Why Ken Buck is Different
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 18, 2024, 09:09:13 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate
  Political Essays & Deliberation (Moderator: Torie)
  Why Ken Buck is Different
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Why Ken Buck is Different  (Read 1747 times)
Vepres
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,032
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: August 12, 2010, 03:19:25 PM »

Why Ken Buck is Different

Two days ago, Ken Buck, the Weld County District Attorney, defeated former Lt. Governor and  establishment favorite Jane Norton in the Colorado Republican Senate primary. Beginning right after the race was called for Buck, there has been a wave of articles and blog posts comparing Ken Buck, who is supported by the Tea Party, to Sharron Angle of Nevada and Rand Paul of Kentucky (some have gone so far as to call him an extremist and compare him to Dan Maes). Most in the media state that Buck will harm the Republican's chances of a picking-up the Senate seat in Colorado because he will, like Rand Paul and Sharron Angle, be too radical and gaffe-prone to win (this is not supported by the polling, which shows Buck doing just as well against Bennet as Norton).

It is true that they have much in common at first glance. All three were the Tea Party-supported candidates in their primary elections who beat the establishment candidates, all three were powered by strong grassroots support, and all three have made national news with various gaffes.

But that is where the similarities end.

Unlike Rand Paul, Ken Buck is no political novice. He has worked in politics his whole adult life, and has been Weld County's District Attorney since 2004. During his time in office there, he has had only minor controversies, but they are not the kind that break a candidate. If anything, they simply make him look more human.

Contrast his gaffes, which are fewer and far less damaging, to those of other “Tea Party candidates”. Compare Buck's statement that he should be elected because he “doesn't wear high heals” to Paul's call to revisit and repeal parts of the Civil Rights Act. One was a bad joke, the other was a radical policy position far outside of the mainstream. How about Angle, who suggested using “Second Amendment remedies” to the current political situation? Can one envision Buck ever making such a statement?

He succeeds at coming off as an everyman, but doesn't lose his ability to discuss the issues in a calm, rational way. Against Bennet, this could invaluable. The incumbent Democrat can be stiff at times, and this only feeds the image of him as an unelected liberal who nobody had ever heard of until his appointment to replace Ken Salazar.

 A Princeton graduate, he is not only intelligent, but pragmatic. Consider that while Angle calls for the repealing of social security, Buck focuses his attention on mainstream conservative solutions to the country's immediate issues. He is not an economic libertarian ideologue. On Afghanistan, and foreign policy in general, he is fairly centrist and avoids the most controversial parts of neocon foreign policy. While he does not support a public timetable for withdrawal, he does believe that Afghanistan cannot be an open-ended nation-building commitment. This position does not scare moderates away like some conservative positions on the war might.

Unfortunately, a narrative-based media and blogosphere lump him with other Tea Party candidates, many of whom are radical and possibly unelectable. His rejecting the most extreme rhetoric and beliefs of the Tea Party have proven that he is a mainstream candidate, and he could very well defeat Michael Bennet this fall.
Logged
Kevin
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,424
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: August 12, 2010, 03:58:53 PM »

Like you said, if you look at Buck's record he is actually quite moderate. I think he is more like John McCain in terms ideology then Rand Paul or Angle.

Good article btw, I take it you wrote this yourself Vepres?
Logged
Bo
Rochambeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,986
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: August 12, 2010, 05:23:53 PM »

Nice article, Vepres. Based on what I've read recently, Ken Buck is more similar to Marco Rubio than to Paul and Angle. Both Buck and Rubio are mainstream conservatives who got a lot of Tea Party support primarily due to their anti-establishment platforms. Paul and Angle, on the other hand, are a little on the extreme side when it comes to policy positions. I'd give Buck about a 45% chance of winning in CO right now (Obama carried the state by 9% after all, I believe), but his odds might increase if Bennet runs a bad campaign or the economy continues to be sluggish. (And as a side note, I think Paul can win in KY, but that Angle is pretty much done for.)
Logged
Vepres
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,032
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: August 12, 2010, 08:28:16 PM »

Like you said, if you look at Buck's record he is actually quite moderate. I think he is more like John McCain in terms ideology then Rand Paul or Angle.

Good article btw, I take it you wrote this yourself Vepres?

Yes, I did. I have been angered by many in the media lumping Buck with Angle, Maes, and Paul.
Logged
Franzl
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,254
Germany


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: August 12, 2010, 10:31:59 PM »

Yeah Buck isn't a nut.....although I do prefer Bennet.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.214 seconds with 13 queries.