CO-04 (Special Election)
See Full Big Line
(R) Greg Lopez
(R) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Biden*
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%↓
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
90%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
90%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
(R) Ron Hanks
40%
30%
20%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(R) Deborah Flora
(R) J. Sonnenberg
30%↑
15%↑
10%↓
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Dave Williams
(R) Jeff Crank
50%↓
50%↑
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
90%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) Brittany Pettersen
85%↑
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
(R) Janak Joshi
60%↑
35%↓
30%↑
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
July 28, 2010 02:51 AM UTC
84 Comments
.
this IS the first time that you’ve ever listed an American Constitution Party candidate on the line. One of the community members would have noted such an occasion with boisterousness and glee.
.
Having Tom Tancredo as your candidate. Maybe you can get David Duke to run as your Senate candidate and then you can really pop the champagne.
After he loses the primary.
I think the primary will be very very close.
Make up your own assumptions. Don’t make up mine.
I think he could very well win.
And then he’ll go on to lose the general. No question.
He just spent his litteral last cent. Noble cause to some a fool’s errand to others.
Both would start off with empty bank accounts. I’m not too worried about Romanoff getting the money he needs if he wins the primary. Having Bennet’s balance would be better, but the money will be there.
to hand that seat to the Republicans?
But AR said he wouldn’t take DSCC money.
He won’t take SEIU money.
He won’t take AFL-CIO money.
He has apparently relaxed his rejection of out of state donors, since President Clinton hit up his nationwide list.
Romanoff campaign will accept, and what would be done by outside groups on behalf of THE Democratic candidate for US Senate.
which they probably would in the unlikely event that he wins the primary, then of course they’ll put the money toward saving a seat with a better chance. But few think it’s going to come to that. Bennet wil have no funding problems. And Clinton, having shown his loyalty, no harm no foul, to the DLC Clintonite loser, will be happy to rejoin the rest of the party establishment in supporting Bennet instead.
and by how much? And how material is that at this pount unless it’s by a big lead? As far as that goes, McInnis and Hick are in a statistical margin of error poll tie. So you think that means McInnis has an even shot? I doubt this particular debate will extend past 8/10.
is that they, not you, control the message.
Are you suggesting that outside groups won’t get excited about the “outside money bad” theme?
C’mon, it’s all for the bigger good. Or the good of something or someone.
abandon this race, if Bennet does not win? I don’t think so – Romanoff has stated repeatedly that he will support Bennet if Bennet wins. But where are Bennet and his followers on this? Again, does anyone really believe that the winner of the Dem Primary should not be fully supported? If anyone does, they’re so misguided they really don’t belong in the big-tent Democratic Party.
that I will enthusiastically support the Democratic candidate for the US senate, whoever it turns out to be. I’m pretty sure a lot of other Bennet supporters have said the same.
…if he wins the primary. But I don’t have enough money to make him viable. To my bitter regret.
Just because he has had a bee in his bonnet about Bennet or said unkind things and had no message that anyone can remember other than “Money Bad”.
It would be nice to see this person with a lot of experience in the legislative process come out with some amazing policy ideas but the next best thing would be for him to not knee capp Bennet to the point that Snortin Norton or Buck Buck get to add Senator to their name prefix.
Romanoff would be fine as a senator but like McInnis, he seems to be one of those people who have high aspirations that never quite work out.
.
got his email handy ?
.
n/t
His supporters are on the street corners. You see more Romanoff yard signs to Bennet’s. The weird part is you don’t see any recent polling on either Senate match up. It’s like the polling was frozen a month ago and everyone is suppose to take it on faith that last months poll is still relevant today. It doesn’t make sense to me.
Bennet does not want a poll because it might show him trailing the “house seller”.
And, Andrew has no money for polling.
So the last thing you want to do in that scenario is release your own internals, which might give your opponent something to go on. Releasing internal polling numbers is an odd strategy anyway, but which seems to be popular this year, among Repubs anyway. I would never do it under (almost) any circumstance.
More importantly, the reason you know that internal polling shows Bennet leading comfortably is the fact that he has responded to AR’s attack ads so mildly, and hasn’t increased his buy or put in any of his own money. Nor has he arranged for any surrogate attacks on Romanoff’s record. In fact he hasn’t really attacked AR at all, just responded to AR’s stuff with standard “I’m above this, why is Andrew going negative?” responses that invariably come from campaigns that know they’re way ahead.
… because while I think Bennet is likely to beat Romanoff in the primary, I think nobody really knows who will turn out to vote. So I can’t say Bennet is THAT much of an overwhelming favorite. And as much as Romanoff had money probs in the primary, that was mainly a result of the White House and state party leaders shutting AR out of the big donor loop; if AR wins the primary, I have to think his odds are as good as Bennet’s.
Because there is so much uncertainty. I would not be surprised to see either win by a couple of points.
I’d also put Buck first, he’s doing better than either Dem in the polls. I think the Senate is going to be very bad for incumbents in November because of the job picture. And for Dems in general.
… if you held a gun to my head and made me guess who will win, I’d bet on Bennet, if just because the broad-based mail voting could expand the electorate beyond party activists. But I really don’t know.
And yeah, if I had to guess who our next Senator is, I’d have to guess Buck, if just because it’s looking to be a good R year due to the economy. To swim against the tide, the D has to be super or the R has to be disastrous (as in the Gov race); I don’t know that either Bennet or Romanoff is that super, and I don’t know that Buck will be disastrous (though his recent gaff-prone campaigning says maybe).
Ken Buck might have hit his high water mark and the chaos in the governors race will be even more pronounced down ticket if insurgents like Maes or Buck win over conventional republicans.
To say that all incumbents will get beat up on election day omits the obvious gaffs and extremism by Republicans that seem to be making daily headlines.
Instead of paying Merida, he should find out a legal way to get those mail-in ballots mailed or delivered to the Election Division.
So this is my question for Dan Willis (who truly deserves some kind of recognition for his unfailing accurate contributions)
Can candidates give stamps to citizens to cover the cost of mailing in the ballot?
Busy thread, so it might have gotten lost.
it makes little difference. So Romanoff’s chances ought to be expressed in somewhat different terms. The results will be the same. AR is finished on Aug 10th. Dave will have to rejoin the real world. We’ll be happy to welcome you back, Dave.
They are about the chances at winning the GENERAL election, not the Primary. We have Romanoff low because we think he’s a long shot to win the Primary, and if he did, he’s not in a good financial position to compete in the General. On the other hand, Buck and Norton have a better chance at winning the GOP Primary than Romanoff has at winning the Dem Primary, so there is less of a hurdle for them in winning the General.
a taste extreme, I think. But as I agree that there isn’t going to be a Senator Romanoff being sworn in any time soon, it’s no biggie. Still don’t get you’re being so optimistic on Garnett. Think he has a legit shot and hope he wins but an advantage?
You all are I think committing the first and most common mistake of political junkies: Assuming everyone else knows the same things you know. I’m a political junkie myself (duh, why else would I be here), and follow all the statewide races pretty closely. Hell, I even know Andrew Romanoff a bit, in the sense of having heard him speak innumerable times and having had quite lengthy conversations with him. And yet I know almost nothing about him. Nothing about who he is. I know he has chosen to fund his campaign differently than Bennet (no PAC’s), which no non-political junky cares two cents about. I know he did a few important things as Speaker (not all to his credit, imo, but some). But I know a LOT about Michael Bennet, just from having watched TV this past month or two. Andrew’s a tireless campaigner (so is Michael) but there’s a rather low limit to the number of people you can reach retail: The physical limit of 24 hours in a day, and the political reality that the same people come to virtually all political events, and they’re not even really persuadable. They dominate caucuses, but primaries, not so much.
There’s a reason why no primary candidate has won a prominent office in this state while being outspent on TV since … well, since I can’t even come up with the last one. A huge majority of the folks who turn out on primary day will know almost nothing about Andrew Romanoff, except perhaps that he doesn’t take “special interest money” and used to be in government. They certainly won’t know why they should fire Bennet.
Bennet 55-45 is the highest AR can get; a ten point loss would be a great day. Not because AR’s necessarily lost the argument, but because he never really entered an argument (other than the silly PAC thing, the shiniest fool’s gold in politics, which has never won anyone anything). If he wins, it will be the biggest shock in my 20 years following politics. Bar none.
We try to adjust the Line based on those factors — how candidates are appealing to voters overall, and particularly the uninformed voters. In the case of Romanoff vs. Bennet, we just don’t see anything to indicate that Romanoff has advanced beyond the “active Democrats” stage.
The Internet is changing that a lot. It used to be TV was it. Now for a lot of people, they go to Google to learn. That doesn’t eliminate the impact of TV, but it does lessen it.
You’ve been truly delusional about Romanoff, David. I have hope that you, unlike certain others on this site, will actually learn something about how wrong you’ve been on this primary.
Michael Bennet will beat Romanoff by at least 10 points. Unfortunately, I’ve had only one taker of my open invitation to bet on the outcome (jpsandsci for $25). Do you want to step up? Anyone else??
Regardless, I also believe that, like my client who supports Romanoff but really likes Bennet after he got a chance to talk to him, you’ll also realize what a great senator we have in Michael Bennet.
I just wish his world view included the possibility that the banks need some of the regulation they are totally opposed to.
I also wish his campaign staff wasn’t a bunch of entitled dicks. But I felt that way back when I supported him too, so that’s not a key issue for me.
Sort an “underpants gnomes” theory of victory there, don’t ya think?
Yard signs don’t vote (usually) and honk & waves don’t do anything.
But underpants gnomes are nothing to make light of.
That is why they get stolen all the time. Anyone from Tom Tancredo’s home know what the yard sign count is???
They keep the candidate out of headquarters and give him/her something to do.
But I grew up in Hawaii where it’s a key part of campaigning.
YARD
SIGNS
DON’T
VOTE
TV
ADS
DON’T
VOTE
You’re starting to sound irrational, Dave, don’t you?
I don’t know if yard signs have much impact, but saying they don’t vote isn’t terribly useful.
When you spend months sounding like Pollyanna this is what happens. And we all knew what was meant by yard signs don’t vote.
… as someone who gets most of his tips here first, that yard signs are usually the way I first hear of candidates in local elections. Near me, I’ve seen a sign for someone who’s first name is Titus. I can’t remember the last name, but I’ll drive by it again and voila! Name recognition achieved in one potential voter.
Now, at the moment I don’t know what this person is running for, and since the sign is by a bus stop that happens to be at the Denver / Englewood line, it may not be for a race in which I can vote. But it seems to be doing its job.
Your bias is showing.
You got the math all wrong.
THe only thing you got right was names and party affiliation.
Seriously- that one guy sold his house.. That as to count for something like he’s close to even, or even leading.
That other guy abanonded his party and his own advice has never lost a CO election and has awesome name rec. All you gotta do is look at Rassmussen and know you are way off.
Are you just trying to appear stupid, Pols?
I pretty much agree with everything that MADCO is saying
In addition, I think CPols is being VERY generous towards Kennedy and Garnett
n/t
I think you’re letting the big line get away from you. I still don’t understand the advantage you’re giving to Garnett. AR probably deserves better than 25-1 at least through primary. Tank with a considerably better chance than McInnis seems a bit odd but since neither has any chance that’s a minor quibble that hardly seems to matter. In general I think the line is a tad prone to exaggeration this election cycle. Wish I thought it was all going to be as easy for my guys as your line makes it look!
For all the weirdness and message-less scorched earth bullshit of the candidate and his campaign, the fact is Romanoff has been able to put more money into TV than most would have expected, and it’ll help with the last gasp fundraising he needs build out the buy. He has a better chance than I would have expected to get on TV. But he’s competing with thousands of points of Bennet buys going back to March — viewers that now know Bennet and really don’t know Romanoff (even though the Cultists believe his name rec is universal and universally beloved).
If they can get their activists off the streets and on the phones and convert yard signs into actual people, he may be able to close the 15 point gap to single digits, but I remain skeptical he can get within 10.
At least if the Hail Mary doesn’t work, he still has the trust fund and now many thousands in newly liquid dollars to go on a great trip to some out-of-the-way and underdeveloped country that needs him so very badly.
He could go to Nicauragua – Wade says AR is good friends with Ortega.
sure Romanoff probably is closer to 15:1 and I doubt that Garnett really is the the favorite, but my big one is Markey.
I don’t see her sitting pretty in the race and I definitely don’t see Gardner at 10:1 odds. At worst Cory is at 6:1 and the idea that Aden will pull votes looks obvious at face value. However, I think there needs to be some recognition that Republicans are going to do their best to take him to the woodshed and paint the ACP as fringe lunatics (see the latest TV news) and Tancredo as an opportunist, which will have some trickle down.
Markey is tremendously vulnerable and will need a big infusion of cash and 527 money as well as some more missteps from the Gardner campaign.
Also, for the Republican Party, the governor’s race is no longer about the GOP beating the Democrats, it’s about ensuring that the ACP doesn’t gain any sort of foothold as a 3rd party. The gloves will come off and Wadhams will do whatever it takes to crush them, if he doesn’t they will be lamenting it for the next decade.
Bob McConnell has better odds than Gardner? That premise is as insane as Bob McConnell.
Democrats are going to rally around her as much as Republicans are going to rail against her. She has talent and political courage and rarely has a slip up on the campaign trail. She took out the incumbent Marilyn Musgrave and is ready to defend the seat. She is in good position to be reelected.
Adding Doug Aden makes sense with the Tancredo-ACP connection, but adding Ken “Wasco” Waszkiewicz is a complete waste of space. What happened to not listing left-field long shots? Why not add Jason Clark to the guv line, too? The new big line is laughable.
I still think that in the end we see a Governor race without Tancredo, McInnis or Maes. Eventually polling numbers that include Tancredo will be released, and it will show something to the effect of 50-35-15 with Hick in front. At that time (probably late August) some back room conversation will occur, and [Primary Winner] and Tancredo will drop out for the better of the party (and certainly something else), and a new candidate will be appointed.
I know Pols doesn’t normally include speculative candidates on the Big Line, but I’d give the Unannounced (R) 5-1 odds.
The problem with that scenario is the Republican brand in the Gov race will be so damaged by then, and Hick is so good a campaigner, that whoever steps up would do so knowing they are going to lose.
You don’t get the best candidates in that scenario.
And the place holder is clear that he/she is there to hold the party together long enough to get through this cycle.
If Maes is the nominee and isn’t somehow the candidate, it will splinter the party for several cycles to come. And I on’t see Maes withdrawing.
When has Wadhams ever had the sense to leave well enough alone?
How many repubs wish they had voted for Stone for state chair while they had the chance?
Maybe you can offer an opinion.
That Republicans don’t think they can win the Governor’s race, and any replacement candidate would merely exist to try to prop up the ticket for the Senate candidate and the down-ballot races. We wouldn’t expect a replacement candidate, if there is one, to really wage a full-fledged battle in November.
I’m not a gambler, but isn’t there a way to represent odds as better than 2-1?
In your words you say that Tancredo has essentially ensured that Hickenlooper will get elected. I agree.
But if I’m reading your line correctly, 2-1 means if I bet $1 that he would win I would collect $2. That’s a HUGE win for something that’s such a lock. Nobody would take that bet, not even McInnis (who needs to save all his money to be able to pay back that $300K).
If you list the odds as 20-19, for instance, then if I bet $19 I win $1. That’s a bet that someone might take as crazier things have happened, but more importantly it makes it more clear what a lock he has on that race.
I’ve seen odds like 2:5 or 1:5 in horse races.
like 3:2 or 5:4. Those sound like better odds for Hickenlooper. But this isn’t for actual gambling, remember!
But odds ARE for gambling. They’re for calculating the payout. The odds are a fraction–numerator:denominator. Fraction * $2.00 + $2.00 is the payout.
2:5 pays $2.80. 1:5 pays $2.40. 3:2 pays $5.00. 5:4 pays $4.50. 2:1 pays $6.00.
The lowest parimutuel odds you’ll typically see are 1:9.
Why else would anyone care about odds, LOL?
(I guess I spent too much time at the track in my younger days.)
I just realized that the Big Line has the Dems winning every race, except CD-6 for Coffman.
I agree that the Dems are going to do better than the pundits say today.
Bottom Line: The only thing people hate worse than Democrats is Republicans (especially of the Tea Party kind).