December 5, 2006 9:13 AM
Beauprez for Senate in '08?
Rep. Bob Beauprez is circulating an electronic newsletter and isn't ruling out a run for the Senate if Wayne Allard honors his pledge not to serve more than two terms, reports M.E. Sprengelmeyer.
His gubernatorial campaign committee sent an e-mail to supporters signed "Bob," in which he talks about lessons Republicans could learn from this year's elections. He also invited people to sign up for a new e-mail-based newsletter he plans to use for regular updates on national issuesBeauprez's move comes at a time when political observers in Colorado are waiting to hear whether Sen. Wayne Allard, R-Loveland, will honor a long-standing pledge to serve only two terms or seek re-election in 2008.
In a recent interview with CBS 4 News, Beauprez would not rule out a future Senate run, telling interviewer Terry Jessup: "We'll take a serious look at almost any opportunity, including that one, I suppose."
Beauprez's missive alluded to things he could have done different in his one-sided race against Bill Ritter.
"As we analyze results in Colorado, and nationally, there are also lessons to be learned for our party about our strategy, as well as that of our opponents," Beauprez said. "Clearly, it was a difficult year for Republican candidates across the country, facing disfavor with unaffiliated voters on a scale, and with intensity, not seen since the post-Watergate election of 1974."
Could Beauprez be a credible contender if Allard doesn't run? Would Republicans be eager to give someone who ran a lackluster statewide campaign another shot at it?
December 5, 2006
10:30 AM
JW writes:
Jeez I hope not. It would be nice if the Republicans could put up a politician that isnt totally corrupt, an asshole, or both.
December 5, 2006
10:33 AM
gr8fuldude writes:
I can see his ads now:
"I'm Bob Beauzeau. I ran a crappy campaign, and I want you to hold me accountable"...
December 5, 2006
10:36 AM
jay writes:
You would think there would be a lesson learned in there somewhere...
December 5, 2006
11:48 AM
BH writes:
No kiddn' Jay. This guy can't take a hint, can he?
And you're right JW, the Republicans haven't produced a top-rate nominee for Gov or Senator since Bill Owens. The Dems took a great amount of care in selecting their candidates this past election cycle, often pushing electible candidates over party insiders... with spectacular results. The Republican bigwigs forced in their man Beauprez, who is closely tied to the Prez, over a much stronger independent voice in Marc Holtzman... a quality candidate with no real ties to the beleaguered President. As a result they lost BOTH the house seat vacated by Beauprez AND the governor's race.
Brilliant.
December 5, 2006
12:05 PM
Jim K. writes:
Beauprez seems to be nothing but a job hopper always wanting to ascend to higher office. And, if the
Republicans keep on the way they are going, they will continue to elect
loser, non-conservatives. Time to get the Republicans back to conservative ways.
December 5, 2006
12:13 PM
JW writes:
I like fiscal conservativism.
Social conservativism is a dead end in the world of globalization. There needs to be a ballance. Im all in favor of social centrism.
December 5, 2006
12:30 PM
BH writes:
Jim K.:
What exactly is a Conservative then???
I consider myself a conservtive in the Libertarian wing of the Republican Party and I see our party at a big crossroads. If the party retreats into its southern stronghold, it will become a more socially conservative and regional party. But if it wishes to remain a national party, it needs to embrace the libertarian model. The 1994 Republican Revolution was not centered on gay-marraige or eroding Roe v Wade, it was centered the Reagan principles of strong defense, low taxes and responsible limited government. I'm tired of the inluence a small number of intellectually flawed social conservatives exert over the Republican Party. So if you mean we need to get back to 'conservative ways' by limitingthe social conservatives' flawed infuence on the party... I'm all for it.
December 5, 2006
12:44 PM
am 760 writes:
Please run again so you can get you ass kicked again by a common sense democrat.
December 5, 2006
3:00 PM
FYI writes:
Regardless of which aspect of our political system Beauprez claims to represent, he's a crooked dimwit with no real worth to our government.
I don't care if he's a conservative conservative, a progressive conservative, a compassionate conservative, a neo-con, an ex-con, a con-man, a RHINO, a walrus or a wildebeest. People pay way too much attention to political affiliation and not enough attention to fixing the problems in our system.
I'm sick of hearing people trumpeting their political alignment. "I'm an ultraconservative values voter! I'm a neo-conservative with progressive tendencies! I'm a pseudo-moderate leftocentrist with a 45 degree tilt!" These idiots care more about which team they're on than they do about actually doing some good for society.
This kind of attitude is what's keeping Iraq from settling down and letting the troops come home; Sunnis and Shiites would rather argue loudly about "I'm Sunni and I'm proud!" "I'm Shia and we rock!" than cooperate and actually achieve something.
December 5, 2006
3:52 PM
BH writes:
Hey FYI,
So how do you see a functioning democracy succeeding WITHOUT factions? Sure, if we become consumed by labels and allow them to pidgeon-hole our opinions into tiny boxes, then the labels lose power in a democracy. However, when they clarify the debate and offer voters clear choices, then such labels hold power. Besides, such factions form naturally in the democratic process
mostly because democracy needs competing factions in order to function with a modicum of efficiency. You are naive to believe modern politics can escape the faction-forming name game.
I understand your frustration with the fixation on labels, but they are necessary to understand each others' general starting position. Details may vary from candidate to candidate and voter to voter, but we need the framework to start the discsussion and inform the voter. Otherwise the voices of hundreds of politicians competing for your attention would be overwhealming.
December 5, 2006
4:02 PM
FYI writes:
You've completely misunderstood me. I'm not saying that we need to get rid of the categories, I'm saying that the categories need to stop being more important than the issues. Right now, people care more about belonging to a particular club than they do about what's wrong and how to fix it. Too many people are looking no further than the label before casting their vote, regardless of whether the person actually represents their position on the issues.
December 5, 2006
5:40 PM
jay writes:
BH,
The "social conservatives"...while admittedly doing a lot of damage to your Republican party...aren't responsible for the out of control spending that has typified your recent Administrations (Reagan included). I know a lot more Republican party faithful that are up in arms about the fiscal and foreign policy failures than I do that despise your logicless stances on gay marriage, stem cell and abortion.
At some point the Republican party is going to have to decide if they are going to continue to be corporate/lobby lapdogs and start legislating for the middle and lower classes. Only then (ironically coming towards the center) will you see the type of gains that Rove had in mind when in 2004 he said the Democrats were a dead party.
December 5, 2006
5:46 PM
Jeff writes:
BH, you dolt! It was the whole Holtzman fiasco that delivered Bob to the dungeon. Marc Holtzman takes no responsibility in the whole scenario from the juvenile delinquents he put on his staff to the antics they staged which made the GOP look foolish and never made amends to the the GOP or Beauprez. The GOP then splintered and the losers (Holtzman's crew) bolted for the Dems like a bunch of 6 year-olds to 'show' the GOP how strong they were. All they did was weaken Colorado and the GOP. Congratulations and I hope all the Holtzman whiners enjoy the next administration.
December 5, 2006
9:50 PM
OMG writes:
oh no its that smell again
its not politics , its BOB
Why do we keep getting the same moron Bush worshipping Bob? Geez Bob take a hint.