Early Ad Blitzes Cost Norton
Ex-CO LG Jane Norton (R) leads the GOP field in her bid to face Sen. Michael Bennet (D), but a costly primary is already sapping Norton of much-needed resources as she heads into an early test of strength.
Norton has spent $243K on TV ads since announcing her candidacy, including a recent surge in the run-up to tonight's caucuses. The ads urge GOPers to attend the caucuses which, even though they are non-binding, could serve as an embarrassment if she loses to either of her less-well-known rivals.
The run-up to the statewide caucuses "is hugely labor-intensive. It's all-consuming for a campaign," said GOP pollster Nicole McClesky, a veteran of CO campaigns who is not affiliated with a candidate this year. Even if Norton loses tonight, McClesky said, "she's the front-runner."
But as in other states where the GOP's establishment favorite has run into roadblocks, Norton is finding trouble on her right flank. If Norton loses to either of her 2 rivals tonight, it will be evidence that the GOP activist class is not ready to coalesce around a candidate yet, and that attacks on Norton's record are having an impact.
Weld Co. DA Ken Buck (R) and state Sen. Tom Wiens (R) have been making inroads by hammering Norton on her record, especially on Referendum C, an '05 measure approved by voters that allowed CO to take in more than it had been allowed to under a Taxpayers' Bill of Rights.
Most incumbent politicians on both sides of the aisle, including Norton and Gov. Bill Owens (R), supported the bill.
At least one rival has backers with deep pockets. The Declaration Alliance, a group backing conservative candidates, is running ads slamming Norton for her record as LG. Norton's campaign says the group's major funder supports Buck; the group did not return calls seeking comment.
"This is a 527 group that's tied to Ken Buck, and it's unfortunate," said Nate Strauch, Norton's spokesman. "He has someone very wealthy behind him who has decided they're going to circumvent campaign finance laws and try to buy a senator."
Still, Norton's camp, while not directly responding to the Alliance's $115K in ad spending so far, is pursuing their own expensive strategy. Norton's $243K spent on ad buys so far amount to more than a third of her campaign bank balance at the end of the year, when she finished with $595K on hand.
"It is surprising to me to see third-party ads starting this early," said CO GOP chief Dick Wadhams, who is staying neutral in the party primary.
Wadhams said he is determined to keep the primary from devolving into bitter name-calling, though he did say there would be "some give and take" between the contenders. And GOPers remain optimistic they have a good chance to win back the seat, given both Norton's strength and the animus building between Sen. Michael Bennet (D) and his primary rival, ex-House Speaker Andrew Romanoff (D).
"They're going to have a bloody primary of their own. Whoever comes out of that is going to be wounded and pretty far to the left," McClesky said. Norton "can probably raise the resources that are needed to be competitive, and she's an attractive candidate."
Whether Norton will have any of those resources left after what already appears to be an expensive primary remains to be seen.
Funny thing about these commercials is NO ONE supposedly knows who is paying for them.
Since they're very pro-Buck its pretty easy to guess isn't it?
Search the FEC website for Buck's contributors...
http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/can_ind/2009_S0CO00237
There's an awful lot of Hensel Phelps folks there. I wonder how much money that firm has given him?... Hmm... Would a federal contracting company have ANY interest in getting him elected?
I’m regularly bouncing all over the net most of the time which means I possess a tendency to browse a ton, which unfortunately is not typically a good thing as most of the web pages I find are composed of pointless waste copied from several other web pages a trillion times, on the other hand I have to give you credit this website is certainly decent and also contains a lot of authentic substance, for that reason thank you for breaking the phenomena of exactly duplicating other peoples’ blogs and forums... Nice work!
I’m regularly bouncing all over the net most of the time which means I possess a tendency to browse a ton, which unfortunately is not typically a good thing as most of the web pages I find are composed of pointless waste copied from several other web pages a trillion times, on the other hand I have to give you credit this website is certainly decent and also contains a lot of authentic substance, for that reason thank you for breaking the phenomena of exactly duplicating other peoples’ blogs and forums... Nice work!
For all you that haven't seen them, take a look at SubmitterSoftware.com
The caucuses are not non-binding. In Colorado, each political party participates in caucus. Using the previous election voter turn-out for each party, the number of delegates that will attend the State Assembly is determined. At a majority of the precinct caucuses, delegates are voted on to represent each precinct in the State Assembly. These delegates will vote at the State Assembly to determine the candidates that make it on the primary ballot. Candidates have to receive 30% of the delegate vote to be automatically included on the primary ballot. If they receive 10% of the vote, they can then try to petition onto the ballot.
Perhaps what you were referring to as non-binding were the straw polls that were taken, which generally show which candidate has the most support at caucus time. Personally, I think the straw poll was a joke, because at the precinct caucus I attended, most of the people in my precinct didn't even know who was running at the point.
The point of pushing people to attend caucus is to get your supporters there so they can become delegates and vote you onto the ballot. This year, many, many people went to caucus for the first time and those people are not die hard Republican party-faithful. Those people are well-informed, conservatives and they are tired of the same ole people the Party keeps giving us on the ballot. This is the reason Jane Norton did not do well and it is the same reason she has decided to forego the State Assembly and try to petition on the ballot.