Comments on: Maverick Senate Campaign Could Be History Before It Hurts Udall

By: Jay Marvin

Jay Marvin — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:31:24 +0000

This guy will not hurt Udall. He belongs to a wing of the Dems that isn’t mainstream enough. He’s also someone who must want to put a member of the GOP in that seat. The faults of congress do not start with Mark Udall they start with the GOP. If he really cared he’d be on Bob Schaffer’s case about what he stands for and how he feels about things like Iraq, health care, and other things that matter to working people.

By: LHKMAN

LHKMAN — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:48:13 +0000

OK, Mr. Benner has had his few seconds, thanks to one-day stories by the local media and in Jim’s blog. On a personal note, I’m getting tired of the left-wing of the Democratic Party calling itself “progressives.” One could just as easily refer to the mainstream as the progressives and the left-wing represented by Benner as the whacko left or if that’s too strong, call them the radical left. As discussed in an earlier column of Jim’s, Pat Waak’s job is to still internal debate and present a united party because her requirement is to win elections or seek career opportunities elsewhere.

By: noidea

noidea — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:08:11 +0000

Jay,
Other than impeaching GWB (and even that is somewhat mainstream amongst Dems), the other positions Brenner has according to Jim ( 1. Withdrawing troops from Iraq 2.Single payer health care system 3.enacting campaign finance reform 4. stopping the privatization public services through firms like Blackwater and Halibourton) sounds like the stump speech for any of the current Democratic presidential candidates.

He sounds like a mainstream Democrat to me. I think that it really comes down to that they want an “annointed candidate” by the party elite based upon their vision of “electability”. The people should have no say……because they know best.

By: LHKMAN

LHKMAN — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:09:01 +0000

Golly, Jay, I must have misunderstood. I thought the object in a primary election was to defeat others of your own party so you could be the nominee for election in the general. You seem to take Benner seriously. He could inveigh all he wants against Schaeffer (not a bad idea at that), but that would only piss off Republicans and wouldn’t do Benner or die-hard Democrats any good at all.

Seriously, this extreme right/left vs. the center/moderate is a situation that drives the gridlock in American policy. Candidates are driven to the extremes within their parties, and coupled with gerrymandered districts that ensure little change from one party to the other, we end up with a bunch of ideologues like Tom Tancredo in Congress. I specifically do not use the term “representing us” because Tancredo never represented anyone but himself except for one issue. Now that his pension and lifetime health care are ensured, he couldn’t get out of Dodge fast enough. This is how we get the Musgraves and the Schaeffers, because they pander to the so-called “base” more effectively than more mainstream members of their parties.

By: Anoldguy1944

Anoldguy1944 — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:09:43 +0000

I’m inclined to agree with LHKMAN, even though I’m personally more toward the left wing of the Colorado Democrats. Emotionally, I’m right with Benner when it comes to impeaching the “Current Occupant,” but impeachment is a political dead horse, and will gain the Democrats little or nothing if it’s pursued. I’m more interested in getting right-wing ideologues and corporate whores OUT of office than the ideological purity of the Democrats running against them, and frankly, Mark Udall has credentials that qualify him as reasonably progressive anyway, at least by Colorado standards.

I like Mike Miles very much in 2004, and would have cheerfully voted for him, but I also doubt that, had he been the candidate, Democrats would have won the Senate seat they did. Politics is almost never an all-or-nothing endeavor, and democracy (or a “republic,” as conservatives like to remind us) doesn’t work at all if there’s no ability or willingness to compromise.

By: noidea

noidea — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 04:10:42 +0000

What happened today in New Hampshire was pure democracy. Candidates in each party representing each of their ideals. Record numbers of people voted in the primaries. People voted and the vote moves on. There wss not hand wringing about whether or not a potential candidate’s challenge would expose the “real” beliefs of their opponent and weaken them in the general election. The primary system is MEANT to expose the beliefs of the candidate, whatever party. Colorado is a microcosm of the U.S. primary system. It seems that some people (Democratic Party of Colorado and Jim Spencer) have no faith in the people and would rather have their candidate not expose their ideas and ideals in a hard fought primary battle. Democracy or The Kremlin? is this the state of the Democratic party in Colorado?

What happened in New Hampshire today is brilliant and I have a disdain for Hillary, but am pleased by democracy. Unlike others in our state, apparently. She should have given up yesterday as she was down double digits. Who’s to say Brenner wouldn’t do the same? oh yeah, Jim Spencer and Pat Waak.

By: Wildflower

Wildflower — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 21:19:59 +0000

Benner’s idea of impeachment is fruitless at this point in time, but it isn’t a bad idea because if the Bush Administration were tied up with impeachment proceedings maybe they wouldn’t have a chance to get us tied up in a war with Iran or someone else before they get out of office.