Brew Pub Owner Wins Denver Mayoral Runoff

DENVER - A brew pub owner who captured the public's fancy with whimsical ads and promises of new ideas won by a large margin Tuesday in the runoff for mayor of Denver.

John Hickenlooper had 65 percent of the vote to 35 percent for City Auditor Don Mares. With 99 percent of precincts counted, Hickenlooper led 66,907 votes to 36,424.

Hickenlopper will replace Wellington Webb, who is barred by term limits from seeking a fourth term as leader of the nation's 25th largest city. Although the election was nonpartisan, both men are Democrats. Webb didn't endorse anyone.

Hickenlooper savored his victory at a celebration that drew hundreds of supporters to a city park.

"It's like drinking a glass of the finest beer and wanting that taste to linger as long as you can," he said. "What a glorious night. What an incredible crowd."

Hickenlooper, 51, who owns eight restaurants, touted his experience in business and inexperience in politics, saying he will bring fresh new approaches to governing and leading the city out of an economic slump. Recent surveys showed his message appealed to voters across all geographic, ethnic and political lines.

Political analysts credited Hickenlooper's ads with setting a positive tone and establishing him as the independent candidate. The commercials poke fun at what he called the "nonsense of government," including city policies that raised prices on parking meters and drove shoppers out of downtown.

In one spot, he wears a change maker and drops a quarter into a meter just in time to stop a ticket from being written. In another, he tries on different suits, including an Uncle Sam hat, to try to look mayoral but decides that he's really an outsider.

Mares, 48, emphasized his experience as auditor and his concern for working people. He said much of Hickenlooper's nearly $2 million in campaign funds came from "high rollers" with business connections, while much of his $910,000 came from individuals making small contributions.

Mares also said the city needs an experienced mayor, especially since voters will also choose 10 new council members for the 13-member City Council.

"If you have a mayor with no city government experience, that's a huge learning curve," he said.

Hickenlooper finished first with 43 percent of the vote among seven candidates in the May 6 election, short of the more than 50 percent needed to win the mayor's office outright. Mares was second with 22 percent.

The new mayor will have to deal with an economic slump that has cost residents 35,000 jobs over the past 18 months. He also will have to find a way to cope with a $50 million budget gap predicted for next year.

Hickenlooper, although a 'Rat, was the candidate most Republicans supported. I can't recall the last time a Republican won the mayorship of Denver, probably not in over 40 years.

2 posted on 06/04/2003 5:43 AM MDT by fieldmarshaldj (~Remember, it's not sporting to fire at RINO until charging~)

The last was :

Nicholson, William F. -- also known as Will F. Nicholson -- of Denver, Colo. Republican. Candidate for U.S. Senator from Colorado, 1948; delegate to Republican National Convention from Colorado, 1952; mayor of Denver, Colo., 1955-59.
http://politicalgraveyard.com/bio/nicholson.html

chuck <truth@YeshuaHaMashiach>

That would make sense, given the way whoever wins the endorsement of organized labor is pretty much elected Mayor by default there.

I actually did a quick check on the internet, though, and discovered this:

Cobo, Albert E. (1893-1957) of Detroit, Wayne County, Mich. Born in Detroit, Wayne County, Mich., October 2, 1893. Republican. Mayor of Detroit, Mich., 1950-57; died in office 1957; candidate for Governor of Michigan, 1956. Died September 12, 1957. Interment at Woodlawn Cemetery, Detroit, Mich.

So Chicago's had 'RAT rule for at least 27 years longer (Chicago hasn't even had a Republican come CLOSE to winning since the late 50s!) They are truly hopeless braindead voters.

Scary, isn't it?

I'm in Nashville, so I have both Detroit, Denver, and Chicago beat for one-party control. We last elected a Republican Mayor in 1886 (and that was when African-Americans were still allowed to vote and even elected a Black Republican as head of our then-City Council). Like Dan, I, too, can claim a "big city" Mayor as a relative (who also was my great-grandfather's first cousin, too). Henry Kiel of St. Louis, a Progressive Republican, served from 1913-25 (back then, St. Louis was about the 5th largest city in the country with almost 900,000 people, but has lost 2/3rds of its population since) and has never had anyone surpass his time in office. Kiel, a 100% German-American (during WW1 no less), almost ended up in the U.S. Senate (had he run in 1928 rather than 1932) and his opponent in 1934 would've been none other than Harry S Truman from the corrupt 'Rat Kansas City regime. Some regard him as the city's greatest Mayor and several buildings are/were named for him. In the decade following his death in the '40s, the 'Rats hijacked control of the city and haven't relinquished control in well over 50 years. My cousin would be horrified to see the mess they made of his crown jewel, from the corruption to the running-down of the inner city, which was once filled with people and gleaming new structures (many of which he personally built). Truly a shame. :-(

Wow, this has become quite an interesting thread! Kind of ironic that it would be Nashville, considering Tennessee was the first southern state to break away from solid-Dem rule (they were electing Republicans statewide in the 20s)

I like the tribute to black Republicans section of your profile. Very interesting! Oscar DePriest was the last decent Congressman in district (of course, back then the district didn't snake into the suburbs like it does now, nor was it controlled by the Chicago Dem machine). DePriest voted against FDR's new deal program in 1933, saying it was socialist (like any good Republican would do!) Unfortuantely, it cost him his seat and marked the beginning of blacks going to the Dem plantantion. If only we could go back in time and shift a few votes in the 1934 election!

"Wow, this has become quite an interesting thread! Kind of ironic that it would be Nashville, considering Tennessee was the first southern state to break away from solid-Dem rule (they were electing Republicans statewide in the 20s)"

Tennessee was never as solid Dem as the rest of the former Confederate states. There was a solid block of Republicans making up the first two Congressional seats going back to after we were readmitted to the Union. The 1st district hasn't elected a 'Rat since Robert Love Taylor in 1878, and the ancestral 2nd (centered around Knoxville) last sent a 'Rat in 1852 (it was a Whig stronghold before it became Republican), one of the longest non-'Rat reigns in the country, if not the longest. In 1920, 5 out of the 10 Congressmen were Republican and we also elected a Governor, too (we might've won a Senate race if there had been a race that year), but the state reverted back in '22 and it took about 50 years before we regained a majority of the delegation and elected another Governor again. Much more interesting detail to go into, but that'd take too long...

"I like the tribute to black Republicans section of your profile. Very interesting! Oscar DePriest was the last decent Congressman in district (of course, back then the district didn't snake into the suburbs like it does now, nor was it controlled by the Chicago Dem machine)."

Yup.

"DePriest voted against FDR's new deal program in 1933, saying it was socialist (like any good Republican would do!) Unfortuantely, it cost him his seat and marked the beginning of blacks going to the Dem plantantion. If only we could go back in time and shift a few votes in the 1934 election!"

Well, even if DePriest had eked out a win in '34, it was all but certain he would've lost in the disaster of '36, where all but the most hardcore GOP districts went 'Rat (we elected something like 89 out of 435 members, down from a high of 300 in 1920). The man who defeated DePriest, Arthur W. Mitchell, was the very first Black Democrat ever elected to Congress. A Black Democrat was a rather strange concept at the time, I can't imagine wanting to share the same party label with some of the most rabid racists in Congress then ('Rats all). It wasn't an easy road to hoe for DePriest dealing with racism (as he was the first Black member elected from a non-Southern state, and the first Black elected since 1898 when he came in 30 years later), but it must've been even more difficult for Mitchell (who would be succeeded by the more famous and long-serving Bill Dawson, who had been a Republican switching right after the start of the Depression). Mitchell, too, probably had been a Republican right up to about 1930. Both DePriest, Mitchell, and Dawson were all native Southerners, where it was utterly unthinkable to be a Democrat. The latter two, I'd imagine, switched because they realized the GOP was heading to minority party status and that would mean scarcely little leverage for Black interests (a smart move at the time). We may start to see that similar realization take hold in this decade (especially in Southern states where Black 'Rat legislators now in the minority will and can be ignored, having no leverage at all).

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.