Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Romanoff, Buck win Colorado assembly races

Former state House Speaker Andrew Romanoff defeated appointed Sen. Michael Bennet at the Colorado Democratic assembly this afternoon.

Romanoff took 60 percent to 40 percent for Bennet although the incumbent qualified for the ballot by taking more than 30 percent of convention delegates.

On the Republican side Weld County Prosecutor Ken Buck cruised to a win -- a victory ensured by former Lt. Gov. Jane Norton's decision to bypass the convention and petition her way onto the August primary ballot.

In the runup to Todays vote, Bennet allies fought to downplay its importance -- noting that the winner of the convention rarely goes on to win the party nomination in the primary.

Romanoff, on the other hand, painted the assembly win as a sign of his grassroots strength and further evidence that voters were rejecting the insider profile of Bennet.

Bennet was appointed to the job by Gov. Bill Ritter after Ken Salazar was named Secretary of Interior.

By Chris Cillizza  |  May 22, 2010; 9:37 PM ET
Categories:  Senate  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Andrew Cuomo announces run for NY-Gov
Next: Charles Djou, Republicans capture Hawaii House seat


Mark, this thread looks like it isn't polluted. I don't mind the new year approaching facelift bar junk merchants.
In their criminal enterprise, at least they are obvious.

Let me try to jump to where you all were.
The issue is not whether illegal labor exploitation depresses wages and benefits for Americans, it does. The issue is, who thinks that this is a good thing and why do they think that?

The politics of illegal labor amount to the politics of labor productivity. Right now we have illegal labor directly checking the wages and benefits of American workers.

Is this agreed?

If it is, then who benefits from that fact.
All Americans? Capitalists? No Americans?

Earlier the one who shall remain nameless said the Democrats benefit because the illegals vote for Democrats. This is an odd argument (first of all, they don't vote), because everyone knows Democrats and labor unions are in bed together. Illegal labor is organized labor's nemesis.

Anyway, the illegal labor discussion has to happen and it has to focus on...of course...the money.

If we understand who in this country wants illegal labor, who gets rich because of it, we understand why it is happening.

Posted by: shrink2 | May 23, 2010 11:12 PM | Report abuse

The new year approaching, click in. Let's facelift bar!
====== =====
fr ee sh i pp ing

(jordan shoes) $32

(air max) $34
++++ ++++++++++



▍ ★∴
   ....▍▍....█▍ ☆ ★∵ ..../

Posted by: itkonlyyou77 | May 23, 2010 10:05 PM | Report abuse

malis, good to hear from you. Have a great summer.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | May 23, 2010 1:56 PM | Report abuse

Sean is correct. The makeup and degree of commitment of delegates to the nominating conventions (both Ds and Rs) are not that much different from that of Utah, hence convention results similar to Utah whose Bennett also lost.

Difference is our Bennet doesn't need the convention, so unlike Utah’s sitting Senator, will be on the primary ballot.

Romanoff, in a necessary effort to differentiate himself from the centrist Bennet, has been moving far to the left of his former moderate positions, and away from the bipartisan cooperation he was known for when he was Speaker of the House. While this has made him even more popular with D party activists, it won’t help him at all with the more moderate primary voters. He certainly would not have done this had Gov Ritter appointed him instead of Bennet to fill the rest of Salazar’s term (many people think the reason he’s running is simple spite—he felt it was his turn and was insulted when Ritter chose someone else).

I always liked Romanoff before…not so much now. I predict an easy Bennet primary win and likely win in the General (mainly because of the R’s uninspiring choices).

Posted by: malis | May 23, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Of course there is a reason to vote for Romanoff.

Romanoff has a great track record in the CO state house, and more importantly, he is NOT taking corporate donations.

Bennet is up to his butt in lobby donations, and has been late in responding to his constituents desires (public option, etc).

Posted by: THX1139 | May 23, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

Sean, are you in CO?

Posted by: mark_in_austin | May 23, 2010 10:02 AM | Report abuse

The polls suggest otherwise.

Posted by: SeanC1 | May 23, 2010 1:00 AM | Report abuse

Any Demoncat in Colorado will get smoked in November... So... it don't matter none...

Joe Kelly
Blog Talk Radio

Posted by: jmarnich | May 22, 2010 10:46 PM | Report abuse

Won't mean anything. Salazar lost the convention in 2004 and he did fine.

Romanoff has more institutional support among the delegates, hence, his victory. But he's offered no particular ideological reason for his candidacy, so, unlike, say, Joe Sestak or Bill Halter, there's no particularly compelling reason to vote for him.

Posted by: SeanC1 | May 22, 2010 10:29 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company