Why the Michael Bennet - Ken Buck Race Matters

A new poll shows the conservative tea-party favored Senate candidate, prosecutor Ken Buck, is leading among independents in Colorado.

In the state's highest profile race, Weld County District Attorney Ken Buck (R-Colorado) leads Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colorado) 48 to 43 percent with eight percent going to another candidate and one percent undecided. Of the polling sample, Buck leads among self-described independents, 53 to 34 percent. He also leads decidedly among male voters, 52 to 37 percent, and among younger voters ages 18 to 34, 54 to 33 percent.

Where Sen. Michael Bennet is leading: Among women and older voters. Why? Because of Buck's positions against abortion and conflicting position on birth control and social security.

So Dems need to get out the female and older voters. Another reason it matters: The Personhood Amendment is on the ballot. If the anti-choice crowd comes out in greater numbers, the amendment, which grants constitutional rights from the moment of conception, has a greater chance of passing. [More...]

Here's Bennet's position on reproductive choice and on seniors. Here's Buck on "Respect for Life" and social security. Here's Personhood's talking points: "It's best for babies."

Bennet's TV ads against Buck on these issues have been effective and getting good air-time. I hope you will consider making a donation to his campaign. Both Ken Buck and Amendment 62 need to be defeated. They seem to be going hand-in-hand.

< Travel Alert Issued for Europe | Sunday Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Not to question the poll (none / 0) (#1)
    by christinep on Sun Oct 03, 2010 at 03:16:35 PM EST
    because when I saw it this morning, the front-page news produced a "yech"...but, because also I try not to question automatically polls that deliver news I don't like.  While the differential is 5 points and there is definitely time (historically) in this state to make up the difference, two very surprising aspects of the SurveyUSA poll stand out: (1) A subheading on the story reports that only 1 percent (one percent) of the 647 automated phone survey respondents are undecided. Alarm bells and credibility bells ring (as in "Is there any historical situation a month out for a federal House/Senate candidate wherein only one percent remain to decide?") I don't know... it strikes me as funny...although it is possible that the automated poll successfully pushed respondents to declare?  (2) Within the paper's report, there is a vague notation that the author questions the Latino portion of the polling because of a "20 point" difference PRO Republican. After my husband, the political scientist, heard that one, some breakfast was coughed forward. Then again, maybe there is something going on we don't know about...even in view of Republican Buck's notoriously harsh stance on immigration matters.

    I strongly second Jeralyn's request for donation (and help) for Senator Bennet. One of the reasons for my strong support for Bennet is the environment. The Senator has been in the forefront of environmental protection in Colorado. (See especially his bill last year to recoup more royalties from mining operations on federal lands, a much needed revision to the 1872 Mining Act.)

    Got a GOTV... (none / 0) (#2)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Oct 03, 2010 at 05:54:04 PM EST
    ...call from the Bennet folks the other day.  Surprising since I'm a registered independent.  

    I certainly hope we, as a State, haven't regressed to the point where we would actually elect a whack-job like Ken Buck to office.  

    Didn't the "polls" all have Romanoff ahead of Bennet going into the primary?  I'm a little leery of them anyway in this day and age given that they target those with land lines and miss the cell phone only people...  

    Nope (none / 0) (#3)
    by andgarden on Sun Oct 03, 2010 at 05:57:47 PM EST
    the polls had Bennet ahead. I haven't gotten the crosstabs yet, but the claim that Buck is winning young people is suspicious.

    IMO the toplines are probably right, though: this is a 5 point race--in the wrong direction. There are about 3-5 Senate seats that fit that description right now.


    Yeah... (none / 0) (#4)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Oct 03, 2010 at 07:30:11 PM EST
    ...PPP had Bennet up by 6 with 9% undecided on August 9th.  I guess it just seemed like it was the other way around from the way it was being spun.  

    I'm suspicious of the 5 to 3 indy break too.  

    Both of them have come in with 44% unfavorable--with Bennet having more neutrals (22 to 16%).  Certainly room for some movement...

    Dan Maes is polling at 15%--awful close to the magic number for getting the GOP minority party status.  Tancredo continues to bleed off a lot of his support too.  Not to mention that Secret Agent Maes is just plain nuts, unqualified and is getting no money.


    The least interesting crosstab (none / 0) (#5)
    by andgarden on Sun Oct 03, 2010 at 07:53:46 PM EST
    tends to be part ID, especially the group calling themselves "independent." The word doesn't mean anything, and it's an entirely different poll of voters from 2006.

    i believe you already have: (none / 0) (#6)
    by cpinva on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 01:35:02 AM EST
    I certainly hope we, as a State, haven't regressed to the point where we would actually elect a whack-job like Ken Buck to office.

    unless district attorneys are appointed, not elected, in your neck of the woods:

    Weld County District Attorney Ken Buck (R-Colorado)

    with respect to the "personhood" amendment, aside from the lack of scientific basis (fundies never let science get in the way of a good religious rant), there's the actual constitutional issues involved. with respect to age requirements for public office, spelled out very clearly in the document, as an example.

    if "personhood" starts at conception, would a person be considered 9 months old at birth? as well, this would seriously impact programs such as social security, requiring a completely new actuarial analysis, based on newly re-computed ages, for everyone. unless, of course, "personhood" at birth isn't made retroactive.

    the practical problems this would cause are, by themselves, reason enough to vote against this.

    Hence... (none / 0) (#7)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 10:21:07 AM EST
    ...the reason I put the "as a State" qualifier in my comment.  We've elected quite a few nut jobs to local/regional, but few to statewide/national office in my 25 years out here.  In fact, people like Wayne Allard and Bill Owens would be considered too liberal for the GOP by today's standards.  

    ahhhhhhhhhh, ok, (none / 0) (#8)
    by cpinva on Mon Oct 04, 2010 at 12:36:32 PM EST
    i misinterpreted that. while we're on the subject though, we'll trade you our gov. & AG, for two politicians to be named later.