Overview:
Republican U.S. Senate candidate Mark Baisley acknowledges he "didn’t do so good" during his debate with Sen. John Hickenlooper.
Closely following his U.S. Senate debate with Sen. John Hickenlooper, Republican state Sen. Mark Baisley sat in a small dressing room surrounded by a handful of journalists. A few of Baisley’s friends and family linger about while he takes questions.
“I’m not so sure; I don’t feel terrifically confident,” Baisley said. “Kyle Clark dug up stuff to throw at me that I don’t have any recollection of.”
That uncertainty reflected one of the central tensions of the hourlong 9NEWS debate Wednesday, Oct. 14: Hickenlooper defended his first term in Washington while Baisley was repeatedly pressed about his record in the Colorado Legislature and his support for President Donald Trump.
“We need change in Washington,” Hickenlooper said. “A vote for Mr. Baisley would be two years more of the same.”
Additionally, some of Baisley’s comments regarding immigration drew a loud crowd reaction.
“I don’t think we should be supporting the health care of people who are here illegally,” he said. “We want the Elon Musks.”
One of Baisley’s more difficult exchanges came when Clark asked about House Bill 20-1272, legislation Baisley sponsored as a state representative in 2020. The bill would have restricted marriage licenses to opposite-sex couples and barred same-sex couples from adopting children. It was postponed indefinitely in committee.
After the debate, Baisley acknowledged struggling to explain his support for it.
“I’m trying to defend something that not only do I not remember doing, but I’m going, ‘Should I have done that?’” he said.
Baisley said he would not have introduced the legislation himself and suggested party loyalty influenced his decision to sign onto it.
“I would not have introduced the bill to outlaw same-sex marriage, but when confronted with fellow conservatives who did introduce that bill, I said I’ll sign on with you,” he said. “I’m not sure if that was a good decision or not, but frankly I knew it would fail anyway and not get out of committee.”
Today Baisley’s stance is “to remove government from licensing the religious institutions of marriage altogether.”
Hickenlooper used much of the debate to connect Baisley to Trump’s policies on spending, tariffs and health care. He criticized the Republican-backed One Big Beautiful Bill Act, calling it the “One Big Bad Betrayal Act.”
Health care produced another clear divide between the candidates. Colorado health officials have repeatedly warned about affordability problems, including residents delaying care because of cost. Hickenlooper advocated for expanding access to coverage.
“They decided no one needs health care unless they are wealthy enough,” Hickenlooper said. “Health care should be a right, not a privilege.”
Baisley, by contrast, argued that greater reliance on market forces could reduce costs.
“Let the industries govern themselves,” he said.
The debate covered other issues, including the war in Iran and the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, but Baisley’s explanation of the 2020 marriage bill became one of the exchanges he was still thinking about afterward.
His comments in the dressing room offered a notably candid assessment from a candidate minutes removed from the stage. Rather than insist the debate had gone according to plan, Baisley acknowledged there were answers he wished he had handled differently.
“I probably didn’t do so good there,” he said.
Hickenlooper, meanwhile, closed the debate by arguing that Democratic control of Congress would “bring a new era of sanity into Washington.”
While the debate did not go entirely according to plan, Baisley did not sit defeated in the dressing room post-debate. He spoke confidently about his ability to transition to a seat in Washington.
“The best training for United States Congress is the state legislature,” he said. “I feel like I’ve been in training for eight years.”
