Let the Sliming Begin
With John Hickenlooper continuing to run so strongly in early polls of the 2006 Colorado governor's race, it was only a matter of time before the right-wing focused its slime machine on the popular Denver mayor.
The opening salvo was fired yesterday on Political State Report, a usually responsible blog.
The site's Republican correspondent breathlessly reports:
After careful research and a undercover investigation, there appear to be some skeletons in Hickenlooper's closet.As most 5280 readers know, Hickenlooper owned a bunch of Denver bars for more than a decade before being elected mayor, so, let's face it, there's likely to be good dirt, right? So what have the Republicans come up with?
The first [and] probably most damaging reason for Democrats to reconsider the viability of Hickenlooper's candidacy is the existence of several photos of Hickenlooper with local Denver area drag queen Nuclia Waste. Some photos are available here. You can also see Nuclia Waste in her natural habitat here, here and here. These photos would be devastating to Hickenlooper if they were used in a television campaign.Ya think? The guy got elected by airing TV ads that showed him trying on goofy suits and riding a scooter around town. If anything, the old photos provide graphic proof that Mayor Hickenlooper has developed into a far better dresser than Candidate Hickenlooper. So what else? Well, there's the shocking (shocking!) news that Hickenlooper supports gay marriage and last year's debate over religious groups at the Parade of Lights. Both, obviously, have been wide reported and neither seems to have put even the slightest dent in Hick's sky-high poll numbers, either in Denver or the surrounding suburbs. These kinds of attacks, however, aren't aimed at Denver voters, or even, perhaps, suburban voters. The likely targets are voters in the rest of the state, and even more likely, Hickenlooper himself. Consider it a warning shot across the mayor's bow -- enter the race, and we promise it'll be ugly. Our bet is that Hickenlooper won't be intimidated by such tactics (if he were, in fact, to decide to run). How the rest of the state reacts, well, that's another question altogether. With 80 percent of the state's electorate living here in the Front Range, it may not matter.
Comments
Submitted by Curious Stranger (not verified) on Thu, 2005-04-14 18:58.
You still haven't corrected your misleading post over on Polstate Blogicus. I'm all for real political analysis. I agree with your general point, but in the process of making that point - that Hickenlooper could be defined as a Denver liberal, a point so obvious your motives for bringing it up were already suspect - you mislead your readers by making things up and actively taking part in that process of definition. Should you get the benefit of the doubt? Maybe, but but your misleading mistake is still there in that article on Polstate, 2 days after you said you'd fix it. Actions speak louder than words and it makes one wonder.
Making things up is not real political analysis.
Submitted by James C. Hess (not verified) on Tue, 2005-04-12 08:14.
". . . [A] usually responsible blog. . ."
Riight. Well, in comparison we have your comrades at the Colorado Pols blog that send threatening e-mails to people for excercising their First Amendment rights, who violate First Amendment rights by deleting select comments that don't support, condone, and advance their agenda while allowing such remarks as "Dangerous right-wing agenda. . .", "The Republican paty is a joke in Colorado", and from the Rocky Mountain News reporter Lynn Bartels, "The Republican Party is controlled by a bunch of "home-schooling, gay-bashing, Limbaugh loving, right-wing Republican psychos."
Apparently 'responsible' is a relevant term, and does not apply to those whose politics are left of center.
Go ahead: Threaten me. Delete my comments. You and your cronies at the Colorado Pols blog have made it quite clear you don't believe in Free Speech, the First Amendment, or the Constitution of the United States of America.
Submitted by Dan (not verified) on Tue, 2005-04-12 08:32.
James, we've never deleted any of your comments.
And I'm not comrades with the ColoradoPols guys. I don't even know who they are.
Any chance you'd like to respond to the substance of the item?
Submitted by Curious Stranger (not verified) on Tue, 2005-04-12 20:58.
The "refusal to comdemn" Dani Newsum's comments, supposedly cited in a "transcript" at Free Republic is a completely made up charge. The thread referenced contains no transcript and there is no mention of Dani Newsum. There is a mention of Hickenlooper not condemning the actions of Gavin Newsom, mayor of San Francisco. But this is no surprise, as Hickenlooper is a public supporter of gay marriage. In a later post, the author, Blogicus Maximus, says that with Hickenlooper so popular, "the early battle will be to define him." It looks like the battle is on, and Blogicus has chosen sides.
Submitted by blogicus maximus (not verified) on Wed, 2005-04-13 23:44.
James, thank you for the defense, Daniel, here is what a Democrat on Colorado Pols had to say on Hickenlooper...
Steve posts over at coloradocomments.blogspot.com
I've been called plenty of bad things this last week (it seems no one remembers my stories on the Jeffco GOP and Bob Schaffer), but, if we want to to real political analysis, not just press releases, we have to look at the good and bad of candidates. Hickenlooper has branded himself a certain way, but the branding is soft outside of Denver (fewer than half know him North, about a quarter to the south). If the other side can brand him as a Denver-Boulder liberal he would be in trouble. If he can brand himself as a pragmatic populist he could have some Salazar like coattails.
PS, you may want to make a correction, the poll wasn't a gubernatorial (sp?) poll, it was a "favorability poll." Two different things.
