For the past year, Colorado has been perceived as a likely 2010 political battleground with a modest but steady Republican advantage. Last Tuesday’s primary results have challenged that status.
Republicans leaders had recruited Jane Norton for the Senate and Scott McInnis for the governorship. Republican primary voters, however, had other views. They nominated Ken Buck, an underfunded local DA from Greeley who attracted Tea Party backing, and Dan Maes, a political novice carried along by the powerful anti-establishment trend in the Republican Party.
In contrast, the Democrats nominated party establishment picks. After Bill Ritter, the vulnerable first-term governor, decided to drop his re-election bid, Democrats recruited popular Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper as their candidate, who was unopposed in the primary. In the Senate race, although appointed Sen. Michael Bennet was able to fend off a scrappy Andrew Romanoff with the help of money and establishment support — including considerable involvement from President Obama and his political machine — he survived despite 46 percent support for Romanoff.
The Democrats now believe they have their best team on the field. The Republicans are less sure about Buck and consider the governorship lost. Not only is Maes broadly perceived as ill-informed about the job, but his business credentials have been challenged and his campaign finance reports are a source of controversy. But, most problematic, anti-illegal immigration firebrand Tom Tancredo is in the race as an independent candidate, splitting the Republican vote and leaving a large plurality or solid majority for John Hickenlooper.
Unfortunately, this is a loss for voters. In May and June, McInnis and Hickenlooper began to engage in a debate about the future direction of Colorado. Oil and gas regulations, land use policy, water resource development, state budget cuts and financing were discussed in numerous forums. With the Republican infighting and the under-financed and inexperienced Republican nominee, it is less likely there will be a debate on state issues. In fact, with Tancredo in the race, the next 12 weeks may be a long, if not fruitful, shouting match about the state’s stance on immigration.
In spite of the Republicans’ problems, Colorado remains on the battleground list:
• The latest Gallup poll on states’ partisan preferences has Colorado exactly in the middle of the 50 states, with 42 percent of voters declaring Democratic and Republican preferences, respectively. Each party has slightly more than 800,000 active voters (Republicans are currently ahead by about 30,000), with the balance of power held by about 800,000 unaffiliated voters.
• The more the U.S. Senate election is a referendum on the president and Washington than just a contest between Democrat Michael Bennet and Republican Ken Buck, the better Republicans should do. For nearly a year, President Obama’s approval ratings have been below 50 percent, the danger zone for congressional Democratic re-election. They are even lower here, especially among unaffiliated voters. Congress’ own approval of 20 percent is in record low territory.
• Republican turnout in this Senate primary was 68,000 more than Democrats — partially reflecting that midterm elections usually are more about changing Washington than supporting it — and this year, Republicans are change agents. This advantage can be seen in early head-to-head polls showing a 5 percent Republican advantage in the Senate race.
Still, as the primaries demonstrated, campaigns and character matter. Buck gave away his post-convention lead with a series of missteps. Norton battled back from a 20-point deficit with an aggressive, negative media campaign.
The Scott McInnis plagiarism scandal, compounded by his poor initial handling of it, effectively ended his campaign.
Both Buck and Bennet have similar tasks to accomplish quickly. They must stage shows of unity with their respective primary opponents and fans, refill their coffers and make the transition to general election issues rather than the niche issues that engage narrow constituencies. The challenge is to make the transition without losing the enthusiasm of the core activists of their respective parties.
Bennet repeatedly voices his independence from Washington, but after linking his campaign closely to Obama, he will be challenged in making that case. Obama was useful in August; he is unlikely to be an asset in October. Buck needs support from party leaders and is underfinanced. Democrats will immediately link him with the most extreme views of the Tea Party.
Colorado’s senatorial race will remain on the national radar because its candidates clearly represent two dominant themes among voters in this election: the anti-Washington, anti-establishment stance, and the desire to address national problems, which Obama and the Democratic Party legislated over the last two years.
Obama’s policies on health care, cap and trade, immigration and more stimulus spending should be strongly debated given the highly contrasting positions of the incumbent Democratic senator and the conservative Republican nominee.
And this battle will take place in a state with a close partisan balance. It should be a campaign the country wants to watch.
Floyd Ciruli (fciruli@aol.com), founder of Ciruli Associates, is a Denver-based pollster and political analyst.
