Marc Ambinder "45% of CO Dems voted against POTUS's choice"

[wndycty]

Think about that shit for a minute. 55% of Colorado Dems voted for POTUS's choice, which means POTUS's choice won by 10% but Ambinder looks for the negative Obama angle.

http://twitter.com/marcambinder/statuses/20845693639

Clinton's endorsement of Romanoff made it a race, so Obama 1, Clinton 0 stuff is silly. 45% of CO Dems voted against POTUS's choice

[Jennicut]

1. I honestly think most voters did not vote for or against a President or former President.

They voted for who they wanted. Bennett had a lot of older voters on his side per the PPP polling. Romanoff had younger people. It depends on who went out and voted.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

5. I agree

[democrat2thecore]

54. Absolutely right. -nt

[book_worm]

2. You know this is really nit-picky stuff--according to Rachel in the end

neither Clinton nor the president did much for either candidate. In my view Romanoff was gaining ground and then suddenly when he went negative in the last few days it turned on him. Bennett overall ran a positive campaign--in the end that helped him.

[Hawkeye-X]

4. Bennet has a VERY poor record

and Romanoff has been extremely positive and was a far better choice than this a-hole.

Sorry, but our vote(s) is for sale to you, Michael Bennet. Each vote (2) will cost you $500,000 each.

You can bum from that Anschutz asshole.

Hawkeye-X

[niyad]

36. if you seriously think bennet ran a positive campaign, you obviously didn't see the last two weeks

worth of ads.

[paulk]

57. Bennet's campaign accused Romanoff of voting for the

privatization of social security while he was speaker of the CO house - fliers with this claim (an absolute falsehood) bombarded older registered Democratic voters.

Is it any wonder that Bennet's biggest advantage was with older voters?

This was done fairly early on, btw

I wouldn't call that a positive campaign

[Hawkeye-X]

3. And because of Obama's interference, I am not voting for Bennet . His ballot will be empty

I plan to vote for everything else but him.

I'll write in Andrew Romanoff because that's who deserves this position. Even the wisdom of the Colorado Democratic Party back in '08 wanted Romanoff as Salazar's replacement. But Ritter bucked the wisdom and picked that Anschutz errand boy.

Fuck him.

My family will not be voting for this idiot - we'll be leaving his ballot blank. I don't care if we get a Republican senator (unlikely, but possible because POLLS after POLLS shows that Romanoff defeats any of the idiotic Rethugs).

[FrenchieCat]

6. If you live in Colorado, then you will have to suffer the consequences of your actions or inactions.

and walk around without a nose on your face.
Hope it suits you.

[wndycty]

7. Plus 100,000

BTW check you PM in a minute

[Hawkeye-X]

8. My vote is no longer free.

Bennet will have to pay me $500,000 each (2) votes from our family.

We cannot afford another DINO in the Senate. Bennet is a DINO and dead to me.

I was 100% for Romanoff, because I know him well - he was my state representative and the state Speaker of the House (after he helped capture the Senate side of the Legislature after 40+ years of Thug domination)

He was term limited.

[FrenchieCat]

26. whatefucking ever!

That's your call.

Remember that once you stop voting,
you ain't got shit to say,
because you have become part of the problem,
even if you don't want to think so.

[scheming daemons]

34. Bennet is DINO? LOL.... 100% record of voting with the Democrats

100%.

[paulk]

58. even when he changed his vote

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/c-span-as-red-pill-camera_b_651594.html

You can watch the C-Span video here. To see the sequence, watch at 3:03:30 Bennet vote against the interest rate cap amendment. Then watch at 3:05:23 Udall vote against the amendment. Then, watch Bennet and Udall confer with Senator Charles Schumer, waiting to see if the amendment will lose. Once the amendment is guaranteed to die, Bennet switches his vote at 3:07:57 and 15 seconds later Udall does the same.

[WI_DEM]

44. Dino with a 100% record of voting with the dem majority? Oh come on.

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[OhioBlue]

17. I understand your frustration

especially right after the candidate that you support and believe in loses in a Primary. I felt the same here in Ohio when Lee Fisher backed by the Governor, the DSCC, etc beat Jennifer Brunner who I KNOW would have made a much better candidate and Senator.

However. I'll vote for Lee Fisher (D) over Rob Portman (R) for sure.

[saltpoint]

19. I endorse your plan to vote for Fisher over that

puke Rob Portman.

I loved Brunner also but my god Portman just has to be defeated in this election.

[MadBadger]

18. How fucking petty and sad

[impik]

33. What are you, 3 years old?

[Mass]

40. I hope you will be happy with your republican senator. We had knee-jerk reflexes like that

in MA, and look what we got. An idiot who competes with Sarah Palin.
So, good luck with that, but, if he wins because of people like you, remember other people than you will suffer.

Talk about selfishness. I did not get what I wanted, so I will make sure everybody is screwed. Talking like a true progressive!

[WI_DEM]

43. That is a stupid knee-jerk reaction and hopefully you'll come to your senses

It's okay for Bill to endorse but not the POTUS?

[Blue_Tires]

51. fwiw a lot of people in Va. had that same attitude last year, even a few Duers admitted it

And that is why the commonwealth is now blessed with McDonnell/Cuccinelli

[depakid]

9. Think about it- Obama shouldn't have been in the race in the 1st place

Yet another bit of poor judgment- though perhaps not quite as bad (or as pathetic) as supporting Blanche Lincoln.

Or Joe Lieberman. LOL. That one worked out well for him and the rest of us, eh?

Yep- now 45% of Colorado Dems (and who knows how many independents) have needlessly been slighted.

Good luck wooing them all back come November Mr. Emanual & Gibbs.

[Jennicut]

10. So Bennett winning pissed off those that didn't vote for him so he should not have won?

Endorsements mattered little here. It was who was motivated to go out and vote. Romanoff could not motivate more then Bennet did. Younger voters, which were on Romanoff's side, do not always come out and vote.

[depakid]

20. No, the point is that the administration going into state primary races is arrogant and foolish

There's no upside come November- and every risk of a downside.

Chicago machine style politics is an artifact of the 20th Century that ought to be left in the 20th Century.

[Jennicut]

22. If Obama had stayed out of it (and Bill Clinton too) would the outcome be different?

Romanoff tried to make Bennet the insider when the guy was there not even two years yet. Not enough people bought that.

Also, Chicago-machine style politics are not exclusive to Chicago. FDR interfered more them most people realize.

[tsuki]

48. Former Colorado Democratic Party officials agreed with you.

http://coloradostatesman.com/content/991665-open-letter-president-barack-obama-democratic-national-committee-officers-and-democra

[Hawkeye-X]

59. I know Polly Baca well - she is actually a client of mine

She is one of the sweetest person I've ever met, and she is very down-to-earth person. When I come to her condo to work on her Internet issues, her house is full of accomplishments and people she has met throughout her career (from JFK to Bill to Obama), and she was a great person.

[paulk]

25. being outspent 6-1 didn't help Romanoff, either

the big money won this election, as usual.

-----

[Jennicut]

29. In CT, Lamont outspent Malloy. Malloy won. Sometimes people just like who they like.

[paulk]

31. by six to one?

[Jennicut]

32. Lamont is a multi-millionaire. Malloy is not.

Romanoff's total spending so far is $1.7 million, compared with Bennet's nearly $5.8 million. http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_15663719

While Malloy participated in the state's program, receiving $2.5 million for his primary campaign, Lamont has spent $8.6 million of his own money in his primary battle. http://www.thehour.com/story/490138 I think Malloy didn't spend all of his money, either.

[paulk]

53. seems like a rejection of Lamont - who voters were familiar with

because of his previous Senate run, than a matter of money...


in CO the multimillionaire won

[Hawkeye-X]

13. Going to take a vacation from Colorado politics until the end of September

I've just had about enough.

Bennet is already losing in the GE - he doesn't have my vote (yet)

[Jennicut]

15. The last two polls on these races in CO show something different.

Latest PPP poll:

It is 46% Bennet and 43% Buck.

It is 46% Bennet and 40% Norton.

Latest Survey USA poll:

43% Bennet 43% Buck

46% Bennet 40% Norton

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/senate/co/colorado_senate_buck_vs_bennet-1106.html


He is either tied or ahead in both polls.

[donco6]

42. Guess he doesn't need us then.

Good to know.

[scheming daemons]

35. What a ridiculous angle to take

Bennet voted with the Democratic majority 100% of the time... of COURSE the President is going to support him.


You've really gone off the deep end. Presidents endorse candidates that support their agenda. That's what they do.



You're become a caricature of a left-wing loony.

[paulk]

55. it's true - Bennet supported Obama's pro-Wall St/Big Bank

agenda right down the line. of COURSE Obama supported him. Loaned him his campaign organization, even. Raised 3/4 million bucks for the guy.


-----

speaking of caricatures

Bennet is a caricature of a Democrat.

I wonder what that makes Obama?

[MessiahRp]

38. I think the big names and the party should stay the fuck out of primaries...

Allow primaries to be won on ideas and principles and let the people decide what type of Democrat they want to run against the Republican.

Then the party structure and Obama and bigwigs can come in and help all they want because they will be campaigning against a REPUBLICAN.

Strange how often they interject in these primaries but do very little against the GOP in the big races.

Railroading progressives out of races seems too high a priority for the top Democrats. Of course since this has been the entire Rahm "I am not a Democrat, but rather a corporate asshole" Emanuel strategy for years, I am not surprised.

Rp

[whistler162]

39. D*mned if he does and D*mned if he doesn't....

how many complaining about the President endorsing Bennett would be complaining about the President not endorsing either.

My guess 95% or better.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

11. When are people going to learn that ALL politics is local! Didn't Ambinder learn anything from

Tip O'Neill? He's so full of shit...

This is a shocker! I thought for sure that Romanoff would win. However, one thing that pleased me about Bennet: he was NOT a Washington insider. Romanoff tried to paint him as one. Bennet did stand up for the public option, and I remember how brave he was. However, some may believe that he was doing it only for political expediency, knowing fully well that his efforts were going to fail. Still, this one was is toss up for me. I was torn over it. I'm not 100% convinced that Romanoff was more progressive than Bennet. That seemed to be the talking point. I'm glad Obama won this one because I can't take the M$M's relentless attack on the president and trying to divide the Democratic Party and relive the bitter 2008 Dem primaries.

[Robbins]

12. Romanoff

There were those who said he was really a DLC Dem posing as progressive.Plus polls have had Bennet as stronger candiate against the
Republicans.Obama supported an Incumbent who cast tough votes for him.Presidents always support Incumbents In primarys.

[Hawkeye-X]

14. True, he was DLC, but he trashed DLC the minute he refused PAC money

and if he won tonight, he would have continued to refuse PAC money, through DSCC, ala Barack Obama.

But it doesn't matter anymore. Bennet is bought and paid for, clearly.

Hawkeye-X

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

21. Yes, I'm well aware of that. My issue is Romanoff painting himself as the progressive.

He appeared on Ed's show several times and at his town hall meeting in Denver, posing as a progressive. But Clinton endorsing him makes me think that he's really not a progressive and Ed was being punked.

What is more, he painted himself as an outsider, though Bennet had neither held nor been elected to political office---ever! Romanoff went negative. Scorched Earth politics between Democrats always turns me off.

But again, I'm torn on this one. Bennet may indeed be a semi-corporatists, but I'm not convinced that Romanoff was not.

We'll see what happens.

[Jennicut]

24. He wasn't, just like Halter was not ultra progressive either.

I actually would have voted for Romanoff, he seemed to have more experience then Bennet did. However, I think this whole I am the only true progressive is a load of crud.

[paulk]

28. acually, Presidents rarely take sides in primaries

especially competitive ones

This notion "Presidents always support Incumbents In primarys", that has been repeated over and over by Bennet's folks is simply not true.


What Obama did is highly unusual - to lend Bennet his OFA for the campaign and to actively fundraise for him.

Let's hope he hasn't alienated enough Democratic voters to effect the general election this fall.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

30. It used to be true that presidents remained neutral in primaries. I think that's more true of

Republicans, just because they tend to be more cohesive. As the Democrats become a bit more divided on issues, it has become more commonplace to take sides. I don't like it, either. I think we ought to let the people decide. There's a difference between supporting Democrats as they run against Republicans. But, I'm with you. I cannot stand this recent phenomenon of presidents getting involved in primaries. Let the people decide who they want!!

[niyad]

37. bennet was the incumbent ONLY because he was appointed by ritter to take salazer's place

a good many people believed he should have appointed romanoff, not some corporate moneybags.

[saltpoint]

16. In William Faulkner's novel THE REIVERS, the character

Boone asserts that in a horse race the horse who places first wins.

Ambinder should read more Faulkner.

[FrenchieCat]

23. Might as well adopt the MSM tactics.....

Worked for Cenk and a few others.

[rufus dog]

27. and if my Aunt had balls she would be my Uncle

She doesn't (to my knowledge) and losing by 10 is not a win.

[donco6]

41. Colorado lost out on a really good choice in Romanoff.

It's a sad day.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

47. Seems like every day is a sad one for you. (nt)

[donco6]

49. Not always. But a good candidate was defeated by money.

That's always a sad day.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

50. A good candidate will find money.

That's an essential element to being a good candidate in the current system (unfortunately).

[donco6]

52. Well, but a candidate that refuses PAC money because of the obligations is requires -

versus a candidate that DOES take it regardless of the obligations it requires is always going to be at a disadvantage. But if you prefer bought and sold candidates versus those who don't want to be beholden to big corporations, I guess that's your choice. Now THAT'S sad.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

45. The whole concept is nuts in the first place, and it always is.

I don't think people put very much stock at all in endorsements. If there's active campaigning involved - perhaps - but I don't buy that just placing the "hand of god" on someone is going to change anyone's vote.

[paulk]

56. it was more than the "hand of god"

Obama let Bennet use his campaign organization (OFA) to phonebank and knock on doors. He raised 3/4 of a million dollars for him.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/ericasagrans/gGMTgd

"Organizing for America made 11,500 calls and knocked on nearly 3,500 doors in the last four days alone on behalf of Senator Bennet. This year’s Vote 2010 effort proved successful in getting out the vote in Colorado, and today’s news shows how Organizing for America is building strength heading into this fall’s races:"

Obama had a lot invested in this race for whatever reason and drawing the conclusion that the closeness of the race is something of a negative for Obama is certainly arguable.

[ncteechur]

60. Gee, seems like Ambinder is underlining Gibbs' point.