In a surprise announcement Wednesday, Weld County Republican District Attorney Ken Buck dropped out of the race for U.S. Senate while U.S. Rep. Cory Gardner, R-Yuma, jumped in. The former will run for Gardner’s House seat, while the latter instantly became the leading Republican to oppose incumbent U.S. Sen. Mark Udall, D-Eldora Springs.
The new alignment should present Colorado voters with a more lively contest, a more intelligent debate and, in the end, a clear choice based more on the issues and less on gaffes and knee-jerk ideology. This is a more competitive race now. And, done right, the voters should benefit from that.
That is not to say Udall is necessarily in trouble; far from it. His name recognition represents a multi-generational family tradition of honesty, public service and respect for western values. He also has the advantage of incumbency, which, in what should be a hard-fought nationwide contest for control of the Senate, could translate into serious financial support. And, while the Republicans will – as they already have – come at him over Obamacare and his association with the president in general, Udall can also run on his own respectable record.
But neither is he a shoo-in. And that, from a GOP perspective, is the reason for the candidate switch.
Ken Buck is a personable man and a veteran district attorney. He will no doubt do well running for Gardner’s seat in the 4th Congressional District. In fact, he has all but been handed a free ticket to Congress. In that strongly Republican district, what might be considered gaffes or misstatements in a general election will be understood as perhaps clumsy – but honest reflections of heartfelt beliefs.
Gardner, however, is young, photogenic, energetic, likeable and an up-and-comer in the Republican Party. Seen as a better bet, it is also likely he will have more money. He may also be a better statewide candidate. Although probably just as conservative as Buck, he is less likely to couch his more controversial beliefs in easily caricatured terms. With all that, he should give Udall a serious challenge.
Democrats are decrying this switch as a back-room deal, which is almost certainly accurate. But there is nothing necessarily disreputable about that. Buck gets an all-but-guaranteed House seat; the party gets a better shot at picking up a Senate seat; and, we can only suppose, Gardner gets an iron-clad promise of big-dollar support and maybe a good job somewhere if the effort fails. That is not crooked politics, just smart.
Perhaps the biggest problem Gardner faces in running for the Senate is his résumé almost negates the GOP’s chief argument against Udall. For while not a senator, he, too, is an incumbent – one with partisan, if not personal, baggage.
He and the Republicans can easily attack Udall over Obama administration actions and programs, but in this case, that works both ways. As a sitting member of the House majority, Gardner cannot but own that body’s actions and behaviors – many of which are at least as unpopular as the president’s. With some justification, the GOP is counting on the low-approval ratings of the president and his policies to translate into victory at the polls. But the fact is, the House is held in equally low public esteem. So, if Gardner can tie Udall to Obamacare and Benghazi, so too can Udall link his opponent to government shutdowns and endless obstructionism.
With luck, the campaign will be more positive than that. But in any case, it should be hard-fought and well-argued. With that, the voters may have already won.
