Democrats have not had the best of luck with their senatorial vacancies this year. Caroline Kennedy’s potential ascension to New York’s seat is triggering a flurry of controversy in the blogosphere. We don’t need to remind you what’s going on in Illinois. Ted Kaufman, appointed to fill Joe Biden's shoes in Delaware, has been less controversial, although we criticized the pick for being too inside baseball.
And now the Democrats have another vacancy to fill – this time in Colorado, where Senator Ken Salazar, who was up for re-election in 2010, has apparently been selected to become Barack Obama’s Secretary of the Interior.
But this one has the potential to turn out a little bit better for the Democrats. With Colorado having turned bluer, Salazar’s moderation is no longer such a prize to the Dems, especially given that his approval ratings are no better than average. Basically, the Democrats ought to be able to wind up with either (i) someone just as electable as Salazar, but more liberal, or (ii) someone no more liberal than Salazar, but electorally untouchable. And just who might that someone be?
The Denver Post lists seven potential replacements for Governor Bill Ritter to pick from, and it’s a fairly strong group of candidates.
Rep. John Salazar – Brother of Ken Salazar and third-term Congressman. Moderate Democrat who aligns himself with the Blue Dog caucus -- probably more moderate than his brother, and would not be a certain vote for the Democrats, especially on pocketbook issues. Has overperformed in his district, winning re-election easily in an R+4 district, and for obvious reasons should hold most of Ken Salazar's electoral support. Basically, he would represent a sacrifice of ideology for electability.
Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper. Extremely popular in Denver. Has an interesting and salable background, with credentials ranging from geology to business development. Generally seems to be liberal, particularly on environmental issues, although he bought himself some credibility with moderates by opposing Denver’s marijuana decriminalization initiative (which passed anyway). Arguably the most upside of anyone on this list; however, there isn’t that much history of mayors of large cities transitioning into the Senate, as the two positions require fairly different skill sets.
Rep. Diana DeGette – Quite progressive Congresswoman who just won re-election to her 7th term. Entrenched/intimidating enough so as to no longer elicit serious Republican challengers in her Denver district. Is she too liberal to win statewide? Hard to say in Colorado, which tends to be more idiosyncratic and libertarianish than classically moderate. One downside is that her fundraising has not been terrific, although that’s not uncommon for someone who isn’t facing a serious challenger.
State House Speaker Andrew Romanoff -- Term limited, and so is departing the state legislature. Young and has a reputation for ambition; one gets the feeling that he’ll run for Congress someday if he doesn’t get the Senate seat. State legislative leaders tend to have skills that transfer pretty well to the US Senate and have a fairly good electoral track record. Ritter is undoubtedly used to working with him. Conservatives will try and paint him as something of a tax-and-spend liberal based on his positioning on past state budget disputes.
Rep. Ed Perlmutter – Mainline-to-liberal Democrat who was just re-elected decisively to his sophomore term in purple CO-7. Has a reputation for strong constituent services. A fairly safe, compromise pick.
Former U.S. Attorney Tom Strickland. The Democratic nominee for Senate in both 1996 and 2002; he twice lost to Wayne Allard, by about five points each time out. Politics are a little hard to discern, although appears to tend more toward the moderate side.
Denver Public Schools Superintendent Michael Bennet. Was on Obama’s short list to be Secretary of Education. That’s pretty much all that I know about him.
Final Thoughts: If he’s interested in the position – and who knows if he is – then Hickenlooper’s combination of resume, electability, and most likely being a reliable Democratic vote would seem to be something of a dominant strategy.
Strickland and Bennet are relatively untested electorally (actually, Strickland has been tested and twice failed that test). They would seem to be the most unorthodox choices.
That leaves the four legislators –- Salazar, Romanoff, Perlmutter, DeGette –- who probably run in that order from moderate to liberal, with a big gap between Salazar and the other three. Picking Salazar, when the Democrats have any number of well credentialed alternatives, would represent an awfully cautious choice on Ritter’s behalf; it's also one that he'll be under a lot of pressure to make.
12.16.2008
Colorado's Salazar To Head Interior, Creating Another Vacancy for Democrats
by Nate Silver @ 2:50 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

107 comments
Nate, is this the most senators being appointed after an election? It seems high to me, but that may be because it is so unimportant a figure as not to stick in my mind.
Dems need to think long term electability when they make this appointment, CO is a swing state, and it would be sad to lose it going forward.
How about some numbers on the 2010 Senates races and the 2012 Presidential. Does polling this early predict anything historically? When does polling begin to matter?
It's beginning to bug me that Obama is raiding so many senators for his cabinet. I realize he's much more politically savvy than I am, but I wonder whether he could be weakening the power and potential effectiveness of the Democratic caucus in the Senate through these raids.
wv: denessea. Dat's da state south of kentucky, ah reckon.
This will certainly be interesting for us in CO, and I'm curious to see what happens next!
please 538 pleeeeaaase do a historical analysis of the number of vacancies left by incoming administrations.
i'd like to know how obama charts.
i generally think it is good to open vacancies. it makes room for your junior players to move up through the system, and helps solidify long term advantage.
Kaufman filling (not throwing) Biden's shoes in Delaware, not Denver?
Michael: Not just senators. With the Napolitano pick, the Democrats have left Arizona with a Republican governor (and a partisan one at that) for possibly the next 8-10 years, and has left us without the only candidate who could have possibly defeated McCain in his senate reelection campaign in 2010.
Apparently this is a complete no-brainer. Obviously you go with the most popular candidate in John Hickenlooper. And Hickenlooper would be mad not to want this seat. Ken Salazer was a pretty lousy senator anyway. Utterly spineless typical blue dog.
When I first read Obama had tapped Salazer for Interior, I thought he was insane. Now it's looking like develop into a potential gain for the Democrats.
Recap on what I'd like to see happen in the senate, in addition to Franken winning:
Mayor John Hickenlooper replace Ken Salazer in Colorado
Appoint Jan Schakowsky to the President's vacated seat. Then in 2016, Michelle Obama run for Schakowsky's (who'll then be in her 70s) vacated seat.
Beau Biden eventually replace the Vice President.
Caroline Kennedy or Andrew Cuomo (if playing it safe) for NY.
If Hickenlooper does succeed Salazer, then Obama is one clever bugger.
"Colorado's Salazar To Head Interior, Creating Another Vacancy for Democrats"
upsy daisy,
looks like your electoral season is in endlessly mode.
btw:
I read this advice in the left side of the site:
"...
Tell McConnell American
workers and families
deserve as much
help as Wall Street..."
http://ga1.org/campaign/mitch
agree.
good morning folks.
:)
Sorry to reduce the intellectual level of these posts, but knowing nothing about the candidates, I just think Sen. Hickenlooper sounds absolutely fantastic. Straight out of Dr Seuss!
"oh say, can you say:
when the hickenlooper looped and the hoopenlicker licked, then
then peter piper picked the peck of pickled pepper and the senator was picked" or something.
You're right, Mrs. B. Then again, the name makes me think of somebody out of a book by Virgina Lee Burton.
Hickenlooper. Funny name, fantastic Mayor.
I guess it's kinda selfish of me, but I almost prefer he stay here in Denver. He's done a phenomenal job, so far.
While we're on appointments, anybody have a reaction to EPA head Jackson?
This sounds like the first appointment which is not only of somebody who has been on the wrong side of important relevant questions (like say Summers) but also hasn't shown good administrative competence.
Does anybody know what's up with that? Care to talk me down?
Ugh, ANOTHER vacancy? When are all these going to be filled, before the 111th Congress is sworn in?
Also, does that mean Mark Udall is going to be a Senior Senator? lmao
Hickenlooper would be a horrible choice.
I want him to stay as my mayor forever (ignoring term limits.)
Ritter could appoint himself.
Colorado has extremely conservative Republicans and very Liberal Democrats, but the Party establishment is moderate and practical. Don't expect a true Liberal-Progressive to be selected, or to win state-wide.
That said, John Salazar keeps his CD03 seat safe. Diana DeGette, whose pet issue is Stem Cell Research, is probably too liberal to win state wide. Hickenlooper the popular (and liberal) mayor of Denver is well-positioned for Governor or some other executive post.
That leaves Romanoff and Perlmutter. Andrew Romanoff has better state-wide credentials, and much legislative experience as Majority leader.
I'm betting on Romanoff.
according to the news this morning, this guy who used to run the NASDAQ named Madoff literally made off with several billion after running what has been described as 'the world's largest Ponzi scheme disguised as a hedge fund'.
Although the SEC just caught him last night, there are reports that people informed the SEC he was running a Ponzi scheme as far back as 6 or 7 years ago. One of the things that inhibited the SEC's ability to investigate him and catch him sooner was the lack of regulation with regard to hedge funds, which are not currently required to divulge any details at all of what investments are being made with the money in the fund.
For all you free-market fundamentalists out there with your unabashed worship of Reaganomics, I wonder if you realize how insane you look to the rest of the world. Especially since most of the Milton Friedman types I've talked to this about have insisted that the cause of these debacles is not deregulation but not enough deregulation of the market.
You sound just like religious fanatics that try to explain a plague or a natural disaster as the punishment of God for not being puritanical enough.
Reaganomics is truly voodoo economics. Take your beads and rattles and get away from my government.
The 2010 senate races will depend a lot on how Obama is doing. If people think he is making things better they will vote for the democrats.
If the perception is we have a runaway democratic congress the republicans will make big gains.
My bet is that Obama will be governing as a pragmatic centrist who will be popular and the gop will be looked at as trying to be obstuctionist, so if it plays out right the democrats may end up with 62 or more senators and end all fillibuster chances.
Hopefully Reid will be replaced as leader, the man is useless, if any democrat loses in 2010 I hope it`s him!
I absolutely abhor the idea of Salazar, who has a wretched environmental record compared to the likes of Brian Schweitzer, Tony Knowles, or John Kitzhaber, taking over at Interior. But I've always found Salazar as a senator to be the wrong kind of conservative Democrat, and I'm not going to miss his vote.
I don't like how Hickenlooper opposed marijuana decriminalization. I think Romanoff is both the best and the most likely candidate for the position.
I wish he'd clean out some of the deadwood in the senate dem caucus by making Reid Postmaster General or something. Feinstein could be ambassador to Antartica and Bayh emissary to the North Pole.
I repeat my earlier concern about replacing these senators is a recipe for tough elections depending on world events...
I'm with you Statler. We too still have these people over here in the UK, who argue for more deregulation against in the face of every piece of evidence you put in front of them that proves deregulation is a licence for the unscrupulous to rip everybody off. It's like religion - they believe, so anything that contradicts their world view is automatically wrong. Sadly, none of them ever seem to have to end up penniless on the streets, which is about the only thing I can think off which might convince them to rethink.
"...however, there isn’t that much history of mayors of large cities transitioning into the Senate, as the two positions require fairly different skill sets"
Ummmmm.... What about Diane Feinstein??
John Salazar's House seat, though, would have a decent chance of going Republican, so that would weigh on Ritter's decision. Granted, it's gotten more Democratic (50-47 McCain in 2008, after going 55-44 for Bush in '04) but it wouldn't be the easiest seat for a Democrat to hold in a special election.
@Statler
@MrsB
@guests
I deeply agree with you both about lack of regulation on free market, the worst results are in front of us, nobody with a brain inside the skull,can deny them.
If I may, I would add something more in my humble opinion:
There are fields where you must not allow private business, they must be handled and controlled by public .
these fields are basically 3:
#1-Welfare,retirement –401k for you Americans to give an example.
#2- Educational system, basically: school from primary to university.
#3-Health care system.
Now probably (I am almost sure ) within few minutes some AIR will came to tell me I am a socialist.
Ok,I can bear it.
Look,this is not socialism this is how it works mostly in Europe, I would prefer to call it progress.
Now do your research:
We got welfare ,schools , hospital , all free for everybody (of course we pay taxes in order to have those benefit,but I know you also pay taxes and still don’t have those benefit ).
And if you stick to research you’ll find a big surprise:
We pay less than you to have more than you.
Furthermore in this very moment, probably middle class in Europe (because we are not going to lose those benefit in any way) will face this financial crisis a bit less concerned about the future.
Ok.
I apologize,yet again for my terrible, elementary English, but I just wanted to tell it.
Bye.
:)
What about Alberto Pena (sic)? Wasn't he a former Transportation Secretary and Mayor of Denver? Shouldn't he be considered in the mix?
matador, your English is pretty good; you have no cause to apologize.
I forget which country you're from, but there are some private schools in Europe, and there's no way private schools will be abolished in the U.S., nor should they be. The issue is whether the government should fund not only public but also private schools.
As for private pensions, I think they're fine but need to function in addition to Social Security, which should be sufficient by itself, since many people have no pension from work.
Honestly, I'm surprised Salazar accepted this. He could easily stay in the Senate as long as he wanted. If I had to guess, I would say he might use this cabinet position as a spring board to run for another office. Possibly Governor or Colorado in 2014.
Dems are going to have to play it safe on this one. I would go with either Hickenlooper or Romanoff. Probably the latter.
However, I must issue a correction. The initiative in Denver that Hickenlooper originally opposed was, in fact, a LEGALIZATION initiative, not a decriminalization one. And, after Denver passed the initiative, Hickenlooper was forced acknowledge that it certainly signals a major shift in public opinion on this issue.
hi matador
you are in Italy, right? I am in the UK. You have dear Berlosconi, friend and companion of Tony Blair. My commiserations.
I am with you all the way. Much more efficient for the state to provide education and health etc, much cheaper for the individuals, and much more compassionate than leaving people either uneducated, diseased, dying or starving.
To those in the US who attack European state health care as socialism, I say - ok, put your money where your mouth is and go back to private armies for your defence, pay for your own piece of road, your own private security police, finance your own bank bailouts etc etc. Fine if you are stinking rich, not such a success if you aren't.
Socialism, pah, common sense.
"Honestly, I'm surprised Salazar accepted this. He could easily stay in the Senate as long as he wanted."
It's conceivably possible that this appointment isn't 100% a done deal. I think it's strange that Obama went ahead and announced his energy-environmental team without his nominee for Interior Secretary present at the rollout.
I just think it's weird that Obama wants Ken Salazar at Interior in the first place. The guy's record on protecting the environment is Republicanesque.
Nate you miss one key point: all of these people have legislative records that can be attacked except Hick. That is a HUGE plus.
This pick is extremely easy: Pick Hick. Plus, Ritter kind of owes Hick, since it was common knowledge in 2006 that had he entered the Dem primary for governor, Hick would have pounded the less-known Ritter. Ritter kind of owes him a bit for not running.
Mark,
Hickenlooper is also on Obama's shortlist for Transportation Secretary.
I’m surprised so many Senators (and a Governor) are willing to give up relatively secure elected positions for the uncertainty of serving in a Presidential administration where you serve at the pleasure of the President.
Senator Biden, I can understand. He was probably getting near retirement and has been grooming his son to replace him anyway. Plus, it is not that easy to fire the Vice-President.
Perhaps Senator Clinton never intended to use the Senate seat as anything but a springboard to the Presidency, and having failed with that, is taking a position where she believes she can have real impact.
I don’t know enough about Salazar to comment on his motives, or Governor Napolitano’s, although she seemed to have a good shot at McCain’s Senate seat if she was interested.
The thing that concerns me is the possibility that Obama is more interested to his needs than any regard for the future of the Democratic Party. President Clinton only took two people out of the Senate (Gore and Bentsen), but both of those seats went Republican and have stayed that way.
Speaking as a Coloradan, I can tell you that noone would do a better job than Romanoff. He is the best legislator that I have ever seen. He tackles the tough issues and works with everyone to solve the problem.
The others would do a great job as well and I am proud of the bench that Colorado Dems have but Romanoff is head and shoulders above the rest.
Off topic to New Hampshire:
John DiStasio reported in the Mancheser Union Leader today that Paul Hodes (newly elected 2nd term Congressman from NH's 2nd district) is seriously considering challanging Gregg's senate seat in 2010. Shea-Porter (1st District) is also the subject of rumors, but Hodes has indicated he is interested and will probably decide after Obama's first hundred days in office.
Mrs B, Matador, anyone interested in joining the debate
1) A for-profit corporation (as defined by US laws) has only one responsibility-to produce a profit for the shareholders. That's it. Those ads that try to depict Corporate America as being driven by altruistic humanitarian principles? Bullshit. It really is all about the money. People mean nothing except in terms of what money they can bring to the company.
2) Some sectors of the economy are heavily perverted when their focus is profit-driven as opposed to public service-driven. Imagine if the police were for-profit. You'd have to pay them to catch a thief, or to stop a murderer. Or imagine if the Army only protected you from foreign invaders if you paid a subscription. At one point, fire departments here in the US were arranged like that, and the results were awful. Any field which is essential to the preservation of human life will be similarly perverted by profit-driven motivations over public service oriented concerns.
3) This does not mean there is no place for the private sector to operate alongside the public sector. The police (as mentioned above) are public sector-and yet, you can still hire security guards (therefore, private sector) if you want additional services. So too with healthcare- public service healthcare can be complemented by private sector healthcare if it is desired. The rich lose nothing if both sectors are allowed to coexist, and yet the poor gain access to what is essential to human life.
4) The good of the whole is enhanced when public sector services deal with matters affecting the public as a whole. For instance, a thief or serial killer that robs or kills a poor person today could kill or rob a rich one tomorrow; therefore, having public sector police services available to all income levels benefits both rich and poor. So too with diseases, which may be easily and cheaply curable if caught early on; a homeless man with TB can spread it to a rich lawyer like Andrew Speaker with nothing more than a cough. Microbial pathogens do not discriminate between rich and poor, and it is to the benefit of the rich to preserve the health of the poor.
5) Many of the investors in the 'hedge fund' of Mr. Madoff included retirees, small-town school teachers, small investors as well as large banks. Every one of them, rich and poor alike would have benefited from regulation requiring Madoff to disclose where the funds were being invested. The Ponzi scheme he was running would have been obvious to anyone, and the number of victims few.
6) The recent 'no strings' banking bailout failed miserably. Banks still aren't lending to each other. The reason? We aren't MAKING them loan to each other. The solution? next time, any and all baliouts come with strings, ALOT of strings. Don't want strings? Don't ask for money. Anyone who's ever had to beg their parents for money (I hate doing this, for precisely this reason - as a result, I almost never go to the Banc du Mom and Dad unless I'm in waaaay over my head) is familiar with this principle. It serves two purposes: reduces the number of people begging for handouts, and allows you to correct errant behavior.
Is this socialism? No, it's still capitalism. It just isn't the insane fundamentalist-extremist capitalism Reagan-Thatcher imposed on us. Look at it like you would medicine: one dose is exactly what you need for the cure, not more, not less and taking ten or twenty doses- on the idea that if one is good then 20 is fucking amazing- will kill you. Moderation in all things is always the wisest course of action. Even when it comes to the market.
I think Obama's real world view is becoming clear with these picks - IT'S ABOUT PEOPLE AND JOBS!
His foreign policy seems to be - everyone just don't cause trouble and we will leave you alone and pay attention to domestic issues.
His environmental policy seems more tied to jobs than the environment.
His domestic policy is JOBS, JOBS, JOBS.
I must say, I agree with his pragmatic choices, GO_BAMA!
Fred,
Down here in New Orleans, we spell it Geaux Bama.
Merci
Regulation of the market is everywhere, somewhere there is a moderate center on regulation like everything else. Self regulating markets do not work - this recession is proof. Heavily regulated markets do not work well - see France and Soviet Union.
Moderation in all things, even government.
So people think that Hickenlooper would be a great name for a senator? Well, there happens to have been one for about 30 years, a Bourke Hickenlooper from somewhere in the midwest....
Fred,
Agreed. The perception of where that middle ground lay is askew, however. In the US, we tend to react to ANY regulation at all as being too much. When we look at things from a more global angle, however, what we think of as communism in the US is more like the centrist approach of the Scandinavian countries. Real communism does still exist, and it has a demonstratively paralyzing effect on innovation - observe how the USSR could compete with the US effectively up until the early 1970's, and after that it was impossible for them to catch up to us. But what is being discussed here is not Communism, but more of a moderate form of capitalism. The level of regulation we have here in the US is nominal to barely existent. While we have not gone as far as the Cayman Islands Banking System or Monaco or Luxembourg or heaven-forbid Nauru in our willingness to let corporations run completely amok, we have gone farther than is sane - and the fallout is what we are now experiencing, with the housing and credit bubbles and now this hedge fund mess. Moderation in government does not mean anarchy-it means government that DOES get involved to the extent needed and then backs off when it no longer is.
Dr. Joh Kitzahber, MD, would be an excellent choice for HHS should Daschle not serve the whole time. He was a highly regarded Governor of Oregon and makes Cowboy boots look good.
While we're on Oregon, Representative Peter DeFazio is wildly popular here and would be excellent for any environmental position. If not for Pete, Oregon would be a much sadder place than it is today.
Michael Bennett was actually helped into the Superintendent position by Bill Gates, of all people. The Bill and Melinda Gates fund donated lots of money to Denver Public Schools, and they sort of pushed Bennett on the district.
there's already a Hickenlooper? No! OK, some statistician work out the odds on TWO senators with the name of Hickenlooper!
Where does a name like that hail from, anyway?
Statler,
a lot of good points in there. Some form of capitalism is inevitable because most people are motivated primarily by getting more for themselves (though that "more" is not necessarily financial, it very often is). But something has to curb that selfishness - hence the need for regulation. IMHO, regulation is a naturally liberal thing, as what it boils down to is that the regulation is there to make sure that anybody is free to do anything they like, AS LONG AS IT DOESN'T HARM ANYONE ELSE (kind of a proto-definition of liberalism).
Out of interest, being French influenced and everything, is there any difference in attitude to regulation/capitalism in Louisiana as opposed to the rest of the US? I ask because the French have a bit of a reputation in Europe for liking state intervention and regulation of things like working hours and protectionism and for being a bit militant in defence of things like workers rights. Not saying that's necessarily bad or good, just that that's their reputation.
Yes, Hayford, Bourke Hickenlooper was from Iowa, and was known as part of the most conservative and isolationistic members of the Republican Party, and as possibly one of the most conservative American congressmen.
This is an online petition to get Obama to appoint Michael Pollan for Secretary of Agriculture.
If you've never read Pollan's books, do. The man has an absolutely transformative viewpoint of Agronomy and public policy.
We agree Statler.
I take that back, we agree on capitalism and moderation in regualtion - we need more in the U.S. currently.
I am not sure we agree on ag. Ag policy needs more free market, but it does not need a wholesale change.
Mrs B,
Depends on where you are in Louisiana. NOLA (contraction of New Orleans, Louisiana) was founded by Creoles, who were the landed gentry of French North America, and oddly, this has made NOLA more liberal than the rest of the state.
Lafayette is Cajun country, and most of these folks were the working classes that got forcibly evicted from Canada long after Louisiana was founded and came here to flee the British. They're more populist - if times are good, then the free market is good. If times are bad, they elect people like Huey 'a chicken in every pot' Long.
Shreveport is conservative, more like Arkansas or Texas than the rest of the state. Baton Rouge is kind of quirky. Kentwood is VERY Republican, but they're more polite about it than alot of Republicans. They'll tell you liberals are crazy to your face, but they will listen to your arguments at least without shouting you down or going all Bill O'Reilly on you.
So, yeah, it depends on where you are. NOLA's pretty liberal, the rest of the state not so much, although you can get some folks to vote liberal in times of trouble out on the bayou if it becomes obvious to them their chance of survival is improved by it.
site looks good nate, good job on staying relevant in this post-electoral climate.
Couple of stray, semi-interrelated thoughts.
1) The appointment of Salazar to Interior seems to be more about getting him out of the Senate than recruiting any sort of expertise to run the agency. I'm assuming that he accepted because he did not want to face a tough re-election in 2010 where his chances are possibly < 50/50.
2) So long as Obama has someone strong at EPA (and pro-renewable at Energy), the reality is that having a Blue Dog like Salazar at Interior is irrelevant.
3) Napolitano is forgoing a run against McCain in 2010 in favor of going up against Kyle in 2012. That's the right move, IMHO for both Napolitano and the Democratic party. First, McCain is far more reasonable/moderate than Kyle. Second, given his age, McCain is only looking at one more term while Kyle (66) is looking at another 2 terms unless he is defeated, so it makes sense to run the best challenger possible against him. Furthermore, as Secretary of HS, Napolitano will (hopefully) be able to run a pro-security platform that respects civil rights. Of course, if there is a major lapse, it could destroy her political future. But serving in Obama's cabinet and running in 2012 is probably a superior plan to staying as governor and running against McCain in 2010 (with no credible challenger to Kyle around for 2012).
4) The primary benefit of selecting sitting senators to serve in the cabinet is of course that they have existing relationships with senators. That generally ensures a smooth approval of the nomination and less contentious oversight hearings. Getting nominees approved quickly and easily is a top priority for Obama. So far, Steven Chu (Energy) appears to be the only potentially difficult nomination because:
1) he's never been vetted for a high-profile public office (I believe his appointment as director of Lawrence Livermore Labs required Senate approval, but there the concern was primarily security, not political);
2) he's relatively new to public life (about 4 years in a relatively low-profile position), having spent most of his career in academia; and
3) he was implicated a few years ago in a scandal in which he improperly received special compensation from the University of California (although the failure to report was determined to be the UC's, not the faculty members)--still might be a problem if anything else crops up (unlikely, given how carefully Obama seems to have vetted his nominees).
5) Patterson needs to either appoint Caroline Kennedy ASAP or definitively say that he isn't (and suffer whatever personal political price is associated with that, if any). But the speculation is starting to be an unwanted distraction that is making the Democrats look foolish (eg, Fran Drescher on Larry King last night) and there's really no point in drawing this process out.
6) In light of the IL debacle and the likely appearance of nepotism in Patterson's pick (particularly if it's Caroline Kennedy, and to a lesser degree with Cuomo), the decision not to appoint Beau Biden in DE looks really good. It creates a sour narrative for the entire party when considerations other than simply who will best represent the state or be the most electable in two years decide the selection.
7) Democrats need to make the appointment to replace Salazar strictly based on electability and, if at all possible, avoid a pick tainted by nepotism. Both those criteria probably exclude
Joe Salazar.
How progressive/moderate is Gov. Ritter himself? That would shed some light on the horse race.
Statler N Waldorf said...
Is this socialism? No, it's still capitalism.------
Actually it is both. Socialism was not originally "the government owns everything" but socialized society as in socialized child - each "decider" held accountable for their decisions rather than the Royal unaccountability of leadership just because the business was private.
Even in the early days of this country someone like Madoff would be stripped of every penny, tarred, feathered and run out of town on a rail.
Unsocialized Pirates be they Senators or CEO's commit their transgressions because they do not expect to be accountable. It will only stop when when they are.
Fred,
My main problem with current Ag policy is that it tends to benefit large, corporate farms over the small farmer and family owned operations. There's this documentary canned King Corn that will explain the nuances of it farther than I can in the space we have here, if you'd care to check it out on netflix.
I also have a problem with the way businesses like Monsanto operate. For one thing, if a single seed from a passing truck lands in your field and a plant grows from it, Monsanto can (and has on a number of farms in North Dakota) come down like a ton of bricks on you in court. The basis for this is the fact that they have managed to copyright the genomes for their products- which means any plant bearing that genome is technically Monsanto property, no matter if it got where it is because you planted it or a bee cross-pollinated it with your crops, or if, like I mentioned before, a few stray seeds blew off the top of an open-bed truck and it drifted into your field. I think this is excessive. I'm not a fan of copyrighting genetic material anyway, seems a little too creepy for me, but to litigate over something a small farmer has no control over, like bees or even the fucking wind, that's going far beyond the pale.
So, I do think some regulation can help when it comes to correcting excesses in the Ag market too. The Farm Bill that periodically comes up for renewal also tends to subsidize unhealthy crops like corn and sugar over healthier foodstuffs like soy, favors giant corporations over small farmers by allowing subsidies to anyone making less than 750,000 a year, and even affects the grain market in Mexico in a negative way by making our exports cheaper than their home grown grains and thereby creating a 'Wal-Mart' like effect on local markets along he US border.
Re the Ag Secretary position,
Michael Pollan doesn't want the job.
Yeah, the original Sen. Hickenlooper was the the right-wing guy the liberals loved to hate. He was a terrible thorn in their side for many years....
I can't find any evidence on the Net that the mayor of Denver is even remotely related to him. He grew up in Penn., not Iowa, where the other guy was from. And has been a dedicated liberal all his life, apparently.
Come on what about MN, we need Nate's secret sause (now that sounds funny) on this, it's been well over a week since you posted some substansive number crunching, and did you take the ballot challenge, and if so what did you get as some corectable error rates and what not
ssmith
So what? We can still draft his ass. I'm sure that if Obama managed to corner him on national TV during Prime Time and look him right in the eye and say, 'Michael, your country needs you, and I as your President am calling you to serve', he'd shit himself with horror and then accept the position.
Sometimes, you gotta do the ugly thing to a man to save the country.
About mayors serving in the Senate: eight former mayors are in the Senate, though some were not from big cities and some had other political positions.
Feinstein (SF)
Lugar (Indianapolis)
Coleman (St. Paul)
Menendez (mayor of Union City, had other positions)
Voinovich (mayor of Cleveland and governor)
Inhofe (Tulsa, US House of Reps)
Corker (Chattanooga)
Enzi (Gillette)
And another mayor, Mark Begich, was elected this year.
22 members of the US House are former mayors.
slight risk here, but I'm going to take it....
MR, the whole problem with a truly free market arises precisely because of what you have outlined - it is a set of voluntary arrangements between people in which some people make good decisions and some people don't. Everything would be fine if a) everyone was equally intelligent and clued up on what they were getting into, b) everyone was honest c) no-one was greedy and unscrupulous. Oh, and your definition of a bad decision might differ from mine - but I am assuming that you mean a bad decision for themselves, not a bad decision for everyone else. The other problem for me (being someone who likes things to be fair) is that the greedy and unscrupulous people usually come out on top because they take advantage of the trusting honest people. Those are the reasons why no sane individual would advocate operating unregulated markets of any kind. It comes down to the fact that a lot of human beings are unfortunately not very nice.
@Statler N Waldorf, et al, (whose name I finally googled so I now get where your critique from the balcony comes from. Plus you're a Crawdad giving you a unique perspective on corruption in govt.).
To further illustrate your point on the difference between the heavily republican 'trickle down' philosophy; a term for me that has always had a slightly 'let them eat cake' ring to it, versus the predominately Democratic 'rising tide floats all boats' theory. Given republicans and the corporate pure Milton Friedman propensity to de-regulate everything and let the market forces determine our fate, I think we have plenty of examples where that idea falls flat. Do we learn from it? Not usually. We are cautious for awhile but drift back into old habits. And corporations always seem to have the trump card: ie, "see, we've got the money and we create jobs, ergo we must be right so leave us alone and let us do it our way". The problem with that is that in any completely unregulated economy you'll eventually get a Gordon Gekko who wants to run the table. We de-regulated energy, we got Enron. We de-regulated communications somewhat, we get Clear Channel and a homogeneity of the airwaves. I personally have been fighting over the control of public land use. I shudder to think of what would become of aviation safety standards if there were further de-regulation of that industry. And now, of course, a complete GLOBAL financial meltdown. There are, indeed some common public stock that do not lend themselves to de-regulation.
And then, of course, there is the big problem with pure capitalism which presumes and endless supply of both raw materials and consumers. Which in turn encourages companies to engage in non-sustainable practices such as planned obsolescence and advertising that encourages perceived obsolescence (fashion trends). So not only do corporations point the bus towards the cliff, they put the pedal to the metal.
A case study I'm examining: Hewlitt Packard, in a commendable greening effort, is looking at sustainability in their procurement and supply chain. Sounds great but completely sidesteps part of their business model. The fact that printers are almost irrelevant. It's ink cartridges that drive the industry. In fact HP has over 150 different types of ink cartridges. That's a lot of landfiller. This proprietary mentality is troublesome to me in other industries as well; electronics for example. How many different cables, AC adapters and connectors do you have in that random stuff drawer in the kitchen? How often do you replace that cell phone or computer. I could go on, and if I ever finish this Public Policy and Planning thesis you can read all about it.
BUT, don't get me wrong. I am not a socialist. I do not believe capitalism and sustainability are mutually exclusive. It's just that we've got to be more responsible with it. There are some things we can get a do-over on. We should have gotten the bigger picture after the oil embargo of the 70's; and we did for awhile to the benefit of Toyota and Honda, but we went right back to big ass SUV's eventually. Repeat mistake in mid 2000's. Will we get it this time? Are we doomed to destroy the world economy every couple of generations? One thing I am certain of is that we do not get a do-over with the environment. We better get that one right because that one is not a mistake we will be able to learn from. More problematically is that all of these things are intertwined in a tapestry; keep pulling out threads and it's all going to unravel.
Enough oracle of doom. In addition to moderation I advocate clear oversight.
wv: puldshu - as in quit pulin' d shoe
Statler-
Don't believe the hype on Monsato. No judge in the U.S. or Canada has ever, or will ever, find against a farmer who had stray seeds land on his field. Intent is required, but, of course, Monsanto knows that and has never sued someone who did intentionally plant stolen seed. Period. Greenpeace is lying.
As for King Corn, it is imperative we create the most food at the least cost - the world needs it. The idea that we will intentionally produce less so greenies can sleep well is insane in a world with starving people.
Finally, farmers are not dumb, and they don't need your protection. Costies don't get ag, leave it to the free market. The best way out is less gov funding and fewer price supports.
Mrs B,
Engaging MR is always a dicey proposition. I tried it and it got him to leave for a day, but he came back and dumped all his pent up attention-whorishness onto the board.
I think of market regulation the same way i think of other forms of regulation. It's illegal to kill people. That's a good law. Why do we have it? Because if we didn't, there wouldn't be anybody left from all the killing people would be doing. Does it mean that all killing has stopped? No. Is there less killing than there would be otherwise? look at Somalia if you really need to ask that question.
Similarly, it should not seem so alien to people that the market should have regulations inhibiting certain forms of bad behavior. Naked shortselling aggravated the housing bubble and caused AIG to collapse. It greatly contributed to the downfall of Lehman Brothers, a company that had been a Blue Chip stock for years (along with AIG). Then they banned it to put a stop to that shit before it crashed the whole market.
To assume that human beings will never take advantage of each other and therefore we don't need laws to protect them is naïvete at it's worst. OF COURSE people will fuck each other over for a buck if you let them. This is why the housing bubble blew up - people saw a vulnerable population, aggressively marketed predatory mortgages at them,a nd then when they couldn't pay and walked away from the property, they took these bad debts and rolled them into CDOs and then tried to use those as bait to fuck each other over after their original clients had been sucked dry. The banking system's almost in a state of total collapse precisely because we refused to regulate the market and prevent people from fucking each other over. If we completely removed the ban on naked shortselling, returning tot he state of deregulation we were in a few months ago, we'd be in a depression by the middle of next year. If you think that's hyperbolic of me to suggest, may I remind you that Intrade is currently rating the possibility of a US depression (note: I said DEPRESSION, not Recession)in 2009 at 25%.
Arguing with a free market fundamentalist is like arguing with a religious fundamentalist. They're completely intractable, and you can never get them to acknowledge the other side, even after they've been proven wrong. To quote Zeno, " If you could reason with religious fundamentalists, there would be no religious fundamentalists".
If I'm not mistaken, this is just one of two Senatorial positions being vacated by appointments post-election. And given that the other is Hillary Clinton, and from New York, you can scarcely count it. That's a gimme.
There's obviously much thought going into the Salazar pick.
He was a strong supporter on the campaign trail.
He portrays himself as the kind of politician with the sensibilities, constituency, etc to effectively lead the Interior, as well as still have a major hand in Colorado politics.
And maybe most importantly, this vacancy, with a competitive race in 2010, provides the Obama Administration a critical opportunity (one of many to come, I'm sure) to re-wage a battle in a state the Democrats are in the process of permanent cementing in their column. This gives the grassroots team the chance to flex their muscles, keep strong, etc.
@ SNW: ...he'd shit himself with horror and then accept the position.
Not likely, but I do love your cowboy swagger. Carry on.
statler I agree with you 100% - free market fundamentalists = religious fundamentalists. I have one of them as my local MP. I stood against him at the last General Election (came second out of 7, one of whom was from a party called the Telepathic Partnership, and another from the Monster Raving Loony Party - don't mock, they have councillors in some places in England....) and will be taking him on again next time. I have a sort of civil relationship with him. He can be sensible - except he is rabidly pro-market and anti-regulation, and also anti-EU. Even as things started to go wrong with the banks as the sub-prime mortgage stuff surfaced, he was still arguing against any form of regulation of the mortgage market.
I never thought I'd say this, but I agree with Mule Rider. I think the government's responsibility to protect citizens from theft and harm does extend to taking a limited regulatory role to prevent corporate exploitation and market malfeasance, but when the government gets involved in pumping liquidity into companies that have been sunk by their own bad business practices, when the government is trying to keep the housing bubble inflated, it's really just perpetuating the problem and setting the stage for an even bigger market crash later.
WV: speedo: 'Nuff said.
@Statler, Fred, et al.
REgarding AG policy. Pollan's book, "The Omnivore's Dilemma" is a highly recommended read.
I personally think we need to look more towards locally and organically grown foods. This also means looking at city and community design (did I mention that I'm a policy and planning grad student?). Google Desmond Despommier for an example. It has been surmised that in a complete economic collapse where fuel prices became exorbitantly prohibitive or some other major worldwide catastrophe, that most large cities would run out of food in a matter of days. Think of the gas that would be saved if we didn't truck everything everywhere and the resulting lessened impact on the environment. Of Course, this means I'd have to tolerate hothouse tomatoes for nine months out of the year...oh wait, I already do that.
I spare you all the diatribe on genetic Frankenfoods for now.
Davy, may be of interest to you that in the UK in the last couple of years allotments have really taken off, after years of people not wanting them.
In case the word allotment means nothing to you, allotments are plots of land (typically around 1/4 acre) owned by the local council and leased out to local people at low rent for them to grow stuff on. It sort of goes back to World War II and dig for victory.
Allotments are reviving nationally, but to add a little local flavour, the parish council I am a member of has a block of around 30 allotments and for years a number were not taken up, but now we have a waiting list. People mostly grown their own fruit and veg on them, not flowers. I suspect the credit crunch will give allotments a greater boost.
Davy and Mrs B-
Small plots of land are cute, and there is no reason we should not use them. Keep in mind that under that model the earth supprts 1-3 billion people. I guess you can choose who dies...
As for Frankenfoods - they don't exist. GMO's have been on the market for decades with no problems or issues and they have saved billions of tons of pesticides sprayed on our land and flowing through our rivers. They have also saved billions of tone of noxious herbicides being sprayed - being replaced by the highly bio-degradeable glyphosate.
Try facts, not hype.
RE: Housing
One aspect that I think is overlooked in the housing issue: house flippers. Nothing illegal about this practice but something unethical and contributory to the current housing problem along with the predatory and irresponsible lending.
I went to one of those seminars which teaches you how to get wealthy quickly in the real estate market just to see what the deal was. You've probably seen run across these traveling infomercials in your city on occasion. These guys are nothing more than equity thieves. I realize it's just real estate speculation but it artificially drove up housing costs past the point where the market peaked.
An overlooked aspect of the problem, I should think.
@statler, mule rider, and other conservatives,
First, thanks to statler for the information about the behaviors of conservative republicans.
I am a liberal and I am planning to vacation with my liberal friends in the South this winter, not cancun.
But, Bill O'Reilly said on the Daily Show that if I go into parts of Alabama, the conservatives with their gun would tired to killed me or scare me off.
So, I am not sure if I should go. Bill O'Reilly is a conservative but I am curious if what he said about southern conservatives are true.
My friends and I do really want to vacation in the South this winter but we are scared after watching the Daily Show with Bill O'Reilly as a guest.
Mark,
I agree that it is a good idea to let businesses fail when they adopt bad corporate practices that put them in that position to begin with IF there will be no serious devastation to the rest of the economy as a result.
Let me give you an idea of what I mean. Now, the Big Three have been total fuckups by producing huge gas guzzling behemoths during an oil shock and now during a recession. They want money, and I would be willing to give it to them if they corrected this behavior. Better still, I'd offer to give that same bridge loan to alternative-fuel cell car companies like Zen or Tesla motors, and on helping filling stations to convert to allow people to recharge their electric cars or fill up on biodiesel. Fuck it, it makes your car exhaust smell like french fries. Who doesn't like the smell of french fries?
Davy, Fred
I fundamentally distrust copyrighting the genome. I think that's going way to far, Monsanto should be restricted from doing so. It creeps me out on a visceral level. Sorry, I know that's not a reasoned argument, but the fact is, it gives me the serious creeps.
As far as producing food the cheapest we can, I don't agree. There is a point when you're actually causing more harm than good, especially if Mexican farmers can't sell their crops in their own country. That does not help Mexicans at all, that hurts them and prevents them from attaining financial independence. So no, this does not benefit the world in the way you make it sound, Fred.
I agree that locally grown is better. Less gas wasted on transportation, less carbon emissions resulting therefrom, more money to the small-time family farm that has kids to feed and clothe and less to the corporate greed-heads. I stop at every farm stand I run across for this reason.
The subsidization of corn grown for ethanol is one reason why food has become MORE, not less expensive-for countries that depend on us exports like Haiti, this has resulted in Food Riots. Corn is mostly processed into High Fructose Corn Syrup, which is a major contributor to the US obesity epidemic, diabetes, and tooth decay. We should not be subsidizing corn in the US.
As far as the Crawdad comment goes--- Illinois might be one of the more corrupt states in the Union, but we practically invented the art form in Louisiana. Our elections are never a contest for the most qualified; they're more like a brawl from which only the most corrupt can survive. I assure you, Blagojevich wouldn't last a week down here.
fred, I wasn't advocating allotments as an answer to all our troubles, just giving an illustration that things might be moving in a more sustainable direction.
On GM foods, I am neither pro nor anti as a concept. I am not concerned about speeding up hybridisation etc, but the bit I do have concerns about is the bit that transplants genes from one species into another, particularly where such cross-species changes could not happen otherwise. I suppose that after thalidomide, radioactive paint, CFCs, lead in petrol etc I am just not sure whether scientists have always thought through the possible end consequences of what they are doing. And the more they demand to be allowed to do stuff because they know they are right, the less I believe they really are on top of things, because people who are really truly right can always show why through evidence, they don't need to throw their weight around.
We need to do something about feeding the world, that's for sure. How about the west consumes less? Something like one third of all the food bought in the UK is thrown away. Maybe you know the equivalent stat for the US. That is truly shocking.
MR, I know I'm gonna regret talking to you, but here goes. I'm doing this with my nose pinched.
I think the solution to the overpopulation issue is condoms and better education. Seriously. Statistically speaking, the farther you go in formal education (I'm talking college and grad school), the less kids you have. Also, by promoting safe sex education in school, we can prevent unintended pregnancies in our youth, and show them that if they wait till they graduate from college, they can actually support their kids and give those kids a good childhood. I don't believe abstinence education is the solution-ask Sarah Palin how her daughter's experience with abstinence only education worked out.
Fact is, people act more responsibly when they know what the hell they're doing. You can't teach common sense, but if you present people with options for a better life, they tend to take them if they think it'll work. We need to promote higher ed in our youth if we want to reduce the burden on our food supply.
@Mrs. B
We have community gardens here. cost me about $60 US a year. But then I live in the Greenest City in America (Nat Geo's Green Guide).
@Fred
6 1/2 billion people and rising world wide. RE: Frankenfoods. Obviously you work for MonSanto. I can point you to a few dissertations if you like that point out the problems with GMO's but I've got to get ready for work and don't have time to show you how to get your head out of your ass.
tstermitz said...
Colorado has extremely conservative Republicans and very Liberal Democrats, but the Party establishment is moderate and practical. Don't expect a true Liberal-Progressive to be selected, or to win state-wide.
That said, John Salazar keeps his CD03 seat safe. Diana DeGette, whose pet issue is Stem Cell Research, is probably too liberal to win state wide.
Hickenlooper the popular (and liberal) mayor of Denver is well-positioned for Governor or some other executive post.
That leaves Romanoff and Perlmutter. Andrew Romanoff has better state-wide credentials, and much legislative experience as Majority leader.
I'm betting on Romanoff.
I agree.
Romanoff would make a good Senator. He and Hickenlooper would be the best candidates. DeGette is fine, but she really is a better fit for Denver. Her statewide appeal is probably limited. She could conceivably lose the Independent vote (which is key to any statewide election) and lose in 2010.
If I were Hickenlooper I'd hang around and then succeed Bill Ritter as Governor. That could actually be a ticket to the White House in 2016. Despite this election, governors historically have a much easier pathway to the Presidency than Senators.
A personable western governor who's liberal but has strong appeal to moderates as a pragmatist who gets things done, would make a very powerful candidate at the Presidential level. I don't know that Hickenlooper has such an ambition, but many politicians do, and it would be far easier for him to make a run for the Presidency in 2016 or 2020 if he's been governor rather than Senator.
Hickenlooper got his start opposing Denver's parking problems. He ran ads where he put a quarter into a parking meter and instantly the expired flag went up. He looks confused, puts another quarter in and the flag just goes up again. The meter just keeps sucking his quarters.
This struck such a chord with Denverites frustrated over the endless parking meter increases that he won election and has received strong popular support ever since.
Those ads were some of the best political ads ever.
wow Cugel - unlike the rest of us, you posted something on topic! way to go!
For those interested, the Star-Tribune is live blogging the canvassing board proceedings in Minnesota: http://politicalblogs.startribune.com/bigquestionblog/?p=1248
There is also streaming video, if you need a nap.
@Statler
Nawlins: Tru dat.
Humourous aside: I was getting a trailer hitch installed in Alabama and the salesman was a Katrina refugee. But the electrician who was supposed to install it had gone for the day. So the salesman said, "You got 50 bucks cash, I can install it but you gotta pay me around the side of the building out of sight of the security camera."
I smiled and said, "You really are from the Big Easy."
But I got to leave with trailer and he got a Ulysses Grant under table. Everybody's happy.
A lot of media have been doing corruption pieces like top ten corrupt states in America, etc. But I think they do it based on people who have been caught. That just means that Illinois is dumb; in LA, it's just a way of life.
@Mrs. B
Cugel probably hasn't waded through all 80 posts yet.
OK, I'm really going now.
wv: gosts - like I am on these posts
MR,
The most worthy tasks in life are the most difficult. I think it would be a far better use of our tax dollars to spend it on opening schools and hospitals across Africa, Asia, and Latin America than to buy bombs to drop on them. When you educate people and offer them a chance at self-sufficiency, the pride that productive work offers a person, the dignity of being able to care for your own-they become quite reasonable, and you are more secure because of it.
If I had my way, we'd increase the Peace Corps and reduce the War Corps.
Make Love, Fuck War, Peace Will Save Us :)
This is off topic - but there isn't any place else to post this.
I've been watching a bit of the canvassing board meeting today. It seems they are almost exclusively discussing Franken challenges today. Most (but not all) are votes for Coleman that Franken's side claimed were votes for no one. Most of the time the judge's decision is upheld, which means these will appear some time soon as a sudden plus for Coleman. Anyone looking only at totals will suddenly assume Coleman is building a lead.
On the other hand, there have been a signficant number of decisions favoring Franken, i.e., votes that suddenly will appear for Franken, or votes that Coleman probably expected that are now non-votes. If you assume the judges are always right, except when the board says they are wrong, this will cause a significant shift towards Franken.
In summary, I anticipate at the end of the day Coleman will say "I'm ahead even more than I was before" while Franken says "I've increased my lead." Not until the board examines a signifcant number of Coleman challenges will either of these claims carry any weight.
On a related note, what is happening with the improperly rejected ballots? As I recall, Coleman asked a judge to issue an order preventing them from being opened, but I haven't heard any more. In the mean time, those ballots could already be opened and counted, and once that's done, you probably can't put them back in their envelopes.
melissa,
If you hear banjos, run. That's my one piece of advice to you.
I like the selection. Western ranchers, farmers and property owners will respect having a Westerner chosen, but politically, Democrats might be pushing their luck winning out West.
Re: Minnesota
The only thing that matters is the final count, with all challenged ballots resolved. If one side wants to crow about a 'lead', they can.. but it's not going to change the final result. They will still be on the sidelines, watching the other guy get sworn in.
The "fifth pile" rejected absentee ballots are currently being opened and counted by all counties except Ramsey and DeSoto; Hennepin just agreed to begin counting, which should be worth hundreds of votes for Franken. Even if they are not allowed to be added in to the final total, Franken is still a razor-close favorite to win. Unless a Supreme Court of either state or federal flavor stops them, the MN Secretary of State has said each county can choose to file an amended total including any absentee ballot that was rejected for a reason other than the four listed by the legislature.
Errr.. not DeSoto.. Dodge.
Also, slightly off-topic, but forget about Salazar -- the real news yesterday, for us environmentally-minded types, was Obama's naming of Steven Chu as Secretary of Energy. Probably the best pick he's made yet.
Even more off-topic, but too funny not to share:
Pelosi Lays Down The Law With Rahm
Up next: Rahm eats Pelosi's liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti.
@KennyB:
The streaming video of the canvassing board is actually fascinating.. not nap-worthy at all. Certainly for political junkies as are found here. :P
fascinating to read the out-of-stater analyses of the situation ... to see what our characters look like to those who don't really know them, and to see the stereotypes of the West evolving more slowly than the region itself
here in Colorado, i know Ken Salazar to have more cowboy hat than spine, and so i was dismayed to envision him having authority over public lands (@walt526, your points 1 & 2 make me feel a little better -- perhaps Salazar will be easy to herd around with Obama's policy cowbell hanging from his neck); some of us here would have expected Salazar to switch parties if the Dems hadn't done so well lately ...
the replacement question is tough; John Hickenlooper is a good, plain-spoken mayor, but his administration is fairly opaque and prone to deal-making (the "businessman" thing); most importantly, Hickenlooper has no presence on national issues, except perhaps those peripheral to urbanism (transportation, schools, budget); i'm glad he is my mayor, but would not trust him in the US Senate
John Salazar makes me puke; sorry, that's what Blue Dogs are for; he would offend the front range Democrats and set the seat up for turmoil
Andrew Romanoff is my choice; Romanoff is also in the running for Colorado Secretary of State (a post we are fortunate Frank Coffman is vacating), but i think he's not the best choice there (Ken Gordon is), and yet Colorado has an investment in Romanoff that needs to be redeemed somehow; i think it would pay off with him in US Senate; if somehow it came out opposite: Romanoff in Colo. Secretary of State and Gordon in Senate, we'd be still be well-served, but i think Gordon is too good a man to survive a Senate re-election battle
Since Nate is sitting on his hands on this whole MN thing, anyone get any full analysis of todays results based on original decision and current decision. I assume that if one can extrapolate some number of challenges being upheld. Other question were any challenges decided differently from both the original judgement and the Franken challenge, just a question
Ritter appoints his LT Governor Barbara O'Brien for the Salazar US Senate Seat. He selects Joan FitzGerald as his Lt Governor.
Just to flesh out the bit of historical trivia about the former Senator Hickenlooper: he was U.S. Senator from Iowa from 1945-69 (encompassing the four years I went to college in Des Moines). He was a McCarthyite conservative, but had a reputation as a bumbler. "Pulling a Hickenlooper" was Capitol Hill slang for some particularly boneheaded maneuver.
Mrs B said...
hi matador
you are in Italy, right? I am in the UK. You have dear Berlosconi, friend and companion of Tony Blair. My commiserations.
December 16, 2008 11:24 AM
################
Yes I am in Italy, and listen ,just for desperate fun:
I wish to have 10 Tony Blair instead of a single one Berlusconi.
Blair is the brightest star compared to our prime minister, He knows what democracy is, Berlusconi simply is a fascist dictator, nothing less than Putin , in fact they are best friend.
Anyway, thank you for the support and thanks to all guests for the interesting discussion which follow after my post.
Even Muley, for the first time, as far as I remember, wrote something which seemed to come from an human being (and that said it all )
Good night.
Statler N Waldorf said...
December 16, 2008 11:58 AM
#########
@Statler,Sir,
I read it.
You are the one.
;)
Hoo boy- Hickenlooper would be a great Senator, but a strategic argument could be made for a liberal or moderate from El Paso County (Colorado Springs), the once invincible (well, it still is, yet less so) GOP stronghold. My choice would be former city councilman and community activist Richard Skorman. That would throw the CO GOP into shock, because then all the other positions would be steady- Ritter, Salazar, and DeGette would still be around and Hickenlooper could continue to be one of the best mayors in America. Someone from Pueblo or Boulder would be a good idea too, I just can't think of anyone off the top of my head.
Mrs B, Matador,
I'll trade ya Bush if ya want. I mean, if you think Blair and Burlesconi suck ass, try this guy out-he'll make you nostalgic for the guys you now hate.
I mean, the man makes me miss Reagan. I can't stand Reagan, but he's better than this asshole.
Hell, he makes me miss NIXON!
Bring back Switch-Horse Campbell!
NOT
Hey, how did a thread about CO morph into Burlisconi and Blair?
Hickenlooper or Romanoff probably are the best choices, unless a wildcard like Skorman is thrown into the mix.
With some backing, Skorman would a)galvanize every progressive in Southern Colorado, particularly the 104,000 people in El Paso County that voted for Barack, b) with more statewide awareness about him he would be very palatable to both moderates and progressives (Aspen, Telluride, Steamboat, Ft.Collins, Pueblo as well as Denver Metro), and c)would be an outsider to the Denver political scene and not from Boulder, so he just might become appealing to more conservative-minded folks in rural areas, including the Western Slope areas like GJ and Glenwood.
Just my CO native take on it.
I just hope this gets done quickly.
Even though it is a caretaker Senator, what happened in Delaware is a much preferable scenario than the ongoing soap opera in New York or the even worse situation in Illinois.
Besides that the longer something like this takes and the more names are tossed out there, the harder it becomes to make a choice the pleases everyone.
If Ritter is smart, he won't take more than a week, two at the longest to make an announcement.
FYI, Mayor John Hickenlooper is indeed related to Senator Bourke Hickenlooper (there's only so many Hickenloopers in the world, ya know). Bourke Hickenlooper was the brother of the mayor's great-great- grandfather. Which would what.. make John a great, great grand newphew??
Your argument assumes that the governor's agenda is that of the National party. I would expect him to appoint someone who will increase the ability of the up-and-coming Western Democrats relative to the Eastern base.
^^ nice blog!! ^@^
徵信, 徵信網, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 感情挽回, 婚姻挽回, 挽回婚姻, 挽回感情, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信, 捉姦, 徵信公司, 通姦, 通姦罪, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 捉姦, 監聽, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 外遇問題, 徵信, 捉姦, 女人徵信, 女子徵信, 外遇問題, 女子徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 徵信公司, 徵信網, 外遇蒐證, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 感情挽回, 挽回感情, 婚姻挽回, 挽回婚姻, 外遇沖開, 抓姦, 女子徵信, 外遇蒐證, 外遇, 通姦, 通姦罪, 贍養費, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信公司, 女人徵信, 外遇
徵信, 徵信網, 徵信社, 徵信網, 外遇, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信, 女人徵信, 徵信社, 女人徵信社, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 女人徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社,
徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 抓姦, 離婚, 外遇,離婚,
徵信, 外遇, 離婚, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信社, 征信, 征信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 征信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信,
^^ very nice
徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,
徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,
外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇 外遇
外遇 外遇外遇 外遇 外遇
外遇 外遇 外遇
外遇
外遇 外遇
外遇
外遇 外遇外遇
外遇
外遇 外遇外遇 外遇 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 ,
外遇 外遇 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇外遇 外遇外遇 外遇 外遇
外遇 外遇
外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿喜帖囍帖卡片外遇外遇 外遇 外遇外遇 外遇
外遇 外遇 外遇 外遇剖析 外遇調查 外遇案例 外遇諮詢 偷情 第三者外遇話題 外遇發洩 感情挽回 徵信社 外遇心態 外遇 通姦 通姦罪 外遇徵信社徵信社外遇 外遇 抓姦徵信協會徵信公司 包二奶 徵信社 徵信 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信 婚姻 婚前徵信 前科 個人資料 外遇 第三者 徵信社 偵探社 抓姦 偵探社 偵探社婚 偵探社 偵探社偵探家事服務家事服務家電維修家事服務家事服務家事服務家事服務家事服務持久持久持久持久持久持久持久離婚網頁設計徵信社徵信社徵信徵信社外遇離婚協議書劈腿持久持久持久持久持久劈腿剖析徵信徵信社外遇外遇外遇外遇徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信徵信社徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,
Post a Comment