Udall To Kick Off Campaign, Spread A Little Carbon

Our Green Man-Who-Would-Be-Senator kicks off his campaign for Senate today.

I know . . . I was pretty sure he's been running for months, too.

At any rate, here's his itinerary:

745 Colorado Springs
1015 Gunnison
1230 Grand Junction
300p Craig
530p Denver


Hey, look--candidates can do whatever they feel is necessary to win the office they seek. But THIS candidate--this particular candidate--should really be aware of the carbon footprints he's spraying around the state during the campaign.

Somebody might think to call him a hypocrite.

I wonder if he's going to fly over the Roan Plateau on his way around the state, burning up hundreds of gallons of foreign oil?

Udall 47, Schaffer 41 In Latest Poll

PolitickerCO has the rundown of the latest Rasmussen poll of 500 likely voters conducted May 19:

A new Rasmussen Reports poll of the Colorado U.S. Senate race shows Democrat Mark Udall with a 6-point lead over Republican Bob Schaffer -- the first time a Rasmussen poll has shown either candidate with a lead outside the margin of error.

The poll of 500 likely Colorado voters, taken on May 19, showed Udall leading Schaffer 47 percent to 41 percent. The margin of error was +/- 4.5 percentage points.

In April, Udall had a statistically insignificant 3-point lead; March's poll showed Schaffer up by a single percentage point.

In the past two months, Schaffer's overall ratings have dropped: his overall favorable rating in May of 44 percent is down 3 percentage points since April and 9 percentage points since March. His overall unfavorable rating, meanwhile, has increased 7 percentage points - from 32 percent in March to 39 percent in May.

Udall's overall favorable rating for May was 50 percent -- up two percentage points from April, but down two points from his March favorable rating. The Democrat had a May unfavorable rating of 35 percent, compared to 37 percent in April and 34 percent in March.

The first credible outside-the-margin separation favors Udall, though the favorability/unfavorability of each is staying fairly close:

With the exception of the "very favorable" category where Udall holds a fairly large lead, the candidates are almost identical, and both still have double-digit responses for "not sure."

When asked if the Schaffer/Abramoff alleged scandal had given the voter cause for concern, here were the results:

"How concerned are you about the alleged relationship between Bob Schaffer and Jack Abramoff?"

19% Very concerned

18% Somewhat concerned

24% Not very concerned

17% Not at all concerned

23% Not sure

There is certainly traction for the story, but it is difficult to discern whether that concern comes from those voters likely or undecided to vote for Schaffer in the first place. A story with resonance only among Udall's supporters won't do much more than galvanize his base, and not result in vote switching or undervoting behavior. Bet on the Udall camp and his surrogates to push this story again and again this summer and fall.

Takeaways--it is clear that Udall has broken the margin of error stalemate, which would be assumed given the widespread consensus that this is a toss-up seat leaning in Udall's favor in the media and the punditry. Anything less would be quite a disappointment for the Dems.

But it is still May and the Democrats' battle over their Presidential nominee has still not been concluded. Udall has yet to declare how he would vote as a superdelegate, nor given any indication as to what terms he would debate Schaffer this summer. And finally, the Democratic National Convention in Denver could prove to be a showcase or a debacle for Udall and the Dems, helping or hurting the candidate. With all this to consider, it is still a long road to November for Udall.

SvU's updated tracking poll and trendlines (click to enlarge):

Udall's First Ad Subjected To Truth Test

By 9NEWS.

Attack on Bob Schaffer's Energy Record from Tainted Group that Shares Mark Udall's Out-of-Step Agenda

Today the Denver Post highlights competing ads on Bob Schaffer's energy record. One ad praises Schaffer for a comprehensive support of traditional and alternative energy sources.

The other ad, produced by the League of Conservation Voters (LCV), attacks Bob Schaffer for not taking a punitive stance towards companies that engage in oil exploration and production. Guilt by association has been a common thread of the Big Blue Lie Machine assault on Schaffer.

This LCV ad is lost in its own enviro-mythology that renewable energy alone can save American consumers with relatively little pain. LCV's views quite seamlessly align with those of Mark Udall, which we have deconstructed here:

- To Colorado's Detriment, Mark Udall Tries to Take Both Sides on Roan Plateau

- Mark Udall's Priorities Out of Whack as Skyrocketing Energy Prices Hit Coloradans

- Udall Rejects Gas Holiday, Offers No Meaningful Solution to Energy Dependency

- Mark Udall and Nancy Pelosi "Shed Crocodile Tears" Over High Gas Prices

- Mark Udall's Energy Plan Lacks Sense

- "Vote Mark Udall for Even Higher Energy Prices"

And Mark Udall doesn't seem to mind that the group performing attacks on his behalf is tainted with a recent history of campaign violations:

Wadhams pointed out that the group in 2006 ran afoul of Federal Election Commission laws, earning it a $180,000 fine....

Here's a copy of the FEC's findings against LCV. Outside groups like LCV may try to keep muddying the waters during this campaign, but we are glad to help clear them up.

Bob Schaffer's Reasonable Comprehensive Energy Policy: A Contrast with Mark Udall

This ad, touting Bob Schaffer's record in support of comprehensive energy solutions, also highlights a key contrast with Mark Udall. Schaffer supports extending tax incentives to renewable energy providers. So does Udall.

What's the difference? Mark Udall also voted to impose tax offsets on oil and gas companies - all part of Udall's efforts to raise prices on average, hard-working Coloradans who still depend on these traditional energy sources.

Bob Schaffer has a more reasonable and moderate approach that recognizes the advantages of renewable energy without running roughshod over the economic well-being of families and small businesses. Schaffer's solution - a comprehensive energy policy - is more sensible than Udall's, because it's friendlier to the pocketbooks of average Coloradans.

League of Conservation Voters Hit Piece To Be Unveiled Wednesday

PolitickerCO's Jeremy Pelzer reveals early details:

The ad, called "Fingerprints," will raise "critical questions about former Congressman Bob Schaffer, who earned a place on LCV's Dirty Dozen List for consistently voting with Big Oil and against Colorado values," according to a LCV press release.

The group will screen the new ad Wednesday at the State Capitol, the release stated.

We'll post it when it becomes available online.

Udall Offers Praise To Family Friend and Liberal Stalwart Sen. Kennedy

Via PolitickerCO's Jeremy Pelzer:

“My prayers go out to Senator Kennedy and his family. He has devoted his public life to championing the hopes and needs of America’s working families. His many accomplishments are well known, but I am particularly affected by this news because his family and mine have enjoyed a warm relationship throughout the years.

“Senator Kennedy is a natural leader who has always reached across the aisle to bring Democrats and Republicans together to do what is best for our country. To echo what many have said today: Edward Kennedy is one of the most effective Senators to ever serve in Congress. I am confident he will be back at his post soon and I look forward to working with him again as a friend and colleague.”

Sen. Ted Kennedy is a formidable political opponent, but the thoughts and prayers of everyone at SvU go to the Senator and his family.

Udall Not Immune To Campaign Ad Troubles

Schaffer's recent ad was withdrawn and resubmitted once a photo of Pikes Peak was corrected--in Udall's case, the offending campaign was pulled once it was discovered in violation of House rules governing the use of floor footage for campaign purposes:

Udall was forced to pull a video from his campaign website last October that showed C-SPAN footage of him criticizing President Bush's Iraq War policy. House of Representatives rules prevent members from using floor speeches for campaign purposes. His campaign manager, Mike Melanson, said as soon as the campaign became aware that it was a violation, they immediately complied.

Of the two ads, it appears that the misuse of footage was more grievous than a photographic error.

But that won't stop the Big Blue "mountains out of molehills" Lie Machine.

New Ad Underscores Schaffer's Comprehensive Energy Achievements

From Coloradans for Economic Growth.

"Vote Mark Udall for Even Higher Energy Prices"

Highlighting Mark Udall's out-of-touch energy policy has become a recent staple of this site. In that light, it was interesting to read these comments from new blogger "Civil Sense" about Mark Udall's acceptance speech at the Democratic assembly in Colorado Springs:

It sounds more like American energy dependence on government subsidies, not energy independence. This is more like the broken windows fallacy. In this scenario, breaking a window appears to increase economic activity since the window needs replacement. However, the money that the owner uses to replace the window could have been used for a multitude of other items. Fixing the window is just displaced economic activity.

The subsidies to “green” energy work the same way. For the government to spend millions of dollars to subsidize more expensive wind, solar, and biofuel energy, it first must displace this money from the taxpayers. Due to the market distortion, the “green” energy sources become more competitive with traditional energy sources than they would without the subsidies.

The statement that a renewable standard for electricity would save money for Colorado families is ludicrous on its face. For the foreseeable future, fossil fuels will provide the cheapest, most reliable energy source. Nuclear power is another low-cost power option. Forcing utilities to utilize 15 percent as renewable energy means that 15 percent of the energy will be is actually forcing utilities to buy more expensive energy from Mark Udall’s friends and campaign supporters in the “green” movement.

This speech suggests another campaign slogan: Vote Mark Udall for even higher energy prices.

Of course, it was the slogan that elicited attention: "Vote Mark Udall for Even Higher Energy Prices." There's reason to believe that's just what Udall wants: strain the budgets of middle-class Coloradans to impose a new lifestyle on them. Sorry, those aren't Western values.

Udall Hints At Nomination Endorsement Timeline

Mark Udall has indicated that it will be the superdelegates' duty to make their feelings on the party's nominees known after the last primary, June 3.

We'll keep you posted.

Bob Schaffer Highlights Energy Policy to Jewish GOP, Udall's Weakness Exposed

Joshua Sharf, candidate for Denver's House District 6, reports on Bob Schaffer's featured appearance last Thursday at the Jewish Republicans meeting. Joshua highlights what figures to remain a top issue throughout the campaign:

Schaffer made the point that our current energy prices are a combination of increased worldwide demand, and a deliberate policy by liberals, environmentalists, and socialists (er, is there a difference there?) to limit domestic energy production on the basis of aesthetics rather than economics.

So let's see: we turn our food into energy, which is an inefficient use of everything involved in the process: corn, fertilizer, natural gas (which is what you make fertilizer from), energy itself. We prevent drilling in Alaska, offshore, in-state. (Cuba apparently is less environmentally sensitive.) We streamline the nuclear plant licensing process at just the time when materials and design costs are double plant costs. We limit our exposure to the world natural gas market by preventing LNG terminals.

And then we're surprised when the cost of energy, relative to everything else, rises.

The insights of candidates Schaffer and Sharf follow points we have made here many times, most recently:

- To Colorado's Detriment, Mark Udall Tries to Take Both Sides on Roan Plateau

- Mark Udall's Priorities Out of Whack as Skyrocketing Energy Prices Hit Coloradans

- Udall Rejects Gas Holiday, Offers No Meaningful Solution to Energy Dependency

- Mark Udall and Nancy Pelosi "Shed Crocodile Tears" Over High Gas Prices

- Mark Udall's Energy Plan Lacks Sense

As long as energy policy remains a big issue, Mark Udall will have a tough time withstanding the careful scrutiny. Perhaps that's part of the reason he is hiding from Schaffer's proposal for unscripted debates.

Inconvenient Facts for Mark Udall and Big Blue Lie Machine's Assault on Bob Schaffer

The Catholic News Agency weighs in on the Big Blue Lie Machine's absurd claims that U.S. Senate candidate Bob Schaffer turned a blind eye to forced abortions in the Marianas:

According to diocesan officials in Chalan Kanoa, they have received no solid evidence that forced abortions had in fact occurred.

And:

One 1998 report from the U.S. Office of Insular Affairs found squalid living conditions for foreign workers in the Marianas. Investigators also said that at least one woman claimed that her company forced her to abort her child upon discovering her pregnancy.

Schaffer said that he “found the reports credible" and had “not seen them refuted."

During the five days that he spent on the islands in 1999, the legislator told the Denver Post that he tried to determine how often abortions occurred and to track down anyone with knowledge of forced abortions occurring.

Yet, according to Schaffer, every religious or public official he talked to could only say that they had heard the rumors that forced abortions were occurring, but that they never discovered any actual evidence or had anyone come forward with a claim.

When contacted by Catholic News Agency, Angie Guerrero, Catholic Social Services’ director, confirmed Schaffer’s assertion that evidence on forced abortions is lacking.

“We have heard that (of the claims of forced abortions), but none of the alleged victims have come out and said that they were forced to have abortion. So that’s all hearsay, because we can’t prove it; they’re only allegations,” she said.

As director of Catholic Social Services, Guerrero oversees pro-life ministries throughout the Diocese of Chalan Kanoa, which includes the islands of Saipan, Rota and Tinian. Her office is currently working on a program to assess the number of abortions occurring in the region, but as of yet does not have exact figures. [emphasis added]

"All hearsay." "Only allegations." That's all it takes for Mark Udall and the Big Blue Lie Machine to start slinging mud at Bob Schaffer.

Do you think some Denver Post or Rocky Mountain News reporter could have bothered to make a call to Ms. Guerrero? Do you think an apology is forthcoming from "American Right to Life Action" or from the Lefty bloggers who swarmed to its aid to denounce Schaffer without thinking?

The lie has already circumnavigated the globe several times. But now the truth has its boots on. Time for Mark Udall and the Big Blue Lie Machine to recant and move on to another story.

Why is Mark Udall Hiding from Unscripted Debates?

The editors of the Rocky Mountain News follow up on Mark Udall's reluctance to respond to opponent Bob Schaffer's call for unscripted debates, in the famous Lincoln-Douglas style:

...[W]e know what Schaffer is getting at, and he's right: Let's have a series of free-wheeling debates in which candidates have the opportunity both to respond to each other's comments and question each other, in a format that doesn't impose rigid limits on the time devoted to any statement or topic.

Udall has unfortunately balked at the proposal, arguing that such wide-open exchanges might fail to address a host of policy matters that were important to voters. The 2nd District congressman says he wants to debate Schaffer this summer, but that the format should allow questions from moderators or the public.

Fine, but why not hold both kinds of debates?

That's a question that should continue to be posed to Mark Udall until he gives a clear answer or otherwise responds to Bob Schaffer's proposal. Why NOT hold both kinds of debates? A glance at the counter on the right sidebar will let you know just how long Udall has been hiding from Schaffer's request for unscripted debates.

The people of Colorado deserve something more than the sound bites and pre-packaged pablum that accompanies the overwhelming number of today's political campaigns, and Mark Udall seems determined to continue.

Mark Udall Puts Big Labor Unfunded Mandate Ahead of Taxpayers, Local Control

This morning, a watcher astutely points to another glaring contradiction in the rhetoric of Boulder liberal Mark Udall.

In March, Mark Udall took sides in favor of the Washington D.C. gun ban on the principle of local government control.

Now, Mark Udall is the co-sponsor of the Public Safety Employee-Employer Cooperation Act, which "would make the top officials at local unions the exclusive bargaining agents for public safety officers in every town or city with more than 5,000 people." An unfunded mandate that would impose unionization on local governments and make local taxpayers bear the cost? As a watcher correctly notes: "It looks a lot like local control to us, NOT."

So, let's get this straight. For Mark Udall, local control trumps the Second Amendment, but the Big Labor agenda trumps both. Does anyone else think Udall has been in Washington, DC, so long that he has confused the importance of the Constitution with the agenda of special-interest lobbyists? It sure looks like a reasonable explanation for Udall's hypocrisy and duplicity.