Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

Neither Schaffer, Udall can control all the intangibles

By Lynn Bartels, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published August 13, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.

Text size  

Udall discusses energy issues


Democratic Senate candidate Mark Udall on Wednesday talks about his opponent Bob Schaffer's energy policy.

Video powered by Flickr

Protest at Udall speech


Supporters of Republican Bob Schaffer's U.S. Senate campaign held protest signs while Democratic Senate candidate Mark Udall spoke on energy Wednesday at the state Capitol.

Video powered by Flickr

Bob Schaffer, who spoke Friday to the University Hills Rotary Club, says his opponent is on the wrong side of the energy issue.

Photo by Tim Hussin © The Rocky

Bob Schaffer, who spoke Friday to the University Hills Rotary Club, says his opponent is on the wrong side of the energy issue.

Mark Udall poses for a photo with Barbara McGhee at a party on Thursday to thank his volunteers in Denver. He has long supported development of renewable energies.

Photo by Linda Mcconnell © Special To The Rocky

Mark Udall poses for a photo with Barbara McGhee at a party on Thursday to thank his volunteers in Denver. He has long supported development of renewable energies.

Related Stories

More Elections

More stories »

The formula hasn't changed in three decades: Bob Schaffer and Mark Udall need to win Denver's suburbs to become Colorado's next U.S. senator.

But if the formula is certain, the intangibles are not - and political experts say it's the factors neither candidate can control that may determine the winner in the Nov. 4 general election.

Will the rising cost of gasoline continue to boomerang the Republicans' way or can Democrats take back the energy issue they once dominated?

If problems plague the Democratic National Convention when it comes to Denver this month, does that hurt Udall?

Will a possible tidal wave of voters attracted to Democrat Barack Obama's presidential campaign create insurmountable problems for Schaffer?

Even the people who make a living trying to decipher such questions agree there are few solid answers, particularly in August. But they also know the fall - the home stretch - will be here soon.

"It's hard to predict any of this," said Democratic political analyst Steve Welchert. "What's happening now is likely to be upside down in October."

Udall and Schaffer emerged from Tuesday's primary in a rare position for an open Senate race: They had no competition and thus don't have to chew up valuable time nursing hurt feelings in their own party. For now, they're busy doing what statewide candidates in Colorado do in general elections: move to the center.

Schaffer, of Fort Collins, ran for Congress in 1996 against two primary opponents with the slogan "The real Republican, the real conservative." Four years ago in his unsuccessful bid for Senate, he hammered the theme that he was more conservative than his primary opponent, Pete Coors, who could never be mistaken for a moderate.

But these days Schaffer refers to himself as mainstream, which he knows sells better in the voter-rich suburbs.

Udall, of Eldorado Springs, is serving his fifth term in Congress. His reputation as a liberal began during his one term in the state legislature, where he championed a topic deemed then as some sort of tree-hugger utopia: renewable energy.

On the campaign trail, however, Udall touts his ability to work across the aisle. He knows all too well that the "L" word doesn't play well in plenty of places statewide.

Coloradans vote on the conservative side but Democrats can do exceedingly well - and have in the last two election cycles with the help of unaffiliated voters, the largest voting bloc in the state.

So, how do the candidates win in 2008?

"I think Bob's challenge is bigger because of dissatisfaction with Washington, particularly Republicans and primarily because of the president," said pollster Floyd Ciruli.

"Udall has an advantage by being the Democratic nominee, but that is hardly set in stone," Ciruli added. "This race can change very quickly - you have a volatile presidential race."

Dick Wadhams, Schaffer's campaign manager and the GOP state party chairman, agreed the "national headwind" is a problem. But he thinks that is shifting as gas prices climb and Americans want more drilling for oil.

Wadhams said Schaffer beats Udall by going after Udall's record in the Boulder-based 2nd Congressional District.

"The 'Boulder liberal' moniker is real," Wadhams said. "They can talk about his nonpartisanship all they want, but Boulder liberal Mark Udall has spent the last 10 years voting against energy exploration. He's on the wrong side of the issue - the public wants oil exploration."

Schaffer travels the state with a red, 32-inch steel gas pump that he sets in front of voters before he begins his pitch.

"The guy I'm running against actually proposed a 50-cents-per-gallon tax increase," he told voters in the San Luis Valley last month.

Udall's campaign contends the charge is false, and another indication of Schaffer's game plan.

"They're been dishonest about Mark Udall's record and Bob Schaffer's record because they know they have to deceive the voter to have a chance to win," said Udall's campaign manager, Mike Melanson.

So, how does Udall beat Schaffer?

"We show people the real Mark Udall and the real Bob Schaffer," said Udall's campaign manager, Mike Melanson.

On the trail, Udall often talks about another campaign, in 2004. He traveled the state with the Republican speaker of the House, Lola Spradley, successfully rounding up support for Amendment 37, which dealt with renewable energies.

Melanson charged that Schaffer never did anything on wind energy when he represented the 4th Congressional District, waiting until he went to work for an oil and gas company that had a small wind energy enterprise.

"I find it interesting that when personal gain was involved, Bob had no problem supporting wind energy," Melanson said. "Well, Mark Udall has been there along. Mark Udall has done more economically for the 4th District than Bob Schaffer ever did."

Though it's just August, both campaign managers railed against the other party's nominee in detail, indicating just how intense the race is going to be.

Said Ciruli: "You're going to hear a lot about energy, and probably the economy. I think you're going to see some fancy dancing by these two candidates over the next three months."

bartels@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-5327

The blue (and red) print for victory

Colorado's U.S. Senate contest between Democrat Mark Udall and Republican Bob Schaffer is one of the most closely watched races in the nation. Here's what political experts say they'll need to do to win:

Win Denver's suburbs

Boulder County will go Democratic, just as surely as Douglas County will go Republican. So, all eyes will be on voter-rich Jefferson and Arapahoe counties, which have a history of picking the winners. In recent years in Jefferson County, the percentage of victory in marquee races has been nearly identical to the statewide tally.

Take Larimer County

Schaffer has lived in Fort Collins for 22 years, but the political climate has changed in his home county since his last congressional race in 2000. Two years ago, Democratic congressional candidate Angie Paccione was considered a weak candidate and still got nearly 9,500 more votes in Larimer than the incumbent, Republican Marilyn Musgrave.

Experts say Schaffer can't make up the votes if Udall trounces him at home. Schaffer, they add, must convincingly win Larimer County.

Make inroads in "unfriendly" counties

In the last U.S. Senate race, in 2004, Democrat Ken Salazar performed better in rural Colorado than a number of his Democratic predecessors.

Salazar easily took the San Luis Valley, where he grew up on a farm. And while Pete Coors overwhelmingly won the eastern plains, Salazar pulled votes in each county that normally go to the Republican candidate.

Comments

  • August 13, 2008

    7:54 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    JohnSmith2 writes:

    D--- Wadhams should read the news. Gas prices aren't climbing, they are falling. This is primarily due to one thing--conservation. By reducing daily demand for oil by 800,000 barrels per day, Americans have driven the price of gas down from over $4.25 to just over $3.80 nationally, despite the fact that OPEC has correspondingly reduced production because Big Oil wants to keep prices high.

    Once again it's regular Americans who have taken control of their own destiny. Not Big Oil, whose Senator Bob Schaffer would be if he were elected in November.

  • August 13, 2008

    8:18 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    rckymnthoss writes:

    Like Mark Udall, you don't understand basic economics JohnSmith2.

    A large reason that gas prices have fallen -- that is if you really consider $3.80 cheap -- is not because of conservation. It is because of several factors, mainly cyclical changes in demand that happen every year at this time and the fact that the US dollar has become marginally stronger in recent weeks.

    The fact remains that we need oil today becuase there is no immediate alternative. Schaffer recognizes this need and the fact that we need solutions for our future.

    Udall just wants to force us all to stop driving today by keeping gas prices high. Udall's policies are the same as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi from San Fransisco, not the same as suburban Denver residents.

  • August 13, 2008

    11:44 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    rckymnthoss writes:

    It's remarkable how Jared Polis outed Mark Udall in his victory speech lastnight.

    He said that he hopes the 2nd District will CONTINUE SENDING PROGRESSIVE LIBERALs to Washington.

    It goes to show Udall really is a dyed-in-the-wool Boulder-liberal, despite the attempt to cloak himself as a moderate around the rest of the state.

  • August 13, 2008

    8:04 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    HopiMedicineMan writes:

    First, this is an excellent analysis piece by Lynn Bartels and should have had better positioning in the on-line edition.

    Second, oil companies benefit from revenues generated by volume or by price. Oil executives are largely ambivalent about the political climate. Liberals help raise the price by restricting drilling and conservatives help revenues by increasing production. Oil guys win either way. What troubles them is inconsistent policies and the lack of a tariff on imported oil allowing them to develop domestic sources without being undercut as in the 1980s.

  • August 13, 2008

    9:20 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    TheGraphite writes:

    Schaffer is destined for defeat, now that he is repeatedly betraying his conservative pro-life ideals. For years, he has declared that he believes life begins at conception. Now that we have it on the ballot, he spent months being too chicken to even admit a position, and now he is openly opposed to establishing the personhood of the unborn. He has taken ritzy vacation trips disguised as work trips to Asia, where he simply blew off strong allegations of China's forced abortion program being exported even to other Asian countries. And he still pretends to be naively ignorant of this crisis, despite being confronted by a real-life victim of China's forced abortion program (which is, of course, partly funded by Planned Parenthood, by the way). Even Dr. Dobson has finally come out in favor of the Personhood Amendment (48). But Schaffer? Pro-life conservatives are stomping mad.

    The answer my friend, is blowing in the wind. And Bob doesn't know a hawk from a handsaw, even when the wind is southerly.

  • August 14, 2008

    4:12 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    HopiMedicineMan writes:

    Graphite---"He has taken ritzy vacation trips disguised as work trips to Asia, where he simply blew off strong allegations of China's forced abortion program being exported even to other Asian countries." I don't know where you're getting this. Bob's trips were to the former Soviet satellites, hardly Cozumel. Defining personhood
    is a very risky proposition. Lose the vote and this cannibalism will know no bounds.

  • August 15, 2008

    10:02 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    JohnHKennedy writes:

    "As John Dean points out, Bush/Cheney have broken the same laws Nixon did, only Nixon's actions did not cost the lives of over 4000 brave American men and women" (and over 30,000 GIs wounded, one Million Iraqis Killed).

    Bush and Cheney are the most impeachable US executives in American history.

    The failure of the House Democrats to hold Bush and Cheney accountable for the WMD Lies is unforgiveable. The Democrats lied to us about Stopping The Iraq War in 2006 and then proceeded to fund it through 2009.

    No matter what Bush/Cheney Crimes evidence comes out the Incumbent House Democrats will try to ignore it.

    How can we make Impeachment Hearings Happen?

    Most rank and file Democratic voters want Impeachment but are being ignored by the Democratic Congress.

    Unless Angry Liberal Democrats, Independents, Republicans, Greens and the rest of you get off the couch and carry signs in front of all Incumbent House Democratic Congressmen's offices with harsh language such as

    "UDALL is a Traitor to Our Constitution because he Refuses To impeach"...

    There Will Be No Impeachment and No Accountability.
    It is up to you.

    I think it will be very interesting to see the effect of the
    "intangibles" on Udall's bid to be a senator.

    John H Kennedy, Denver CO, 43 yr Democratic voter,
    Obama delegate to the Denver County Democratic Convention, organizer of the
    IMPEACH COLORADO COALITION http://ImpeachCO.com

    ..