CO: Bob Schaffer announces Senate run

[Tender Branson]

Former Rep. Schaffer announces Senate bid
 
By Aaron Blake 
May 03, 2007 

Former Rep. Bob Schaffer (R-Colo.) said Saturday at a Lincoln Day Dinner that he would run for U.S. Senate in 2008, according to local sources.

Speaking at a small dinner in Teller County, Schaffer told a crowd of about 100 that he had decided to run, according to two local party operatives who were there.

“He announced that we were the first to know that he is a candidate,” said County Commissioner and former county Republican Party Chairman Bob Campbell. Campbell added that Schaffer said a formal announcement and release would be coming at a later date.

Current Teller County Republican Party Chairman Mark Sievers also confirmed Schaffer’s announcement: “He did say that. He was unequivocal.”

Schaffer emerged as a top potential candidate after former Rep. Scott McInnis (R-Colo.) unexpectedly dropped out of the race in March. But he had not strongly indicated that he would run.

Democrats appear ready to line up behind the candidacy of Rep. Mark Udall (Colo.). The seat is vacant because Sen. Wayne Allard (R-Colo.) decided to retire after his second term.

Schaffer did not return a call seeking comment by press time.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/former-rep.-schaffer-announces-senate-bid-2007-05-02.html

[Rawlings]

Yes!  Schaffer has always been the top candidate.  McInnis got in the way and so he was pushed out by a newly united GOP in Colorado.  People outside of the state just don't realize how popular and talented Schaffer is and I think he'll have a much easier time with the race against Udall than most predict.

[Rob]

People outside of the state just don't realize how popular and talented Schaffer is

61 percent of Colorado Republicans disagree with you.

[Rawlings]

People outside of the state just don't realize how popular and talented Schaffer is

61 percent of Colorado Republicans disagree with you.

I'm not sure why liberals keep bringing that primary up.  When you've got a guy with a name like Coors--which has been foundational in Colorado politics--who has the backing of every Republican whose anybody--of course he's gonna win!  Schaffer got stabbed in the back, thrown under the bus, and left to dry.  But instead of vindictively going after Coors Schaffer stepped up and supported the campaign and has helped rebuild the GOP.

If there were a primary today between Schaffer and any other Republican excluding Bill Owens, Schaffer wins at least 70% of the vote.  But that's neither here nor there.  There will be no primary in the Centennial State.  It's Udall and Schaffer and in right-leaning Colorado it makes Republicans like me excited.

[CPT MikeyMike]

People outside of the state just don't realize how popular and talented Schaffer is

61 percent of Colorado Republicans disagree with you.

Pure example of the mess-up Colorado did in 2004. Only good thing out of it was Ken Salazar.

Coors was (and is) an idiot.

[SPC]

This is now a tossup, but Udall is favored.

[Rawlings]

People outside of the state just don't realize how popular and talented Schaffer is

61 percent of Colorado Republicans disagree with you.

Pure example of the mess-up Colorado did in 2004. Only good thing out of it was Ken Salazar.

Coors was (and is) an idiot.

Yep.  There are compelling arguments out there that should Schaffer have been the anointed candidate not only would we have kept that seat but we would probably still be in power today.  That was the moment at which the party dissolved into disarray.  The state is conservative enough to have given Bush the victory and keep Colorado red.  But the embers were smoldering all around us and nobody really took notice until after this past election.

That's one of the primary reasons I'm quite convinced that Colorado's turn to the Democrats has much more to do with politics as usual than ideology or even demographics.  The Democrats have found new millionaire fundraisers to smoke GOP fundraising and they've been up against a split, defeated, GOP.  That's  playing the Red Sox playing the Yankees without an outfield.  The conservative coalition is strong in Colorado--but its not strong enough to win elections without libertarians and moderate Republicans.  When the GOP is united, funded, and awakened in Colorado I don't think the Democrats will have an easy time of things at all.

It looks to me, both from an outsiders and insiders perspective, that Schaffer is the only can that can unite the party here.  He'll hit three core principles in his campaign: spending, education, war on terror, family values(he's currently on the state board of education).  Dick Wadhams is brilliant at disciplining a caucus to hit three or four key issues and never moving off of them.  Those are all winning issues in Colorado--with the war on terror framed rightly--and it's why Schaffer should have the early edge in polling.

[Aizen]

Udall vs Schaffer is going to be an epic fight

[Keystone Phil]

Udall vs Schaffer is going to be an epic fight

Are you being sarcastic? I really think there is about an 80% chance of Udall winning against Schaffer.

[Gabu]

Udall vs Schaffer is going to be an epic fight

Are you being sarcastic? I really think there is about an 80% chance of Udall winning against Schaffer.

What are you talking about?  Colorado is more conservative than Idaho and Schaeffer will win in a rout, obviously.

[Sam Spade]

Another battle b/w a present Congressman and a former Congressman for an open Senate seat (if the Colorado GOP lets him win this time)

Any guesses on the last time sitting Congressman beat a former Congressman for an open Senate seat.   Last time this happened was Oklahoma 2004, where Coburn (former Congressman) beat Carson (present Congressman).

[Rawlings]

Udall vs Schaffer is going to be an epic fight

Are you being sarcastic? I really think there is about an 80% chance of Udall winning against Schaffer.

Are you really a Republican?  Or is this schadenfreude for you, pure and simple?  Because your own state is irrevocably blue do you gloat in the demise of red states?

Good grief, Charlie Brown!  How can you be so pessimistic?  I'm a Colorado Republican and I'm telling you to buckle your seat belt for a major campaign in which the Republican emerges.  Aizen is a Colorado Democrat telling you to buckle your seatbelt for a major campaign.  So, maybe--just thinking out loud here--you should actually believe us.  You clearly have no idea what's going on in Colorado--at best--and, at worst, you are a self-hating Republican.  If you truly believe that we're right on the issues then you having nothing to worry about in '08.  It won't be a great year--but this 80% garbage is silly.  Just silly.

[Keystone Phil]

Udall vs Schaffer is going to be an epic fight

Are you being sarcastic? I really think there is about an 80% chance of Udall winning against Schaffer.

Are you really a Republican?  Or is this schadenfreude for you, pure and simple?  Because your own state is irrevocably blue do you gloat in the demise of red states?

Do me a favor...ask anyone on this forum if Keystone Phil is really a Republican. Ask anyone. No one can call me a RINO so do me a favor and get to know this forum a little better before you say stupid stuff.

By the way, kid, my state isn't solid Dem so get a clue on that as well.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Schaffer is a weak candidate and Udall is a powerhouse. I'm not a "self hating Republican" because I can recognize the obvious.

And let me let you in on a little secret...saying there is an 80% chance of Udall winning doesn't mean I think he will win with 80% of the vote if that is what you are assuming I am saying.

Ultimately, I hope I am wrong. I hope I have to look like a complete ass when it comes to this prediction when all is said and done in 2008 because I want to keep the seat. Don't think that I am rooting for the Dems to pick up Colorado.

[bullmoose88]

Phil's a gigantic RINO. Democrat in disguise.



(Don't even think of doing something sarcastic states...I see that move a mile away.)

[Rawlings]

Udall vs Schaffer is going to be an epic fight

Are you being sarcastic? I really think there is about an 80% chance of Udall winning against Schaffer.

Are you really a Republican?  Or is this schadenfreude for you, pure and simple?  Because your own state is irrevocably blue do you gloat in the demise of red states?

Do me a favor...ask anyone on this forum if Keystone Phil is really a Republican. Ask anyone. No one can call me a RINO so do me a favor and get to know this forum a little better before you say stupid stuff.

By the way, kid, my state isn't solid Dem so get a clue on that as well.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Schaffer is a weak candidate and Udall is a powerhouse. I'm not a "self hating Republican" because I can recognize the obvious.

Ultimately, I hope I am wrong. I hope I have to look like a complete ass when it comes to this prediction when all is said and done in 2008 because I want to keep the seat. Don't think that I am rooting for the Dems to pick up Colorado.

"Powerhouse?"  Udall, a powerhouse???  Why do you say that?  He's a lifetime congressman from the state's most liberal district?  That's like rolling out the representative from inner-city Philly or something and putting him up against the rep. from Scranton.  The Philly guy has to convince the whole state that he's not an uber-liberal lifetime politician.  But the Scranton guy is folksy, relatable, likeable, well-known, conservative, and is not a lifetime politician.  Even in blue Pennsylvania I would give the edge to the Scranton guy.  In Colorado--more conservative than PA--why wouldn't you give Schaffer the edge? 

Udall has about the same name recognition as Schaffer.  Udall is not, contrary to popular east coast opinion, a household name in Colorado like Rockefeller is in New York.  He's just the Boulder liberal whose big on environmental stuff.  Schaffer is the conservative guy whose big on education.  If you know anything about Colorado you can't possibly be -rating this race any higher than 50-50.

[Keystone Phil]

"Powerhouse?"  Udall, a powerhouse???  Why do you say that?  He's a lifetime congressman from the state's most liberal district?  That's like rolling out the representative from inner-city Philly or something and putting him up against the rep. from Scranton.  The Philly guy has to convince the whole state that he's not an uber-liberal lifetime politician.  But the Scranton guy is folksy, relatable, likeable, well-known, conservative, and is not a lifetime politician.  Even in blue Pennsylvania I would give the edge to the Scranton guy.  In Colorado--more conservative than PA--why wouldn't you give Schaffer the edge?

Is Udall not a big name (for good reasons) in Colorado?  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I guess I'll have to take your word for it. Just because Schaffer has the same name recognition of Udall doesn't mean it is for good reasons.

[Rawlings]

"Powerhouse?"  Udall, a powerhouse???  Why do you say that?  He's a lifetime congressman from the state's most liberal district?  That's like rolling out the representative from inner-city Philly or something and putting him up against the rep. from Scranton.  The Philly guy has to convince the whole state that he's not an uber-liberal lifetime politician.  But the Scranton guy is folksy, relatable, likeable, well-known, conservative, and is not a lifetime politician.  Even in blue Pennsylvania I would give the edge to the Scranton guy.  In Colorado--more conservative than PA--why wouldn't you give Schaffer the edge?

Is Udall not a big name (for good reasons) in Colorado?  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I guess I'll have to take your word for it. Just because Schaffer has the same name recognition of Udall doesn't mean it is for good reasons.

Schaffer represented a conservative, rural district.  Most voters live in Colorado Springs and metro Denver.  They never had a reason to hear from him.  Udall reprents--and has for years--a rural, mountain district including the uber-liberal town of Boulder.  Most people simply never had a reason to hear from him.

Both are fairly non-descript and have just never made a splash in the media.  That means that both are coming to the game with a blank slate.  The problem for Udall is that he is known as 'The congressman from Boulder.'  Boulder is kind of the state's pariah as it is like a mini-Berkely amidst a conservative tiger.  No matter how moderate he may or may not be--the mere image of a Boulder congressman conjures up images of tofu and Birkenstocks.

With that said, a skillful campaign can deflect that image.  Both Schaffer and Udall have a chance to recreate themselves in the image of the state and that's what will make it such an interesting campaign.  But Udall is no powerhouse--neither is Schaffer.  It's just a strong conservative against a strong liberal.  Colorado is not strongly conservative--but it is center-right and competitive much in the same way that Florida is.  That's why I'm picking Schaffer.

[Keystone Phil]

Can someone (probably Rawlings) explain Schaffer's successful run for the state Board of Education? I found out about it here - http://www.bobschaffer.org/

When was the race? Did he run representing a specific district? If so, what area?

[Sam Spade]

Another battle b/w a present Congressman and a former Congressman for an open Senate seat (if the Colorado GOP lets him win this time)

Any guesses on the last time sitting Congressman beat a former Congressman for an open Senate seat.   Last time this happened was Oklahoma 2004, where Coburn (former Congressman) beat Carson (present Congressman).

Bump.  I like my question and I'm curious as to the answer (a question Al might know the answer to), because I think it's been quite a long while.

[Conan]

This is sad. This race is done unless something terribly goes wrong in the country. Udall has already won, it's too bad the CO Republican is blind to what's happening in his own state, statistically speaking.

[Verily]

Another battle b/w a present Congressman and a former Congressman for an open Senate seat (if the Colorado GOP lets him win this time)

Any guesses on the last time sitting Congressman beat a former Congressman for an open Senate seat.   Last time this happened was Oklahoma 2004, where Coburn (former Congressman) beat Carson (present Congressman).

Bump.  I like my question and I'm curious as to the answer (a question Al might know the answer to), because I think it's been quite a long while.

Thune v Daschle, technically, though I think you mean a former Congressman who's been lazing around since being a Congressman, not a Senator who happens to be a former Congressman. Probably not for a while since former Congressmen don't run in elections very often.

[HardRCafé]

Are you really a Republican?  Or is this schadenfreude for you, pure and simple?  Because your own state is irrevocably blue do you gloat in the demise of red states?

He's been like that ever since Casey beat Santorum.  No reason to try any more.

[Keystone Phil]

Are you really a Republican?  Or is this schadenfreude for you, pure and simple?  Because your own state is irrevocably blue do you gloat in the demise of red states?

He's been like that ever since Casey beat Santorum.  No reason to try any more.

Uh, what the hell has been your deal recently with the attacks towards me? I'm calling it as they are. Colorado isn't going our way but I think Louisiana will. How is that me just seeing everything as doom and gloom or not being a Republican?

[HardRCafé]

Uh, what the hell has been your deal recently with the attacks towards me? I'm calling it as they are. Colorado isn't going our way but I think Louisiana will. How is that me just seeing everything as doom and gloom or not being a Republican?

I did not mean it as an attack, but Rawlings is right.  Hell, you conceded the John Warner seat the other day.

[Smash255]

Uh, what the hell has been your deal recently with the attacks towards me? I'm calling it as they are. Colorado isn't going our way but I think Louisiana will. How is that me just seeing everything as doom and gloom or not being a Republican?

I did not mean it as an attack, but Rawlings is right.  Hell, you conceded the John Warner seat the other day.

Rawlings is probably one of three people that think Udall won't win....

Not only is Phil on the side of most people on what will happen in the Senate Race in 08, he is on the side with most people in his party on the future of that seat ie their is none...

Regarding his comments on VA.  For starters no John Warner running obviously makes the seat quite interesting,  The Dems probably have a slightly deeper field with kaine and well of course if Mark Warner decides to jump in (John Warner not running increases the chance of Mark Warner running again and no one is going to beat Mark Warner period. 

Secondly he could also have been talking about Davis's congressional seat.   The chances of the GOP retaining that seat without Davis is slim to nil.