Run Ken Run!

I actually wouldn't mind at all if Ken Salazar sat out the 2004 senatorial election, took the governorship in 2006, and was sitting in the governor's mansion as a second termer during redistricting after the 2010 election. But stories like this point out a very good reason for Salazar to run. The media has already decided on their storyline for this race -- the Senate seat is Bill Owens' for the taking so long as he can convince his estranged wife to sign on for the campaign. (Looks like he is working on that even as I write this.) So if Owens doesn't run, any Democrat will be viewed as running just because Owens didn't get in (Republicans too, of course) and it will all be about how none of the candidates has Owens' stature.

Except Ken Salazar. He's the only potential the Rocky Mountain News is willing to say "won't consider potential opponents when considering a run." And, Salazar plans to beat Owens to the punch by announcing his intentions first.

If Salazar decides to run, and announces before Owens does, he has the power to change the it's-all-about-Owens narrative. It could even turn the storyline into "The Republicans had to run Owens because no one else has the stature to challenge Salazar." And that isn't a bad storyline for Salazar to run on, against anybody.

Update: Owens is out. (Link thanks to ohwilleke at PSR.) Very smart politics of him to make the announcement first; now everyone will be dogged by the "only running because Owens stayed out" meme.

Comments

[Blue the Wild Dog]

I was glad to see in that article that Udall and Salazar are coordinating - Udall won't run if Salazar does.

Suppose Salazar and Owens both run, and Salazar loses to Owens. Would that rule out a run for Governor by Salazar in 2006? I know the theory, but I wonder if it really matters in practice.

[Colorado Conservative]

What if Owens clears the field for McInnis? Will Tancredo stay out? McInnis and Udall would be a classic match-up in so many ways.

[DCMike]

I assume by now you've heard Owens is not running. I expecct Mark will now go for it.

[Ralph]

I may run for Udall's Seat.

[Daniel]

I'm still not sure that Udall would be a stronger candidate than Miles. Yes, Udall has more political experience and more money, but it isn't yet clear whether added political experience would help him much, especially when compared with military, diplomatic and teaching experience. Also, I've looked alot at both candidates, and I really think that Mike Miles is a special candidate, one of substance rather than pure politics. I know that Udall would be heavily favored, but I think that Miles might be the real thing, and as alot better of a shot than anybody might guess.

[Ralph]

Fade in to Boulder Daily Camera headlines:
"City Council Makes Pet Owners "Companions""
"Boulder Librarian Refuses to Fly American Flag"
"CU Sex Scandal"
Fade in picture of Udall:
"Udall Votes Against War on Iraq"
"Denver Post: Udall one of Congress' most liberal members"
Fade out:
Don't let Boulder Democrats do to Colorado what they've done to Boulder.
Vote for Scott "Mainstream" McGinnis.

We only get one shot at this every six years.

[Luis]

Oh spare me the defeatism, Ralph. We can hit them hard too. Show some drilling rigs going up over a gorgeous mountain panorama and then cut to McInnis. Have some rancher talk about how McInnis supported the drilling plan that destroyed his family well. And all you need to do on Beauprez is contrast his campaign rhetoric from 2002 with his votes to help out the drug industry.

[Ralph]

I'm not defeatist, but damn, General Custer, there sure are a lot of Indians out there.

[Blue the Wild Dog]

Ralph - you forgot about the Boulder library displaying the severed penises while not displaying the US flag. But I agree with Luis that we don't need to be defeatist, because I think it's likely that the 2004 election will be a reaction to the 2000 and 2002 elections.