March 17th, 2011 | Category: Government Waste, John Hickenlooper, John Salazar, PPC | Comments are closed
|
||||||
|
Barring a miracle just short of a virgin birth, John Hickenlooper will be the next governor of Colorado. You do not have to be concerned with your vote “spoiling” the election and “throwing” it to a progressive Democrat. The GOP has already taken care of that.
Republican nominee Dan Maes’ problems are well-documented. He has been abandoned by the GOP. Beauprez, Brown, Andrews and Wadhams made it official.
Tom Tancredo abandoned the GOP, the party that elected him U.S. Congressman, and joined something called the “American Constitution Party” so he could either force Maes out or ensure his defeat. He did not accomplish the former. He has accomplished the latter.
If either Maes or Tancredo satisfy you, by all means, vote for him. If neither do, you are free to vote your conscience. If you believe in small government – both economically and socially – vote for Libertarian candidate for governor, Jaimes Brown.
Vote your conscience. What a radical notion.
The Colorado GOP State Assembly is this weekend. Any candidate (that chooses to participate in the assembly) that gets 30% or more of the vote will make the primary ballot.
If a candidate does not participate, the candidate may gather signatures to make the primary ballot. For instance, U.S. Senate candidate Jane Norton is not participating in the assembly for strategic reasons. Her primary rival, Ken Buck, is participating. Both will be on the primary ballot.
The Governor’s race, however, presents an interesting strategic choice. GOP establishment candidate Scott McInnis is by far the favorite to win the nomination and take on Democrat John Hickenlooper. However, he faces two challengers. Only one, Dan Maes, is participating in the assembly. If Maes doesn’t get 30% of the vote, he is done.
Joe Gschwendter, a relative latecomer to the race, will not participate in the assembly but will petition on to the primary ballot. Gschwendter, according to sources, has far more campaign money than Maes and might raise enough to put up a reasonable effort against McInnis.
Both Gschwendter and Maes position themselves as anti-establishment candidates. They hope to ride the current anti-establishment wave to victory over McInnis.
This presents an interesting strategic question for McInnis:
Would he be better off in a head-to-head matchup with Gschwendter or in a three way race that includes Maes?
I submit the answer is clear. In a head-to-head race, all the anti-establishment vote will be consolidated against McInnis. McInnis would still be the favorite, but he will want to avoid consolidated opposition if he can. His chances for success go up if the anti-establishment vote is split between between Gschwendter and Maes.
McInnis WANTS Maes on the primary ballot.
Therefore, what if the McInnis vote counters determine Maes is just shy of 30% at the assembly? Would it not make strategic sense for McInnis to have some of his delegates switch their votes to Maes to insure a three-way race?
Makes sense to me.
The Colorado GOP knows it has uphill battle on its hands in the 2010 race for governor. GOP leadership has acknowledged that Democratic candidate John Hickenlooper is a likable fellow and their candidate Scott McInnis is …. well….. not. (See Dick Wadhams warns Republicans Scott McInnis can’t beat John Hickenlooper in a personality contest).
In a press release today, Colorado GOP chairman Wadhams says “This is not an election for class clown, it is an election for Governor of Colorado.”
This is a doomed strategy. It will backfire.
Continuing the “class clown” analogy, making fun of the popular guy does not make one more popular. Generally speaking, the one making fun of the popular guy comes across as a jerk. Or, in today’s vernacular, a “hater.”
McInnis does not need help in that regard.
Even those that don’t particularly care for the class clown will feel some sympathy for him as the jerk keeps calling him names. The official GOP name for Hickenlooper in almost all of its press releases is “Hickenritter,” a reference to the sitting Democratic governor, Bill Ritter.
While the GOP may think Hickenlooper is the “class clown,” it is the GOP itself acting like petulant school boys.
If the Colorado GOP does not grow up, the Colorado governor race might be one of the few elections the Dems win in 2010.
Think they’ll be hatin’ it then?
Grand Junction’s Free Press published the following article on January 18, 2010. Candidates should giddy up and answer our survey by Linn and Ari Armstrong Shucks, mayor; you done warmed our Western hearts with your down-home talkin’ and dusty cowboy hat. While announcing his candidacy for governor, Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper, a.k.a. “Hickenritter” (if you listen to GOP Chair Dick Wadhams), a.k.a. “Hick,” said it’s “Giddy up time in Colorado.” Yippie ki-yay. Now all he needs is a running mate named Tonto. What we want to know is whether Hickenlooper’s campaign is more Lone Ranger or more Woody from Toy Story. To help us out, the mayor can answer the survey we sent to him the day he announced. We’d be much obliged. We sent the survey to all the major-party candidates for governor and U.S. Senate. All Colorado candidates are welcome to respond, and answers will be published unedited at FreeColorado.com. We hope voters and other journalists encourage candidates to answer the survey. Voters have a right to know where the candidates stand on the issues. You can find the survey at http://tinyurl.com/cosurvey10. Before we describe the survey, we offer an important elections announcement [that is now dated]. Tomorrow, January 19, is the final day to affiliate with a party if you wish to be involved in the caucus process. While Hickenlooper scared away his competition, many candidates face preliminary party votes. To affiliate with a party, first you need to get a Colorado voter registration form, available at http://tinyurl.com/mesavote. You can scan in the form and email it to voter.info@mesacounty.us; deliver it in person to 544 Rood Avenue, Suite 301A; or mail it to P.O. Box 20,000, Grand Junction, 81502, postmarked by January 19. We thank the Mesa County Elections office for helping us with this information. Now back to the survey. We have this crazy idea that elections should be about more than hair color, fancy slogans, and name-calling. We believe that elections should mostly be about the issues. Ideas matter. Where do the candidates stand? What do they believe? Obviously any survey will reveal only so much about a candidate. For example, our survey doesn’t include questions about the Democratic health bill. Most candidates are already talking about this issue, and we hope they clearly articulate their views on their web pages and elsewhere. Our survey was more intended to reveal positions that candidates aren’t talking about as much. We want to know whether candidates endorse corporate welfare. We want to know where they stand on key business controls, such as antitrust and Sarbanes-Oxley. We also want candidates to quit obscuring their views. For example, while Scott McInnis used to be “pro-choice,” he now calls himself “100 percent pro-life.” But what does that mean? Does he want to ban absolutely all abortions? If not, what exceptions would he allow? The matter of abortion (and related issues such as birth control) will be particularly important this election, given a measure may again be on the ballot to define a fertilized egg as a person. We want to know where candidates stand on immigration issues. Should a guest worker program be expanded? Should the Colorado legislature force businesses to verify with the federal government the legal status of potential employees? Should businesses be fined for failure to do so? Should tax-funded benefits ever be extended to non-citizen immigrants? What about property rights? Do candidates endorse eminent domain, the forcible taking of private property? Under what circumstances? Do candidates endorse the smoking ban, even for on-stage performances? Regarding the Bill of Rights, where do candidates stand with respect to free expression and the right to bear arms? For example, should adults with a concealed-carry permit be able to carry a handgun on tax-funded campuses? Medical marijuana will be a huge issue this legislative session; where do candidates stand on that matter and on marijuana laws generally? What about rules governing petitioners? What about the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights? Whether you’re Republican, Democrat, unaffiliated, or other, you should care about candidates’ positions. We hope that, in 2010, voters make a stand and demand that candidates state their views clearly, openly, and for the record. Here’s what you can do to help. Please contact your federal, state, and local candidates and encourage them to answer our survey and explain their views elsewhere. If you’re a Republican, you can find a list of federal and state-wide candidates at http://tinyurl.com/2010gop. We called the Colorado Democrats, and a representative said that hopefully a list of candidates will be made available at ColoradoDems.org. Otherwise you may need to poke around on the internet or call a party office. Candidates have a responsibility to reveal their views, and voters have a responsibility to critically and fairly evaluate candidates’ positions. It won’t do to take comments out of context or otherwise misrepresent what a candidate is about. We will get the government we deserve. It’s time for candidates to cowboy up. And it’s time for us voters to earn our spurs. Update: As of January 24, we’ve received a reply from one candidate running for governor or U.S. Senate: Dan Maes. 
If Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper decides to run for Colorado Governor, Scott McInnis and the Republicans will lose. Irrespective of politics, many people vote for someone they like. To quote Jules Winnfield, “Personality goes a long way.”
Hickenlooper comes across as a nice, pleasant, likable guy. McInnis, well…. doesn’t.
According to the Denver Daily News, Denver City Councilwoman Judy Montero does not want to see a library in her district close. Mayor John Hickenlooper plans on closing the library in response to the city’s budget shortfall. Montero, however, believes that “It’s our moral obligation as a city to keep the library open. It’s the heart and soul of the community.”
I suggest Ms. Montero start taking up a collection if she wishes to keep the library open. Of course, politely asking for funds is so much more difficult than just spending taxpayer money.
If one has to ask, the answer might be “no.” Taxpayers do not have that option. When one is pursuing a “moral obligation,” one can not be bothered to ask permission for funding. Asking is such a nuisance.
|
||||||
|
Copyright © 2012 Liberty on the Rocks™ Denver - All Rights Reserved |
||||||
