U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse

(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Jena Griswold

60%

60%

40%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Alexis King

(D) Brian Mason

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line

(D) George Stern

(D) A. Gonzalez

(R) Sheri Davis

40%

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%

30%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

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

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

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

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

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

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

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

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Joe Salazar

50%

40%

40%

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 24, 2016 01:39 PM UTC

Michael Bennet is Exactly Who You Thought He Was

  • 14 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO)
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO)

Colorado Republicans have endured weeks upon weeks (upon weeks) of positively brutal headlines as the race for the Republican Senate nomination enters its final month, so we can understand why some in the GOP would be overjoyed to come across some negative news about Democratic incumbent Sen. Michael Bennet.

Before we get to bursting the GOP’s bubble on this particular piece of Bennet news, let us pause to allow our Republican friends to bask in the dim glow of this story from the Denver Post:

The Colorado AFL-CIO dealt a surprising rebuke to U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet over the weekend when the union federation declined to endorse the Democratic incumbent in his bid for re-election.

Bennet was the only Democratic lawmaker in Colorado’s congressional delegation who failed to gain the support of the state’s AFL-CIO chapter…

…Sam Gilchrist, executive director of the Colorado AFL-CIO, said the vote on Bennet was close, but that he fell short of the required two-thirds majority needed for an endorsement because too many union members were unhappy with Bennet’s support of a measure last year that gives the White House more power to cut international trade deals.

That authority is broadly seen as a pathway for the Obama administration to approve a new agreement called the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which would ease trade barriers among 12 Pacific Rim countries, from the U.S. and Canada to Japan and Chile.

While the Colorado AFL-CIO declined to endorse Bennet’s re-election campaign because of the Senator’s perceived support of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, Bennet hasn’t exactly been bullish on the idea, either. As the Colorado Independent reports:

Bennet has not yet taken a public position on TPP.

But Bennet voted on a measure giving Obama the authority to “fast track” negotiations for it and other global trade agreements, and Bennet has drawn fire from the AFL-CIO for his stance on trade before. Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have come out against TPP.

Failing to lock up the endorsement of the Colorado AFL-CIO is certainly not a positive development for Bennet, but it’s not nearly as problematic for 2016 as Republicans would like you to believe. Bennet is a moderate Democrat who goes about his business on Capitol Hill as a moderate Democrat would be expected to act. Bennet’s moderate credentials may not make him beloved by the liberal Democrats in Colorado, but he is who he is. Maintaining his centrist approach to the Senate is a big part of the reason why he is widely favored to win re-election this fall.

Bennet may not get the official support of the Colorado AFL-CIO, but he should have plenty of backing from other labor groups who prefer Bennet over any of his Republicans challengers. Concerns about the TPP issue as a political millstone are overblown as well; you may recall that Bennet supported the Keystone XL oil pipeline in 2015, yet still received the endorsement of prominent environmental groups such as the League of Conservation Voters and the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC).

The very fact that the AFL-CIO felt comfortable enough to not support Bennet also bodes well for progressive politics in Colorado. The AFL-CIO made its point with Bennet; the message was received and understood, but not at the expense of mortally wounding the only swing-state incumbent Democratic Senator up for re-election this year.

Tweet
Share

Comments

14 thoughts on “Michael Bennet is Exactly Who You Thought He Was”

  1. He failed to get the required two thirds majority for an endorsement but the majority did vote for endorsing him so….. not exactlly as dramatic a denunciation as the headline implies. More of a nudge than a kick to the curb.

  3. And of course, failure to pass the TPP, or some similar version of same, gives economic hegemony in the western Pacific to China.

    1. Including intellectual products like software that have been a YUUGE export for US companies that have offset losses in hard goods for something close to net economic gains for the country.

    2. Lordy, Lordy, I sit here wondering whether I really want to engage with a bunch of "Republican" corporatists. Not really, but I can't help myself.

      Conserv. Head Banger: "gives economic hegemony in the western Pacific to China." Let's see – Economic hegemony to China or large corporations. A real Sophie's choice. (Not exact analogy, but I don't want to spend too much time here.)

      Kvothe: "net economic gains for the country." How do the figure that. It is a net economic gain for corporations who 1) outsource jobs, 2) don't actually pay any taxes, and 3) find ways to harbor income off shore. The country doesn't actually benefit, that is unless you are of the belief that whats good for Microsoft, Google and Apple is good for the country. What TPP does is export our broken, monopolistic copyright, patent and intellectual property law to the rest of the world. 

      1. Perhaps if you "spent more time here," you might understand issues better. The TPP issue is separate from the corporate tax situation. The US corporate tax rate is about the highest in the developed world. A lower rate would bring some of the money stashed overseas back home to help create more jobs here. Unfortunately, ultra liberals are too interested in punishing corporations to worry about job creation.

        "Outsourcing jobs….."  Yes, that is a problem. But how would you think US blue collar workers with high school educations are going to compete with similarly educated workers in places like Vietnam and India where wages are much lower? And those lower wages are like manna from heaven for those workers because it's more than they ever earned before as subsistence farmers, etc.  It was a great gravy train for US blue collar workers for several decades after WW II. Now re-training is sorely needed. And maybe those workers moving to places where there are more jobs.  

        1. The US corporate tax rate is about the highest in the developed world. 

          Rates don't tell you much… loopholes and tax credits can and do reduce many corporate tax payments to near zero.

          I would be more interested in what they actually pay.

           

          1. Exactly. No matter what the rate is if you don't actually pay anywhere near it or nothing or even  pay it at a negative rate, the rate is just a number with little real world meaning. I'd be happy with lower rate if corporations actually had to pay all of it.

        2. I have two words for you, Banger – Panama Papers. Demonstrate how the rich used the Panama Trade Agreement to dodge US taxes. So, you see, it all works together.

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

151 readers online now

Newsletter

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