.

      2.  skeletons in his own closet

      3.  Wadhams as campaign manager.  Dick’s philosophy is to have his candidate shut up, and then he goes big-time negative on his opponent 24/7.

  6. Ok, if Schaffer figures he’s lost this, but plans to run for something in ’10, then what should he concentrate on right now? Fundraising. What is Schaffer doing right now? Fundraising.

    This is a wonderful present for us Dems, going into ’10 the unelectable candidate will have the biggest campaign fund. Go Bob, go!

          1. Essentially, the only two offices that I think he can go after, as mentioned here, are CD4 and the gov. Maybe Salazar’s seat, but I dont think thats likely. If he is going to have a huge warchest at the end of this year, I guess CD4 will be the only option. Thanks for the comfirmation.

              2. If people don’t want him going thousands of miles away to represent them in the Senate, why would they want him to run the local government where they live and work?

                I still haven’t seen any realistic GOP contenders for the gubernatorial race yet.

              3. Are there many (or any) high quality candidates for Governor in 2 years? Didnt he want to run for governor, but was pushed aside in 06?  

                First, I have no problem with him making a quixotic, beauprezian run for the gov’s office, and I have no doubt that he would fancy himself as a qualified contender.

                Second, if some of the likely R candidates are the same people that are supporters of A48, which I have no doubt will lose, are the reps going to want to put up someone that is that extreme?

                As far as I can tell there bench is ridiculously thin, which can only help Schaffer. The other thing that Schaffer will have going for him is state-wide name ID. It really boils down to how badly he gets, as you say, the snot kicked out of him. Yes, Udall has this race locked up, but if the final tallies are 52-48, thats a not so terrible loss in a Dem tidal wave year.  

                1. what I’m sure will be a hard-fought Republican primary? Especially since his good ol pal Dickwad won’t be running the state party anymore.

                  They need a moderate R to run if they’re going to beat Ritter. Bill could run purely on the New Energy Economy and win.

                  Our last two Governors were both challenged, but they both served the maximum amount of time they could. If you go back even further to Dick Lamm, we haven’t had a one term Governor since Edwin C Johnson (1955-1957)

                  To unseat Ritter, they would have to have a spectacular candidate. It’s just not in the cards right now.

                  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L…

                  1. It would have to be an unbelievably moderate candidate (a young hank brown), but I honestly cant think of anyone who fits that mold.

                    I guess my point is that in a sea of right wingers they are going to be hard pressed to find someone who can mount a decent challenge against Ritter. Schaffer can present himself as a solid choice if he comes relatively close to Udall.

                    I have little doubt that Ritter will serve a second term, so the race may be sacrificial one, but if his alternative is to run against Markey, which in all likelihood it will be, I bet she will be a force to be reckoned with as well.

                    Essentially, what I am saying is that if Schaffer has a strong, but losing finish (ie 52-48) he will run again in 2 years and I wouldnt be surprised if it was for Ritter’s seat.

                  2. Edwin C. Johnson was gov. for three terms, each of two years.

                    He had two as gov before going to the U.S. Senate for two terms, his 55-57 governorship was the valedictory on the most successful Colorado political career ever. I doubt anyone will ever match “Big Ed’s” record since we now elect governors to four-year terms and limit them to two of those (though with a four year interregnum you could run for gov for a third and fourth term.

                    The last one term-only Colorado governor was Walter Johnson, elected in 1950.

                    2. you see johnson serving the 55-57 term and retiring.  You have to scroll back through six more  My dad, a staunch Democrat, always growled that Johnson, a conservative democrat, “was the best Republican in Colorado”.  

                2. There’s a spectacular Republican candidate for governor hiding in plain sight, who will be making his decision whether to run by the first of the year. He’ll be the only candidate who has a chance.

                  Remember (and Bob, who has a longer memory than most on this board, either knows something about Ritter or is forgetting this), Colorado hasn’t defeated an elected governor* for something approaching 50 years — we like our governors and send ’em back even if their politics are contrary to prevailing political winds. Lamm and Romer both won handily during huge Republican years, so even if there is an Obama/one-party-rule backlash in 2010, Ritter has a clear shot.

                  * the only incumbent governor ousted by voters in living memory was John Vanderhoof, who was elected lieutenant governor but stepped up to replace John Love when he was named Nixon’s energy czar. Lamm beat Vanderhoof in the Democrat’s Watergate sweep of the state in 1974. It’s been at least since the early ’60s that Colorado voted out an elected governor.

                  1. Two-term, six-year incumbent Democratic Gov. Steve McNichols was defeated in his bid for a third term in 1962 by John Love.

                    Big Steve served the last two year term and the first four-year term as governor. I keep hearing rumors about this supposed Republican super candidate. Some have even suggested its john elway, which would be ludicrous, others Hank Brown, who would certainly be credible.

                      As for what I know about Ritter, I can read a poll.  If he loses 58, he’ll really be in a slump.  But remember, Dick Lamm bombed his first two years, lost his own 1976 severance tax initiative, and rebounded to win re-election against Ted Strickland in 78.

                     That’s why, right now, I rate Ritter’s chance of a second term at less than 50/50. But I need to see the outcome of this election and then the possible Republican challenger.  I also wouldn’t rule out a primary challenge to Ritter in 2010 _ or an Obama appointment, a la the John Love one you described, that let Ritter exit gracefully. Time, as it always does, will tell.

                     

                    2. but the key factor was Strickland ran a very poor campaign.  I’ll never forget then state Sen. Eldon Cooper, a democrat and key union leader, hammering Strickland for a bill he had introduced to ban Rodeo!  Stickland did it on behalf of his wife, who keeps something like 60 cats (I’m not joking) and intensely hates rodeo. Cooper made it sound like the communist manifesto!

                    3. I felt confident also qualifyiing since the early ’60s, when McNichols did go down to defeat.

                      There’s just something about our governors that leads Colorado voters to let them serve out their terms — Ritter is still personally quite popular, if in a bland sort of way, but that’s what we seem to like in governors.

                      A primary challenge to Ritter? Seriously? After presiding over the bluification of Colorado, setting a national trend (if that’s what turns out)? His position with Democrats is secure, for the same reason as Pat Waak’s is, despite many who find serious shortcomings in her reign.

                      No, not Elway (who will be appearing with McCain tomorrow), not Brown. Someone who’s still young enough and isn’t marrying a Raider girl.

                    4. …but nobody smart.  What a brilliant way to change your name to mud within the Democratic party.

                    6. …oh wait, he simply held onto the same office he held before challenging Carter.  And, on yeah, his name was Kennedy and he ran only in Massachusettes after losing to Carter.  Yep, good example!

                      Since I’m clearly operating with few facts, feel free to enlighten me with all the facts you have…who exactly do you think might challenge Ritter in 2010?  

                    7. Bob, are you really comparing Bill Ritter with Jimmy Carter circa 1980?

                      Kennedy represented a substantial wing of the Democratic Party that felt it was being ignored by Carter’s ineffectual rule from the weak center — I just don’t see anything approaching that level of dissatisfaction, especially among Democrats, with Ritter. The left wing of the Democratic Party exists in Colorado, but it’s happy enough to have a seat at the table, it’s not willing to risk unseating a governor in the cycle before reapportionment.

                    9. though (I think it was Bob who points out above) he could run again after sitting out a term. Bill’s star is tarnished with the family values wing of his party, and he’s making far too much money to go back into public service. He’ll continue taking pot shots at Democrats whenever there’s a TV camera nearby, but that’s all.

                    12.    I agree with Jambalaya and redgreen below that a serious primary challenge of Ritter does not seem so likely–really he hasn’t done enuf to piss anyone off to that extent. But you are right on about A58–a loss will significantly (and further) weaken Ritter toward a credible Republican challenge.

                        It may be very interesting to compare the outcomes of A58 and A59 as measures of Ritter versus Romanoff, respectively, in shaping state-wide consensus on major policy issues.

        3. Transfer it all up to the RNC, the RNC cuts checks to the RGA, transfers the rest down to the Colorado GOP for coordinated expenditures aimed at getting out the same voters.

          The Republicans know every trick and every loophole around campaign finance laws and push them to the extreme.

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

121 readers online now

Newsletter

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