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 11, 2009 04:29 PM UTC

Navel gazing to defeat the 'far left'

  • 46 Comments
  • by: ClubTwitty

( – promoted by Colorado Pols)

Two months ago Colorado Republicans held a secret hours-long navel gazing strategy session to determine why their brand is in the trash can and what they might do about it, the Denver Post reports.

On a chilly evening in February, the state GOP’s heaviest hitters took an elevator to a members-only club on the second floor of the Brown Palace Hotel to discuss how to rebuild their beleaguered party.

Around the table was the combined experience of the party’s better days – former Gov. Bill Owens; former Sens. Hank Brown and Wayne Allard; former congressmen Bob Beauprez, Bob Schaffer and Scott McInnis.

Party chairman Dick Wadhams sat on one side of the large square table; Mike May, the House minority leader, on another. There were a few key donors and consultants, but the focus of the meeting ultimately was on the “wise men.”

In Colorado, Republicans are still reeling from a rapid tumble from power that saw them lose control of the state legislature, the governor’s mansion, two U.S. Senate seats, and three seats in the U.S. House – all in the span of four years.

They concede that rebuilding and rebranding the party is still a work in progress and envision a process that will unfold over several months.

The February meeting was kept secret in part out of a concern that it might appear too top-down, and some participants talked about it only sparingly while others declined to comment at all.

At the same time, some participants emphasized that the group represented the state GOP’s most successful leaders, politicians who knew how to win elections and whose advice and ideas could be invaluable in regrounding the party.

Sequestered high in the Brown Palace (popular with the common man) the handful of party oligarchs were desperate to grasp why everyday Coloradans abandoned them so eagerly and decisively over the last few cycles.  

Thus they drew from the deepest wisdom they have–like Bobs Beauprez and Schaffer, winners all.  [BWB, note to self: ‘Don’t do a campaign ad with a horse’s ass again!’]

But maybe it’s not the ads, or ineffective, barely-arms-length 527s, that are missing the mark with voters, so busy in their inscrutable lives on the streets below?  Don’t they fear socialism anymore?  

Perhaps it’s the next tier GOP, the ones that apparently did not get the elevator ride to the loftiest of Denver’s most elite clubs, but imagine themselves party leaders nonetheless, that are the problem–dropping the ball?

A few, apparently, are bold enough to be candidates–oh noes!–without having asked Dick’s or Scooter’s blessing, and make crazy talk of primaries…but maybe they have the answers?  

Maybe the Colorado GOP is just not saying NO! loudly enough?  All this talk about moderation being so much hog waste.  Maybe the problem is that the GOP’s utter disdain for solutions is not getting through to the voters?

Enter Cory Gardner, candidate for CD 4, from a different Post article on environmental progress in the recently completed Legislature:

In came a series of “opt-in” programs to help schools or homeowners afford renewable energy devices.

…Among the green bills passed this year were two measures to assist homeowners and schools in financing solar-panel purchases; a bill providing tax incentives for buying solar-heated water systems; a measure giving small power providers the ability to charge higher rates to bigger electricity users; and a requirement that homebuilders offer solar panels as an option on new, custom homes.

…”It’s clear the far left of the environmental movement is kind of where everything starts at the Capitol,” Brophy said. “On occasion it turns back slightly from that, but sometimes they shove it through as is. . . . These guys have an agenda that excludes traditional fossil fuel.”

The far-left helping schools install clean energy projects that will lower their expenses.  The far-left helping homeowners afford solar hot-water heaters.  

Cory might win the 4th CD, maybe the last competitive district in the state.  

But unless the Colorado GOP can offer solutions of their own, all the fancy tea parties in private clubs at the Brown Palace (or pretend ‘populist’ tea parties elsewhere) won’t get the party off the express elevator to irrelevancy.  

Going down?  

Tweet
Share

Comments

46 thoughts on “Navel gazing to defeat the ‘far left’”

    1. last competitive HOUSE district in the state…

      I think Markey will be a good candidate against Gardner.  But I just think Cory has a decent chance at an upset, this term being the best shot.  Similar situation for Bennet, although I think he is probably stronger than a lot of folks think.  

      And a few other CD’s are technically competitive, if the GOP weren’t in so much disarray.  The 3rd, for instance, fvors GOP in registration, but Salazar is in a strong position now, so not so competitive IMO.  

      The GOP’s weakness is the Dem’s winning hand I think.  

      1. then what you wrote was fine, the governor’s race isn’t in a competitive district and neither is the Senate race.

        You’re right about the other HDs being noncompetitive, though. The 3rd and 7th might be toss-ups if they didn’t have strong, entrenched incumbents.

    2. We liberals who don’t live in CD-4 like her. Will the old-school ‘pubs who have the majority there like her enough to stick with her?

      Correct me if I’m wrong, but Gardner doesn’t seem to be such a hard-right con like Musgrave was. If true, that alone will probably account for a couple of percentage points of voters who’d go GOP in 2010 over Markey.

      Musgrave defeated herself as much as Markey won. It doesn’t mean that Markey can’t win again, but she’s got almost as much of a challenge winning re-election as she did winning the first time.

  3. I agree with David on one point–I think the Governor’s race is in play. If I were the Republican Party, I’d be focusing on picking that off as well as on some local state house seats.

    And if Dems aren’t real careful, the purity litmus tests that Dems seem to be requiring for anyone to be a part of their “big tent” is going to put them out of power faster than they got in.

    1. We know Ritter has problems with the Dem base. But how to the swing voters see him? I haven’t seen much to indicate dissatisfaction on their part.

        1. He hasn’t been involved in any really big story scandals so he’s probably the default candidate for the un to not very plugged in.  Grass roots Ds in my HD aren’t thrilled with the guy but don’t want to give the GOP a chance by doing the circular firing squad thing.  Suspect that’s a pretty common attitude and he’s pretty likely to get his second term.

          1. We really do live in a vacuum on blogs and I forget that most folks, in real life, aren’t throwing a hissy fit over 90% of the stuff we are. 🙂

      1. that I keep seeing mentioned as not being properly “progressive” enough representatives of the Democratic Party.

        Bill Ritter

        Michael Bennet

        Arlen Specter

        Betsy Markey  

        1. I fail to see how random people grumbling about the performance of elected officials is anywhere akin to a litmus test.

          Guess what, people don’t approve of everything their elected officials do! Also, people like to express their opinions!

          Litmus test means that there are coordinated efforts from interest groups to challenge incumbents in primaries or to block the nomination of anyone insufficiently beholden to the interests of that group. You can’t cite one example of that happening in recent Colorado Democratic politics. Not a single one.

          Ritter is pro-life and he received a pass on that.  

        3. it has nothing to do with how progressive he is. It has everything to do with how poorly he’s managed the office from a leadership perspective.

          Like Steve pointed out, he’s pro-life and nobody is trying to say that disqualifies him from being the Dem nominee.

          You know me, MOTR, I don’t give a rat’s ass what percentage of your policies are progressive, I just want results. Ritter has been disappointing on all but a few issues, and that has nothing to do with how left of center he is.

          1. What I don’t agree with are those that clearly take issue with his less than “progressive” stance on some issues, including being pro-life, which you will notice is mentioned with regularity by posters on this site. And yet, he has not made abortion or criminalizing it an issue–at all. Not one bit. Which is exactly what he promised when he ran. I know where you are at with him and it’s the same place I’m at. The difference with your stance and some others on this site is that you actually understand nuance and your reasons for being disappointed are quite legitimate.

            So, for those that continue to use Ritter as another example as how Democrats have settled for less, (and God, believe me, I met plenty of them in 2006 and many of them post here or at S2 or Colorado Independent and they made it very clear that he would never be acceptable because he wasn’t prochoice), I keep Ritter as a prime example of those that fail the extremists’ litmus test.  

    3. Please give specific examples of these litmus tests?

      Has a single Democratic incumbent faced a primary challenge financed by or pushed by an interest group imposing a “litmus test” in the last 3 cycles?

      There’s been grumbling about Bennet but that’s died down. If anything I think Dem constituency groups have been far too forgiving of elected officials in safe seats not being standard bearers for the base.

      3. though not for a lack of want from some in the Colorado blogosphere and some Dem activists.

        I agree with the core of what you’re saying though.

      4. We’ve got grumblings over some specific items, but for the life of me I can’t think of any single issue that most of us Dems agree on. I don’t think we’re going to self destruct over a list of items that most be supported or opposed.

        I do think, to agree with other comments above, that we are expecting successful solutions to the problems we face. But I think that is something every voter should expect of every elected official.

    4. I think the purity tests are a bit of a problem. But that I think is ok. What I think is a major problem:

      Ritter – someone yesterday put it well, that they would like to see more action from Ritter. Progressive, conservative, unique – but taking the lead more often. I think if he’s viewed as being too passive, that could lose it.

      Bennet – I think he’s doing really well although the vote against cram-down made no sense politically and his slow response to it is worrisome. I hope this is all due to getting up to speed and not indicitive of the rest of the campaign.

  4. Comrade-Governor’s long campaign to break the back of industry advances…

    From Human Events, online today-

    We in Colorado have just suffered through a 2009 legislative session, wrapped up last week, which resembled an intense microcosm of what’s happening in D.C.

    …In April, Ritter signed HB1292 which made into law new regulations regarding oil and gas drilling, rules which the Colorado Oil & Gas Association described as “the most costly and burdensome” in the country.  

    …Pressure for the new rules came from environmental groups, and the rules give the Division of Wildlife substantial influence over whether a drilling permit will be approved.

    …Says State Sen. Greg Brophy, “Ritter took final action in his long campaign to destroy the oil and gas industry.  …this governor shoves them over the cliff.”

    1. I thought I’d chime in on how disappointing Ritter’s term has been despite the fact that Sen. Brophy suggests that Ritter has been outstanding in at least one regard, with his comment:

      “Ritter took final action in his long campaign to destroy the oil and gas industry.”

      I’d like to point out that Ritter hasn’t really been all that successful in destroying the industry in Colorado and clearly does not stand head and shoulders above other Governors in their attempts to shove O&G over the proverbial cliff:

      Here are the most recent rig count declines from around the region:

      State (decline from 2008 peak rig count)

      UT (72%)

      CO (66%)

      NM (65%)

      TX (63%)

      OK (62%)

      CA (59%)

      WY (58%)

      National rig count declines:

      US (54%)

      Canada (90%)

      So, although Ritter has been able to chase off over 80 drill rigs from Colorado, he is not fit to hold Gov. Perry’s (R-TX) hat. Perry successfully scared off over 600 rigs from Texas! Indeed, even Gov. Henry (D-OK) chased away 135 drill rigs the last 8 months.

      It’s clear from looking at the data that Brophy is merely shilling for the Governor. You should know better, CT, than to just repeat things Brophy says without checking his “facts.”  😉

      All data from Baker-Hughes for the week ending May 8, 2009.

      1. OK, I heard recently that there is indeed a decline in rig #’s but that it is compensated for by newer, higher capacity rigs that require fewer workers– so that the companies can cite fewer rigs and complain that new regulations are causing them to lay people off, while at the same time their capacity is staying up with fewer workers due to better and more efficient (ie requiring fewer people) rigs.  Does anyone  know about this trend?  Is this factual?

        1. In Colorado, at least, there is a lag before operators report their production numbers. I think it’s supposed to be 45 days, but the COGCC doesn’t yet have any 2009 production data posted. Also, there seems to be regular revisions to production data for 2007 still taking place in 2009.

          Colorado natural gas production in 2008 is currently 4% above the total produced in 2007. The last 3 months of 2008 show a dramatic decline in production, but this may be due to late reporting or to an actual decline in production. It may be several more months before the explanation becomes apparent.

          2008 oil production, on the other hand, declined 5.3% from 2007. Even 2007 oil production was 1.3% below 2006 levels. But then, Colorado really isn’t a significant oil producing region.

          Also, operators are very reluctant to admit that the new rigs require fewer person hours to produce a given volume of gas. Go figure!

  5. should be asking themselves how they can attract wise women, non-white men, and non-“traditional family values” types to their camp. how can the so-called best and brightest of a major political party think said party can be successful if all the decisions are made by a homogenous group of people with whom the majority of voters cannot identify?

    1. A group of older, relatively wealthy, white men gather at the Brown Palace to question what has gone wrong with their grand strategy at total domination.

      Hispanics present?  0  

      African Americans?  0

      Women?              0

      Under age 50?       0

      Hmm, what has gone wrong for the GOP in Colorado recently?  Could it be signifianctly less votes from women, Hispanics, and younger voters?    

      3. they already have the right message:  Government, taxes and all those who aren’t conservative, Focus on the Family style Christians are the spawn of Satan and/or (gasp) socialists.  They just haven’t sold it hard enough or loud enough.  

        The electorate isn’t really rejecting the same old message or the same old all grumpy white male just-say-no leadership.  We’ve just become hard of hearing or something. Maybe they could import Rush to do a very loud teaching tour. No listening allowed, of course.

        1. that Colorado’s GOP would view a Colorado-based Rush-like character as their long-awaited savior who would finally convince the electorate that the GOP’s continually narrowing perspective actually represents the majority of the state.  

  6. Great diary, Twitty. That’s sure a lot of has-beens deciding the future of the party, circa 1998. They really are in a world of hurt.

  7. This is exactly why the GOP will lose–this group is a bunch of old, white, straight, men.  Secondly, look where they met–typical Republican hangout.  If there were diversity among the attendees, and they met at a Village Inn, then I’d be scared.

  8. Legislators recap session

    Published May 11, 2009 @ 7:42 am by Sentinel staff

    Got the legislative fever?

    Then hopefully you’ve made reservations for today to come listen to Sen. Josh Penry, Rep. Steve King and Rep. Laura Bradford talk about what went right and what went wrong at the state capitol this year. From noon to 1 p.m. at the Adobe Creek National Golf Course, 876 18 1/2 Road, in Fruita, the trio will recap the session.

    1. I want to go to a post-session session w/ my electeds and be told what they did wrong.

      How about telling people what passed and what the expectations will be for implementation?

      They need to cut the crazy pill prescription.

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

81 readers online now

Newsletter

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