Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

FixCam: Bob Schaffer and the Colorado Senate Race

Note: Please upgrade your Flash plug-in to view our enhanced content.


Above you'll find snippets of a Fix interview with former Colorado Rep. Bob Schaffer (R). He served in the House for six years, from 1996 to 2002. Schaffer honored his term limits pledge and stepped aside. He attempted a comeback in 2004 but was trounced in a primary by beer magnate Pete Coors. Schaffer is back again in 2008 as the establishment pick for the seat being vacated by Sen. Wayne Allard (R) -- the seat that currently holds the #1 ranking on our Senate Line as the most likely to switch party control next November. (Make sure to check this space on Friday to see whether Colorado retains the pole position in the new Friday Senate Line.)

Among the highlights from our sitdown with Schaffer:

* Schaffer criticized the Bush Administration's strategy on Iraq, arguing that not enough was done in the aftermath of the invasion. "I don't think the post-invasion stage in Iraq included enough man power," said Schaffer. "As a result we're a year behind where we should be." On the surge strategy, Schaffer said it was "probably" the right thing to do but added: "It might have been too late."

* Schaffer rejected the perception -- fostered by Democrats -- that he is too conservative to win statewide. "I think it's because I'm consistent," Schaffer said of his reputation, adding that he voted against his party "a lot" in Congress especially when it "was drifting toward the left on spending [and] budgeting."

* Asked whether he can raise the money to compete with Rep. Mark Udall (D), who ended June with $2.5 million in the bank, Schaffer expressed confidence. He noted that he raised more than $1 million in his four-month campaign against Coors and that in the first six week of this race he brought in more than $700,000. But, Schaffer added: "I'm just a guy. I don't hang out with millionaires for a living."

By Chris Cillizza  |  September 19, 2007; 1:30 PM ET
Categories:  FixCam  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Parsing the Polls: Clinton and the Electability Factor
Next: Republican Shays Dangles Retirement

Comments

Hello! Good Site! Thanks you! vfxecjoywbx

Posted by: vttpmywxap | October 1, 2007 3:28 PM | Report abuse

Hello,
I love this site.
Kisses, Lisa

little angels hentai bbs

Posted by: anime dragon drive | September 27, 2007 5:08 AM | Report abuse

Kiss you!
I think this is the best site in the net I have ever visited!
Really, very nice site.
I check it regularly!

free blacks and asian sex

Posted by: videos of teen asian lesbians having sex | September 27, 2007 4:56 AM | Report abuse

Why are you getting so excited about Bob Schaffer? He's already lost a Senate primary before to a less-than-stellar Pete Coors, he was the second choice of the Colorado Republican Party after Scott McInnis dropped his bid and he won't get near the resources from the national party as he would in a normal cycle since they'll be sending cash to save Sununu, Smith, Coleman and Susan Collins.

Mark Udall will wipe the floor with this guy. 54-46 race in Udall's favor.

Posted by: Marc | September 21, 2007 8:15 PM | Report abuse

Bob Shaffer was my Congressman during the five years I lived in Fort Collins. He represented the Colorado 4th district that encompassed nearly all of the eastern plains of Colorado. This district is not representative of the entire state of Colorado, especially given the changes in Colorado brought on immigration from California and the failures of the Republican's in Congress. Udall the son of "Mo" Udall comes from a moderate progressive family that includes his cousin Republican Gordon Smith of Oregon. Shaffer will run the tired Republican campaign of the eighties and nineties of painting Udall a liberal and his traditional conservative values. I worked the conservative Colorado 4th in the '06 cycle and a progressive democrat came with in 6,000 votes of knocking off the Republican Musgrave. I predict that Udall will win this by 4-6 points and Musgrave will lose this election because the vote stealing "Reform" candidate is the democratic primary this time.

Posted by: bradcpa | September 21, 2007 8:43 AM | Report abuse

Bob Shaffer was my Congressman during the five years I lived in Fort Collins. He represented the Colorado 4th district that encompassed nearly all of the eastern plains of Colorado. This district is not representative of the entire state of Colorado, especially given the changes in Colorado brought on immigration from California and the failures of the Republican's in Congress. Udall the son of "Mo" Udall comes from a moderate progressive family that includes his cousin Republican Gordon Smith of Oregon. Shaffer will run the tired Republican campaign of the eighties and nineties of painting Udall a liberal and his traditional conservative values. I worked the conservative Colorado 4th in the '06 cycle and a progressive democrat came with in 6,000 votes of knocking off the Republican Musgrave. I predict that Udall will win this by 4-6 points and Musgrave will lose this election because the vote stealing "Reform" candidate is the democratic primary this time.

Posted by: bradcpa | September 21, 2007 7:52 AM | Report abuse

"a state where republican values appeal to everyone..."
ya, it pretty much says it right there. This euphasism does not change what he is trying to do...does anyone not see this?!

Everyone is trying to convert everyone now adays....

Posted by: Greeneyedwitch | September 20, 2007 10:40 AM | Report abuse

I will back to comment more on this race later... but Chris. If the guy insist on calling the Democratic Party the Democrat party please don't post it. Its rude and childish.

Posted by: bradcpa | September 20, 2007 9:09 AM | Report abuse

Did you ask Bob Schaffer why his party is so terrified of a primary for the GOP nomination, to the point where Dick Wad said Schaffer is the "de facto nominee"?

Dick Wad already lost a Senate seat in Virginia. It's only fair that he bestow the same honor on Colorado.

Posted by: Jon | September 19, 2007 5:41 PM | Report abuse

The cities (excluding suburbs) of Boulder and Denver are both solidly Democratic. Notwithstanding, there are some suburbs that reliably Republican. Additionally, while not a suburb (though that's changing because of development) Colorado Springs is a reliable Republican vote.

Schaffer would probably want to focus on areas such as Douglas County, Colorado Springs, the Eastern Plains/Northern Colorado.

Udall would probably want to focus on Boulder, Denver, certain parts of Jefferson County, etc.

That isn't to say that either candidate is going to ignore other parts of the state, but I'm guessing that there are certain parts of the Colorado, one candidate is going to have difficulty getting a substantial number of votes, no matter how many resources they throw in.

Posted by: Louis | September 19, 2007 4:27 PM | Report abuse

"Schaffer said of his reputation, adding that he voted against his party "a lot" in Congress especially when it "was drifting toward the left on spending [and] budgeting.""

This is standard Republicant crap. It's not a coincidence that every time the Republicants get a chance to govern, they totally mangle the job and leave the nation with far higher deficits than when they took over. That goes for spending under Reagan and Bush 1, and especially under the Republicant congress and Bush 2.

Even Alan Greenspan has admitted that Bill Clinton was the most fiscally responsible president he worked with. So much for those claims of bad fiscal policy by those that don't have an R after their name.

Posted by: corbett | September 19, 2007 4:26 PM | Report abuse

Yes, Udall has done some pandering with the "hunting in Rocky Mountain National Park," thing. Nonetheless, that is minor. Granted, Northern Colorado and the Eastern plains are pretty much locked in for Republican, though Angie Paccione did come fairly close in 2006. Colorado Springs, is virtually impossible for a Democrat to win. Nonetheless, Colorado has shifted Democratic at a certain extent. There are seven House districts in Colorado, and four of them are currently held by Democrats. Add the fact that there is already a current sitting Democratic Senator (Ken Salazar).

Repeating the tired old Republican rhetoric may work in pockets of the state, but by and large, if Shaffer intends to stick to such he is going to be in a world of hurt.

Posted by: Louis | September 19, 2007 4:16 PM | Report abuse

"Federal tax revenue grew by 14.5 percent in 2005 and 11.8 percent last year, receipts this year are expected to grow by about 7.1 percent.
'

lets see here 14.5 11.8 7.1 notice the dropping numbers?? thats what the Bush tax cuts have done. Time to get rid of them.

Back to relevant conversation. Schaffer is going to have a very difficult time in Colorado and I expect him to lose. He isn't raising the cash he needs, he is right wing as he admits himself that the Republican party moved too far left on spending policies. His view on the war is a losing view, one can critize how we did it all they want, not taking a viewpoint ot get us out of there is a losing one and wil lcost him dearly.

Posted by: Rob Millette | September 19, 2007 4:00 PM | Report abuse

thanks for asking the hard questions chris
the co. senate race should be fun to watch

Hypocrite Hillary(DC Experience Matters?JFK & Bill HAD LIL

This Video Is Showing That Hillary is a hypocrite for saying obama has no experience

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBy3AKn_2Fk

Posted by: kyle | September 19, 2007 3:55 PM | Report abuse

Last week the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released its latest update on our country's fiscal situation. According to the CBO, the federal deficit shrank $19 billion over the past 5 months. Additionally, CBO projects the deficit will be $90 billion less than 2006. Is this because of the Democrats policies? No.

Is this because the Democrats have cut spending? No.

This decrease is the continued result of President Bush's tax cuts. In fact, if the Democrats have their way, they will increase federal spending - the spending bills passed by the House are $48 billion higher in non-emergency spending than the CBO baseline, which accounts for inflation related growth. Without any proactive legislation to continue the tax relief already provided for by Congress, taxpayers will see $150 billion in tax increases go into effect in 2011.

Republican tax policies do work. We can have lower taxes and higher federal revenue. Federal tax revenue grew by 14.5 percent in 2005 and 11.8 percent last year, receipts this year are expected to grow by about 7.1 percent.

Posted by: We are Libs, we spend | September 19, 2007 3:18 PM | Report abuse

An article published yesterday in Roll Call, a Capitol Hill newspaper that reports on Congress, noted that the recently passed Defense Appropriations Bill in the House contained 36 earmarks for Congressmen John Murtha (D-PA), Jim Moran (D-VA), and Peter Visclosky (D-IN) totaling over $100 million dollars. Interestingly enough, all 36 earmarks are directed at clients of a lobbying firm founded and comprised of former top aides to all three Congressmen. This lobbying firm, their employees, and their clients have all combined to raise over $542,000 this year alone for these three members of Congress, dubbed the "classic Washington iron triangle" by Steve Ellis of Taxpayers for Common Sense.

Posted by: famous thieves | September 19, 2007 3:15 PM | Report abuse

I want to leave an irrelevant comment too

Posted by: rufuskank | September 19, 2007 2:57 PM | Report abuse

"Pope refuses to meet Rice: report


It said the reply "illustrated the divergence of view" between the Vatican and the White House about the "initiatives of the Bush administration in the Middle East."

The newspaper said the pope had rejected all meetings with political representatives during August.

The Vatican press office refused to confirm the report.
"

WOW. First the catholic church kicks rudy out now this. I'm glad. Sends a message to the rest of the flock that fascism and using christianity the way they did will not be tolorated by the catholics. Good. But a little late. Where have they been the last 20 years on th e"religous right" fascists?

Posted by: rufsu | September 19, 2007 2:53 PM | Report abuse

A paltry 11 percent rated Congress positively, beating the previous low of 14 percent in July.


what we think of the Liberal congress. you're doing a bang-up job brownie. errr, I mean pelosi/reid

Posted by: Anonymous | September 19, 2007 2:13 PM | Report abuse

Judge - You'll have to forgive Mr Schaffer, he was recycling a talking point from the 2004 race.

Posted by: bsimon | September 19, 2007 2:09 PM | Report abuse

""I don't think the post-invasion stage in Iraq included enough man power," said Schaffer. "As a result we're a year behind where we should be." "

Only a year? Try 4 years behind. If we'd sent in the appropriate number of troops initially specified by Shinseki we'd be militarily much better off. We'd still have a political vacuum (why not?) so manpower looks irrelevant. "Thought power" was clearly in even shorter supply than manpower, Schaffer setting yet another good example.

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | September 19, 2007 1:54 PM | Report abuse

"dear rufus (name changed to protect the innocent)

They're at it again.

The Republican noise machine is working hard at distracting America. They think that by attacking what we say, they can ignore the facts. And the mainstream media continues to follow along.

Last week, the Wall Street Journal attacked DFA. And with all the clamor about Petraeus vs. "Betray-Us", every right-wing nut from Bill O'Reilly to FOX news to Rush Limbaugh is screaming that Democrats like you are traitors. They know that Bush's claims about Iraq don't hold water, so they're trying to change the debate.

Don't fall for this bait and switch! America is clear on what Congress must do. No matter how many times the media comes after us, we will not relent in our campaign to Fund Withdrawal, Not the War.

Don't let the truth get twisted. Your $15 contribution gives DFA the resources to get our message out and end this war:

https://contribute.democracyforamerica.com/fundwithdrawal

The Republican noise machine thinks it can turn the debate on Iraq into a game of he said-she said and ignore the facts. While they are playing at distraction, DFA members nationwide are taking real action.

Last week from Sacramento, CA to Wichita, KS to Dover, NH, DFA members organized "Tell the Truth" rallies outside their local news stations to demand that the media reports the true story.

Because the truth is that Bush has been lying about this war since the beginning. The President ordered a four star general to cook the books in support of the White House's failed strategy. And George Bush's troop drawdown is nothing more than regular troop rotation.

Your support lets DFA continue to take action. Chip in $15 right now so DFA can keep the pressure on Congress to fund withdrawal, not the war:

https://contribute.democracyforamerica.com/fundwithdrawal

We will not stand by and let the Republican noise machine control the agenda. Together we can get our message out and return the focus to what matters. Together we can fund withdrawal, not the war!

Thank you for your support,

Rachel Moss
Finance Director

P.S. If you haven't done so already, sign DFA's petition to Fund Withdrawal, Not the War now:
http://www.democracyforamerica.com/fundwithdrawal
"

Posted by: rufus | September 19, 2007 1:47 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company