|
|
"A comprehensive, collaborative elections resource."
|
Colorado: Denver Mayor More Electable than Blue Dogs?
|
|---|
| Parent(s) |
Race
|
| Contributor | Monsieur |
| Last Edited | Monsieur Dec 21, 2008 04:34pm |
| Logged |
0
|
| Category | Election Guide |
| News Date | Sunday, December 21, 2008 10:00:00 PM UTC0:0 |
| Description | Generally speaking, when determining the value of a legislator to his party, we'd want to consider two things: how much he advances his party's agenda, and how likely he is to win election or re-election in his state or district. There is oftentimes tension between the two criteria. For example, the Democrats could almost certainly find someone more liberal than Jim Matheson, their Congressman in Utah's second district, who only votes with his party about half the time. But any Democrat more than a pinch more liberal than Matheson would have a great deal of trouble getting elected in Utah, and would very probably lose his seat to a Republican (and a conservative one at that).
Sometimes, however, a legislator is superior along both dimensions: he's both more electable and would make for a more reliable vote than his alternatives. Such a situation appears to be in place in Colorado, where Governor Bill Ritter is responsible for making an appointment to replace Ken Salazar.
Public Policy Polling surveyed prospective 2010 matchups for two Democrats -- Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper and Representative John Salazar -- against two potential Republican opponents -- former Governor Bill Owens and former Representative Tom Tancredo. Salazar, though a clear asset to the Democrats in his Republican-leaning district, is a Blue Dog Democrat and has been among the handful of most conservative Democratic Congressmen outside the South. Hickenlooper, though a bit harder to pin down, is somewhere on the spectrum between a moderate Democrat and a liberal/progressive one. |
| Share |
|
|
2¢
|
|
| Article | Read Full Article |
|
| Date |
Category |
Headline |
Article |
Contributor |
|
|
