Reaction ranges from it being a "placeholder appointment" to "a trail-ballon rumor" to "WFT is Bill thinking" to "great outside-the-box appointment".  

Most here agree that Mike is a seemingly very compentent, easily liked guy with a good real world resume and the potential to grow into the job.  However, his name ID, ability to raise funds and lack of experience in running (much less winning) a state-wide election are all big question marks.  

But Obama also knows that if he chooses a union-backed candidate such as Linda Darling-Hammond, a Stanford professor active in the transition, he'll have a revolt on his hands from the swelling ranks of reformers. That's why it's more likely he'll settle on a superintendent like Arne Duncan of Chicago, Michael Bennet of Denver or Paul Vallas of New Orleans, any of whom would suit Gates and other reform-minded philanthropists just fine. (I have my money on Bennet, whose new compensation system is popular with Denver teachers, if not the union.)

http://www.newsweek.com/id/172572/output/print

But then Ritter isn't going to buck the Dem party machinery.  I fully believe that Udall's early announcement of his intention to run for Senator was a pre-emptive move to keep Miles out of the running.  I knew Udall would declare when I saw him and both Salazars hand-wringing with Chris Gates after Pat Waak defeated Chris for State Party Chair.  (Pat was seen to be Miles' candidate.  Which she may have been, frankly speaking.)