Ouch.
Gov. Bill Ritter says he would have been better off politically if he had picked former House Speaker Andrew Romanoff to fill the U.S. Senate seat vacated by Democrat Ken Salazar.
But the governor, speaking Monday on the Mike Rosen Show on 850 KOA, said he is sticking by his appointment of Michael Bennet to the seat [...]
"I could have appointed Andrew, and it would have been better for me politically to have done that because he had sort of a longer history in Colorado politics," he said.
Not the most spirited endorsement of Bennet. But on the substance, yes, it would've been easier for Ritter to justify a Romanoff appointment, rather than the perplexing Bennet one. The appointment system is broken in most states, and while Texas isn't usually a political model for anything, their system is by far superior to that of most states -- have the governor appoint a placeholder senator to immediately fill a vacancy, while a quick election fills the seat permanently a few months down the road.
In Colorado, Ritter appointed an unknown person with zero elective experience, potentially endangering a seat that will likely be aggressive challenged by Republicans. Given the circumstances, a primary challenge was almost inevitable. Democrats should have the ability to chose their nominee, not the governor, and we want someone who is electorally tested heading into the general election. If Bennet survives the primary, great for him. He will have learned how to put a field organization together, crafted a message, practiced in a debate or three, and ultimately emerge a stronger candidate against whatever neanderthal the GOP puts up.
In the meantime, the primary challenge will force Bennet to be a better progressive, as has already happened with the public option. And Romanoff himself, no great progressive champion, will have a chance to either remake himself as a progressive champion to pick up grassroots support, or he'll cede that ground to Bennet. The primary will be good for both of them.