Florida’s Marco Rubio and Charlie Crist Poll Even: Is Colorado Watching?
Posted on December 16th, 2009 in clean government, Colorado Politics, Fiscal Policy, General, liberty, National Politics, PPC | Written by Ben | 4 Comments »
While I was busy yesterday highlighting the Rasmussen momentum for Colorado U.S. Senate candidate Ken Buck’s campaign, a truly earth-shattering survey came out from Florida’s Republican Senate primary: As Erick Erickson put it, a bomb went off:
Last night in Washington, close to one hundred leaders of the conservative movement gathered in a townhouse just down from the United States Capitol to hear Senator Jim DeMint and Florida Speaker Marco Rubio at a Senate Conservatives Fund fundraiser for Marco Rubio.
The people in the room for Rubio were the same people who blew up NY-23, helping Doug Hoffman and crushing the chances of a far left Republican, Dede Scozzafava.
Just prior to the start of the fundraiser, a bomb went off in Florida. According to Rasmussen, the Florida Senate primary is now tied between Rubio and Crist.
For perspective, only about six months ago, Rubio was in the single digits with Crist safely over 50%.
Jim DeMint told the crowd that Rubio is one of a handful of “new Republicans” running to take back our country. And the new poll shows it is working. [emphasis added]
That kind of freefalling (and now disappeared) lead is what Governor Crist gets for cozying up to the Obama administration on the stimulus package and showing little backbone on fiscal discipline. If you’re looking for an out-of-state candidate to support, you could do a lot worse than Marco Rubio.
It’s important to note that both Crist and Rubio poll well ahead of their likely Democratic challenger. In other words, supporting Rubio is about principles and electability.
Florida’s Senate primary has some key differences with what’s going on in Colorado — including the fact the NRSC shied away from actually endorsing anyone here. But there are some lessons to be absorbed by national and state party leaders about the enthusiasm of the fiscally conservative, pro-liberty grassroots Republicans who want their voice heard.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
4 Responses
The real, biggest difference between CO and FL is not the NRSC or some political guy sitting at a desk. Here is the real difference:
Norton Issues: http://www.janenortonforcolorado.com/issues
Crist Issues:
http://www.charliecrist.com/issues
Write about that!
AStewart, thanks for the comment. Your point is well taken. My goal wasn’t to make an exhaustive list of the differences. I encourage readers to visit the sites of all the candidates in the field as part of their decision-making of whom to support. I also encourage them to go out and hear and meet the candidates when they get a chance, too.
By the way, who is “some political guy sitting at a desk” & how does he denote a difference between the FL & CO Senate primaries?
With all due respect, I don’t think Colorado’s gubernatorial and senate races are anything like those in Florida. I know tea partiers want to gin up support for their candidates, but I don’t think it will work. Comparing Colorado and Florida is like comparing elk meat and oranges, imho. As AStewart notes, Jane Norton and, I would add, Scott McInnis aren’t vulnerable to “Christing” because they are running on very smart and conservative platforms.
Don, I think you are generally right but overstate the case somewhat. Yes, Norton & McInnis so far indeed “are running on very smart and conservative platforms,” but that is due at least in part to the grassroots speaking up and making its voice heard at the front end of the process (a much more constructive way to approach the problem than addressing things later on).
Further, in the Senate race, I’m not sure there is such a thing as the “Tea Party candidate” — some like Ken Buck, to be sure, and others Wiens or Tidwell. And perhaps Norton, too — she has made what appears to be an admirable effort to reach out to them.
My point in posting this was to re-emphasize the importance of the fiscally conservative grassroots getting involved and staying involved: the CO approach is preferred to the FL one, but the CO grassroots can do what was done in FL, if necessary. My broader point in recent weeks and months has been to keep the focus on a fair and open primary process for the Republican nominations that listens seriously to the interests of the Tea Party folks and pro-liberty, etc.
You’re right: We’re not doing so badly on that front here in CO. In remaining vigilant & trying to keep everybody honest, it is important not to blow our case out of proportion.