Just to make his position even more untenable, the ethics violation and contempt citation, which he made as bad as possible with poor judgement and timing, are dominating most stories about the debates and the narrative into the election.
The Denver Post editorial on Hickenlooper’s ethics imbroglio is generous in that it labels the violations an infraction, but it correctly points out the dragging out of the process and refusing to testify was his decision. Meanwhile, the Aurora Sentinel endorsed Andrew Romanoff as having a clear vision to address the country’s major problems in health care and climate change. The implication is that if Cory Gardner’s failed performance and loyalty to Trump have already defeated him, why not go with the best (most liberal) candidate in their view?
Hickenlooper has had a lucky run since 2003. Last year was a bust; this year may be worse.
|Democratic U.S. Senate candidates John Hickenlooper, left, and Andrew |
Romanoff participate in a televised debate, June 11, 2020 | Via CBS4 Denver