Western Democrat

Gone

Is the McCain camp giving up on Colorado and New Mexico?

From CNN’s Jon King

While Iowa, New Mexico and Colorado are still officially listed as McCain target states, two top strategists and advisers tell CNN that the situation in those states looks increasingly bleak. Iowa and New Mexico always have been viewed as difficult races, but the similar assessment of Colorado reflects a dramatic shift for a campaign that had long counted on the state.

"Gone," was the word one top McCain insider used to describe those three states.

It’s not over until it’s over, and Nevada and Montana remain in play in the West, but this is good news for our Western strategy.

See FiveThirtyEight and electoral-vote for encouraging maps for Democrats.

Update October 21. The McCain camp is pushing back on the report they're losing hope in Colorado. See this link.

Update October 23. Though Senator McCain is headed to Colorado Friday, Republicans are reportedly slashing their television advertising in Colorado's three biggest television stations.
See this link.

Update October 29. CNN reports Senator Obama has doubled his lead in Colorado.

Polling in other Western states and swing states around the country continues to look favorable for Senator Obama and Democrats in general. Tonight's inspiring broadcast will surely help.

Leo Brown | October 20, 2008 | Comment on This Post (1 so far) Permalink: Gone | TrackBack (0) Colorado, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Presidential Politics

The Latest Poll from Colorado

Events are moving at a rapid pace, especially on the economic front, as the 2008 election hurtles toward a conclusion. Colorado is a key state, perhaps the key state, in the election. So what does the latest polling show?

Barack Obama has regained the lead over John McCain in Colorado and has maintained his lead in the three other battleground states being followed by the Quinnipiac University poll.

Obama is favored by 49 percent of likely voters in Colorado, versus 45 percent for McCain. McCain had held a one-point lead in Colorado in late August.

And Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Mark Udall broke a tie with Bob Schaffer, leading the Republican by 8 percentage points in the September poll.

By a 49 percent to 42 percent margin, Colorado voters would rather see Biden as president.

Just over half of the Coloradans surveyed said the economy is the most important issue in the election.
Colorado voters gave Obama the nod — by six points — on which candidate better understands the economy.

And a Western Strategy has helped produce these results.

"Two years ago when the Democrats picked Denver for their convention, one of the main reasons was the hope it would help them win Colorado, which is shaping up as a key state in the Electoral College," said Peter Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. "Sen. Obama has come from behind to take the lead there and it is a reasonable assumption that the convention has something to do with this," Brown said.

Leo Brown | September 23, 2008 | Comment on This Post (2 so far) Permalink: The Latest Poll from Colorado | TrackBack (0) Colorado, Presidential Politics

A chat with Howard Dean about the Western strategy

On Friday, I had a chance to chat with DNC Chairman Howard Dean. Naturally, I asked him about the Western strategy.

Over at BlueOregon, Jeff Alworth (who joined me on the call) has the write-up. Here's what Dean said about the West:

"We’re ahead in New Mexico, Nevada and Colorado right now. We think the road to the White House leads through the west, and if we win those three states, I think Barack Obama will be the next president. [Even] Montana is in play. We're only down two there."

Not only that, but Dean's 50-state strategy is a key underpinning to Obama's 50-state strategy - which includes the West and extends beyond it:

"What Barack is trying to accomplish is something Bush willfully chose not to do. Barack wants to be president of all America, not just the half that agrees with him. The reason he’s adopted the fifty-state strategy is because he wants to be the president even of people who don’t agree with him so he can reunify the country. That’s what I find so refreshing, a candidate that wants to bring people together instead of what McCain is doing by driving them apart. So being a player in every region of the country matters: North Carolina, Virginia is in play, there’s the western states that we talked about that are in play—and that hasn’t happened for a long, long time. And I think that’s the kind of President Barack Obama will be, someone who cares about all the American people, not just those who agree with him."

Good stuff. Let's bring this one home, folks.

Kari Chisholm | September 15, 2008 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) Permalink: A chat with Howard Dean about the Western strategy | TrackBack (0) Colorado, DNC, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Presidential Politics

Colorado part 4

To recapitulate:

In part one we noted that Colorado is a state that is swinging from red to blue or at least purple.

In part two we noted that the growing Hispanic population is a major reason for this.

In part three we discussed how the way to win Colorado is by an appeal to the pragmatic middle on both economic and social issues, since conservatives outnumber liberals in Colorado.

The final piece to the Colorado analysis ties parts three and four together. Hispanics are generally conservative on the wedge social issues. Their Catholic heritage strongly inclines them to be for traditional marriage and pro-life. They may not necessarily be absolutists, but they are very oriented to traditional families. The nativist base of the GOP has been driving Hispanics away from the GOP, but President Bush, who won Colorado twice, made inroads into the Hispanic votes because of his family values platform. The challenge to Democrats is to make Hispanic voters feel comfortable with the Democratic Party. That means connecting with Hispanic families on health care and the economy, while not driving them away on abortion and marriage issues. It is a tough challenge for Democrats, but if the party is pragmatic and moderate on the social issues, rather than left-wing and absolutist, it could swing a generation of Hispanic voters and several Southwestern states into the Democratic column.

Leo Brown | September 7, 2008 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) Permalink: Colorado part 4 | TrackBack (0) Colorado, Policy Issues

Colorado part 3

There is yet another way to look at Colorado’s electorate.

Pro-life Democratic Governor Ritter sees 13% of the electorate as moral conservatives that won’t vote for even a pro-life Democrat because he is a Democrat. He sees 16% as Fox News conservatives who would privatize almost everything. In contrast he sees 20% of the electorate as very liberal Democrats. Those figures alone would argue that a conservative will beat a liberal in a statewide contest in Colorado, but it also leaves a big middle to be distributed. In the middle are 37% who are government pragmatists and 14% who are moral pragmatists.

… the moral pragmatists, [Governor] Ritter explained, “do have issues around gay marriage and they have issues having to do with abortion, but at the same time they don’t want those issues to bog down government’s ability to deliver appropriate functions.”

These voters were the key to Ritter’s [Democratic] victory. “If you win among the liberals, and you win all the government pragmatists, then you’re over fifty per cent…But you may not win all the government pragmatists for one reason or another. So you have to carve into those moral pragmatists, and I think the reason we won pretty significantly was because we carved heavily into that group.”

Senator Obama in his acceptance speech spoke to the moral pragmatists and talked about finding “the strength and grace to bridge divides and unite in common effort.” His ability to do that may well determine who wins Colorado’s electoral votes.

Leo Brown | September 6, 2008 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) Permalink: Colorado part 3 | TrackBack (0) Colorado, Presidential Politics

The Denver Convention

To Denver, to the organizers of and participants in the Democratic National Convention, and to the Obama-Biden ticket I only add: well done, good show, and on to victory in November!

Leo Brown | August 29, 2008 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) Permalink: The Denver Convention | TrackBack (0) Colorado, DNC, Presidential Politics

Colorado part 2

With the Front Range as a backdrop for the Democratic National Convention, this is the second of a multi-part series on Colorado. It may help the questions Why Denver and Why now? One answer is demographics.

There is one clear reason the Democratic convention [is being] held in Denver: Colorado is ground zero in a crucial shift in the partisan balance of power that has the potential to restore Democratic dominance in presidential elections and bring an end to the conservative era of the past 40 years.

The demographic trends here and in New Mexico, Nevada and Arizona all tilt the playing field in favor of the Democrats and threaten traditional Republican strength in the mountain states of the west. There are similar, but not as strong, trends in such Northwest mountain states as Montana and North Dakota.

One reason these [Intermountain] states are increasingly “in play” is the rapid population growth among two key demographic segments—Hispanics and white college graduates—and the concomitant decline of the white working class.

In Colorado, these trends could have their strongest impact in the “battle of the suburbs” within the Denver metro (50 percent of state population), where Democrats need to expand their 2004 margin and the GOP needs to hold the line, and in the “battle of the metros” elsewhere, which pits the Democratic-trending Fort Collins metro, now the fourth largest in the state against the smaller GOP-trending metros of Grand Junction and fast-growing Greeley. Overall, the GOP will be looking to maintain their strong support among the declining white working class, the key to their electoral prospects. The Democrats will be relying on white college graduates, who are rapidly growing and have been moving toward the Democrats, especially since 2000 and Hispanics, who have been driving the growth of the minority vote and vote heavily Democratic.

More on the implications of this in a future post.

Leo Brown | August 26, 2008 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) Permalink: Colorado part 2 | TrackBack (0) Colorado, Demographics, Presidential Politics, The Big Strategy

Colorado

Western Democrat, from its beginning, noticed that moving a few Western states from red to blue would shift the electoral balance in November. The presidential contest looks very close heading into the national convention in Denver.

My favorite polling sites are here, here, and here. If the polls are correct, Senator Obama will likely carry all the states Senator Kerry won, though New Hampshire looks close. Plus Senator Obama looks likely to win Iowa and New Mexico. That results in 264 electoral votes, six short of a majority. Fewer than ten remaining states look winnable for Obama-Biden at this point.

Polls vary daily, but Colorado with nine electoral votes is one of the closest toss up states. Not long ago Colorado was a solidly red state. Resurgent Democrats now hold the governor’s mansion, one U.S. Senate seat, both houses of the state legislature, and congressional seats that were once regarded as irredeemably Republican. Democratic Congressman Mark Udall, son of "Mo" Udall, is holding a modest but consistent lead for Colorado’s other U.S. Senate seat. Colorado is winnable. Colorado may be the key state in 2008.

All this makes the selection of Denver for the national convention look like a very smart move.

Leo Brown | August 24, 2008 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) Permalink: Colorado | TrackBack (0) Colorado, Presidential Politics

The Right to Keep and Bear Arms

On June 26th the Supreme Court upheld the personal right to keep and bear arms. In much of the West, this ruling will have little effect, because that right is already reflected in local laws.

For example,

…while many say the decision paves the way for further state decisions freeing up a person’s ability to own and carry firearms, Colorado laws and local statutes will be untouched, according to local law enforcement officials.

Municipal ordinance in the city of Aspen bars shooting firearms within city limits (the same code also bans throwing stones, hucking snowballs and shooting missiles), according to Aspen Police Chief Richard Pryor.

Thursday’s ruling simply supports laws already on the books in Colorado, Pryor said.

On balance this ruling is good news for Western Democrats, who have had to remind their Democratic colleagues that Cheyenne and Chicago have different views on gun control.

None of this should dismiss very real concerns that remain about guns and crime, but whatever laws are enacted must recognize the Second Amendment of the Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court. I am hopeful that with gun rights advocates reassured by the Supreme Court this country can move forward on laws that will reduce gun violence while upholding the Second Amendment. I believe it can be done. I lived in Switzerland for almost two years, and it was a very educational experience. The Swiss are well armed. It was not uncommon to see Swiss carrying military weapons on trains due to their system of universal military service. At the same time Switzerland is a country with a very low crime rate even in urban areas.

Leo Brown | June 28, 2008 | Comment on This Post (3 so far) Permalink: The Right to Keep and Bear Arms | TrackBack (0) Colorado, Policy Issues

The Battle for the West Commences

As we recently posted, Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada are shaping up as key battleground states for the 2008 election. Not surprisingly, and as Kari just noted, both Senator Barack Obama and Senator John McCain are already campaigning in these three states.

From the LA Times:

The top Democratic and Republican presidential contenders, Barack Obama and John McCain, brought their campaigns to the deserts of the American West on Monday, kicking off what is shaping up to be a fierce contest for the region in November.

The majestic vistas and suburban subdivisions of Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico were among the most contested territories of 2000 and 2004, although they were often overshadowed by the struggle for electoral votes in Florida and Ohio.

"There are a limited number of possibilities to change the electoral map for Democrats," said Mark Mellman, a longtime Democratic strategist. "These three states figure prominently."

"This game is on," said Joe Monahan, an independent political analyst in New Mexico who said Monday's visits would probably be the first of many by the presidential candidates in the months to come.

From the AP:

[Senator] Obama is signaling, even before the Democratic primary formally wraps up, that he intends to fight this fall for Western states that narrowly went Republican four years ago.

New Mexico, Nevada and Colorado aren't definitely Democratic blue or Republican red. Instead, they're known as "purple states" by political junkies.

"We're going to fight as hard as we can in these states. We want to send the message now that we're going to go after them and I expect to win them," the Illinois senator said Monday.

"I'm absolutely confident that we're going to do very well west out here because people out west are independent-minded and are going to look at whether or not over the last eight years the country is better off under Republican rule. I think they're going to conclude they're not and they want fundamental change, something that I'm offering and John McCain is not," [Senator Obama] said.

[New Mexico Governor Bill] Richardson, the nation's only Hispanic governor, called the three states "fertile ground" for Obama, particularly if he courts Hispanic voters with Spanish-language ads, personal appearances and attention to their concerns, such as immigration reform.

Leo Brown | May 28, 2008 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) Permalink: The Battle for the West Commences | TrackBack (0) Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Presidential Politics, The Big Strategy

The lay of the land out West

As far as the general election goes, I am assuming at this point that the contest will be between Senators Barack Obama and John McCain. The outlines of the electoral map start with the 2000 and 2004 maps. The Pacific Coast states of California, Oregon, Washington, and Hawaii look safely blue at this point both by recent polls and by recent history. The Rocky Mountain core of the GOP, Utah, Wyoming, and Idaho looks decidedly red, as does Senator McCain’s home state of Arizona. Alaska is a long shot for Senator Obama, as is Montana, unless Governor Schweitzer is on the ticket. The swing states are Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada. Polls go back and forth, but currently Colorado and New Mexico lean to the Democrats. Strong Democratic Senatorial candidates in those two states should help as well.

How important are those Western swing states? If the election were held today, the outcome would be very close, and Colorado and New Mexico would be crucial. Senator Kerry fell nineteen votes short of an electoral majority in 2004. Colorado and New Mexico have a combined fourteen electoral votes. Iowa, which borders Senator Obama’s Illinois and where Senator Obama is leading, has seven electoral votes. Colorado, New Mexico, and Iowa plus the rest of the Kerry states yield a Democratic majority. Take away the swing state of New Hampshire, and you get an Electoral College tie, which would throw the vote into the House. A detailed analysis of the House races suggests that would lead to a Democratic victory in 2008. Add the swing state of Nevada (five electoral votes), and there is a bit more breathing room.

There remains much uncertainty. There are dozens of imponderable factors and unpredictable events that lie between now and November. One campaign or the other could end up sweeping the election. Given a sagging economy, an unpopular war, high gas prices, an unpopular Republican incumbent, and time for the Democratic Party to heal after a long and sometimes bitter nominating process, the wind should be at the Democrats’ back. Senator Obama is planning a fifty state campaign, as he should, both for the sake of the downballot races and the future of the party. With luck the election could be a Democratic blowout, in which case Alaska and Montana and neighboring North Dakota might be in play, but then again luck is not a plan, and the election could be very close.

So how can Senator Obama cement his narrow lead in the West? First, he has to clinch the nomination. By the only metric that officially counts, convention delegates, he is very close. Oregon recently gave Senator Obama a big boost. The Montana primary is June 3rd. With help from the superdelegates, Montana could put him over the top. Second, he has to reassure important constituencies. The Latino vote is very important in the Southwest, the region we have previously argued is where future elections will be decided and a region where Senator Clinton did well, partly on the strength of the Hispanic vote. Senator McCain, to his credit, is not anti-immigrant, so Democrats will need to pay careful attention to the Hispanic community. Recently, key Hispanic leaders in California have joined the Obama camp. Having Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico on the ticket would help in the Southwest, as would, of course, Senator Clinton. The Jewish community also needs reassuring. The Jewish vote is small, but significant in the Southwest, including California, Nevada, and Arizona. Having Mayor Bloomberg of New York on the ticket would help in that regard. Mayor Bloomberg would also reassure the business community and add economic expertise to the ticket. Those “hard working white voters” we have heard so much about lately need reassuring. Governor Schweitzer of Montana would be a good cultural fit, as would be John Edwards of North Carolina or Jim Webb of Virginia. If the party needs a woman on the ticket, in addition to Senator Clinton, Governor Napolitano, Senator Feinstein, and Senator Boxer, the last three from Southwestern states, come to mind. No one vice presidential nominee can satisfy all those diverse constituencies, but the campaign as a whole has to address all their concerns. The West, particularly the Southwest, will be a key battleground in 2008. Senator Obama and the Democratic Party need to look west.

Leo Brown | May 25, 2008 | Comment on This Post (2 so far) Permalink: The lay of the land out West | TrackBack (0) Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Presidential Politics, The Big Strategy

Meanwhile back at the ranch: Senate Edition

Seven of the thirteen Western states have Senators up for election this year: Alaska, Colorado, Idaho, Oregon, Montana, New Mexico, and Wyoming. The Republicans are defending six of these seven Senate seats. Montana’s Max Baucus is the sole defending Democratic incumbent in the group, and his seat is considered safe. Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico will be open seats, and Wyoming will have both their Senators up for re-election, due to the death of Senator Craig Thomas in 2007.

Colorado and New Mexico look like the best opportunities for Democratic pick ups, and both states are considered swing states in the 2008 presidential contest. Our candidates, Mark Udall in Colorado and Tom Udall in New Mexico, are cousins from the long prominent Udall family.

Larry LaRocco is our Western Democrat running for Idaho’s Senate seat to replace the retiring and embarrassing Larry Craig. It would be great if red-state Idaho could turn purple.

The remaining campaigns are still shaping up. The contests in Alaska and Oregon could be particularly interesting. Senator Stevens (R-Bridge to Nowhere) is the poster child for pork gone wild and an opponent of transparency in government. The Iraq War puts Oregon’s Gordon Smith in a bind. He voted for the war and has been a Bush enabler. Yet he has broken with the Bush administration on the war, and hence will be at odds with Senator McCain on that issue.

Leo Brown | April 8, 2008 | Comment on This Post (4 so far) Permalink: Meanwhile back at the ranch: Senate Edition | TrackBack (0) Alaska, Colorado, Idaho, New Mexico, Oregon, Republicans, Senators

Meet the Udalls

Outside magazine has a great profile on cousins Tom and Mark Udall. Go read it and learn more about one of the great Western Democratic families.

While you're at it, please give Tom and Mark Udall some of your spare change, to assist their campaigns to bring more and better Democrats to the Senate (and more and better Udalls).

Click here to contribute to Tom Udall's campaign to take back Pete Domenici's seat in New Mexico.

Click here to contribute to Mark Udall's campaign to turn Colorado bluer than it already is.

kencamp | March 10, 2008 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) Permalink: Meet the Udalls | TrackBack (0) Arizona, Colorado, Congress, New Mexico

Best in the West

From the beginning of Western Democrat, it was recognized that the West offered the Democratic Party a way out of a recurring pattern of electoral defeat.

The primary season reaches another critical junction this Tuesday. Democrats looking to win in November would do well to visit 270toWin.com and look at the state polls. Poll numbers can be fickle things, but the overall impression is clear: Barack Obama would run much better in the West than Hillary Clinton. The margin is, in fact, the difference between victory and defeat in November.

Consider six states in the West. The first three were won by Kerry, and are must wins in 2008. The second three were lost my Kerry, but would have put him in the White House had he won all three.

The first three are California, Oregon, and Washington. According to recent state polls, Obama would win California by 27%, Oregon by 1% and Washington by 17%. Hillary would win California by 19%, lose Oregon by 3%, and tie in Washington.

The second three are Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada. Obama would will all three by 7%, tie to 15% (two polls), and 12%, respectively. Hillary would lose Colorado by 14% and lose in Nevada by 9% (no recent poll from this source for New Mexico).

Leo Brown | March 2, 2008 | Comment on This Post (2 so far) Permalink: Best in the West | TrackBack (0) California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Presidential Politics, The Big Strategy, Washington

Stunning turnout throughout the West

In a release, the DNC points out that turnout on Super Tuesday was stunningly high throughout the West -- which bodes well for the general election.

• In Colorado, Democrats saw twice the number of caucus-goers as Republicans—119,184 to 55,845. Yesterday’s turnout was eight times higher than that of turnout from 2004 when only 15,000 participated. [Denver Post, 2/6/08]

• In Idaho, 21,224 people caucused for Democrats, far exceeding anyone’s expectations, and forcing officials to print more ballots. [AP, 2/5/08; cnn.com, 2/6/08]

• In Arizona, 368,828 people turned out for Democrats, far exceeding the record of 239,000. [cnn.com, 2/6/08]

• In New Mexico, more than 152,000 ballots were cast, far surpassing the 2004 number of 104,000 in 2004.

• And in Utah, 122,617 people came out for Democrats, far exceeding the 33,839 who participated in the 2004 primary. [cnn.com]

It's going to be a good year.

Kari Chisholm | February 6, 2008 | Comment on This Post (2 so far) Permalink: Stunning turnout throughout the West | TrackBack (0) Arizona, Colorado, Demographics, DNC, Idaho, New Mexico, Utah

Obama Richardson

Over a year ago, we speculated on a Richardson Obama or an Obama Richardson ticket. What I wrote then still looks good to me. Of course, it has been clear for some time that Richardson would not be at the top of the ticket. The Richardson campaign never caught fire, and Governor Richardson wisely ended his campaign. Obama-Richardson could still be a viable ticket in the West and Midwest, but will it happen?

What concerns me and what should concern a lot of Western Democrats is that the GOP may be poised to nominate a Western candidate who can reach across party lines (McCain), while the Democratic Party may be poised to nominate (again) an uncharismatic Easterner who would have difficulty reaching across party lines and who has little appeal in much of the purple West (Clinton). Hillary is a known quantity, and her negative numbers in the West will be very hard to change.

Montana 61% said they would not consider voting for her.

Recent polls in Colorado, Nevada and Arizona have found similar distaste for Clinton.

She's carrying huge negatives out here," said Floyd Ciruli, an independent Colorado pollster who said Democratic congressional candidates would have to highlight their differences with the national party to be successful next year. "It's that liberal East Coast image that is so hard to sell in the West."

One key advisor to a prominent Democratic congressional candidate, who asked not be to identified discussing tensions within the party, went even further. "It's a disaster for Western Democrats," he said. "It keeps me up at night."

Leo Brown | January 20, 2008 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) Permalink: Obama Richardson | TrackBack (0) Colorado, Montana, Presidential Politics, The Big Strategy

The Continued Rise of the Southwest

America’s population is making a diagonal shift from the Northeast to the Southwest. Five of the nation’s largest cities are in the Southwest: Los Angeles, Phoenix, San Antonio, San Diego, and San Jose. Phoenix is now that nation’s fifth largest city, displacing Philadelphia, now at number six. Mesa and Fresno are now bigger than Cleveland, Pittsburgh and Buffalo. Seven of the ten largest American cities lie within 500 miles of the Mexican border. In 1910, in contrast, the ten largest American cities were all within 500 miles of the Canadian border.

What this means to the Democratic Party is that the Northeast and Midwest aren’t a sufficient base by themselves for the future of the party. With the GOP dominating the once solidly Democratic South, Democrats must look Southwest for growth and electoral majorities. Arizona, Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico have a combined 29 votes in the Electoral College and a corresponding number of seats in the Senate and House of Representatives. Moreover, the 2010 Census will undoubtedly raise that number beyond the current 29. Meanwhile, neighboring blue California’s population will continue to grow, reaching perhaps 60 million by 2050 with a Hispanic majority possible by 2042.

Newsweek is already predicting that the 2008 Presidential race will be decided in the Southwest. Their analysis:

The rise of the Swing-State Southwest (and the power of the Latino voters in it) is a function of timing, geography, demographics—and the Electoral College....The Southwest's ascendancy is linked to one key demographic: its vast, rapidly growing—but still politically unsettled—Hispanic vote….Generally speaking, [Hispanics are] culturally traditional, religiously devout and open to conservative appeals from the GOP. Economic populists, all too familiar with the trials of race-based discrimination, they feel an emotional bond with Democrats, too….In 2006 the Hispanic vote that went to the GOP dropped precipitously, to 30 percent. The war in Iraq was one reason, analysts say, but the main one was the war over immigration.

Given the mean-spiritedness of the recent immigration debate, the trend away from the GOP is likely to continue and even accelerate, strengthening the future Democratic base in the Southwest.

Leo Brown | July 11, 2007 | Comment on This Post (3 so far) Permalink: The Continued Rise of the Southwest | TrackBack (0) Arizona, California, Colorado, Demographics, Nevada, New Mexico, Presidential Politics, Republicans, The Big Strategy

Is the GOP losing the West?

The GOP is losing its hold on the rural vote according to a poll reported by NPR.

A new national poll indicates rural Americans are no longer reliably Republican, and the Bush administration's conduct of the war in Iraq seems mainly to blame.

"I think there are two big headlines out of this poll," says Anna Greenberg of the Democratic polling firm of Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research. "The first is 'Republican Collapse in Rural Areas.' And the second is 'Rural is the Battleground in 2008."

But Iraq is not the GOP’s only problem.

Nick Kristoff of the New York Times zeros in on the Southwest and how the nativist wing of the GOP is alienating both Hispanics and moderates on immigration.

…the closer you get to the border, the more voters back politicians who are looking for middle ground — and punish those who follow the rant-for-ratings route.

He sees Arizona, Nevada, Colorado, and New Mexico and their combined 29 electoral votes (more than Florida’s 27 or Ohio’s 20) as potentially the biggest battleground in next year’s presidential race. And he notes that Hispanics are the fastest growing part of the electorate and make up 28% of the population in Arizona, 24% in Nevada, 20% in Colorado, and 43% in New Mexico.

Kristoff cites Democratic congressional gains in Colorado and Arizona in 2004 and 2006 as evidence that Democrats can assemble a new Western majority and quotes David Waid, Chairman of Arizona’s Democratic Party:

“Arizona is in play like never before…and the Republicans are literally handing it to us.”

Republican strategist Clint Bolick sees the same trends.

Hispanic support for Republican candidates plummeted by 10 points, to 30 percent from 40 percent, between the 2004 presidential election to the 2006 congressional election debacle, costing the GOP as many as four congressional seats. In next year's presidential election, Hispanic votes could make the difference in four Western states, including Arizona. If Republicans continue chasing Hispanic voters away, they can kiss their national electoral prospects goodbye.

Here at Western Democrat, we have always believed that the future of the Democratic Party lies in the West. The GOP is doing their part to hasten that future.

Leo Brown | June 22, 2007 | Comment on This Post (2 so far) Permalink: Is the GOP losing the West? | TrackBack (0) Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Republicans, The Big Strategy, Urban/Rural Divide

Ritter pushes renewable energy

Bill Ritter makes good on his promise to bring greater renewable energy development to Colorado:

Raising the state’s standards for electricity produced by renewable energy will create thousands of new jobs and increase Colorado’s gross domestic product by nearly $2 billion, Gov. Bill Ritter said today.

Ritter cited a study by the Environment Colorado predicting that the state would see 4,100 new jobs, $570 million more in wages and $1.9 billion more in gross domestic product if it doubled the minimum amount of electricity its utilities generate from renewable energy — the goal of a bill now before the Legislature.

The bill, which would require utilities to generate 20 percent of their electric power from renewables by 2020, would also save 18 billion gallons of water that would otherwise be used to cool coal- and gas-fueled turbines, the environmental coalition study said.

“We have only just begun to tap the potential of a new energy economy,” Ritter said.

This type of rhetoric is essential.  By framing a renewable energy increase as positive both for the state and for jobs, Ritter neutralizes one of the principal arguments against renewable energy mandates from the outset.

Those revenue estimates are astounding.  If Western states start getting serious about using the vast renewable resources around us, imagine the immense solid revenue generating capacity we could see some of these states develop.  This could be back into the economy by private companies, to raise general quality of life.  This could be put into infrastructure development for schools, roads, other energy projects, etc.  The possibilities are staggering. 

One simple truth remains - renewable energy is the future out West.

Landon Mascareñaz | February 23, 2007 | Comment on This Post (2 so far) Permalink: Ritter pushes renewable energy | TrackBack (0) Colorado, Policy Issues

Now we're talking. Move the Congress to Denver.

Congressional Quarterly's Craig Crawford has a novel solution to the whole dust-up over whether Speaker Nancy Pelosi can have a bigger plane for her longer nonstop flights to San Francisco than did ex-Speaker Denny Hastert.

Convene Congress in Denver.

Yup, he really said that:

As population shifts further and further west, it does not seem fair for so many lawmakers to have such trouble getting back to their constituents. Why not a summer home for Congress in Denver? ...

The Constitution does not require Congress to meet in Washington. And wouldn’t it be nice to share those lobbyist expense accounts with restaurants in the heartland?

Hot damn. Who needs the DNC Convention when you can move Congress?

Kari Chisholm | February 9, 2007 | Comment on This Post (1 so far) Permalink: Now we're talking. Move the Congress to Denver. | TrackBack (0) Colorado, Congress, Media Coverage

Results? You probably elected a Democrat.

Bill Ritter gets to work:

A jubilant Gov. Bill Ritter signed his first bill into law today, creating a way for about 300,000 Coloradans to receive state assistance in buying discount prescription drugs.

"It’s the law," said Ritter as he placed five bill signing pens down and rose from  the table.

Ritter said that he pledged on the campaign trail to not only seek long-term solutions to health care, but to take immediate action to lower health care costs for the 17 percent of the state’s population without health insurance.

"We all know people who at one time or another have delayed filling a prescription, taken less medication than a doctor prescribed or didn’t fill a prescription at all because of costs," he said. "Today, we make the costs of prescription medications for hundreds of thousands Coloradans more affordable."

Senate Bill 1 will allow Colorado residents who lack health insurance to pay a one-time $20 fee to participate in program to buy discounted prescription drugs through the participating pharmacies. The program kicks off Sept. 1, and up to 10,000 types of prescription drugs could be sold at whole-sale prices, providing participants savings up to 80 percent.

Now, how's about that for results?  Bill Owens vetoed this same measure twice and it clearly enjoys the mandate of the voters.  Nothing like a Western Democrat moving in to seize the will of the people for the advantage of all.

Landon Mascareñaz | February 5, 2007 | Comment on This Post (3 so far) Permalink: Results? You probably elected a Democrat. | TrackBack (0) Colorado, Governors

Colorado thinking of joining the Western Primary

California and Illinois (and Barack Obama for that matter) be damned, Colorado is thinking of joining the Western Primary. Dan Slater of the Colorado party is in DC for the winter DNC meeting and gives us this update:

With the exception of four states (IA, NV, NH, and SC), the DNC’s rules do not allow any states to hold their primaries or caucuses before February 5. However, there is a concentrated effort to hold the contest in several Western states on that day — meaning a lot more attention by the candidates to those states. The State Party officers have been in discussions for a while about whether to work with the Legislature to move our caucus up to Feb. 5, joining the other Western states that are doing so. We met with academics, we talked with legislators and other political leaders, and we asked for the input of the county chairs that are the linchpin to the caucus process.

The response was overwhelming. As reported in the Rocky this morning, the Party is now working with the Legislature to make the change from a March caucus to a February 5 caucus. In response to some concerns heard in our process, we’re asking that the move from March to February only take place in Presidential years.

Emmett O'Connell | January 31, 2007 | Comment on This Post (1 so far) Permalink: Colorado thinking of joining the Western Primary | TrackBack (0) Colorado, DNC, The Big Strategy

Rocky Mountain RootsCamp, Denver

RootsCamp is coming to Denver. What's RootsCamp?

RootsCamp is an ad-hoc gathering born from the desire for activists, organizers, leaders and politicians to share and learn in an open environment. It is an intense event with discussions, demos, and interaction from participants.

And it's in Denver now?

Rocky Mountain RootsCamp is for people who played a role in the 2006 elections in the Rocky Mountain Region and are prepared to share with others innovations, failures, old wisdom and new discoveries. It's a place to engage with exceptional people from all levels and all sectors of the progressive movement from throughout the Rocky Mountain Region with an eye towards doing things even better in 2008 and beyond. Please invite other exceptional folks you may have worked with -- from precinct captains to consultants to candidates.

OK, gimme details.

Saturday, Feb 10, 2007 from 9am-5pm and Sunday, Feb 11, 2007 from 9am-3pm. Breakout sessions will be in the Alliance Center at 1536 Wynkoop in Lower Downtown, Denver. General sessions will be next door on the second floor of the Tattered Cover Bookstore on the corner of 16th and Wynkoop.

Learn more at RootsCamp.org.

Kari Chisholm | January 30, 2007 | Comment on This Post (3 so far) Permalink: Rocky Mountain RootsCamp, Denver | TrackBack (0) Colorado

Run Tom, Run!

Images this: an intense anti-immigration candidate that will rally primary voters across the country, spew hate toward the Republican front-runners, thereby fracturing the GOP and delivering Democrats the 2008 election. 

It may be my personal fantasy, but one of my deepest political fantasies is crossing that illegal border called reality:

Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado is making official his interest in a presidential run.       

Tancredo, a Littleton Republican known for his hard-line stance on immigration policies, said today he's filing the paperwork to form a presidential exploratory committee...

Tancredo has said he is interested in a presidential run to highlight the immigration issue, and that he wants to challenge the views of candidates he finds objectionable, including Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. McCain was one of the sponsors of the Senate's immigration reform bill last year. It would have created a guest worker program and a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants. Tancredo backed the House bill, which would have criminalized living in the country illegally.

This set-up should be one of the must watch events of 2008.  I'm looking forward to Tom adding a little bit of his personal flamboyance to the race. 

Tom, I know you don't care one bit but here it is - I just don't want you running in the GOP primary - I want you in the general election as an independent. 

Nothing would make this Western Democrat happier.

Landon Mascareñaz | January 16, 2007 | Comment on This Post (2 so far) Permalink: Run Tom, Run! | TrackBack (0) Colorado, Presidential Politics, Republicans

Governor Bill Ritter's Remarks About Denver Securing the DNC

Newly elected Governor Bill Ritter of Colorado issued a press release following DNC Chair Howard Dean's announcement that Denver will play host to the 2008 Democratic National Convention:

OFFICE OF GOV. BILL RITTER, JR.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

THURSDAY, JAN. 11, 2007

Contact:

Evan Dreyer, 720-350-8370

GOV. RITTER PRAISES EFFORTS TO SECURE 2008 CONVENTION

Gov. Bill Ritter today praised the hard work of many people to secure Denver’s bid for the 2008 Democratic National Committee.

“The convention will have a significant economic impact not just on Denver, but it will have a ripple effect across the entire state and the West,” Ritter said. “This will be great for Denver and great for Colorado.”

Ritter said Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper, U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar and the entire host committee led by Elbra Wedgeworth deserve much credit for their tenacity and commitment.

“A major reason we were able to compete against a city like New York and ultimately win this convention is because Denver made important investments in infrastructure,” Ritter said. “We have the hotels, restaurants, convention space and other facilities to accommodate events like this. This puts us on the national stage and the world stage.”

kencamp | January 11, 2007 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) Permalink: Governor Bill Ritter's Remarks About Denver Securing the DNC | TrackBack (0) Colorado, DNC, Governors

Governor Richardson's Statement on the DNC Convention

Courtesy of Heath Haussamen, here is Governor Richardson's statement on the selection of Denver as the site of the 2008 Democratic National Convention.

“This isn’t just a win for Denver and Colorado, but for the whole mountain west. From Montana to New Mexico, the west is the most fertile ground for Democrats. The Denver convention in 2008 will only further these efforts.”

Today's announcement by DNC Chair Howard Dean, coupled with the decision to move the Nevada caucuses to the front, only boosts Governor Richardson's potential Presidential campaign.

kencamp | January 11, 2007 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) Permalink: Governor Richardson's Statement on the DNC Convention | TrackBack (0) Colorado, DNC, Governors, Nevada, New Mexico

Ritter fills cabinet

Fmr. Colorado Governor Lamm says it best (or worst):

"Appointing people is like eating mushrooms out of your backyard," Lamm said. "You really don't know how it turns out until you've done it."

I'm still not quite sure how that works out. But I think I understand where he is going with it.

Bill Ritter is assuming command in Colorado by appoint people to fill the highest cabinet positions. As the Rocky Mountain News lays it out:

Bill Ritter, who will become the first Colorado governor in more than 30 years without any legislative experience, tapped three former state department heads when filling his Cabinet. In addition, he named three appointees who served in Denver's city government, including two former mayoral candidates.

Veteran politicos say it's good Ritter's Cabinet will be experienced because the governor-elect's only political experience comes from serving as Denver's district attorney.

Experience does matter. But it's not just any experience - sometimes it should have direct relevance to the issues at hand. Ritter campaigned hard on renewable energy for Colorado and I'm glad he went with an old hand to oversee the forthcoming development:

Among Lamm's appointments was attorney Harris Sherman to run the Department of Natural Resources. Sherman was just 33.

Sherman is 64 now and has been selected by Ritter to oversee the same department.

"Harris is a close personal friend, so I'm not very objective, but it's a brilliant appointment," Lamm said.

"You have to bring in new blood, but in this area, with natural gas booming, talk of oil shale development and water problems and everything moving so fast, Harris is the best person to hit the ground running."

I think with the Democratically controlled legislature and now controlling the Governors mansion, we might just see tons of progress coming out of Colorado. I've been talking with many people in the area and they are pretty much convinced everything is on the rise. I took the light-rail on New Year's, enjoyed the bustling downtown (got snowed on HEAVILY days before) and was generally really impressed with Colorado. The older I get, the more I enjoy it. The place has nowhere to go but up.

Let's get the Convention there and keep this momentum rolling.

Landon Mascareñaz | January 8, 2007 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) Permalink: Ritter fills cabinet | TrackBack (0) Colorado, Governors

2008 and House Candidates in the West

Swing State Project recently listed ten Democratic House Candidates who ran close, but unsuccessful, races in 2006, and should run again. These are good candidates who ran in tough districts and now have some name recognition for a second attempt. Of particular note is that half of these are in the West:

Charlie Brown CA-4
Larry Grant ID-1
Tessa Hafen NV-3
Darcy Burner WA-8
Gary Truaner WY-AL

The New York Times and CQ Politics recently reported a list of fifteen close 2006 House races. Again five, though not the same five, are in the West.

CO-4
NV-3
NM-1
WA-8
WY-AL

Combining the two lists already gives us seven House seats to watch in the West in 2008. Two of the seven are in blue states (CA, WA). Two are in the red states (ID, WY). Three are in red states considered to be trending purple (CO, NV, NM).

The focus in 2008 will be on the top of the ticket, but we are now seeing how important control of the House is. Continuing or expanding Democratic control of the House in 2008 may well depend on having a Presidential ticket that can run well in the West.

Leo Brown | January 6, 2007 | Comment on This Post (4 so far) Permalink: 2008 and House Candidates in the West | TrackBack (0) California, Colorado, Congress, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Washington, Wyoming

Hillary may save us from a New York convention

2008 Democratic Convention Watch points to an interesting tale told by Novak, in which he lays bare a badly kept secret about a convention in New York and Hillary Clinton:

Denver lacks sufficient hotel facilities, a suitable arena and labor union support, not to mention adequate financing. But when New York was leaked as the site, the reaction was so negative that Dean delayed a decision. Party members complained that it would be the fourth out of the last nine Democratic conventions scheduled for New York. Backers of Hillary Clinton don't want her nominated in her place of residence. George H.W. Bush and John Kerry lost elections when nominated in their respective hometowns of Houston and Boston.

2008 Democratic Convention watch points out that Hillary is publicly backing New York, but that going back to the 1950s, Presidential candidates who are nominated too close to home have a hard go at it.

Wouldn't it be ironic that Clinton's pre-primary inside the party power -- before she fizzles out in front of voters and caucus goers -- could put the convention out West?

Emmett O'Connell | December 24, 2006 | Comment on This Post (3 so far) Permalink: Hillary may save us from a New York convention | TrackBack (0) Colorado, DNC, National Leadership, Presidential Politics, The Big Strategy

Convention Decision Postponed

Looks like the DNC is going to wait another month for the decision on the 2008 Convention. From the AP:

Party officials have been negotiating for months with host committees for New York and Denver, but a series of problems with Denver's bid — and a significant cooling of interest from New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg — led Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean to seek more time to make a decision.

"Chairman Dean is going to make the best decision for the party based on the merits of each city's bid. ... Because of the holiday week, and at the request of both cities, we will announce the convention city in early January," DNC press secretary Stacie Paxton said in a statement.

What sort of problems in Denver?

Denver, which has mounted an enthusiastic campaign to win the convention, has struggled with labor issues, fundraising and logistical challenges such as finding sufficient hotel rooms. Democrats thought Denver had resolved some of its labor problems when Colorado's AFL-CIO approved a resolution last month in support of Denver's convention bid.

But problems suddenly emerged this week when Jim Taylor, head of city's influential stagehand union, refused to sign an agreement promising not to strike if the convention came to Denver.

Debbie Willhite, executive director of Denver's host committee, said a lack of full union support for the city's bid is "probably a deal-breaker" but expressed confidence the matter could be negotiated.

C'mon everybody. Let's think big picture here.

Kari Chisholm | December 20, 2006 | Comment on This Post (1 so far) Permalink: Convention Decision Postponed | TrackBack (0) Colorado, DNC, Presidential Politics

DNC Decision Delayed

While a decision on where the Democratic National Committee would hold its 2008 convention was expected very soon, today the DNC said a decision would come in January.

Party officials have been negotiating for months with host committees for New York and Denver, but a series of problems with Denver's bid _ and a significant cooling of interest from New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg _ led Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean to seek more time to make a decision.

"Chairman Dean is going to make the best decision for the party based on the merits of each city's bid. ... Because of the holiday week, and at the request of both cities, we will announce the convention city in early January," DNC press secretary Stacie Paxton said in a statement.

Much is being made in the media of Denver's labor issues, and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is now saying fundraising might be more difficult than anticipated. Let me make it simple for the DNC: choose Denver (which I know comes as no surprise to Western Democrat readers).

Denver represents the future of the Democratic party. New York represents the old-moneyed, smoke filled room, good old boys club (a.k.a. the East Coast liberal elite) that the Democratic Party used to be. So, Chairman Dean, do you want to live in the past, or do you want to build the future? At Western Democrat, we look to the future.

kencamp | December 19, 2006 | Comment on This Post (1 so far) Permalink: DNC Decision Delayed | TrackBack (0) Colorado, DNC

10 Senators call for Denver Convention

The campaign to put the 2008 Democratic Convention in Denver is picking up steam. From the AP:

As the head of the Democratic Party moves closer to choosing the site of the 2008 convention, 10 senators and senators-elect from the western half of the nation said the Mile High City is a natural choice. ...

The letter noted that since 2002, Democrats have won GOP-held governorships in Montana, Kansas, Wyoming, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Arizona and Colorado. Last month, Democrats also picked up a Republican-held Senate seat in Montana and GOP-held House seats in Colorado and Arizona.

“In 2008, our presidential nominee will have, for the first time in many years, an excellent chance of winning several Western states, which would secure enough key Electoral College votes to restore our leadership in the White House,” the letter said. “In short, the West is the Democratic Party's new frontier.” ...

Signing the letter were Sens. Harry Reid of Nevada, the incoming Senate majority leader; Ken Salazar of Colorado; Max Baucus and Sen.-elect Jon Tester of Montana; Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico; Byron Dorgan and Kent Conrad of North Dakota; Maria Cantwell of Washington; Tim Johnson of South Dakota; and Ben Nelson of Nebraska.

Keep up the pressure, folks.

Kari Chisholm | December 8, 2006 | Comment on This Post (1 so far) Permalink: 10 Senators call for Denver Convention | TrackBack (0) Colorado, DNC, Senators, Supporters

The New West Project

This is wonderful:

The New West Project, headquartered in Denver, will conduct research and develop strategies to secure and exploit recent Democratic gains in the Western states, party sources said.

At least four Western governors - Janet Napolitano of Arizona, Bill Richardson of New Mexico, Brian Schweitzer of Montana and Bill Ritter, Colorado's governor-elect - are expected to lead the group's advisory council, the sources said. Incoming Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, Sen. Ken Salazar of Colorado and other members of Congress will provide "strategic guidance."

Reid confirmed the creation of the new organization, which he said would "build upon the leadership of people such as governors Napolitano, Richardson and Schweitzer" and "work to focus attention on the West."

This is a high level group. Consider the Western Strategy in play, my friends. It is wonderful to see this sort of institutional arrangement that will only benefit our local, state and national candidates long term. It looks like part think tank, part strategy firm, part communications development - all aspects that will be welcome by the plethora of candidates that will be running these next few cycles to take advantage of our our new promise out here in the west.

The best part of the article? The quote from an unnamed "Western Democrat":

As an example of what the new organization may do, the Western Democrat said that political professionals would analyze such questions as "the difference between first- and second-generation Hispanic voters, ... what motivates them and how we communicate with them," as well as "why a recent transplant from California, who has voted Republican all her life, is now voting for Democrats."

Good question, "Western Democrat" - it just leaves me amazed to see our namesake invoked so strikingly in an article. Methinks the author of the article, John Aloysius Farrell , might just be an reader of our humble site. If so, thanks for the article John - we'll be watching for you in the future.

It's great to have a new project designed for this express purpose and examining the multitude of new questions that are arising from the new political climate in the West. Now, if any of those people involved in the project are paying attention it would behoove them greatly to include netroots and blog outreach as an element of the project. You see, since major political focus has been absent from the West for awhile the netroots and blogosphere have been proliferating and recruiting top candidates all over the place. It would be an essential element of any plan that you should put together.

I'm excited.

Here's the The New West Project!

Landon Mascareñaz | December 6, 2006 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) Permalink: The New West Project | TrackBack (0) Arizona, Colorado, Demographics, Governors, Legislatures, Local Government, Montana, National Leadership, Nevada, New Mexico, Policy Issues, Regionalism, Statewides, The Big Strategy, Urban/Rural Divide, Utah, Wyoming

Meaningless Historical Nonsense

How is about this for a useless argument for why New York has an advantage over Denver for the convention:

New York, they say, has advantages in fund-raising, experience in running national conventions and a track record of success for the Democrats. The last two Democratic presidents, Jimmy Carter in 1976 and Bill Clinton in 1992, both strode onto the big stage in New York. Denver last held a convention in 1908, and the nominee, William Jennings Bryan, a Democrat, was trounced by William Howard Taft.

Yeah, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton won the White House because of the convention's location in New York. I can just imagine a voter now: "Well, I like that Gerald Ford fellow, but that was a damn fine New York Convention..." Or perhaps in 1908: "I like everything about WJB, I've voted for him the last two times he ran but now with that Denver convention I'm not too sure..."

But this is where the article gets good:

But party members across the country say that there is no doubt that Denver has hit on a potent combination of economic development goals and political ambition. A convention with 30,000 eating, drinking, hotel-room-using Democratic partiers and journalists would inject perhaps $160 million into the local economy, organizers say, and at the same time crown the city as an unquestioned capital of the interior West — and the two goals are in sync.

“A convention can provide a stage to introduce the nominee in a way that gets the country’s attention and tells a story,” said Debbie Willhite, a longtime Democratic strategist who came here earlier this year to run Denver’s bid as executive director. “And the networks can’t come in here without showing the broad plains and Rocky Mountains — that’s a very big stage.”

Sing it true, Debbie. I'm just even excited for the possibility. Denver is a city on the rise and is already the capital of the interior west and the front-line on the blue trending occurring all around our region.

Howard Dean, since you're making the call I have faith and I believe you understand the stakes: Either you take us back to where we've been before and the old stereotypes about Democrats or we forge a bright, western and mile-high path to our future as a party.

Landon Mascareñaz | December 2, 2006 | Comment on This Post (1 so far) Permalink: Meaningless Historical Nonsense | TrackBack (0) Colorado, DNC,